11/09/2010 Cost Earnings Survey Technical Memorandum

NOAA Technical Memorandum NMFS-NWFSC-107

West Coast Limited Entry
Groundfish Trawl
Cost Earnings Survey
Protocols and Results for 2004

September 2010

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
National Marine Fisheries Service

NOAA Technical Memorandum
NMFS-NWFSC Series

The Northwest Fisheries Science Center of the National
Marine Fisheries Service, NOAA, uses the NOAA Technical Memorandum NMFS-NWFSC series to issue scientific
and technical publications. Manuscripts have been peer
reviewed and edited. Documents published in this series
may be cited in the scientific and technical literature.
The NMFS-NWFSC Technical Memorandum series of the
Northwest Fisheries Science Center continues the NMFSF/NWC series established in 1970 by the Northwest &
Alaska Fisheries Science Center, which has since been
split into the Northwest Fisheries Science Center and the
Alaska Fisheries Science Center. The NMFS-AFSC Technical Memorandum series is now being used by the Alaska
Fisheries Science Center.
Reference throughout this document to trade names does
not imply endorsement by the National Marine Fisheries
Service, NOAA.

This document should be referenced as follows:
Lian, C.E. 2010. West Coast limited entry groundfish trawl
cost earnings survey protocols and results for 2004. U.S.
Dept. Commer., NOAA Tech. Memo. NMFS-NWFSC-107,
35 p.

NOAA Technical Memorandum NMFS-NWFSC-107

West Coast Limited Entry
Groundfish Trawl
Cost Earnings Survey
Protocols and Results for 2004
Carl E. Lian
Northwest Fisheries Science Center
Fishery Resource Analysis and Monitoring Division
2725 Montlake Boulevard East
Seattle, Washington 98112

September 2010

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
National Marine Fisheries Service

Most NOAA Technical Memorandums
NMFS-NWFSC are available online at the
Northwest Fisheries Science Center
web site (http://www.nwfsc.noaa.gov)
Copies are also available from:
National Technical Information Service
5285 Port Royal Road
Springfield, VA 22161
phone orders (1-800-553-6847)
e-mail orders (orders@ntis.fedworld.gov)

ii

Table of Contents
List of Tables ................................................................................................................................................ v
Executive Summary ....................................................................................................................................vii
Acknowledgments........................................................................................................................................ix
1. Introduction.............................................................................................................................................. 1
2. Survey Design.......................................................................................................................................... 2
2.1. Survey Population and Sample......................................................................................................... 2
2.2. Questionnaire Development ............................................................................................................. 3
3. Survey Fielding Protocol ......................................................................................................................... 4
3.1. Fielding Schedule ............................................................................................................................. 4
3.2. Maximizing Response Rates............................................................................................................. 4
4. Survey Response Rates ............................................................................................................................ 6
5. Comparing Respondents and Nonrespondents......................................................................................... 8
5.1. Data Used to Test for Nonresponse Bias.......................................................................................... 8
5.2. Comparison Results.......................................................................................................................... 8
5.3. Statistical Tests for Nonresponse Bias ............................................................................................. 9
6. Correcting for Nonresponse Bias........................................................................................................... 11
7. Empirical Results ................................................................................................................................... 12
7.1. Costs and Earnings Categories ....................................................................................................... 12
7.2. Calculating Profits and Quasi-rents from Survey Data .................................................................. 13
7.3. Costs, Earnings, and Quasi-rents .................................................................................................... 14
7.4. Crew Size, Fuel Use, and Vessel Speed ......................................................................................... 15
7.5. Crew Share System and Owner as Captain .................................................................................... 16
8. Concluding Comments............................................................................................................................ 17
Tables 1–12................................................................................................................................................. 18
References................................................................................................................................................... 27
Appendix A: Limited Entry Survey Questionnaire..................................................................................... 29
Appendix B: Testing for Nonresponse Bias ............................................................................................... 33

iii

iv

List of Tables
Table 1. Summary of survey response by entire fleet, vessel type, state, and revenue.............................. 18
Table 2. Comparison of vessel physical characteristics and revenue sources for limited entry trawler
respondents and nonrespondents................................................................................................................. 19
Table 3. Comparison of vessel physical characteristics and revenue sources for the crabber fleet
respondents and nonrespondents................................................................................................................. 19
Table 4. Comparison of vessel physical characteristics and revenue sources for the large groundfish
trawler respondents and nonrespondents .................................................................................................... 20
Table 5. Comparison of vessel physical characteristics and revenue sources for the whiting fleet
respondents and nonrespondents................................................................................................................. 20
Table 6. Cost and earnings by category for the entire limited entry trawl fleet......................................... 21
Table 7. Cost and earnings by category for the crabber fleet..................................................................... 22
Table 8. Cost and earnings by category for the large groundfish trawlers................................................. 23
Table 9. Cost and earnings by category for the whiting fleet .................................................................... 24
Table 10. Limited entry trawl fleet costs, revenues, and quasi-rents ......................................................... 24
Table 11. Limited entry trawl fleet crew size, fuel use, and speed ............................................................ 25
Table 12. Limited entry trawl fleet share for captain, crew, and vessel..................................................... 26
Table B-1. Two sample t-tests for statistical significance of differences between respondents and
nonrespondents in five variables................................................................................................................. 33

v

vi

Executive Summary
This technical memorandum describes the fielding protocols and empirical results from
an economic cost earnings survey of the limited entry trawl fleet. The survey was conducted by
the Fishery Resource Analysis and Monitoring Division of the Northwest Fisheries Science
Center in cooperation with the Pacific States Marine Fisheries Commission. The survey
population was all owners of commercial fishing vessels holding a West Coast limited entry
groundfish permit with a trawl endorsement. Only vessels with at least $1,000 of West Coast
landings during 2004 were included in the survey. The species composition of landings was not
a factor used in selecting the survey population. The survey population included vessels that
participate in the shoreside whiting (Merluccius productus) fishery, vessels that participate in the
nonwhiting groundfish fishery, vessels that participate in both the nonwhiting groundfish fishery
and the shoreside whiting fishery, and vessels that participated in neither the nonwhiting
groundfish fishery nor the shoreside whiting fishery (but still held a limited entry trawl permit
and had at least $1,000 of West Coast landings during 2004).
The survey sample was a census of the 143 vessels in the survey population. Data for
2003 and 2004 were collected from each participating vessel owner through an in-person
interview. Because the groundfish trawl buyback program took effect in December 2003 and
removed 91 vessels and their associated permits from the limited entry groundfish trawl fishery,
this document reports results from 2004 (which is expected to be more representative of future
economic conditions in the fishery than 2003). Interviews were conducted with the owners of 99
of the 143 limited entry trawl vessels active during 2004. Of the 99 interviews conducted, 91
were deemed to provide acceptable quality data to be used for statistical inference and economic
analysis. The 91 survey respondents represent 64% of the limited entry trawl vessels and
accounted for 69% the West Coast landings revenue earned by limited entry trawl vessels during
2004.
These 91 responses were used for statistical inference of operating costs, revenue from
sources other than West Coast landings, and vessel operating characteristics (such as crew size
and fuel consumption). Data collected from the survey were combined with economic data
available from other sources, such as the Pacific Fisheries Information Network, to provide
harvester revenues and costs at the vessel level. This document presents the results of this
statistical inference for both the entire limited entry trawl fleet and the primary vessel types
within the trawl fleet. Primary vessel types within the fleet include large groundfish trawlers,
whiting vessels that deliver to shoreside processors, and crabbers.
Tests for nonresponse bias indicated that there was no statistically significant difference
between survey respondents and nonrespondents when examining results for vessel types such as
crabbers, large groundfish trawlers, and vessels participating in the shoreside whiting fishery.
However, results for the aggregate limited entry trawl fleet exhibited statistically significant
nonresponse bias, with survey respondents having revenue from West Coast crab landings which

vii

was significantly larger than that of nonrespondents. While the mean per vessel level of revenue
from West Coast landings of all species for the entire limited entry trawl fleet was $327,425, the
mean per vessel level of revenue from West Coast landings for the 91 survey respondents was
$356,771.
For the limited entry trawl fleet, the average vessel had revenue from all sources of
$488,507 during 2004. West Coast landings accounted for $356,771 and Alaska landings
accounted for $111,168 of the $488,507 in revenue earned during 2004. While the mean level of
revenue from Alaska landings was $111,168, at the individual vessel level almost all survey
respondents had either more than $500,000 of Alaska landings revenue or no Alaska landings
revenue. The mean level of costs collected by the survey for a limited entry trawl vessel was
$376,637. The largest cost categories reported by survey respondents were $97,042 for repair,
maintenance, and improvements, $96,072 for crew, $81,100 for the captain, and $53,857 for
fuel. As discussed in subsection 7.1 of this report, the cost figures reported here reflect
expenditures during 2004, which in some cases differ from opportunity costs. A number of
adjustments to the survey data should be made before calculating economic profits or quasirents.

