46 FISHERY BULLETIN OF THE FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE 



and 22C, which show that there were no returns from outside the State of North Caro- 

 lina from the small number of striped bass that were released there in March and 

 April, 1937. It does not appear, therefore, from the preliminary results of this work 

 that the North Carolina stock contributes more than a small percentage directly to 

 the summer population in the north. Rather, it seems that the bulk of the northern 

 migration of the striped bass in the spring, and the corresponding return to the south 

 in the fall, takes place between the Chesapeake Bay area and Cape Cod, and that 

 only a relatively small number of migrants from the north and south of these regions 

 take part in these movements. 



In this connection the author is grateful to Mr. David H. Wallace, of the Chesa- 

 peake Biological Laboratory of the University of Maryland, for giving him the results 

 of a tagging experiment conducted in conjunction with Dr. Vadim D. Vladykov's 

 investigation of anadromous species for the State of Maryland. Of 483 bass tagged 

 from November 15 to 19, 1937, in the east end of Albemarle Sound, in Croatan Sound, 

 and on the outer coast of North Carolina, most of which were yearling and 2- and 3- 

 year-old fish, only 2 had been recovered from northern waters by June 1, 1938, these 

 coming from New Jersey. This is added evidence that North Carolina contributes 

 only a small amount directly to the population summering in northern waters. It 

 is of interest that 1 of these fish tagged on November 15, 1937, was caught in New 

 Jersey on January 16, 1938, showing that some fish migrate north before the spring 

 months. 



ORIGIN OF THE DOMINANT 1934 YEAR-CLASS 



The problem of the geographical point of origin of the dominant 1934 year-class, 

 that age-group which has already been discussed at some length, is of particular 

 interest. There is considerable evidence to support the conclusion that these fish 

 were produced mainly in the Chesapeake Bay region. Thus, in the summer of 1935, 

 when the members of this year-class were 1-year-olds and probably averaged 15-20 cm. 

 (approximately 6-8 inches) in length, an unusually great abundance of striped bass of 

 about this size and presumably of this age was observed and reported from Chesapeake 

 Bay by many competent people. Truitt and Vladykov (1936) also "found that fish 

 ranging from 21 to 25 cm. in standard length" seemed to be the most abundant age- 

 category of striped bass in Chesapeake Bay during the early and midsummer in 1936. 

 These fish were undoubtedly 2-year-olds at that time — members of the dominant 1934 

 year-class. Vladykov and Waflace (1937) also corroborate this information. On the 

 other hand, diligent inquiry ehcited no reports of yearling bass in 1935 from waters 

 farther north. In the light of these observations it therefore seems logical to suppose 

 that this largo group of fish that were 2-year-olds in the summer of 1936, and first 

 appeared in north Atlantic waters in that year, came hi the majority from the Chesa- 

 peake Bay area and that general latitude. (See below for evidence that the dominant 

 1934 year-class did not come from farther south, p. 49.) From what is now 

 known of the paucity of the spawning areas in the north, it is most unlikely that 

 those, regions north of the latitude covered by Delaware. Bay contributed more than a 

 small fraction to this dominant year-class — or for that matter, that they ever play 

 more than a small and unimportant role in contributing to the total stock along the 

 Atlantic coast under present conditions. Thus it becomes apparent that the striped 

 bass fishery from New Jersey northward is almost entirely dependent for its existence 

 on the stock of bass produced to the south, and on the migrations from the south to 

 the north in the spring, which do not occur until bass become 2 years old or older. 



Granting that the major portion of the production of striped bass takes place from 

 the northern part of Delaware Bay south, it is of interest to determine how far south 

 the stock contributes to the supply in northern waters, and to what extent different 

 areas contribute to this supply. It is known that the Chesapeake Bay area is an 

 important spawning center, and the work of V. D. Vladykov and D. H. Wallace (as 

 yet unpublished) on tagging striped bass in connection with the survey of anadromous 

 fishes for the State of Maryland has shown that the migration of bass out of Chesapeake 

 Bay to the north in the spring is not an uncommon occurrence. Thus it seems well 

 established that this general region contributes to the supply in the north and is an 

 important center of production. 



