Most anglers were male (96%), and they had completed an average of 3 years of college.

The average household income of anglers was in the $80,000 - $99,999 category; 11% of the anglers reported household incomes greater than or equal to $200,000 per year.

Most (68%) anglers resided in Virginia, North Carolina, New Jersey, or Maryland.

The fishery attracted anglers from Canada, Brazil, Denmark, Scotland, Germany, and New Zealand.

Anglers reported fishing an average of 40 days in the last year; most (84.0%) of which occurred in saltwater environments.

Anglers had fished in saltwater for an average of 24 years.

Most (66%) anglers reported they did not belong to any fishing or conservation organizations.

Anglers reported spending an average of $1,221 on fishing tackle and equipment in the previous 12 months.

A majority (64%) of anglers reported they did not put most of their fishing effort into one particular species of fish.

Anglers reported spending on average 2.6 days fishing for bluefin tuna in the last year in the Hatteras area and 2.8 days fishing elsewhere in the U.S. Atlantic for bluefin tuna.

Anglers reported fishing for Atlantic bluefin tuna for an average of 4 years.

Most (81%) anglers had fished for bluefin tuna for 5 years or less. Most anglers had caught (70%) and eaten (62%) a bluefin tuna in the last year.

Most (67%) anglers supported the current regulation of a one fish (27"-73") bag limit per boat with a no-sale provision.

Of the four management options presented, angler support (with 60% opposed and 18% neutral) was lowest for mandatory catch and release of bluefin tuna.

Anglers supported four potential management proposals for the fishery, including mandatory use of circle hooks (68% support), mandatory use of heavy tackle (63% support), prohibition of light tackle (58% support), and mandatory certification requirements in catch and release techniques for captains and crews (55% support).

A plurality of anglers opposed two potential management proposals for the fishery, including elimination of the trophy bluefin tuna allowance of one trophy bluefin tuna per charter boat each year (47% opposition) and a restricted season in the Hatteras area to reduce impacts upon other areas (46% opposition).

Most anglers (63%) reported this was their first bluefin fishing trip to the Hatteras area.

The average trip length for anglers was 3.7 days, 1.7 days of which were spent fishing.

The average party size that accompanied anglers was 4.3 people.

On average, anglers reported their boat caught and brought to the boat 4.9 "large medium/giant" bluefin tuna, 3.7 "large school/small medium" bluefin tuna and 0.2 "school" bluefin tuna per day fishing.

Most (73%) anglers that caught a tuna (89.4%) prior to the closure of the Angling category reported that their boat retained a fish.

An estimated 6,546 angler days fishing for bluefin tuna occurred in Hatteras during the study period. Non-residents of North Carolina who used charter boats comprised most (66%) of the days fishing.

Overall, anglers reported spending an average of $1,005 in the Hatteras area on their trip to fish for bluefin tuna.

Anglers spent a total of $3,635,654 in the Hatteras area and $212,036 elsewhere in North Carolina for a total expenditure of $3,847,690 between January 15, 1997 and March 22, 1997.

The overall economic impact of expenditures by bluefin tuna anglers upon the output of the Hatteras economy was $7,562,160 which supported 170 jobs in the local area.

Non-resident anglers spent a total of $3,233,088 in North Carolina between January 15, 1997 and March 22, 1997.

The overall economic impact of expenditures by non-resident bluefin tuna anglers upon the output of North Carolina economy was $6,013,544 which supported 94 jobs statewide.

Bluefin tuna anglers' willingness-to-pay above their current trip costs (net economic benefits) ranged between $344 and $388 using individual and pooled model results, respectively.

When estimates of net economic benefits are added to their annual bluefin tuna trip expenses of $1,148 (mean per trip expense times annual trips or $1,184 x .97), this yields average estimates of total economic value (total willingness-to-pay) of bluefin tuna angling in Hatteras ranging from $1,492 to $1,536 per year per angler.

The social value of bluefin tuna fishing or the aggregated annual total value of bluefin tuna angling in the Hatteras area ranged from $5,425,907 to $5,585,920.

Bluefin tuna angler expenditures ($3,847,690) in the Hatteras area and elsewhere in North Carolina were sizable, particularly when it is realized they occurred over a period of only 51 days of fishing between January 15 and March 22, 1997 and that they did not exist prior to 1996. Overall, this constituted 1.8% of all angler trip expenditures for all kinds of salt water fishing in North Carolina (Maharaj and Carpenter 1997). According to angler reports, charter boats in Hatteras had gross revenues of $1,849,776 or about 58% of U.S. Atlantic totals reported by the National Marine Fisheries Service in 1994.

