King Mackerel, Scomberomorus cavalla, Mark- Recapture Studies Off Florida's East Coast Item Type article Authors Schaefer, H. Charles; Fable, Jr. , William A. Download date 04/10/2021 08:14:11 Link to Item http://hdl.handle.net/1834/26474 King Mackerel, Scomberomorus caval/a, Mark-Recapture Studies Off Florida's East Coast H. CHARLES SCHAEFER and WILLIAM A. FABLE, JR. Introduction reproductive capacity causing stock re­ Panama City Laboratory, began a co­ ductions and declining recruitment operative mark-recapture study on king King mackerel, Scomberomorus cav­ (Godcharles I). King mackerel have mackerel to determine movements in alla, is a coastal, pelagic scombrid been jointly managed by the South At­ both the Gulf of Mexico and along the found off the U.S. Atlantic and Gulf of lantic and Gulf of Mexico Fishery Man­ Atlantic coast. Subsequently, biologists Mexico coasts. This species has histori­ agement Councils since the implemen­ from both agencies tagged king mack­ cally contributed to commercial and tation of the Coastal Pelagic Fishery erel (17,042 releases, 1,171 returns) recreational catches throughout its Management Plan (CPFMP) in 1983. from 1975 through 1979 (Sutherland range in the southeastern United States. The maximum sustainable yield (MSY) and Fable, 1980; Sutter et aI., 1991; Commercial exploitation intensified for the U.S. king mackerel resource is Williams and Godcharles3). Results there in the 1960's with the introduc­ currently estimated at 26.2 million from this study indicated that the spe­ tion of large power-assisted gillnet pounds (NMFS2). cies consisted of at least two migratory boats and spotter aircraft. By the late The recreational fishery for king groups (stocks). Ranges of the two 1970's and early 1980's, increased de­ mackerel grew in importance as the stocks basically coincided with the Gulf mand for king mackerel had exceeded commercial fishery thrived. Moe (1963) of Mexico and the Atlantic Ocean off stated that in the early 1960's, king the southeast U.S. coast, with some mackerel was the species most desired mixing of the stocks off southeastern by anglers fishing from private boats, Florida during winter months. H. Charles Schaefer is with the Statistics Office, and was the staple catch of Florida's These conclusions were the primary Coastal Resources Division, Southeast Fisheries Science Center, National Marine Fisheries Ser­ charterboat fleet. In 1990-91, king basis for the division of the Gulf of vice, NOAA, 19100 S.E. Federal Hwy., Tequesta, mackerel was one of the three most Mexico (Gulf) and Atlantic king mack­ FL 33469. William A. Fable, Jr., is with the highly targeted species by recreational erel stocks, as defined by Amendment Panama City Laboratory, Southeast Fisheries Science Center, National Marine Fisheries Ser­ anglers along the southern U.S. Atlan­ 1 to the CPFMP (Gulf of Mexico and vice, NOAA, 3500 Delwood Beach Road, tic coast (NMFS, 1992). In recent years, South Atlantic Fishery Management Panama City, FL 32408. estimated king mackerel recreational Councils, 1985). Variable stock bound­ catches have exceeded reported com­ aries are used as part of the manage­ merciallandings in both the Atlantic and ment strategy. The Gulf group is sepa­ ABSTRACT-King mackerel, Scomber­ omorus cavalla, were tagged and released Gulf of Mexico (Fig. I). rated from the Atlantic group I April­ from eastern Florida between 1985 and In 1975, the Florida Department of 31 October at the Collier/Monroe 1993. Recapture trends from these studies Natural Resources (FDNR), now the County line in southwest Florida and 1 indicate an increase in tag returns from ar­ Florida Department of Environmental November-31 March at the Flagler/ eas north ofthe release sites, along with a decrease in recaptures from coastal waters Protection (FDEP), and the National Volusia County line in northeast Florida in the Florida Keys and Gulf of Mexico, Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) (Fig. 2). The area between the Collier/ since earlier king mackerel tagging studies Monroe County line and the Flagler/ completed in the late 1970's. The data in­ Volusia County line in Florida is con­ dicate that eastern Florida waters may maintain resident king mackerel. Cyclical 1 Godcharles, M. F. 1993. Synoptic history of sidered to be a mixing area for the Gulf Federal management of king and Spanish mack­ and Atlantic migratory groups and is tag return patterns were noted along east­ erel and other coastal migratory pelagic species in ern Florida and in North Carolina. The pro­ the Gulf of Mexico and South Atlantic. Southeast referred to within this text as the "mix­ portion ofmixing ofpresently defined king Regional Office, National Marine Fisheries Service, mackerel stocks along eastern Florida may NOAA, St. Petersburg, Fla. Unpubl. rep., 8 p. vary yearly. Comparison of king mackerel 2NMFS. 1994.1994 report of the mackerel stock 3 Williams, R. 0., and M. F. Godcharles. 