Fishery Bulletin 92(1). 1994 



10 



CD 

 -Q 



E 



3 



o 



Log e Number = 6.86 - 0.63 Age 

 N= 1,027; r2 = 0.93; (P<0.05) 



12 3 4 5 6 

 Age (years) 



7 8 



Figure 8 



Catch curve for Atlantic croaker collected from pound- 

 net, haul-seine and gillnet commercial catches in 

 Chesapeake Bay, 1988-91. Ages 1, 2, and 8 (triangles) 

 were not used in calculating the regression line. 



Geographic comparisons 



The possible existence of two groups of Atlantic 

 croaker, exhibiting different life history and popu- 

 lation dynamics attributes north and south of Cape 

 Hatteras, North Carolina, has been extensively dis- 

 cussed in the scientific literature (Chittenden, 1977; 

 White and Chittenden, 1977; Ross, 1988). Ross 

 (1988) hypothesized that these groups may overlap 

 and mix in North Carolina and stated that, if the 

 Atlantic croaker designated in his study as "north- 

 ern" were fish migrating south from the Chesapeake 

 and Delaware Bay areas, their larger sizes (350-520 

 mm TL) and older ages (5-7 years, as aged by 

 scales) would be consistent with the proposed north- 

 ern group life history pattern. However, our results 

 do not support the hypothesis of a group of larger, 

 older Atlantic croaker in Chesapeake Bay, at least 

 in recent years. 



Maximum length and size ranges reported here 

 are consistent with recent data from North Carolina, 

 both for inshore waters as well as for the offshore 

 trawl fishery. Since 1982, Atlantic croaker trawl 

 catches in North Carolina have been dominated by 

 small fish. Fish larger than 300 mm TL and older 

 than 3 years have represented less than 1% of the 

 recent catches (Ross, 1991). Although records of 

 large fish do exist, Atlantic croaker as large as those 

 reported by Ross ( 1988) have never been common in 

 commercial catches from the Chesapeake Bay re- 

 gion. Even in the early 1930's, when the winter 

 trawl fishery had just been established off the coasts 



of Virginia and North Carolina and catches of At- 

 lantic croaker were dominated by large fish, most 

 fish measured 260-360 mm TL (Pearson, 1932). 

 Length frequencies of Atlantic croaker sampled from 

 commercial pound nets in the lower Chesapeake Bay 

 in 1922 (Hildebrand and Schroeder, 1928) and dur- 

 ing 1950-1958 (Massmann and Pacheco, 1960), as 

 well as from pound nets and haul-seines in Pamlico 

 and Core sounds, North Carolina (Higgins and 

 Pearson, 1928), show the same pattern. 



Recreational catch records also indicate that the 

 large Atlantic croaker reported by Ross ( 1988) have 

 not been common in the Chesapeake and Delaware 

 Bay areas. Between 1960 and 1970 the minimum 

 citation weight for Atlantic croaker in the Virginia 

 Saltwater Fishing Tournament ranged from 0.91 to 

 1.36 kg. Although 741 citations were issued during 

 this period, only 1.9% were for Atlantic croaker 

 >1.82 kg. Between 1977 and 1982, however, al- 

 though the minimum citation weight was raised to 

 1.82 kg, 599 citations were issued, including 47 

 entries for Atlantic croaker >2.27 kg (483-610 mm 

 TL). The largest number of citations occurred in 

 1979 and 1980, coinciding with Ross's (1988) sam- 

 pling period in North Carolina. Records from the 

 Delaware State Fishing Tournament show the same 

 pattern as that from Virginia. The number of cita- 

 tions was very small during the early 1970's, 

 reached a peak in 1980, and decreased rapidly there- 

 after. Although complete information covering their 

 entire range is not available, state records of Atlan- 

 tic croaker along the east coast of the United States 

 show the same pattern. Records from Georgia to 

 New Jersey were broken during the period 1977-82, 

 indicating that 1) unusually large fish occurred 

 during this period and have not occurred since; and 

 2) their occurrence was not limited to areas north 

 of North Carolina. 



In conclusion, recent size and age composition 

 data do not indicate the existence of a group of 

 larger, older Atlantic croaker in the Chesapeake Bay 

 region compared with more southern waters. His- 

 toric information agrees well with our results and 

 indicates that fish >400 mm TL have not repre- 

 sented a large proportion of Atlantic croaker in this 

 area. The abundance of unusually large fish during 

 the period 1977-82 apparently constituted an un- 

 usual event and may reflect passage through the 

 fishery of a few strong year classes that seemingly 

 disappeared after 1982. Similar episodes — the occur- 

 rence of larger fish for a few years — have been pre- 

 viously reported for Atlantic croaker in Chesapeake 

 Bay (Hildebrand and Schroeder, 1928; Massmann 

 and Pacheco, 1960), suggesting the phenomenon 

 happens periodically. An increase in survivorship of 