viii

Acknowledgments
The cost earnings survey described in this document was developed through
collaboration and consultation with numerous individuals. The following individuals made
important contributions to the survey design, fielding protocol, analysis of data, or reporting of
data: Leif Anderson, Jim Hastie, Todd Lee, Jerry Leonard, and Mark Plummer, Northwest
Fisheries Science Center (NWFSC); Dave Colpo, Pacific States Marine Fisheries Commission
(PSMFC); Stephen Freese, NMFS Northwest Regional Office; Pete Leipzig, Fishermen’s
Marketing Association; Brad Pettinger, Oregon Trawl Commission; Cindy Thomson, Southwest
Fisheries Science Center; Phil Watson, University of Idaho; and Quinn Weninger, Iowa State
University. The NWFSC and the PSMFC are grateful to the Fishermen’s Marketing Association
and the Oregon Trawl Commission for endorsing the survey. The NWFSC and the PSMFC also
thank all of the vessel owners who volunteered their time and data for the survey.

ix

x

1. Introduction
This technical memorandum describes the survey design and fielding protocol for the
cost earnings survey of the limited entry trawl fleet, which was conducted by the Fishery
Resource Analysis and Monitoring Division of the Northwest Fisheries Science Center
(NWFSC) in cooperation with the Pacific States Marine Fisheries Commission (PSMFC).
Summary statistics computed with data collected through the survey are provided with
accompanying discussion. The survey was fielded between May 2006 and September 2006 and
collected data for 2003 and 2004. Since the limited entry trawl buyback program took effect in
December 2003, responses for 2004 were viewed as more relevant to current conditions in the
limited entry trawl fishery than responses for 2003. 1 As a result, this document focuses on
reporting results for 2004.
Section 2 discusses survey design and questionnaire development. Section 3 discusses
survey fielding. Section 4 discusses response rates. Section 5 compares respondents and
nonrespondents and summarizes the results of tests for nonresponse bias. Section 6 discusses the
issue of correcting for nonresponse bias. Section 7 presents empirical results obtained from
analysis of the survey data. Section 8 provides concluding remarks.

1

The buyback program allowed the holders of federal limited entry groundfish permits with a trawl endorsement to
submit a bid to have their groundfish permit as well as any other associated permits purchased by the government.
The buyback program purchased not only the limited entry groundfish trawl permit associated with the vessel, but
also any other federal fishing permit as well as state crab and shrimp permits. The vessel with which these permits
were associated was not purchased, but was prohibited from engaging in commercial fishing activities. Vessels
whose permits were purchased through the buyback program ceased commercial fishing activities in December
2003.

2. Survey Design
The limited entry trawl fleet accounts for about two-thirds of groundfish landings on the
West Coast (on a revenue basis). In addition, members of the limited entry trawl fleet participate
in other fisheries such as crab and shrimp. The objective of this survey was to obtain the vessellevel information on earnings and expenditures that would support the calculation of economic
performance measures (such as quasi-rents and efficiency) as well as regional economic impact
analysis.
Because this survey was conducted on a voluntary basis and a survey of the limited entry
trawl fleet conducted in 2000 had obtained a response rate of about 15%, survey design placed
an emphasis on obtaining an adequate response rate. Discussions with industry participants
indicated that vessel owners are more likely to respond to an in-person interviewer than a mail
questionnaire, so all data collection was conducted through in-person interviews. Questionnaire
length was limited to four pages (the questionnaire is provided in Appendix A). As discussed in
this report, limiting questionnaire length imposed constraints on the number of cost categories
and the collection of data on purchases of capital goods.

2.1. Survey Population and Sample
The population of interest for this survey is all active commercial fishing vessels holding
a limited entry permit with a trawl endorsement. Active fishing vessels were defined as having
at least $1,000 of West Coast (Washington, Oregon, and California) landings during 2004.
Vessels with less than $1,000 landings were considered to have too low a level of activity to
provide useful cost earnings data. Fish ticket data obtained through the Pacific Fisheries
Information Network (PacFIN) system indicated that there were 143 vessels in the survey
population.
While vessels were required to have at least $1,000 of revenue from West Coast landings
during 2004, no restrictions were placed on the species landed. While most of the vessels in the
survey population obtained a majority of their revenue from whiting (Merluccius productus) and
other groundfish species, some vessels obtained a majority of their revenue from crab or other
nongroundfish species. Of the 143 vessels in the survey population, 12 had no revenue from
West Coast groundfish landings during 2004 but did have a limited entry permit. These 12
vessels earned the majority of their revenue from crab and shrimp.
These vessels are included in the survey population, as the objective of the survey is to
obtain a representative sample of the entire population of vessels that have an associated limited
entry trawl permit. Applications of survey data focusing on groundfish management can choose

2

to omit responses from vessels with no groundfish landings if so desired. 2 Of course, survey
objectives also include obtaining data on a representative sample of vessels engaging primarily
in groundfish harvesting.
Because of the relatively small size of the survey population, this survey attempted to
collect data from all members of the population. All 143 vessels in the survey population were
in the sample population due to the use of this census approach.

2.2. Questionnaire Development
The survey questionnaire was developed initially by representatives of the NWFSC,
National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) Northwest Regional Office, Southwest Fisheries
Science Center, and PSMFC. After survey content was determined, a draft questionnaire was
prepared. The draft was discussed with members of the limited entry trawl fleet by PSMFC
personnel. In addition, NWFSC personnel provided presentations on survey content and timing
to the Pacific Fishery Management Council (PFMC) Groundfish Advisory Panel and the PFMC
Scientific and Statistical Committee. Comments received through these discussions and
presentations improved questionnaire content and format.

2

Of the 12 vessels in the survey population with no West Coast groundfish landings, 7 provided survey responses.
Of these 7 respondents with no revenue from groundfish landings, 6 earned a majority of revenue from crab and one
earned a majority of revenue from shrimp.

3

3. Survey Fielding Protocol
This section describes the protocol used to field the survey and collect data from
respondents. Because of the low response rate to an earlier cost earnings survey of the limited
entry trawl fleet conducted by mail, particular emphasis was placed on implementing protocol
that would maximize response rates. Steps taken to maximize response rates are discussed in
subsection 3.2.

3.1. Fielding Schedule
Fielding began with each member of the survey population receiving a package by mail
containing an introductory letter describing the survey, a one-page description of reasons for
conducting the survey, and a copy of the questionnaire (the latter provided in Appendix A).
Enclosing the questionnaire gave recipients an opportunity to see firsthand the data being
collected by the survey and collect the requested data prior to the in-person interview. The cover
letter noted that the survey had been endorsed by two industry associations, the Fishermen’s
Marketing Association and the Oregon Trawl Commission.
About two weeks after the letter and questionnaire mailing, attempts to contact each
recipient by telephone began in order to schedule a time and location for the in-person interview.
During the following three weeks, up to six additional attempts were made to contact each
member of the survey population until an interview date was scheduled. Survey fielding moved
across geographic areas over time, so as to reduce the travel costs involved in conducting inperson interviews. Interviews were conducted at a location chosen by the respondent. The most
frequent interview locations were the respondent’s residence, vessel, or a restaurant.
Interviewers used the questionnaire during the in-person interviews, asking some
additional follow-up questions when appropriate. For example, interviewers were prompted to
ask questions about the nature of repair and maintenance expenses when survey respondents
reported large repair and maintenance expenditures.
The survey was fielded by the PSMFC and its subcontractors. Survey fielding began in
October 2005 and was completed in September 2006. The unusually long time period for
fielding resulted from administrative hurdles that prevented fielding between January 2006 and
May 2006.

3.2. Maximizing Response Rates
A number of methods were used to maximize survey response rates. 3 First, the
questionnaire is short, consisting of only four pages in written form. Data collection through the
3

While data collection occurred through in-person interviews, many of the protocols used to maximize survey
response were taken from Mail and internet surveys: The tailored design method (Dillman 1999).

4

in-person interview usually took less than one hour. Second, respondents were asked only to
provide information about major cost and earnings categories, thus avoiding what may seem to
respondents like unnecessary detail. Third, data was collected through in-person interviews,
which typically have higher response rates than mail or telephone surveys. Fourth, there were
extensive follow-up telephone calls and mailings after the initial letter and questionnaire mailing
in order to schedule in-person interviews and obtain responses. These follow-up telephone calls
were distributed among weekend/weekday and day/evening time periods to maximize the
likelihood of reaching the contact person. Finally, as noted in the cover letter, the survey carried
the endorsements of the Fishermen’s Marketing Association and the Oregon Trawl Commission.

