BIOLOGY AND NATURAL HISTORY 



213 



decreased natural abundance of crabs), were accompanied by relatively high 

 yield in North Carolina. Years of high yield in the Bay, like those from 

 1929 to 1932 and in 1939, were periods of low production in North Carolina. 

 It is certain that when natural abundance of crabs in Chesapeake Bay is 

 low and insufficient economically to satisfy the industry, imports of both 

 hard and soft crabs from North Carolina will increase. Again, local pro- 

 ducers of crab meat in North Carolina tend to procure larger markets for 

 their products when competition from Chesapeake Bay is reduced. 



The inverse correlation in yield between Chesapeake Bay and North 

 Carolina has given rise to a belief among many crab packers that a high 

 natural abundance in one region is accompanied by a low abundance in the 

 other and vice versa. Although any relationship in natural abundance of 

 crabs in the two regions cannot be ascertained with available catch data, 

 there is more reason to believe that varying intensity of fishing in North 

 Carolina as influenced by economic pressure accounts for the correlation. 

 Table 6, for example, shows that the catch in Carteret County was at a high 

 level in 1940 and 1941 at a time when low natural abundance of crabs was 

 known to prevail in Chesapeake Bay and at a low level in 1946 when a high 

 natural abundance of crabs occurred in the Bay. 



TABLE 5 



Total Annual Catch of Hard Crabs in Chesapeake Bay Compared with Total 



Annual Catch in North Carolina. Figures for 1929 to 1940 Based on Data from 



Fish & Wildlife Service. Chesapeake Bay Catch for 1941 and 1942 



Based on Fish & Wildlife Service Records; North Carolina Catch 



for 1 94 1 and 1942 Based on State Tax Collection Records 



