Table 1. — Results of nearshore cruises using two types of shrimp trawls. 



^SR = stratified random sampling; NR = nonrandom sampling. 



2At least some portions of the waters of these states were sampled. 



mackerels taken in tongue nets on two cruises are 

 presented in Figures 1 and 2, respectively. Com- 

 parisons of the catch rates of Spanish mackerel 

 during the TED evaluations in July- August 1986 

 showed that significantly fewer were taken in the 

 tongue net equipped with a NMFS TED than the 



control net (Mann-Whitney: P < 0.001) or the 

 Georgia TED-net (P < 0.05) (Table 2). There were 

 no significant differences in catches of king mack- 

 erel (Table 3), or in catches of either species be- 

 tween nets on the September-October cruise, per- 

 haps due to the smaller sample sizes. 



Figure 1. — Length-frequency distribution of 

 Spanish mackerel taken in shrimp tongue trawl nets 

 during July-August 1986 along the southern At- 

 lantic coast of the United States in = 2,303). 



FORK LENGTH (cm) 



395 



