FISHERIES, BY STATES. 



239 



Shad. Shad ranked second in importance, con- 

 tributing 14 per cent of the value of the total yield 

 and a third of that of the catch of fish proper. 

 The entire product was taken in the shore and boat 

 fisheries, and its value composed 19 per cent of the 

 value of the total catch of such fisheries. These fish 

 were caught almost entirely with gill nets. The fluc- 

 tuations in the quantity and value of the catch for a 

 number of years are shown in the following tabular 

 statement : 



Sea bass. The catch of sea bass was somewhat 

 larger in quantity than that of shad, but its value was 

 only a little over half as great. Though second in 

 importance among the fish proper, sea bass furnished 

 but 8 per cent of the value of all products of the South 

 Carolina fisheries. The value of the sea bass taken in 

 the vessel fisheries, however, constituted 25 per cent 

 of the total value of products and 77 per cent of the 

 value of the fish proper reported for such fisheries. 

 The bulk of the product was taken in the vessel 

 fisheries with lines. The following tabular statement 

 gives statistics of the sea-bass product for those years 

 for which figures are available : 



1908. 

 1902. 

 1897. 

 1890. 

 1887.. 



SEA-BASS PRODUCT. 



Quantity 

 (pounds). 



491,000 

 710,000 

 632,000 

 826.000 

 889,000 



Value. 



S22.000 



27; ooo 



26, (KX) 

 26,000 

 29,000 



MuUet. Mullet represented 7 per cent of the value 

 of the total fishery product of the state. Nearly 90 

 per cent of the' value of the catch was reported for the 

 shore and boat fisheries, and over two-thirds of the 

 value represented product taken with seines. Of the 

 total product, nearly a sixth was salted. The product 

 for 1908 shows a large increase over that of former 

 years, as is indicated by the following tabular state- 

 ment: 



Whiting. The catch of this species had a value 

 equal to 6 per cent of the value of the total state 

 product. Though in quantity the catch of whiting 

 was less than half as great as that of mullet, in value it 

 ranked little below the latter, as a result of the higher 

 price paid for whiting on the market. This fish was 

 taken almost wholly in the shore and boat fisheries 

 and with lines. The whiting catch in 1908 was con- 

 siderably less than in former years, as is indicated by 

 the following tabular statement: 