5

4. Survey Response Rates
Responses were received from 99 of the 143 vessels in the survey population, a 69%
response rate. However, some respondents failed to provide complete cost data or provided data
that were deemed suspect. 4 After removing 8 incomplete responses, there were 91 responses
(63% response rate), which were used for empirical analysis.
Table 1 presents a summary of survey response rates by vessel type and geographic
location. The vessel type classification scheme used in this report is described by Radtke and
Davis (2000). Within the limited entry trawl fleet, most vessels have landing patterns that place
them in the whiting, large groundfish trawler, or crabber vessel types. Whiting vessels are
defined as having at least $100,000 in annual revenue from West Coast landings and obtaining at
least 33% of revenue from whiting. Large groundfish trawlers are defined as having at least
$100,000 in annual revenue from West Coast landings and obtaining at least 33% of revenue
from groundfish. Crabbers are defined as having at least $15,000 in annual revenue from West
Coast landings and obtaining at least 33% of revenue from crab landings. Vessels were
classified on the basis of their 2004 landings. Vessels that had more than $100,000 in annual
revenue from West Coast landings during 2004 and earned at least 33% of their revenue from
whiting and at least 33% of their revenue from non-whiting groundfish were classified as whiting
vessels.
The survey population includes all vessels operating on the West Coast that are classified
as shoreside whiting vessels or large groundfish trawlers. The survey population also includes
some vessels classified as crabbers (these vessels earn more revenue from crab landings than
groundfish landings, even though they do have a limited entry trawl permit). Geographic
classification is based on the home port of the vessel. While this survey provides representative
data on the population of shoreside whiting vessels and large groundfish trawlers operating on
the West Coast, it also provides representative data on a unique subset of West Coast crabbers.
The response rate for crabbers (74%) is higher than the response rate for either large
groundfish trawlers (65%) or whiting vessels (63%). No responses were received from the five
small groundfish trawlers in the survey population. The response rate was higher for vessel
owners living in Oregon than owners living in Washington and California. A 76% response rate
was obtained from limited entry trawl vessels in Oregon, while responses were obtained from
51% of the limited entry trawlers in California and 50% of the limited entry trawlers in
Washington.
There are three possible reasons for the higher response rate in Oregon. First, the Oregon
Trawl Commission provided a valuable endorsement of the survey. Second, the survey was
4

The most common response regarded as suspect had variable costs (captain, crew, fuel, food, bait, and ice) greatly
exceeding revenue. Large changes in landings between 2003 and 2004 without a corresponding change in variable
costs were also flagged during data analysis.

6

fielded first in Oregon, then lengthened with additional questions on insurance and interest
expenditures before fielding in California and Washington. Finally, trawlers in Oregon have
higher average earnings than those in Washington and California, and survey response rates tend
to be higher as vessel revenues increase.

7

5. Comparing Respondents and
Nonrespondents
A considerable amount of information is available about vessel characteristics and
landings for each member of the survey population. This information can be used to compare
respondents and nonrespondents and perform statistical tests to determine whether differences
between them are statistically significant. This section compares vessel physical characteristics
and revenue from landings for respondents and nonrespondents. Appendix B discusses the
results of statistical tests aimed at determining whether the differences between respondents and
nonrespondents are statistically significant. Subsection 5.3 provides a brief summary of the
statistical tests discussed in Appendix B.

5.1. Data Used to Test for Nonresponse Bias
Data on vessel physical characteristics, West Coast landings (by species, gear type, and
port), and revenue from West Coast landings (also by species, gear type, and port) is available
for all members of the survey population. Available information on vessel characteristics
includes vessel length and horsepower. PacFIN provides vessel-level information on West Coast
(Washington, Oregon, and California) landings by date, species, gear type, and port for all
vessels in the survey population. As a result, it is possible to compare respondents and
nonrespondents with regard to seasonal patterns, species landed, and location of landings. In
addition, some information is available from the Alaska Fisheries Information Network (AKFIN)
regarding landings in Alaska by population members. This information is used to compare the
activities of respondents and nonrespondents in Alaskan waters. This information is important,
as some members of the population are believed to earn considerable revenue in Alaskan waters.
Available information on Alaska landings includes 1) whether each vessel had any landings in
Alaska and 2) whether revenue from landings in Alaska was greater or smaller than revenue
from landings in Washington, Oregon, and California.

5.2. Comparison Results
Vessel physical characteristics and landings revenue for survey respondents and
nonrespondents are compared in Table 2 through Table 5. Table 2 provides a comparison for the
entire limited entry trawl fleet of respondents, nonrespondents, and all limited entry trawl vessels
with landings on the West Coast. Comparisons are provided for engine horsepower, vessel
length, vessel revenue from crab, revenue from groundfish, and revenue from all species.
Table 2 shows that all 143 vessels in the survey population had average West Coast
landings revenue of $327,425. Respondents had average revenue of $356,771 and
nonrespondents had average revenue of $276,069. Respondents earned greater revenue than
nonrespondents from both groundfish and crab. Mean groundfish revenue during 2004 was
$214,341 for respondents and $198,678 for nonrespondents. Crab landings exhibited a greater
8

proportional difference between respondents ($109,499) and nonrespondents ($55,940) during
2004. The difference in revenue from crab landings accounts for about two-thirds of the
difference in revenue from all West Coast landings for respondents and nonrespondents.
Respondents also had vessels with greater length (67 vs. 62 feet) and horsepower (431 vs. 373)
than nonrespondents.
Table 3 through Table 5 present results for the three major vessel types within the limited
entry trawl fleet. Crabbers, large groundfish trawlers, and whiting vessels account for 88 of the
91 survey respondents and 132 of the 143 vessels in the survey population. The results for the
entire limited entry trawl fleet in Table 2 include not only the 88 respondents in these 3 vessel
types, but also the 3 survey respondents in other vessel types.
Table 3 shows that while the mean West Coast landings revenue from all species was
$383,987 for all 30 crabbers in the survey population, it was $391,463 for the 22 respondents and
$363,428 for the 8 nonrespondents. Respondents had higher levels of both crab and groundfish
landings than nonrespondents, as well as larger vessels with more horsepower.
Among large groundfish trawlers in Table 4, respondents had higher mean revenue from
all West Coast landings ($325,719) than nonrespondents ($267,063). Respondents and
nonrespondents earned similar levels of revenue from groundfish landings ($230,961 vs.
$234,005). However, respondents earned considerably more revenue from landings of crab and
other nongroundfish species than nonrespondents. Respondents also had vessels with greater
length (67 vs. 60 feet) and horsepower (401 vs. 339) than nonrespondents.
Table 5 shows that groundfish and crab account for almost all revenue from West Coast
landings for members of the shoreside whiting fleet. While some members of the shoreside
whiting fleet earn almost all of their West Coast revenue from whiting landings (and earn all
other revenue in Alaska), other members remain on the West Coast outside of the whiting season
and participate in other groundfish fisheries and crabbing. The 12 survey respondents had nearly
identical revenue from groundfish (which includes whiting) landings as the 7 nonrespondents
($420,924 vs. $421,705). Revenue from crab landings was about twice as large for respondents
as nonrespondents ($74,021 vs. $36,233). Respondents had smaller vessels (82 vs. 89 feet in
length) with smaller engines (685 vs. 742 horsepower) than nonrespondents.

5.3. Statistical Tests for Nonresponse Bias
A two sample t-test was used to determine whether the differences observed between
survey respondents and nonrespondents were statistically significant. The two sample t-test is
based on a null hypothesis that the mean value of the variable being tested is the same for
respondents and nonrespondents. Detailed results from the two sample t-tests are presented in
Appendix B. This subsection provides a summary of the results from the two sample t-tests.
The two sample t-tests indicate that for each of the three primary vessel types within the
limited entry trawl fleet, the difference in revenue from West Coast landings between
respondents and nonrespondents was not statistically significant. However, there is a statistically
significant difference in revenue from all West Coast landings for survey respondents and
nonrespondents when results are examined for the entire limited entry trawl fleet.

9

The combination of 1) larger though not statistically significant landings for respondents
than nonrespondents in each of the three primary vessel types and 2) absence of small groundfish
trawlers results in a statistically significant difference between revenue from all West Coast
landings for respondents and nonrespondents for the entire limited entry trawl fleet. Thus the
average survey respondent had $356,771 of revenue while the average member of the survey
population had $327,425 of revenue; that is, respondents had average revenue which was
$29,346 (9.0%) larger than that of the average member of the population.

