Arendt et al.: Seasonal occurrence of site-utilization patterns of Tautoga onitis 
525 
predator that may have preyed upon tagged tautog, even 
though these three tautog were never recaptured nor vi- 
sually observed after release. Adult tautog are very in- 
frequently preyed upon by sharks in Virginia (Gelsleich- 
ter et al., 1999); however, sharks are not likely present 
in Chesapeake Bay when water temperatures are 5-8°C. 
At these water temperatures, large striped bass (Morone 
saxatilis ) pose the only possible predatory threat to tau- 
tog. A recent study on feeding habits of adult striped bass 
in Chesapeake Bay found no tautog in the stomachs of 
more than 2000 striped bass, many of which were collected 
from the Chesapeake Bay Bridge-Tunnel complex, a well- 
known fishing area for adult tautog (Walters, 1999). 
All tautog detected or recaptured away from release 
sites were released at manmade sites, which also hap- 
pened to be the smallest sites. No information was avail- 
able regarding the origin of these manmade sites, but both 
have been in place for at least 20 years. 1011 Stone et al. 
(1979) concluded that artificial reefs reach a stable state 
after five years. Benthic macrofauna collected at manmade 
sites during our study were similar to benthic macrofau- 
na collected at natural sites, suggesting that food may 
have been similar between manmade and natural sites. 
Given these observations, habitat size may be an impor- 
tant factor for adult tautog in determining the scale of lo- 
cal movements between adjacent habitats. Understanding 
the relationship between habitat size and site utilization 
warrants further investigation, especially with recent in- 
creased interest in the construction of artificial habitats 
for purposes of stock enhancement and enhanced fishing 
opportunities for tautog. 
Sex ratio of female to male tautog in our study was 
heavily skewed (1:3.5) towards male tautog due to oppor- 
tunistic sampling, and the preponderance of male tautog 
likely contributed to the high levels of site utilization ob- 
served in our study. In laboratory settings, adult male tau- 
tog aggressively defend territories throughout most of the 
year (Olla et al., 1978, 1980) and only during the spawn- 
ing season are female tautog permitted to enter territo- 
ries (Olla and Samet, 1977; Olla et al., 1981). Overall ac- 
tivity, including male agonistic behavior, also decreases as 
water temperatures approach annual minimum and maxi- 
mum values (Olla et al., 1978, 1980). Although sample size 
in our study was too small to distinguish site-utilization 
patterns by sex, it is worth noting that both tautog that 
left the Texeco Wreck in Nov-Dec and that periodically re- 
turned to this site throughout the winter and spring were 
females. In contrast, during the spring spawning season, 
three females (one at Texeco Wreck, two at Coral Lump) 
remained at release sites throughout the spring-summer 
monitoring period and all three were subsequently recap- 
tured by recreational fishermen at these same sites in the 
fall. More sex-specific data are needed to fully comprehend 
10 Verry, S. 1998. Automated wreck and obstruction informa- 
tion system, special area report (37°00N-37°30N; 076°00W- 
07 6°30W). NOAA/NOS, Hydrographic Services Branch/N/CS3 1, 
Silver Spring, MD 20910. 
11 Jenrette, J. 1998. Personal commun. Captain, FV Bucca- 
neer, P.O. Box 149, Route 1108, Cape Charles, VA 23310. 
what role reproductive biology and social structure have 
on seasonal site-utilization patterns. 
Site-utilization patterns exhibited by ultrasonically 
tagged tautog were consistent with patterns reported for 
tautog released at these same sites from the Virginia 
Game Fish Tagging Program (VGFTP). Between April 
1998 and October 1999, 40 tautog, tagged and released at 
these sites, were recaptured, including one tautog recap- 
tured twice at the same site. Six of eight (75%) tautog orig- 
inally released at the Texeco and Airplane Wrecks were re- 
captured away from these sites. Of these six tautog, three 
moved to the Coral Lump and Ridged Bottom and three 
moved to sites located 26.9 to 43.2 km away in lower Ches- 
apeake Bay. In contrast, 32 tautog tagged and released at 
the Coral Lump and Ridged Bottom sites were recaptured, 
all but two (which moved from the Ridged Bottom to the 
Coral Lump) were recaptured where released. One addi- 
tional fish moved to the Coral Lump from an artificial reef 
located 4 km to the northeast and within 2 km of where 
both tautog were recaptured by commercial fishermen in 
spring 1999. 
Ultrasonically and conventionally tagged tautog re- 
leased near Cape Charles, VA, in lower Chesapeake Bay 
demonstrated high site utilization at and high site affin- 
ity (returned to release sites after short emigration) for 
release sites. Extended residence by tautog at familiar 
sites during annual environmental extremes is considered 
more beneficial than emigration to more optimal environ- 
mental conditions because residence at familiar sites re- 
duces the risk of not finding suitable shelter, food, mates, 
or of encountering predators (Olla et al., 1978). Although 
directed seasonal offshore movements were not observed 
in our study, movements between adjacent inshore loca- 
tions occurred several times, including movement to adja- 
cent locations during the periods of seasonal thermal ex- 
tremes. Understanding temporal and spatial utilization of 
habitats is an important first step to identifying essential 
fish habitat and critical to evaluating and protecting fish- 
ery resources within Chesapeake Bay and elsewhere. 
Acknowledgments 
This research represents part of M. D. Arendt’s Master’s 
thesis; earlier drafts of this manuscript were reviewed by 
J. Hoenig, J. Musick, D. Evans, and W. DuPaul. J. Jenrette 
of the FV Bucaneer , C. Machen of the RV Langley, G. Pon- 
gonis, and J. Olney Jr. and VIMS divers (B. Gammisch, W. 
Reisner, T. Chisholm, and W. Stockhausen) provided valu- 
able field assistance. We thank Vemco, Ltd., and Physical 
Sciences Department, VIMS, for assistance with equip- 
ment operation and deployment. We also thank J. Jen- 
rette and S. Speirs (for collectively tagging and releasing 
300+ tautog at study sites and recapturing 5 of 8 tautog 
tagged ultrasonically), volunteer anglers, and the com- 
mercial fishing industry for tagging, releasing, and report- 
ing recaptured tautog. This project was funded by the 
Recreational Fishing Development Fund of the Virginia 
Marine Resources Commission and by General Funds 
from VIMS. 
