tions and abundances, taking into account the many 

 sources of variability- The integrated quantitative 

 and qualitative relative abundance estimates were 

 then verified through an extensive review process 

 utilizing expert knowledge and field experiences of 

 fisheries scientists, managers, and field biologists. 



The relative abundance categories — highly abun- 

 dant, abundant, common, rare, and not present — 

 were intended to simulate the categories routinely 

 used by fisheries biologists. This type of comprehen- 

 sive and consistent format is readily understandable 

 by field biologists, fisheries managers, and academic 

 scientists alike. An ordinal relative abundance scheme 

 of this type is often adopted in the field, at least 



casually, and the ELMR methodology has only de- 

 fined this classification scheme more rigorously. The 

 abundance of a species life stage was considered 

 relative to that of the same life stage of other "similar 

 species." Similar species were considered to be those 

 having similar life modes and gear susceptibilities 

 (e.g. skates and flounders, bluefish and striped bass). 

 From the ELMR regional species lists, several groups, 

 or guilds, of species were derived, summarized in 

 Table 4. These guilds are: 



• Sessile Invertebrates 



• Shrimps and Squids 



• Large Crustaceans 



• Shallow Water Fishes 



• Pelagic Fishes 



• Demersal Fishes 



Cynoscion regalis 

 Weakfish 



Delaware Bay 



Delaware / New Jersey / Pennsylvania 



Legend: 



Relative Abundance: 



= Not Present 



= Rare 



= Common 



= Abundant 



= Highly Abundant 



Data Reliability (R): 



1 = Highly Certain 



2 = Moderately Certain 



3 = Reasonable Inference 



Figure 3. Example of a species/estuary data sheet: weakfish in Delaware Bay. 