10

6. Correcting for Nonresponse Bias
Survey respondents have greater revenue from total West Coast landings than
nonrespondents for each of the three primary vessel types within the limited entry trawl fleet, but
these differences are not statistically significant at the 95% confidence level. For the entire
limited entry trawl fleet, respondents have revenue from West Coast landings that is 9.0% larger
than that of all limited entry trawl vessels. Since much of the statistically significant bias among
the entire limited entry trawl fleet results in part from not having any survey responses from the
five small groundfish trawlers, weighting responses would not be an effective way of reducing
this bias. Since no responses were received from small groundfish trawlers, there is no data to
weight. As a result, this report presents only unweighted results for both the major vessel types
within the limited entry trawl fleet and the entire limited entry trawl fleet. Since respondents had
greater revenue from West Coast landings than the survey population, estimates of variable costs
(which depend on the level of fishing activity) derived from the data provided by respondents are
biased upwards. All estimates of costs, revenues, and operating characteristics reported in Table
6 through Table 12 were calculated using PROC SURVEYMEANS in SAS.

11

7. Empirical Results
This section provides empirical results from the survey for the limited entry trawl fleet
and the major vessel types within each fleet.
Before examining cost and earnings data from 2004, it is worthwhile to consider the
health of the West Coast groundfish and crab fisheries during 2004. That year, total commercial
and tribal groundfish landings (including whiting) for all gear types on the West Coast were
240,172 mt, slightly below the average of 251,488 mt observed from 2005 to 2009. Commercial
and tribal groundfish landings for all gear types during 2004 included 213,478 mt of whiting and
38,010 mt of non-whiting groundfish. Both whiting and non-whiting groundfish landings were
slightly lower during 2004 than the annual average over the 2005–2009 period.
Revenue from commercial and tribal West Coast groundfish landings (for all gear types)
was $68.1 million in 2004, well below the annual average of $85.1 million observed during
2005–2009. Revenue from groundfish landings during 2004 included $24.2 million from
whiting landings and $43.9 million from non-whiting groundfish landings. Both figures are
below the annual average of $33.8 million from whiting landings and $51.3 from non-whiting
groundfish landings recorded during the 2005–2009 period. Revenues from landings during
2004 are further below the 2005–2009 annual average than landings, reflecting the rise in
whiting and sablefish (Anoplopoma fimbria) prices that occurred between 2004 and 2009.
The West Coast crab fishery had a high level of landings and revenue during 2004. That
year, West Coast commercial and tribal crab landings (with all gear types) were 28,537 mt, the
third largest annual harvest during the 1998–2009 period and higher than the average of 24,465
mt recorded during 2005–2009. Revenue from crab landings was also higher than normal during
2004. West Coast crab landings provided revenue of $115.7 million during that year, well above
the average of $106.3 million recorded during 2005–2009.

7.1. Costs and Earnings Categories
Table 6 provides average expenditures and revenues for all survey respondents in the
limited entry trawl fleet. Some respondents did not respond to all questions, so the number of
observations varies across variables. Cost categories covered by the survey include payments to
captain, payments to crew, fuel, food, ice, bait, repair, maintenance, and improvements (RMI),
insurance, interest, permit purchases, and permit leases.
The mean limited entry trawl survey respondent earned $356,771 from West Coast
landings, $111,168 from Alaska landings, $11,319 from at sea deliveries, $2,041 from the sale
and leasing of permits, and $7,209 from all other sources. As shown in Table 10, this results in
total revenue of $488,507 for the average limited entry trawl vessel.

12

The $111,168 revenue from Alaska landings and the $11,319 in at sea deliveries reported
in Table 6 are averages that are rarely observed. Most Alaska landings were reported by vessels
in the whiting vessel type. These vessels typically participate in the West Coast shoreside
whiting fishery for a few months and spend most of the year fishing in Alaska. Among the 91
survey respondents, 12 reported revenue from Alaska during 2004 averaging $843,024, and 79
reported no revenue from operations in Alaska. Similarly, only 5 of the 91 survey respondents
reported at sea deliveries to motherships in the West Coast at sea whiting fishery during 2004.
While the average revenue from at sea deliveries across all 91 respondents was $11,319, the
average revenue from at sea deliveries for the 5 vessels reporting non-zero at sea deliveries was
$206,000.
The largest variable cost categories for limited entry trawlers are crew expenditures
($96,072), captain expenditures ($81,100), and fuel expenditures ($53,857). These three cost
categories account for more than 60% of all costs. These three variable costs plus RMI account
for about 85% of the costs reported on this survey.
In an effort to keep the questionnaire length short and boost response rates for this
voluntary survey, data was collected on all expenditures for RMI. No distinction is made in
Table 6 through Table 9 between purchases that are expensed and purchases that are capitalized
and depreciated in future years. As a result, individual vessel level costs show considerable
variation due to variation in purchases of capital goods that provide services over many years.
A more theoretically desirable way to have collected data on purchases of capital goods
would have been to collect information on 1) purchases expensed during 2004, 2) purchases
capitalized during 2004, and 3) depreciation taken during 2004 for capital goods purchased in
previous years. However, this approach increases questionnaire length and complexity, and was
rejected for use in this voluntary survey.

7.2. Calculating Profits and Quasi-rents from Survey Data
Using the survey data provided in Table 6 through Table 9 to calculate economic
performance measures such as quasi-rents (the difference between total revenue and variable
costs) and profit requires that a number of issues be considered and addressed. The first two
issues discussed in this subsection affect the calculation of both quasi-rent and economic profit.
The third issue affects the calculation of economic profit but not the calculation of quasi-rents, as
it affects fixed costs that do not enter into the calculation of quasi-rent.
First, the survey does not cover all costs incurred by vessel owners. In an effort to limit
survey length and boost response rates, the questionnaire (provided in Appendix A) did not
collect data on costs such as moorage, unloading fish, and transporting fish to the buyer. Of
course there is no way of knowing the exact magnitude of the cost categories not covered by the
survey, but conversations with industry participants suggest it is in the range of 5% to 10% of
total costs.
Second, calculating economic profit would require adjustment for the vessel owners who
serve as captain and do not always pay themselves a salary as captain. Rather, these vessel
owners derive their compensation for service as captain through their earnings as the recipient of

13

vessel profits. Since actual expenditures differ greatly from opportunity costs in such cases, it is
necessary to develop another way of estimating captain costs for vessels where the captain
receives no salary on some trips.
The third issue that must be addressed when using this survey data to derive a measure of
economic profit is the opportunity cost of the money tied up in marketable capital goods such as
the fishing vessel and equipment. The fishing vessel and onboard equipment represents an
opportunity cost for the vessel owner. Were the vessel to be sold, the money received for the
vessel could be invested and earn a positive rate of interest.
As a result of these three considerations, this document (whose function is to report
survey results) does not attempt to perform and report the considerable additional work required
to estimate economic profit. 5 However, quasi-rents can be calculated without the fixed costs that
are also included in the definition of profit, and can be calculated from the available survey data
with fewer adjustments than economic profit. Since fewer and simpler adjustments are required
to calculate quasi-rents, this document does report quasi-rents.

7.3. Costs, Earnings, and Quasi-rents
Table 10 reports revenues, variable costs, and quasi-rents calculated using the survey data
with no adjustment for vessel owners who serve as captain without salary compensation on some
groundfish trips. The table also reports adjusted variable costs and adjusted quasi-rent, which
attempt to correct for the bias created by vessel owners taking their compensation for serving as
captain through being the residual claimant. Based on an examination of captain expenditures
reported for vessels where the owner does not serve as captain, this adjustment assumed that the
vessel captain should earn at least $80,000 annually. In cases where the reported captain
expenditure is less than $80,000, the reported captain expenditure is replaced with $80,000.
Table 10 shows revenue (total revenue from West Coast landings and all other sources
such as Alaska landings), total costs (the total of all expenditures shown in Table 6 through
Table 9), variable costs (the total of expenditures for captain, crew, food, fuel, bait, and ice), and
quasi-rents (total revenue minus variable costs). Costs in Table 10 are derived by summing the
cost categories shown in Table 6 through Table 9. Table 10 also includes columns labeled
adjusted variable costs and adjusted quasi-rent. Adjusted variable cost was obtained by making
two adjustments to variable costs for each vessel. First, annual captain expenditures were
assumed to be equal to a minimum of $80,000 per vessel. Second, variable costs were increased
by 10% to account for those expenditures not captured by the survey questionnaire.
Table 10 indicates that the average limited entry trawler earns adjusted quasi-rents of
$216,761. These quasi-rents are equal to 44% of total revenue. The average crabber earned
adjusted quasi-rents of $234,204, which equals 49% of total revenue. The average large
groundfish trawler earned adjusted quasi-rents of $131,134, which equals 38% of revenue.
While large groundfish trawlers earn $133,950 less revenue than crabbers, their adjusted variable
5

See Lian et al. (2010) for an example of how these adjustments to the survey data can be made to derive an
estimate of economic profit. That journal article adjusts the survey data to account for 1) costs which were not
reported on the survey questionnaire, 2) vessel owners who served as captain and did not pay themselves a salary,
and 3) the opportunity cost of capital (vessel and onboard equipment) used in harvesting groundfish.