Our estimates of boat trips and angler expenditures varied considerably from other research efforts due likely to methodological differences. For example, the National Marine Fisheries Service estimated there were 1,558 and 1,335 charter and private boat trips, respectively, during the 1997 winter season for Atlantic bluefin tuna while Novak estimated there were 2,478 and 420 charter and private boat tuna trips during the previous 1996 season. We used an on-site census approach whereby marinas and boat slips were checked daily by project technicians (instead of estimating procedures) to count 1,020 and 370 charter and private boat tuna trips, respectively. Likewise, Novak used information from boat captains to estimate angler expenditures in 1996 ranged from $10 to $16 million; our estimate of local expenditures based on angler reports was $3.6 million. We have confidence in the procedures used to count trips, survey procedures used to gather expenditure data from the diversity of bluefin tuna anglers who came to Hatteras, and resultant estimates of their expenditures and economic impacts.

There would appear to be ample room for expansion of the Hatteras bluefin tuna fishery should local efforts be made to move in this direction. Visitation and expenditure results for the 1997 season occurred with a minimum of regional, statewide, and national promotion. Trip counts revealed the charter fleet operated at 50% or more of capacity for only 17 of the 51 days that boats went out fishing; about one-half of these were weekend days. Likewise, the private boat fleet docked in Hatteras made fewer than ten bluefin tuna trips offshore on all but 14 days during the season. Hopefully, a marketing and promotion strategy can be developed that will produce more favorable economic impact results from both a state and local perspective.

We found the bluefin tuna anglers in Hatteras are similar to billfish anglers studied previously in the U.S. Atlantic and Costa Rica (in terms of their demographic characteristics, fishing frequency per year, years of fishing experience, self-rated skill level, and the importance of fishing to them as an outdoor recreation) but they differed in some notable ways, too. For example, they fished for their target species much less frequently per year and had done so for far fewer years than billfish anglers. Comparisons with U.S. Atlantic bluefin tuna anglers were not possible because no studies of this angler group have been completed elsewhere. We concluded the current bluefin angler clientele can best be characterized as opportunistic. They are not bluefin tuna anglers in the sense they focus a major portion of their fishing effort upon this particular species. They were likely attracted by regional newspaper accounts which emphasized the opportunity to catch large bluefin tuna with multiple hook-ups in a day at Hatteras. In sharp contrast with what is happening in the billfish angling community, on about one-half of the charter and private boat trips taken for bluefin tuna, anglers retained one fish of legal size per boat despite a no-sale provision for the fish.

The results for the net economic value of the bluefin tuna fishing experience (the difference between the total benefits received by the angler and the expenditures made to utilize the resource) provide a useful baseline measure for this fishery. As more bluefin anglers are attracted to Hatteras and if the fishing quality and conditions remain the same, the bluefin tuna experience will result in an even higher net economic value and greater aggregate of total economic value reported in this study ($5,425,907 to $5,585,920). Further, this will generate greater regional economic impacts (direct and indirect). Likewise, the differential values associated with each of three bluefin tuna management scenarios were useful to understanding the future of this fishery. Whereas economic benefits associated with the most restrictive management alternative were significantly lower than the other two management alternatives investigated, if anglers were less harvest oriented (more conservation-minded), there was little effect in terms of lost value associated with the catch and release alternative. This means that if an increase in total economic benefits is sought and there will be no additional quota in the future, the Hatteras area needs to attract more anglers who are conservation-minded and not harvest-oriented. Catch and release angling can provide a valuable fishing experience without having to take a fish out of the bluefin stock. Thus, angler numbers, their regional economic impacts, and the net value they receive can all increase within the current bluefin tuna quota.

The future of the Hatteras bluefin tuna fishery depends on some important contingencies. Clearly, there is no winter bluefin tuna fishery in Hatteras without an allocation by the National Marine Fisheries Service and this allocation is not expected to increase. Also, the recreational fishing tourism system there needs to be able to support current fishing levels as well as those anticipated in the future. Most importantly, those involved in the tourism system operating in support of the Hatteras bluefin tuna fishery need to agree on the product they have to offer. If the product is the opportunity to harvest one legal-sized bluefin tuna per boat and the quota doesn't increase, then any further infrastructure and promotional efforts to attract anglers will exhaust the quota even earlier than 1997's closure on March 2. If a catch and release product is recognized as being in the best interest of the local area because more fishing activity and related expenditures can occur, then local marketing and promotion efforts need to focus on finding more anglers with this orientation. To maximize local benefits, future efforts need to attract anglers who are more interested in the challenge and adventure aspects of making multiple hook-ups per day on large bluefin tuna and in fisheries conservation than those interested in harvesting large fish with a no-sale provision. This would appear to be in the best interests of all involved with this fishery.

Future research needs include: 1) using this study design in other U.S. Atlantic coastal communities to better understand the extent of their recreational bluefin tuna fisheries, their participants, their local and statewide impacts, and anglers' willingness-to-pay (net economic benefits) above trip costs and 2) annually sampling the bluefin tuna Angling category permit holders using the computerized permit system recently established by National Marine Fisheries Service to conduct survey research to provide social and economic insight to this population of U.S. Atlantic bluefin tuna anglers.