Fishery managers are mandated to understand the effects that environmental damage, fishery regulations, and habitat improvement projects have on the net benefits that recreational anglers derive from their sport. Since 1994, the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) has worked to develop a consistent method for estimating net benefits through site choice models of recreational trip demand. In estimating net benefits with these models, there is a tradeoff between computational efficiency and angler behavior in reality. This article examines this tradeoff by considering the sensitivity of angler-welfare estimates for an increase in striped bass (Morone saxatalis) angling quality across choice sets with five travel distance cutoffs and compares those estimates to a model with an unrestricted choice set. This article shows that 95% confidence intervals for welfare estimates of an increase in the striped bass catch and keep rate overlap for all distance-based choice sets specified here.