14

costs are only $30,880 lower. As a result, a large groundfish trawler on average earns less than
60% of the quasi-rents earned by a crabber in the limited entry trawl fleet. Whiting vessels,
which not only earn the most revenue on the West Coast of any vessel type but also earn the
most revenue in Alaska, earned adjusted quasi-rents of $551,188 per vessel. Quasi-rents for
whiting vessels averaged 50% of total revenue. While crabbers and whiting vessels earned
nearly identical adjusted quasi-rents as a percentage of revenue, large groundfish trawlers earned
considerably lower adjusted quasi-rents as a percentage of revenue. In other words, adjusted
variable costs consume a greater share of total revenue for large groundfish trawlers than for
crabbers or whiting vessels.
Since quasi-rents represent the difference between total revenue and variable costs, they
do not consider the fixed costs (such as insurance, interest, permits, and RMI) that a vessel
owner incurs. 6
The data in Table 10 cannot be used to directly calculate a measure of accounting profit
or economic profit. Accounting profit measures the difference in a given time period between
revenue and cost, where cost includes items that are being expensed in the current period as well
as depreciation from capital goods purchased in earlier time periods. Measuring accounting
profit would require adjusting the survey data for 1) adjustment for those minor cost categories
not collected by the survey and 2) knowledge of how much of the current expenditure on capital
goods is depreciated and how much is expensed, as well as knowledge of how much depreciation
for capital goods purchased in earlier years is being taken in the current year. Economic profit
measures the difference between revenue and the opportunity costs incurred during a given time
period. Calculating a measure of economic profit that accounts for all opportunity costs incurred
by the vessel owner would require adjusting the survey data for 1) vessel owners who serve as
captain without an explicit payment for their provision of captain services, 2) the interest income
lost by having capital tied up in the vessel rather than an interest earnings asset, and 3) cost
categories not collected by the survey.

7.4. Crew Size, Fuel Use, and Vessel Speed
Table 11 provides crew size, fuel use (gallons per hour), and vessel speed (knots per
hour) for the limited entry trawl fleet and major vessel types. Crew size exhibited little variation
across fisheries. For all limited entry trawl vessels, the average crew size (not including the
captain) was 1.9 for groundfish trawl, 2.0 for shrimping, and 2.1 for crabbing. When crew size is
examined by vessel type, whiting vessels and large groundfish trawlers report similar crew sizes,
and crabbers report smaller crew sizes by activity than whiting vessels or large groundfish
trawlers.
Fuel use showed considerable variation across fisheries, ranging from 19.1 for groundfish
trawling to 8.2 for crabbing. While the average member of the limited entry trawl fleet uses 19.1
6

The 2004 data used in these calculations come from a period before implementation of the buyback program
landing taxes. In December 2003, NMFS required all accepted bidders to permanently cease fishing with the fishing
vessels and permits whose privileges had been relinquished in exchange for buyback program reduction payments.
Landings taxes on groundfish, crab, and shrimp are used as a source of funding for the buyback program. Collection
of these taxes began in September 2005, so the 2004 data reported herein does not reflect the impact of buyback
landings taxes.

15

gallons of fuel per hour when trawling, this figure ranges considerably across vessels and vessel
types. Vessels targeting whiting are typically larger than vessels in the large groundfish trawler
and crabber vessel classifications, and hence have higher fuel use. Because of the small number
of whiting vessels engaged in shrimping, confidentiality considerations prohibit providing fuel
use or speed for whiting vessels engaged in shrimping.

7.5. Crew Share System and Owner as Captain
Table 12 reports the share of revenue on groundfish trips paid to the captain, crew, and
vessel owner. For the limited entry trawl fleet, the vessel owner served as captain for 82% of
trips targeting groundfish. On trips where the vessel owner served as captain, landings revenue
minus deductions was allocated at 21% to the captain, 22% to the crew, and 57% to the vessel.
These percentages are nearly identical for trips where the vessel owner is not the vessel captain.
While the captain receives a 20% share when he is not the owner, the captain receives a 21%
share when he is the vessel owner.
Results for the major vessel types indicate that whiting vessels are less frequently
captained by the vessel owner than crabbers or large groundfish trawlers. The vessel owner
served as captain on 60% of the trips targeting groundfish made by whiting vessels, but 85% of
the trips made targeting groundfish by crabbers and 86% of the trips made targeting groundfish
by large groundfish trawlers.
The allocation of landings revenue minus deductions also varies across vessel types.
Whiting vessels pay the captain a somewhat lower percentage of revenues after deductions than
crabbers or large groundfish trawlers. It should be remembered that whiting vessels typically
have higher revenue from landings than crabbers or large groundfish trawlers.
Table 12 shows that whiting vessels had a similar allocation of landings revenue after
deductions when the owner served as captain and when the owner did not serve as captain. On
the 60% of trips where the owner served as captain, landings revenue after deductions was
allocated at 15% to the captain, 25% to the crew, and 61% to the vessel (numbers do not add to
100% due to rounding).
For large groundfish trawlers on the 86% of groundfish trips where the owner served as
captain, landings revenue after deductions was allocated at 23% to the captain, 22% to the crew,
and 55% to the vessel. On trips where the owner did not serve as captain, landings revenue after
deductions was allocated at 20% to the captain, 20% to the crew, and 60% to the vessel. On trips
where the owner is not on board, a larger percentage of landings revenue is allocated to the
vessel and a smaller percentage to the captain and the crew.
Crabbers were captained by the vessel owner on 85% of trips targeting groundfish,
almost identical to the 86% figure obtained for large groundfish trawlers. On trips where the
vessel owner served as captain, the allocation of landings revenue after deductions by crabbers
was 22% to the captain, 21% to the crew, and 57% to the vessel. The allocation changes slightly
when the vessel owner did not serve as captain, with 26% to the captain, 19% to the crew, and
55% to the vessel.

16

8. Concluding Comments
The NWFSC and PSMFC thank all of the vessel owners who participated in this
voluntary survey. The NWFSC and PSMFC also are grateful for the survey endorsement
provided by the Fishermen’s Marketing Association and the Oregon Trawl Commission. The
quality of data and summary statistics provided in this report depends on the willingness of
commercial fishermen to provide their time and confidential data.
While this report provides a considerable amount of information taken from the survey
responses, it does not provide all possible summary statistics that could be derived from the
survey responses. Individuals interested in further information about the survey should contact
either the NWFSC or PSMFC.
The NWFSC and PSMFC intend to conduct cost earnings surveys of the limited entry
trawl fleet on a regular basis. This will allow for the development of a time series database that
will support evaluation of the economic performance of the limited entry trawl fleet.

17

Tables 1–12
Table 1. Summary of survey response by entire fleet, vessel type, state, and revenue.
Survey
population

Complete
responses

Response
rate (%)

143

91

64

Trawl vessel type
Crabber
Large groundfish trawler
Other
Small groundfish trawler
Whiting

30
83
6
5
19

22
54
3
0
12

73
65
50
0
63

Trawl by state
California
Oregon
Washington

49
76
18

25
57
9

51
75
50

Trawlers by annual WOC landings revenue
<$200,000
$200,000 to $400,000
>$400,000

51
52
40

27
34
30

53
65
75

Limited entry trawlers

18

Table 2. Comparison of vessel physical characteristics and revenue sources for limited entry trawler
respondents and nonrespondents.
Variable

Response status

Number of
observations

Engine horsepower

All
Respondents
Nonrespondents

135
85
50

410
431
373

19
26
29

Vessel length (feet)

All
Respondents
Nonrespondents

135
85
50

65
67
62

1
1
2

Revenue from crab (US$)

All
Respondents
Nonrespondents

143
91
52

89,961
109,402
55,940

11,848
16,363
14,572

Revenue from groundfish (US$)

All
Respondents
Nonrespondents

143
91
52

208,645
214,341
198,678

14,228
17,177
25,217

Revenue from all species (US$)

All
Respondents
Nonrespondents

143
91
52

327,425
356,771
276,069

17,127
21,314
27,599

Mean

Standard
error

Table 3. Comparison of vessel physical characteristics and revenue sources for the crabber fleet
respondents and nonrespondents.
Variable

Response status

Number of
observations

Engine horsepower

All
Respondents
Nonrespondents

30
22
8

351
376
281

39
52
31

Vessel length (feet)

All
Respondents
Nonrespondents

30
22
8

56
57
53

3
3
4

Revenue from crab (US$)

