350 U. S. BUREAU OF FISHERIES 



(2) Nearly all (90 percent or more) of the squeteague taken in the 

 Middle Atlantic States are 2 years of age or older, and nearly all 

 have i^assed their yearling summer south of Delaware Bay. This 

 view is based on age analysis of large samples collected at various 

 localities in New York and New Jersey between 1928 and 1934 and 

 on the observation that the second (yearling) growth zones of the 

 scales of virtually all northern market squeteague are of the type 

 characteristic of the corresponding growth zones of southern year- 

 lings. The conclusions drawn from scale studies are confirmed by 

 tagging experiments. 



(3) Yearling squeteague predominate in the southern catches. 

 This observation is based on age analysis of samples taken by Hig- 

 gins and Pearson in 1925 in North Carolina and of samples taken 

 during the present investigation in Virginia and North Carolina 

 in 1928, 1929, 1931, 1933, and 1934. 



(4) Squeteague grow much more rapidly in the North than in the 

 South. For example, squeteague at the end of their third summer 

 average only 11 inches in length and 0.43 pound in weight south of 

 Delaware Bay. In southern New Jersey they average 12 inches in 

 length and 0.56 pound in weight and in northern New Jersey 13 

 inches in length and 0.75 pound in weight. 



For a number of years restriction of both the commercial and 

 angling catch of squeteague has been urged in New York and New 

 Jersey. In New York such proposals have invariably been rejected 

 by the legislature. In New Jersey a number have been adopted, 

 among them prohibition of purse seining within 2 miles of the shore, 

 restriction of the length of gill nets, specification of minimum mesh 

 size for gill nets, and imposition of closed seasons for gill-net fishing 

 in certain areas. Restrictions are usually urged on the ground that 

 abundance may be maintained or increased in the future by protect- 

 ing spawning adults. 



In the light of our present knowledge of squeteague life history, 

 it is apparent that restriction of the New York and New Jersey 

 catch of adult squeteague cannot be expected to influence future 

 abundance sufficiently to compensate for the immediate sacrifices 

 required. As has been pointed out, the northern spawning stock 

 is not wholly self-perpetuating but depends on southern spawning 

 for at least half of its annual increment even if it be assumed that 

 northern juveniles result from northern spaAvning. This means that 

 of the fry resulting from the spawning of 2 northern adults, on the 

 average but 1 weak fish returns to the North 2 years later. Conse- 

 quently, in order to add 1 more weak fish to the catch in 1937, it 

 would be necessary to refrain from catching 2 in 1935, obviously 

 an unprofitable bargain, even if the cost of enforcing restrictive 

 legislation be left out of account. 



It is necessary to consider other measures if the present unsatis- 

 factory conditions in the Middle Atlantic States are to be improved. 

 The yield of squeteague in these States has declined from an average 

 of 17,000,000 pounds per annum for the years 1901, 1904, and 1908 

 (years for which statistics are available), "to an average of 12,000,000 

 pounds for the years 1926, 1929, 1930, 1931, and 1932. It is highly 

 probable that this decline is in large part due to an increase in the 

 catch of the southern fishery (Maryland, Virginia, and North Caro- 



