statistics of catch and effort are summarized in table It. The 

 catch consisted of 381 fish of which 280 were tuna (Thunnidae)l/. Of the 

 tunasj there were 149 skipjack or al-n:i ( Katsuwonus pelamir ) ranging from 

 2/, to 10-4 pounds (41 to 61 cm,,, fork length}; 22 frigate mackerel ( Auxis 

 thazard) ranging from 1 to 2o pounds(32 to 37 cmo); 64 "little tunny 

 (henceforth called "tunny") or kawakawa (Euthynnus yaito) ranging from 

 1 to 15 pounds (about 37 to 58 cm, )j and 45 yellowfin or ahi ( Neothunnus 

 macropterus ) ranging frori 1 to dh pounds (29 to 58 cmo ),, Among the other 

 fishj there '"rere 2 wahoo or ono ( Acanthocybium solandrij included by 

 Brock (1950) in Thunnidae of 20 and 231 pounds (121 and 123 cm,,)} 97 

 dolphin or mahimahi (Coryphaena hippurus ) ranging from about ih to 32 

 pounds (about 45 to 122 cm' )i and 2 jack or omilu ( Caramc stellatus ?)j, 

 both of about 4 pounds 



As shown by the mean catch per hour's trolling, fishing was 

 very poor during January,, February^ and Marchj it improved during April j 

 it was relatively good from May through October^, with June and August the 

 best monthso Skipjack and dolphin were caught throughout February to 

 Octobers "runs" appearing for 2 or 3 weeks at a time, and then disappearing.-, 

 Frigate mackerel ^ tunny j and yellowfin were caught sporadically from May or 

 June to September or Ootobern The fishing record compares favorably with 

 that reported by Welsh (1950) who used the same fishing method and the same 

 vessel (in part) and who fished in the same general area (for the most part)c 

 His mean catch per hour amounted to lo79 fish for the period March 1948 to 

 June 1949 J, whereas ours was 2^,42 fish for the period January to Octoberp 

 I95I0 However, he caught relatively more tunny and relatively fewer skip- 

 jacki he encountered the best fishing during Octoberc 



HANDLING AND TRANSPORTING THE FISH 



When the fish took the lures^ they were hauled aboard and were 

 either killed or placed in the livewell^, depending on the species, size 

 of the fishj and the extent of injury from the hookn Many of the fish, 

 especially the larger ones, were hooked through the eye, through the nose, 

 or deep in the throat, so that they were fatally injuredo Those which 

 were lightly hooked through the jaws and were judged likely to survive, 

 were placed on the deck or in a canvas cradle or they were held in the 

 hands of a second person (the method depending on the size of the fish and 

 on the available help) for rapid but careful removal of the hooko Often 

 the hook could be removed with but small damage to the fish if its mouth 

 was held open by a second persono If after this operation the fish was 

 judged to stand a reasonable chance of survival; it was placed in the 

 livewello Otherwisep it was killed and thrown into the fish lockero It 

 was found unwise to place injured, bleeding fish in the livewellg their 

 violent movements and the resulting bloody,, murky water excited uninjured 

 fish and caused them to damage themselves on the sides of the well, 



-i For the most part, the classification and nomenclature used by 

 Brock (1950) was followedo 