All
Respondents
Nonrespondents

30
22
8

265,796
276,134
237,367

30,397
37,734
49,500

Revenue from groundfish (US$)

All
Respondents
Nonrespondents

30
22
8

75,573
85,603
47,990

19,305
24,846
23,424

Revenue from all species (US$)

All
Respondents
Nonrespondents

30
22
8

383,987
391,463
363,428

46,026
56,270
81,892

19

Mean

Standard
error

Table 4. Comparison of vessel physical characteristics and revenue sources for the large groundfish
trawler respondents and nonrespondents.
Variable

Response status

Number of
observations

Engine horsepower

All
Respondents
Nonrespondents

76
48
28

378
401
339

18
22
32

Vessel length (feet)

All
Respondents
Nonrespondents

76
48
28

65
67
60

1
2
2

Revenue from crab (US$)

All
Respondents
Nonrespondents

83
54
29

44,776
55,414
24,967

9,520
13,564
9,470

Revenue from groundfish (US$)

All
Respondents
Nonrespondents

83
54
29

232,024
230,961
234,005

15,339
17,228
30,425

Revenue from all species (US$)

All
Respondents
Nonrespondents

83
54
29

305,225
325,719
267,063

17,366
20,777
30,435

Mean

Standard
error

Table 5. Comparison of vessel physical characteristics and revenue sources for the whiting fleet
respondents and nonrespondents.
Variable

Response status

Number of
observations

Engine horsepower

All
Respondents
Nonrespondents

18
12
6

704
685
742

74
104
90

Vessel length (feet)

All
Respondents
Nonrespondents

18
12
6

84
82
89

2
1
4

Revenue from crab (US$)

All
Respondents
Nonrespondents

19
12
7

60,099
74,021
36,233

26,030
37,794
29,622

Revenue from groundfish (US$)

All
Respondents
Nonrespondents

19
12
7

421,212
420,924
421,705

33,546
46,833
47,642

Revenue from all species (US$)

All
Respondents
Nonrespondents

19
12
7

487,931
501,557
464,571

43,456
58,991
65,771

20

Mean

Standard
error

Table 6. Cost and earnings by category for the entire limited entry trawl fleet.
Number of
observations

Mean (US$)

Standard
error (US$)

Cost of:
Captain
Crew
Food
Fuel
Bait
Ice
Insurance
Interest payments
Leasing permits
Purchasing permits
RMIa

89
89
88
90
91
91
33
33
91
91
91

81,100
96,072
5,257
53,857
5,697
4,711
18,893
5,210
2,444
12,052
97,042

3,656
4,958
591
3,687
592
372
1,846
1,369
700
3,552
8,704

Revenue from:
Alaska
Hawaii
Other sources
At sea deliveries
Sale/leasing of permits
All speciesb
Groundfish
Crab
Shrimp
Salmon
Pelagic
HMSc
Halibut

91
91
91
91
91
91
91
91
91
91
91
91
91

111,168
0
7,209
11,319
2,041
356,771
214,341
109,402
17,976
3,614
322
3,563
7,386

19,620
0
2,616
3,157
692
12,692
10,229
9,744
3,065
825
64
722
2,245

Variable

a

RMI = repair, maintenance, and improvements.
Groundfish, crab, shrimp, salmon, pelagic, HMS, and halibut do not represent 100% of species landed; as a result,
the sum of revenue for these species is less than revenue reported for all species.
c
HMS = highly migratory species.
b

21

Table 7. Cost and earnings by category for the crabber fleet.
Number of
observations

Mean (US$)

Standard
error (US$)

Cost of:
Captain
Crew
Food
Fuel
Bait
Ice
Insurance
Interest payments
Leasing permits
Purchasing permits
RMIa

22
22
20
22
22
22
7
7
22
22
22

76,764
91,370
2,689
34,621
11,005
2,963
7,286
286
0
6,591
83,041

12,105
15,084
763
10,438
2,448
855
2,395
169
0
4,754
14,721

Revenue from:
Alaska
Hawaii
Other sources
At sea deliveries
Sale/leasing of permits
All speciesb
Groundfish
Crab
Shrimp
Salmon
Pelagic
HMSc
Halibut

22
22
22
22
22
22
22
22
22
22
22
22
22

54,545
0
28,682
0
2,955
391,463
85,603
276,134
8,037
11,674
158
7,953
1,894

50,110
0
16,235
0
2,714
51,694
22,825
34,665
7,383
4,885
69
3,447
1,055

Variable

a

RMI = repair, maintenance, and improvements.
Groundfish, crab, shrimp, salmon, pelagic, HMS, and halibut do not represent 100% of species landed; as a result,
the sum of revenue for these species is less than revenue reported for all species.
c
HMS = highly migratory species.
b

22

Table 8. Cost and earnings by category for the large groundfish trawlers.
Number of
observations

Mean (US$)

Standard
error (US$)

Cost of:
Captain
Crew
Food
Fuel
Bait
Ice
Insurance
Interest payments
Leasing permits
Purchasing permits
RMIa

52
52
53
53
54
54
25
25
54
54
54

64,794
71,841
3,368
42,535
4,261
6,282
19,582
5,805
4,119
6,050
62,467

3,256
4,442
434
2,979
824
715
2,223
2,272
1,535
2,260
6,746

Revenue from:
Alaska
Hawaii
Other sources
At sea deliveries
Sale/leasing of permits
All speciesb
Groundfish
Crab
Shrimp
Salmon
Pelagic
HMSc
Halibut

54
54
54
54
54
54
54
54
54
54
54
54
54

12,037
0
370
5,556
13
325,719
230,961
55,414
24,283
572
34
2,676
11,635

9,455
0
291
4,364
10
16,320
13,533
10,655
5,899
373
18
1,026
4,944

Variable

a

RMI = repair, maintenance, and improvements.
Groundfish, crab, shrimp, salmon, pelagic, HMS, and halibut do not represent 100% of species landed; as a result,
the sum of revenue for these species is less than revenue reported for all species.
c
HMS = highly migratory species.
b

23

Table 9. Cost and earnings by category for the whiting fleet.
Number of
observations

Mean (US$)

Standard
error (US$)

Cost of:
Captain
Crew
Food
Fuel
Bait
Ice
Insurance
Interest payments
Leasing permits
Purchasing permits
RMIb

12
12
12
12
12
12
1
1
12
12
12

155,819
200,793
15,280
130,844
3,850
1,500
—a
—
0
10,417
216,726

24,158
33,111
5,398
27,847
2,357
617
—
—
0
9,964
72,238

Revenue from:
Alaska
Hawaii
Other sources
At sea deliveries
Sale/leasing of permits
All speciesc
Groundfish
Crab
Shrimp
Salmon
Pelagic
HMSd
Halibut

12
12
12
12
12
12
12
12
12
12
12
12
12

538,040
0
417
60,833
5,000
501,557
420,924
74,021
0
3,429
2,000
395
179

142,046
0
399
27,295
4,783
56,425
44,796
36,150
0
604
590
373
65

Variable

a

An em dash (—) is placed to maintain confidentiality when fewer that three respondents.
RMI = repair, maintenance, and improvements.
c
Groundfish, crab, shrimp, salmon, pelagic, HMS, and halibut do not represent 100% of species landed; as a result,
the sum of revenue for these species is less than revenue reported for all species.
d
HMS = highly migratory species.
b

Table 10. Limited entry trawl fleet costs, revenues, and quasi-rents (in US$).

