Economic analysis of white sturgeon in the upper Fraser River

Learn how we’re using cost benefit analysis to understand the potential impacts of listing the white sturgeon in the Upper Fraser River.

About cost benefit analysis

We’re looking at a cost benefit analysis while deciding whether or not to close parts of the Fraser River to white sturgeon angling. This analysis lets decision makers know how proposed changes can impact Canadians.

The economic analysis doesn’t provide any definitive answers on closure listing decisions. The Governor in Council makes listing decisions by balancing all relevant considerations, including:

science advice
recovery options
cost benefit analysis
First Nation consultations
stakeholder consultations

This analysis also doesn’t assess impacts on the Indigenous cultural significance of white sturgeon. The species at risk program undertakes a process to understand information on Indigenous cultural, social and historical significance. They also look at other impacts on Indigenous groups that are outside the scope of an economic analysis.

Angling days and expenditures in British Columbia

The following table shows the total number of freshwater angling days in 2010 and 2015, organized by resident, non-resident Canadian and other non-resident fishers.

Type of freshwater anglers	Number of angling days (2010)	Percent of total angling days (2010)	Number of angling days (2015)	Percent of total angling days (2015)
Resident	3,458,221	91%	3,773,342	91%
Non-resident Canadian	205,488	5%	258,574	6%
Non-resident non-Canadian	151,607	4%	122,270	3%
Combined total	3,815,316	100%	4,154,186	100%

The following table shows the total freshwater expenditures for 2010 and 2015 by looking at daily angler expenditures multiplied by total angling days.

BC Freshwater Angling	Direct expenditures made by all freshwater anglers	Major purchases and investments wholly attributable to recreational fishing made by all freshwater anglers
2010	$247.18 million	$324.97 million
2015	$224.41 million	$227.56 million

Various estimates of GDP and employment related to freshwater angling in BC exist using different methodologies and base years (for example: GDP estimates range from $164 million to $262 million and employment estimates range from 3,875 to 4,991.

White sturgeon baseline information

There is an increasing trend in non-guided angling. In the Fraser River’s Freshwater fisheries regions 3 and 5 most of the angling for white sturgeon is non-guided.

Angling days that would be impacted by proposed measures include those in region 3 and 5, which have:

around 500 guided angling days total
around 4,100 total non-guided angling days, including:
- 3,500 days in region 3
- 600 days in region 5

Assumptions

In calculating the cost benefit analysis, we’ve assumed that a white sturgeon fishing trip can also include angling efforts on other species. If a white sturgeon catch-and-release fishery is closed, a certain percentage of angling effort and expenses for other species would also be lost to the local economy.

A ratio of guided salmon angling to white sturgeon angling of 20% would mean 1 lost white sturgeon angling day would result in 1.2 lost days in total.

However, we’ve also assumed that anglers use disposable income on white sturgeon angling and would redirect a large majority of these expenditures to other activities over time.

Expenditures

The costs of the proposed measures are based on the number of angling days applied to expenditure estimates and investments which would be lost under the proposed management scenarios.

Non-guided angling days

We’ve estimated an expenditure value of $230 per day based on the estimate of $200 advanced in the Gislason 2005 SARA report. We’ve deemed this to be the most relevant, as it derives from research related to recreational catch-and-release fishing for white sturgeon.

The 3,500 non-guided angling days in region 3 plus the 600 in region 5 multiplied by $230 gives us an estimate of $943,000 in expenditures for non-guided angling days.

Guided angling days

We’ve estimated an expenditure value of $625 per day based on the estimate of $435 advanced in the Gislason 2005 SARA Report. This includes guide revenues, ancillary client expenditures and transportation.

Estimated expenditures per angler and per day guided angling day - white sturgeon	Expenditure estimate ($’s 2016)	% of total
Guide revenues	$383	61%
Ancillary client expenditures	$137	22%
Transportation	$105	17%
Total	$625	100%

The 600 guided angling days in region 3 multiplied by $625 gives us an estimate of $375,000 in expenditures for non-guided angling days.

Economic impacts

Estimates of impacts to anglers, businesses that support recreational fishing and the communities in which they are located are based on the total expenditures spent on recreational fishing.

Impacts are evaluated first in terms of lost producer and consumer surpluses, including:

producer surplus losses, which is affected by charters/guides revenue
consumer surplus losses, which is the lost value from angling day experience to recreational fishers

In addition, regional economic impacts to the local communities are estimated to show:

lost household income and employment
impacts to the provincial gross domestic product

Regional economic impacts can be:

direct economic impacts, which include lost income and employment to businesses that sell directly to anglers, such as tackle shops and hotels
indirect economic impact, which is lost income and employment to businesses that are suppliers to the companies directly servicing the fishing sector, such as hotel laundry service
induced economic impact, which includes lost income and employment to businesses that sell goods and services to workers employed as a result of the local fishing activity, such as local car dealerships

We derive our estimates from models developed by statistical agencies to measure the inter-dependence (supply chain linkages) among various sectors of the economy. We use them to estimate how a decrease in demand in one sector may impact other related sectors that supply goods and services as inputs.

Benefits

Benefits are tied to recovery measures. Incremental benefits would occur if recovery measures result in faster recovery than the baseline or in improved outcomes for the populations.

For the upper and middle Fraser River portions of the designatable unit, the Recovery Potential Assessment targets the current population abundance so we expect no changes.

2018 engagement: what we heard

In late 2018, we provided workbooks to stakeholders so they could provide input on how the proposed white sturgeon measures would affect them. We’ll use this input to inform assumptions in the Cost Benefit Analysis and the briefing package that will be developed.

Responses from anglers

Of the 10 workbooks that were submitted by anglers, all indicated that they participate in white sturgeon angling.

Out of these anglers, 8 stated that they:

spend more than 80% of their fishing time angling for white sturgeon in the proposed closure area
purchase their supplies, including food, equipment and fuel, in the Lillooet area

When asked how closure for white sturgeon angling in the Middle Fraser River would affect them, they stated:

3 would continue to use the area, but would reduce their fishing days
3 would continue to use the area and would make up fishing days by focusing on other species or other areas
3 would stop fishing in the affected area and fish in elsewhere
1 did not respond

Responses from business operators

We received 7 completed workbooks from business operators, with 6 charters/guides and 1 accommodation.

Of the 6 charters/guides respondents, all 6 stated they fish for white sturgeon and other species in the proposed closure area. Of those, 4 stated they purchase supplies, including food, equipment and fuel in the Lillooet area.

The proposed closure area represents the following percentage of their business:

98% for 4 businesses
60% for 1 business
10% for 1 business

When asked how closure for white sturgeon angling in the Middle Fraser River would affect them, all 6 said their business would no longer be operable.

Next steps

We will post the draft cost benefit analysis for a 30 day review period as part of the regulatory impact analysis statement.

Language selection

Search