PROGRESS IN BIOLOGICAL, INQUIRIES, 19 .{4 351 



liiia) fioin an avci-aiic of ll,r)()(),()()0 j)()iimls jjcr aniuiin in li)()l and 

 190S to an avorafjfo of 18.()00,()()() pounds per annum for tlic years 1025, 

 19:29, 19;U), 1981, and 1932. It has been seen that virtually the only 

 squetea<rue available to the northern fishery are those which escape 

 the intensive southei-n fishery to which they are subject durin«r their 

 yearlin«x summer. If the increase in yield in the South were due to 

 increased abundance rather than to an increase in the i)ercenta<ji;e toll 

 taken by more intensive fishino;. it is to be expected that a similar 

 increase would have occurred in the northern fishery. 



It does not necessarily follow, however, that the most effective use 

 of the sqnetea<rne resource requires restriction of the southern fish- 

 ery. It is unwise to })ostpone capture of fishes beyond the point 

 where natural mortality removes more pounds of fish than are re- 

 placed by frrowth. Since the investigation has not ])ro<Tressed suffi- 

 ciently to make possible reliable estimates of natural mortality, it 

 cannot be said fairly that the yearlin": squetea^rue taken in the south 

 would be more valuable if spared for an additional year or more. 



Althou<]:h there is insufficient evidence to justify restriction of 

 that portion of the southern catch which is actually utilized, the 

 present destruction of juvenile and yearling' squeteague too small to 

 be marketed cannot be too strongly condemned. As pointed out by 

 Higgins and Pearson (1925), this destruction may amount to as 

 much as 30 percent of all squeteague taken. There can be no reason- 

 able objection on the part of southern fishermen to elimination of this 

 waste, for enough of the benefit w^ould accrue locally to compensate 

 for anv inconvenience brought about by changed methods of fishing. 

 It is urgent, therefore, that experiments be undertaken at once to 

 devise modifications of the gear to permit the escape of undersized 

 fish. 



Snip. — Continued investigation of this species by W. C. Neville 

 during 1934 has been concerned with determining the effect, if any, on 

 abundance of the increased exploitation to wdiich this species^ has 

 been subjected since about 1929. As stated in previous reports, the 

 rapid development since that year of a winter trawl fishery off the 

 Virginia capes for scup, sea bass, and fluke has resulted in an addi- 

 tional strain of approximately 25 percent on the general stock of 

 scup. The analysis, therefore, has been mainly a study of the fluctua- 

 tions in the catch of both the summer and winter fisheries to determine 

 wdiether the changes are related to the increased fishing activity. 



It has been demonstrated clearly from tagging experiments and 

 from the ages and sizes of the fish in the catch that the summer and 

 winter fisheries are drawing on the same stock of scup. Tagging 

 experiments have demonstrated that scup migrate in the fall from 

 the summer fishing grounds along the shores of southern New Eng- 

 land, New York, and New Jersey to the winter fishing grounds off the 

 Virginia capes, and in the spring make a return migration from the 

 winter grounds to the summer area. Analysis of the catches has dis- 

 closed that broods of scup that have been conspicuous in the summer 

 fishery have constituted a large part of the catch of the southern 

 trawl fishery in the following winters. 



Observation on the summer fishery during 1934 was not possible, 

 through lack of funds, so that nothing definite is known as to what 

 age groups are supporting that fishei-y at tlie present time and as 



