334 
Fishery Bulletin 107(3) 
70°Q’0” W 70°0'0” W 70°0'0” W 
0 75 150 300 450 600 
Figure 4 
Seasonal recapture locations for all striped bass ( Morone saxatilis) tagged in 1999 and 2000 in Mas- 
sachusetts estuaries (n = 198). Recaptures for 1999-2007 were plotted for (A) May-June, (B) July, 
August, September, and (C) October. Because of symbol overlay, not all points are visible. ME=Maine, 
MA=Massachusetts, CT7RI = Connecticut and Rhode Island, HU = Hudson River (a spawning location), 
NJ = New Jersey, DE = Delaware River (a spawning location), CB = Chesapeake Bay (a spawning loca- 
tion). All years were combined. Numbers in all panels of Figures 3 and 4 sum to the total number of 
fish for which release and recapture locations (n = 198) were available. Months are grouped to illustrate 
seasonal distributional patterns of striped bass. Fish were recaptured by angling. The map projection 
is Albers Equal Area Conic, NAD (North American Datum), 1983. 
The summer locations of striped bass along the Mas- 
sachusetts coast and in the Great Marsh were not the 
result of random movement. If fish were choosing either 
the ocean or the estuary randomly, the first model pre- 
dicted that only 0.25 of the tagged striped bass would 
be present in the release location during the first sum- 
mer. This is significantly less than the proportion ob- 
served in both the Great Marsh and along the Massa- 
chusetts coast (GM, 0.77, ;^=74.6, df=2, P=0.005; MA, 
1.0, x 2 =151, df=2, P=0.005). The model can be used to 
back calculate the required probability that striped bass 
remained in the estuary by adjusting p e until the model 
output matches the observed proportion of observed re- 
captures. Based on RM-1, this approach indicated that 
to obtain the observed proportion of recaptures (0.77) 
for striped bass released and recaptured in the Great 
Marsh, the weekly probability that a striped bass re- 
mained in the Great Marsh was high (p e - 0.95; Table 2). 
Similarly, in order for all the observed recaptures (1.0) 
to have occurred in Massachusetts during the first 
summer, the weekly probability of remaining in waters 
off the Massachusetts coast was very high, (p e - 1.0; 
Table 2). Using the more spatially complex and real- 
istic model (RM-2), to obtain the observed proportion 
of recaptures (0.77) in the Great Marsh, we found that 
the weekly probability of striped bass remaining in the 
Great Marsh was again high (p e = 0.75; RM-2, Table 2). 
Many fish were caught where they had been released 
in subsequent years, and this finding would indicate 
that these fish return to non-natal estuaries. Across all 
years and times of year, 38% (41 of 108) of the recap- 
tured fish released in the Great Marsh and 61% (120 
of 198) of the tagged fish released along the Massachu- 
setts coast were recaptured where they were released 
(Table 1). Across all times, of the fish recaptured where 
they were released (41 in GM; 120 in MA), 59% (24 of 
41) were recaptured in the Great Marsh and 66% (79 of 
120) were recaptured in Massachusetts 2-7 years after 