Fleet
All trawlers
Crabber
Large groundfish trawler
Whiting

Total
cost

Variable
cost

Adjusted
variable
cost

376,637
305,610
286,842
839,093

240,996
208,407
188,819
504,236

271,746
243,441
212,561
554,660

24

Total
revenue

Quasirent

488,507
477,645
343,695
1,105,848

247,511
269,238
154,876
601,611

Adjusted
quasirent
216,761
234,204
131,134
551,188

Table 11. Limited entry trawl fleet crew size, fuel use (gallons per hour), and speed (knots per hour).
Number of
observations

Mean

Standard
error

Crew size for crabbing
Crew size for shrimp trawling
Crew size for groundfish trawling
Crew size for salmon trolling
Fuel use for crabbing
Fuel use for shrimp trawling
Fuel use for groundfish trawling
Speed when crabbing
Speed when shrimp trawling
Speed when groundfish trawling

19
12
33
12
46
44
86
42
43
86

2.1
2.0
1.9
4.3
8.2
13.5
19.1
3.5
2.1
3.0

0.1
0.0
0.1
0.3
0.5
0.5
1.1
0.2
0.0
0.1

Crabber

Crew size for crabbing
Crew size for shrimp trawling
Crew size for groundfish trawling
Crew size for salmon trolling
Fuel use for crabbing
Fuel use for shrimp trawling
Fuel use for groundfish trawling
Speed when crabbing
Speed when shrimp trawling
Speed when groundfish trawling

6
2
7
3
20
13
21
20
13
21

1.8
—
1.3
3.0
8.4
15.1
14.7
3.8
2.2
2.4

0.3
—
0.2
0.5
1.1
1.9
2.6
0.3
0.1
0.1

Lg. groundfish trawler

Crew size for crabbing
Crew size for shrimp trawling
Crew size for groundfish trawling
Crew size for salmon trolling
Fuel use for crabbing
Fuel use for shrimp trawling
Fuel use for groundfish trawling
Speed when crabbing
Speed when shrimp trawling
Speed when groundfish trawling

10
7
22
7
23
29
51
19
28
51

2.2
2.0
2.1
5.4
6.6
13.1
14.9
3.4
2.1
3.1

0.2
0.0
0.1
0.3
0.4
0.6
1.0
0.3
0.0
0.2

Whiting

Crew size for crabbing
Crew size for shrimp trawling
Crew size for groundfish trawling
Crew size for salmon trolling
Fuel use for crabbing
Fuel use for shrimp trawling
Fuel use for groundfish trawling
Speed when crabbing
Speed when shrimp trawling
Speed when groundfish trawling

3
2
3
2
3
1
11
3
1
11

2.3
—
2.0
2.0
18.3
—
44.6
3.0
—
3.7

0.3
—
0.0
0.0
5.7
—
7.2
1.1
—
0.1

Fleet

Variable

All trawlers

25

Table 12. Limited entry trawl fleet share for captain, crew, and vessel.
Number of
observations

Mean
(%)

Standard
error

Captain share without owner as captain
Crew share without owner as captain
Vessel share without owner as captain
Captain share with owner as captain
Crew share with owner as captain
Vessel share with owner as captain
Percent of trips with owner as captain

74
74
74
44
44
44
44

20.1
20.6
59.4
21.3
22.0
56.6
82.3

0.7
0.5
0.7
1.3
0.6
1.4
2.6

Crabber

Captain share without owner as captain
Crew share without owner as captain
Vessel share without owner as captain
Captain share with owner as captain
Crew share with owner as captain
Vessel share with owner as captain
Percent of trips with owner as captain

16
16
16
16
16
16
16

26.1
18.6
55.3
21.7
20.9
57.4
85.3

3.8
2.0
3.7
3.9
1.7
4.2
5.7

Lg. groundfish
trawler

Captain share without owner as captain
Crew share without owner as captain
Vessel share without owner as captain
Captain share with owner as captain
Crew share with owner as captain
Vessel share with owner as captain
Percent of trips with owner as captain

43
43
43
24
24
24
24

19.7
20.1
60.1
22.8
22.4
54.8
86.0

0.9
0.9
1.0
2.1
1.2
2.3
4.6

Whiting

Captain share without owner as captain
Crew share without owner as captain
Vessel share without owner as captain
Captain share with owner as captain
Crew share with owner as captain
Vessel share with owner as captain
Percent of trips with owner as captain

12
12
12
3
3
3
3

14.1
24.5
61.4
14.7
24.7
60.7
60.0

1.2
1.4
1.4
0.6
1.1
1.1
9.6

Fleet

Variable

All trawlers

26

References
Dillman, D. A. 1999. Mail and internet surveys: The tailored design method. Wiley, Hoboken, NJ.
Lian, C., R. Singh, and Q. Weninger. 2010. Fleet restructuring, rent generation, and the design of
individual fishing quota programs: Empirical evidence from the Pacific Coast groundfish fishery.
Mar. Resour. Econ. 24(4):329–359.
Radtke, H. D., and S. W. Davis. 2000. Description of the U.S. West Coast commercial fishing fleet and
seafood processors. Pacific States Marine Fisheries Commission, Portland, OR.

27

28

Appendix A: Limited Entry Survey Questionnaire
OMB No. 0648-0369

Expiration date: 7/31/09

CONTACT INFORMATION FOR SURVEY RESPONDENT
1. Name: ________________________________ 2. E-mail: ________________________________
3. Date (month/day/year): __________________ 4. Telephone: (____)________________________
5. Mailing address (street, city, state, and zip code):
__________________________________________________________________________________

VESSEL OWNERSHIP AND CHARACTERISTICS
6. Please verify the following information on record about your vessel’s characteristics. If the
information on record is correct, please place a check mark in the Corrections column. If the information
on record is incorrect or there is no information on record, please provide the correct information in the
Corrections column.
Item

Information on record

a. Owner’s name

Charles Smith

b. Owner’s address

333 1st Street, Waldport, OR
97005

c. USCG vessel ID

33221843

d. State vessel ID

OR33214

e. Home port

Newport, OR

f. Length (feet)

75

g. Fuel capacity

300

h. Engine make and model

No information on record

Corrections

7. What is the approximate market value of your vessel (not including associated permits) in dollars?
$__________________
29

8. Please provide your vessel’s fuel consumption, speed, and crew size (not including captain) when
engaged in each of the following activities. If this vessel does not engage in an activity, please write
“NA” in the appropriate columns.
Activity

Fuel consumption
(gallons per hour)

Speed
(knots per hour)

Crew size (not
including captain)

a. Trawling (while towing)
b. Longlining
c. Shrimping (while towing)
d. Crabbing
e. Trolling
f. Steaming (fully loaded)

Not applicable

g. Steaming (empty)

Not applicable

COSTS AND EARNINGS
Questions 9 through 11 collect information about this vessel’s costs and earnings while operating in all
fisheries (groundfish, crab, shrimp, salmon, etc.). This survey’s primary objective is to collect data on
costs and earnings for 2004. However, we recognize that conditions in the fishery change from year to
year and that two years of data can provide a more complete picture than a one-year snapshot. If possible,
we would appreciate receiving your cost and earnings data for both 2003 and 2004.
9. In what month does your vessel’s fiscal year begin? ___________
10. For each of the earnings (income) sources listed below, please indicate the income earned during
your fiscal year 2003 and fiscal year 2004. If no income was earned from a particular source during a
particular year, please write NA in the appropriate box.
Earnings (income) source

2003 ($)

a. Landings in Alaska
b. Landings in Hawaii
c. Landings outside of the United States
d. West Coast at sea deliveries
e. Sale and leasing of permits associated with this vessel
f. Other (please specify)________________

30

2004 ($)

11. For each cost category below, please provide total annual expenditures during your fiscal year 2003
and fiscal year 2004. If you do not have separate data on expenditures for captain (part a) and crew (part
b), please write combined expenditures in part a and write NA in part b. If no expenditures were incurred
in a particular category during a particular year, please write NA in the appropriate box. For location of
expenditures, please indicate the location of expenditures in either dollars or percentages in the following
location categories: hp = home port, hs = home state but not home port city, wc = West Coast (WA, OR,
or CA) state but not home state, ak = Alaska, us = United States outside of West Coast and Alaska, ot =
outside the United States. For crew expenditures please indicate the percent of crew that reside in each
location category.

Cost (expenditure) category

2003 ($)

Location of
expenditures

2004 ($)

a. Captain (including share payments,
bonuses, other forms of compensation,
and payroll taxes)

hp:
hs:
wc:

ak:
us:
ot:

b. Crew (including share payments,
bonuses other forms of compensation,
and payroll taxes)

hp:
hs:
wc:

ak:
us:
ot:

c. Fuel and lube

hp:
hs:
wc:

ak:
us:
ot:

d. Food and crew provisions

hp:
hs:
wc:

ak:
us:
ot:

e. Ice

hp:
hs:
wc:

ak:
us:
ot:

f. Bait

hp:
hs:
wc:

ak:
us:
ot:

g. Repair, maintenance, and
improvements for vessel, gear, and
equipment

hp:
hs:
wc:

ak:
us:
ot:

h. Insurance

hp:
hs:
wc:

ak:
us:
ot:

i. Interest and financial services

hp:
hs:
wc:

ak:
us:
ot:

j. Purchase of permits used with this
vessel

NA

NA

k. Leasing of permits used with this
vessel

NA

NA

31

CREW COMPENSATION
Questions 12 through 16 collect information about crew payments when this vessel is participating in the
West Coast (Washington, Oregon, and California) groundfish fisheries.
12. Does this vessel use a crew share system to pay its crew when operating in West Coast groundfish
fisheries?
a. Yes (proceed to question 13).
b. No (proceed to question 17).
13. Which of the following expenses were deducted from total revenue before calculating the crew share
when this vessel operated in West Coast groundfish fisheries?
Deducted before calculating crew share?
a. Fuel and lube
Yes
No
b. Food and other crew provisions.
Yes
No
c. Landing taxes
Yes
No
d. Unloading expenses
Yes
No
e. Trucking expenses
Yes
No
f. Other. Please specify ________________
Yes
No
14. On what percentage of fishing trips does the vessel owner serve as captain? _____%
15. On trips when the vessel owner serves as captain, please indicate the share of net revenue (revenue
minus the deductions listed in question 13) going to the vessel, captain, and crew. If the vessel owner
does not serve as captain on any trips, please circle NA.
Vessel share _____%

