35 



Abstract-A total of 1784 legal-size 

 (>35G nun TL) hatchery-produced red 

 drum (Sciaenops ocellatus) were tagged 

 and released to estimate tag-reporting 

 levels of recreational anglers in South 

 Carolina (SC 1 and Georgia ( GAl. Twelve 

 groups of legal-size fish (-150 fish/ 

 group) were released. Half of the fish 

 of each group were tagged with an 

 external tag with the message "reward" 

 and the other half of the fish were 

 implanted with tags with the message 

 "$100 reward."These fish were released 

 into two estuaries in each state (n=4); 

 three replicate groups were released 

 at different sites within each estuary 

 (/i = 12). From results obtained in previ- 

 ous tag return experiments conducted 

 by wildlife and fisheries biologists, 

 it was hypothesized that reporting 

 would be maximized at a reward level 

 of $100/tag. Reporting level for the 

 "reward" tags was estimated by dividing 

 the number of "reward" tags returned 

 by the number of "$100 reward" tags 

 returned. The cumulative return level 

 for both tag messages was 22.7 (±1.9)9; 

 in SC and 25.8 (±4.1)% in GA. These 

 return levels were typical of those 

 recorded by other red drum tagging pro- 

 grams in the region. Return data were 

 partitioned according to verbal survey 

 information obtained from anglers who 

 reported tagged fish. Based on this 

 partitioned data set, 14.3 (±2.1)9; of 

 "reward" tags were returned in SC, 

 and 25.5 (±2.3)9, of "$100 reward" tags 

 were returned. This finding indicates 

 that only 56.79; of the fish captured 

 with "reward" tags were reported in 

 SC. The pattern was similar for GA 

 where 19.1 ( + 10.6)9, of "reward" mes- 

 sage tags were returned as compared 

 with 30.1 (±15.6)9; for "$100 reward" 

 message tags. This difference yielded 

 a reporting level of 639; for "reward" 

 tags in GA. Currently, 509; is used as 

 the estimate for the angler reporting 

 level in population models for red drum 

 and a number of other coastal finfish 

 species in the South Atlantic region of 

 the United States. Based on results of 

 our study, the commonly used reporting 

 estimate may result in an overestimate 

 of angler exploitation for red drum. 



Tag-reporting levels for red drum 

 (Scioenops ocellatus) caught by anglers 

 In South Carolina and Georgia estuaries* 



Michael R. Denson 



Wallace E. Jenkins 



Marine Resources Research InsKtute 



South CaroNna Department of Natural Resources 



217 Ft Johnson Rd 



Charleston, South Carolina 29422-2559 



E mail address (for W. E Jenkins, contact autlior) lenkinswigimrd dnr.slale sc.us 



Arnold G. Woodward 



Coastal Resources Division 



Georgia Department of Natural Resources 



1 Consei^ation Way 



Brunswick, Georgia 31523 



Theodore I. J. Smith 



Marine Resources Research Institute 



South Carolina Department of Natural Resources 



PO Box 12559 



217 Ft. Johnson Rd. 



Charleston, South Carolina 29422-2559 



Manuscript accepted 1 August 2001. 

 Fish. Bull. 100:35-41 (2002). 



There are major marine recreational 

 fisheries along the south Atlantic and 

 Gulf of Mexico coasts of the United 

 States that target red drum, Sciaenops 

 ocellatus (Matlock, 1986a; 1986b). Dur- 

 ing the late 1980s, overexploitation of 

 red drum in many states resulted in 

 the closure of commercial fisheries in 

 most states and in the imposition of 

 creel and size limits on catch of rec- 

 reational anglers (McGurrinM Concur- 

 rently, studies were initiated in a num- 

 ber of coastal states to gain a better 

 understanding of red drum life history 

 and to attempt to estimate exploita- 

 tion rates. These investigations relied 

 heavily on the use of fishery-dependent, 

 mark-recapture studies to obtain the 

 data necessary for creating a robust 

 population model (McGurrin^). 



Generic population models have been 

 developed by using mark-recapture 

 studies to estimate expected number 

 of animals that survive and are re- 

 captured from a year class within a giv- 

 en year (Brownie et al., 1985). Pollock 

 et al. (1991) emphasized the need to 

 modify tag recovery models in which 

 data from multiyear tagging studies 



were used and suggested incorporat- 

 ing variables for postmarking survival 

 and for reporting to estimate the re- 

 capture component of the model more 

 accurately. The current model used to 

 estimate recovery (recapture) rates of 

 tagged fish (0) includes a number of 

 variables in an attempt to accurately 

 account for what happens in nature 

 {9=<pljX), where (p = tag retention mul- 

 tiplied by fish survival after tagging; i.i 

 = exploitation rate; and A = reporting 

 level (Hoenig et al., 1998). Reporting 

 level (A) of tagged fish captured by an- 

 glers is perhaps the most difficult vari- 

 able to estimate accurately and is often 

 assumed to be constant over time and 

 geographic area (Hoenig et al., 1998). 



' Contribution 467 of the South Carolina 

 Department of Natural Resources, Charles- 

 ton, South Carolina 29422-2559. 

 McGurrin J. 1991. Fisheries manage- 

 ment report 19 of the Atlantic States 

 Marine Fisheries Commission. Fishery 

 management plan for red drum — amend- 

 ment 1, 123 p. Atlantic States Marine 

 Fisheries Commission, 1400 16th St. NW 

 Suite 310, Washington, DC. 20036. 



