604 U. S. BUREAU OF. FISHERIES 
so that we fish inshore and get enough of the small fish of 2 or 3 or 
possibly 4 year old size. We can not seem to get any of these sizes 
offshore. 
Mr. TuHompson. Did you analyze only the catches that you made 
yourself ? 
Mr. ScHroeper. Yes. 
Mr. Tompson. I then ask would the size of the hook make any 
difference in the class of fish caught? 
Mr. Scuroeper. It is true we did change the size of our hooks, but 
even then if young fish were present in any numbers at all you would 
expect to catch a few and the hooks are not so large that it was 
impossible to hook them at all. I have tried with one or two sizes; 
I have tried with smaller hooks and attempted to catch young fish, 
but have never succeeded. 
Mr. TuHomrson. I am not familiar with the codfish or their fishing 
methods, but we might experiment with the dominant year classes. 
From my own experience with other fish, it is necessary to carry on a 
far more extensive analysis of catches—perhaps catches that were 
turned in by the fleet. You will find out, no doubt, that there are 
distinctive sizes in various parts of banks, so that before you could 
even attempt to demonstrate a dominant year class you would have 
to examine the commercial catch from all parts of the bank. 
Mr. Scurorper. That would be preferable, but it was very hard to 
get all the fish that the commercial fishermen caught; usually this 
smaller size is almost worthless and the net return is so small they 
frequently throw them away so that it would be very hard to get any 
of the unselected catch. Furthermore, we usually fish 4, 5, 6, 7, or 8 
hours, drifting all over, so that we have ample opportunity to cover 
a bank rather thoroughly. You may fish for an hour and catch 
nothing; then occasionally you catch fish 30 and 31 inches long; then 
you get no more of these big fish for 20 or 30 minutes; then another 
haul. We found, on Nantucket Shoals, that we would occasionally 
strike a body of other fish, and these would be smaller fish. 
Mr. Rapcurrre. Isn’t it true that in recent years there has been a 
considerable increase in the intensity of fishing around that area— 
around Nantucket Shoals—and in the number of tags that have been 
taken from that area? 
Mr. Scuroeper. It has affected the cod more than the haddock. 
Mr. Rancrirrr. Is it possible that the increase in intensity of fish- 
ing has reduced the proportion of larger fish ? 
Mr. Scuroeper. I really don’t think so, because most of the fishing 
there is along the edge of the bank. Sometimes we do not see a com- 
mercial fisherman for two or three days around the grounds. Of 
course, they may be around when we are not there, but Nantucket 
Shoals has not been considered a particularly important cod ground 
in the last few years. Some years ago, in 1914, Nantucket Shoals 
and the Chatham grounds actually contributed more cod than all the | 
other cod grounds along our coast. 
Doctor BicrLow. Speaking of the migration of the fish—you state 
that the fish migrated but were confined largely to individual banks. 
I do not get the connection between these two statements. 
Mr. Scurogper. It is hard to see why the fish migrate, for we know 
some do and some do not. For example, if we tag 1,000 fish in eastern 
a 
TE ge? aOR a cate . 