Captain share _____%

Crew share _____%

NA

16. On trips when the vessel owner does not serve as captain, please indicate the share of net revenue
(revenue minus the deductions listed in question 13) going to the vessel, captain, and crew. If the vessel
owner always serves as captain, please circle NA.
Vessel share _____%

Captain share _____%

Crew share _____%

NA

VESSEL EARNINGS AND HOUSEHOLD INCOME
17. Approximately what percentage of your annual household income comes from earnings associated
with this vessel?
a. less than 20%

b. 20% to 40%

c. 40% to 60%

32

d. 60% to 80%

e. greater than 80%

Appendix B: Testing for Nonresponse Bias
This appendix presents the numerical results of the two sample t-tests, which were used
to determine whether the differences observed between survey respondents and nonrespondents
are statistically significant. Results from these tests were summarized in subsection 5.3. This
appendix provides the actual numerical results of the test as well as interpretation of whether the
test results indicate the presence of nonresponse bias that requires corrective measures.
The two sample t-test is based on a null hypothesis that the mean value of the variable
being tested is the same for respondents and nonrespondents. The form of the tests reported in
Table B-1 assumes that respondents and nonrespondents do not have equal variances.
Table B-1 indicates that for each of the three primary vessel types within the limited
entry trawl fleet, the difference in revenue from West Coast landings between respondents and
Table B-1. Two sample t-tests for statistical significance of differences between respondents and
nonrespondents in five variables.

T-statistic

Degrees of
freedom

Probability
> T if
H0 true

Fleet

Variable

All trawlers

Engine horsepower
Vessel length
Revenue from crab
Revenue from groundfish
Revenue from all species

1.52
2.05
2.44
0.51
2.31

115
99
137
97
108

0.13
0.04
0.02
0.61
0.02

Crabber

Engine horsepower
Vessel length
Revenue from crab
Revenue from groundfish
Revenue from all species

1.57
0.78
0.62
1.10
0.28

28
20
16
22
14

0.13
0.45
0.54
0.28
0.78

Lg. groundfish trawler

Engine horsepower
Vessel length
Revenue from crab
Revenue from groundfish
Revenue from all species

1.62
2.88
1.84
−0.09
1.59

52
54
81
46
54

0.11
0.01
0.07
0.93
0.12

Whiting

Engine horsepower
Vessel length
Revenue from crab
Revenue from groundfish
Revenue from all species

−0.42
−1.44
0.79
−0.01
0.42

15
6
17
15
14

0.68
0.20
0.44
0.99
0.68

33

nonrespondents was not statistically significant. When respondents and nonrespondents are
compared at the vessel type level, the only statistically significant difference is in the length of
large groundfish trawlers. Table 4 indicates that among large groundfish trawlers, respondents
had a mean length of 67 feet and nonrespondents had a mean length of 60 feet, producing a
t-statistic of 2.88.
Because respondents and nonrespondents at the vessel type level were not statistically
different for revenue from groundfish landings, revenue from crab landings, and most physical
characteristics, there is no need to weight survey responses at the vessel type level. The
unweighted survey responses provide a representative picture of revenues and costs earned by
each of the three major vessel types operating in the limited entry trawl fishery. There is no need
to correct the vessel type level data for nonresponse bias, and consequently, all results presented
in this document at the vessel type level are unweighted.
For the entire limited entry trawl fleet, respondents had values for vessel length, crab
landings, and total West Coast landings that were significantly higher than those of
nonrespondents. The difference between respondents and nonrespondents was not only
statistically significant, but also of large magnitude. Survey respondents had mean revenue from
crab landings of $109,402 while nonrespondents had mean revenue from crab landings of only
$55, 940.
Respondents also had higher groundfish landings than nonrespondents, but the difference
was not statistically significant. As shown in Table 2, revenue from all landings had a mean
value of $356,771 for respondents and $276,069 for nonrespondents.
While it may at first appear paradoxical that there is no statistically significant difference
between revenue from West Coast landings for respondents and nonrespondents in any of the
three primary vessel types when there is a statistically significant difference for the limited entry
trawl fleet as a whole, it should be remembered that the three primary vessel types only include
132 of the 143 vessels in the limited entry trawl fleet. The other 11 vessels tend to have
relatively small levels of revenue from landings. In particular, 5 of the 11 vessels are small
groundfish trawlers, for which no survey responses were received. As a result, the average
respondent had $356,771 of revenue from landings while the average member of the survey
population had $327,425 of revenue from landings.
It should be noted that the three primary vessel types within the limited entry trawl fleet
include 132 of the 143 limited entry trawl vessels. The other 11 vessels fall into three other
vessel types. Since no responses were received from the five small groundfish trawlers, they are
not represented in the survey results for the entire limited entry trawl fleet. The combination of
1) larger though not statistically significant landings for respondents than nonrespondents in each
of the three primary vessel types and 2) absence of small groundfish trawlers results in a
statistically significant difference between revenue from all West Coast landings for respondents
and nonrespondents for the entire limited entry trawl fleet.
While nonresponse bias is statistically significant and of sufficient magnitude to make
calculation of weighted survey results desirable, the lack of data on vessel types such as small
groundfish trawlers makes the calculations of weighted survey results to correct for nonresponse

34

bias impossible. It is not possible to weight responses in strata with lower response rates more
heavily when there are no respondents in that strata. As a result, only the unweighted results are
provided in this document for the entire limited entry trawl fleet.

35

Recent NOAA Technical Memorandums
published by the

Northwest Fisheries Science Center

NOAA Technical Memorandum NMFS-NWFSC106	 Harvey, C.J., K.K. Bartz, J. Davies, T.B. Francis, T.P. Good, A.D. Guerry, B. Hanson, K.K. Holsman,
		
J. Miller, M.L. Plummer, J.C.P. Reum, L.D. Rhodes, C.A. Rice, J.F. Samhouri, G.D. Williams, N. Yoder,
P.S. Levin, and M.H. Ruckelshaus. 2010. A mass-balance model for evaluating food web structure and
community-scale indicators in the central basin of Puget Sound. U.S. Dept. Commer., NOAA Tech. Memo.
NMFS-NWFSC-106, 180 p. NTIS number pending.
105	 Gustafson, R.G., M.J. Ford, D. Teel, and J.S. Drake. 2010. Status review of eulachon (Thaleichthys pacificus) in Washington, Oregon, and California. U.S. Dept. Commer., NOAA Tech. Memo. NMFS-NWFSC-105,
360 p. NTIS number pending. 		
104	 Horne, P.J., I.C. Kaplan, K.N. Marshall, P.S. Levin, C.J. Harvey, A.J. Hermann, and E.A. Fulton. 2010.
Design and parameterization of a spatially explicit ecosystem model of the central California Current. U.S.
Dept. Commer., NOAA Tech. Memo. NMFS-NWFSC-104, 140 p. NTIS number PB2010-110533.
103	 Dufault, A.M., K. Marshall, and I.C. Kaplan. 2009. A synthesis of diets and trophic overlap of marine species in the California Current. U.S. Dept. Commer., NOAA Tech. Memo. NMFS-NWFSC-103, 81 p. NTIS
number PB2010-110532.
102	 Reppond, K.D. 2009. Biochemistry of red king crab (Paralithodes camtschaticus) from different locations in
Alaskan waters. U.S. Dept. Commer., NOAA Tech. Memo. NMFS-NWFSC-102, 16 p. NTIS number
PB2010-110531.
101	 Sands, N.J., K. Rawson, K.P. Currens, W.H. Graeber, M.H. Ruckelshaus, R.R. Fuerstenberg, and J.B.
Scott. 2009. Determination of independent populations and viability criteria for the Hood Canal summer chum
salmon evolutionarily significant unit. U.S. Dept. Commer., NOAA Tech. Memo. NMFS-NWFSC-101, 58 p.
NTIS number PB2010-110530.
100	 Linbo, T.L. 2009. Zebrafish (Danio rerio) husbandry and colony maintenance at the Northwest Fisheries Science Center. U.S. Dept. Commer., NOAA Tech. Memo. NMFS-NWFSC-100, 62 p. NTIS number PB2009113299.

Most NOAA Technical Memorandums NMFS-NWFSC are available online at the
Northwest Fisheries Science Center web site (http://www.nwfsc.noaa.gov).