This study investigated the choices anglers make between hypothetical fishing trips as defined by harvest regulations, fishing expectations, and trip costs and ranking the various management scenarios being considered. A fractional factorial design required generation of 80 choice sets. A conditional logit model was used to estimate the preference model. All estimated coefficients of attributes had expected signs except for the “retain more fish greater than the maximum size limit” variable. Anglers did not favor regulations allowing retention of more fish above the current bag limit. The status quo scenario (with most conservative harvest restrictions) was least preferred, as expected. The most liberal harvest restriction scenario was most preferred. When angler expectations were changed, anglers wanted more stringent management that closely resembled the status quo option. Anglers were willing to relax certain rules and seemed to be choosing conservation of fishery resources over exploitation. Funding support for this research by the Coastal Fisheries Division, Texas Parks and Wildlife Department and the Texas Agricultural Experiment Station was much appreciated. The authors thank the following individuals who provided important advice and review comments at various stages of the research: Oystein Aas (Norwegian Institute for Nature Research), Dan Fesenmaier (Temple University), Kirk Gillis (Recreational Boating and Fishing Foundation), Robert Hearne (North Dakota State University), Richard Woodward (Texas A&M University), and the two anonymous reviewers of this article.