1984. tags show internal anchor tags to have a assessment panel. Southeast Fish. Sci. Cent., King mackerel tagging and stock assessment. Fla. higher percentage of return and lower per­ Natl. Mar. Fish. Serv., NOAA, Contrib. MIA-93/ Dep. Nat. Resour., Project 2-341-R, Completion centage oftag loss than dorsal dart tags. 94-42,27 p. rep. (unpub!.), 45 p. 56(3), 1994 13 10 Gulf migratory group. fishing year (July·June) ( Recreational Commercial <n -g 4 o:::J a. FLN c ~ Flagler .s 0 85/86 86/87 87/88 88/89 89/90 90/91 91/92 92/93 29°25' N en Volusia Q) (Apr.· Oct.) -5 10 Atlantic migratory group, fishing year (April-March) 7ii U f: Recreational ~ 8 Commercial FLW 7ii E ~ 6 i W N FLS Jupiter. , I 85/86 B6I87 87/88 88/89 89/90 90/91 91/92 92/93 Boynton. t Figure I.-Estimated catches of king mackerel from the Gulf and Atlantic stocks by fishing year (FY). Source: 25°48'N NMFS (1994). (Nov.· Mar.) Dade 25 °20.4' N Monroe ing zone." For management purposes, / the commercial sector of the Gulf group .. -- FLK is partitioned into the eastern (Florida) and western (Alabama to Texas) zones. Annual quota allocations and bag lim­ its are enforced for each migratory Figure 2.-NMFS tagging locations (shaded), variable Atlantic/Gulf stock boundaries, and subareas used to partition Florida tag returns. group in accordance with the fishing year (FY). The Gulf group FY is de­ fined as 1 July-30 June and the Atlan­ tic group FY as 1 April-31 March. FDEP tagging. The tagging methods return address or phone number printed In 1983, the NMFS began additional and techniques for procurement of fish on the streamer. IA and SLA tags also scientific mark-recapture work to fur­ follow the original procedures devel­ included the tag number printed on the ther evaluate movement patterns of king oped during the FDEP study. Although disk portion. mackerel within Gulf of Mexico and only internal anchor (IA) tags were used During all of the tagging studies de­ Atlantic waters. Since then, tagging for the earlier FDEP tagging (Sutter et scribed, commercial handline fishermen studies have been conducted off Mex­ aI., 1991), the NMFS has experimented were contracted to catch king mackerel ico, Texas, Louisiana, northwest and with four different types of king mack­ for tagging. These fishermen were com­ eastern Florida, and North Carolina. erel tags from 1985 through 1993 (Fig. pensated for successfully tagged and The primary objective of tagging along 3). Single red or orange plastic IA tags, released fish based on the total weight Florida's east coast was to better under­ similar to those used during the FDEP of marked releases during each trip, as stand mixing patterns of king mackerel study, were used during 1985-88. Or­ calculated using a weight to length con­ from the eastern Gulf group and the ange shrink-lock internal anchor (SLA) version table. Although this method of Atlantic group. This paper summarizes tags were tested along with IA tags dur­ procurement proved costly, large num­ the current results of the NMFS mark­ ing winter 1989-90 tagging. Yellow bers of relatively unharmed fish were recapture work from 1985 through 1993 double-barb dorsal dart tags (DD92) usually available for tagging, and accu­ along eastern Florida. were used in combination with IA and rate information on releases could be SLA tags during 1991-92 tagging. The obtained by NMFS personnel (Fable, Methods following winter (1992-93), a new ver­ 1990). For continuity, earlier king mackerel sion of the dorsal dart tag (DD93) was King mackerel were caught using tagging studies (1975-79) by the state tested along with IA tags. All tags in­ commercial troll gear. Fish were imme­ of Florida and NMFS are referred to as cluded an identification number and diately unhooked aboard the vessel and 14 Marine Fisheries Review Initially, to publicize the king mack­ erel tagging program and to reward an­ glers for returning tags, posters and news releases were circulated, and a $10 reward was offered for each returned Shrink·lock anchor (SLA) tag. In 1986, to help increase the tag returns, an annual $1,000 drawing, sponsored by NMFS, was added to the !ll reward program. In 1991, the individual 81F====:J;m:JmmlIlJ~== reward was increased to $20 per fish. !!i Release and recapture data for the Internal anchor (IA) described studies (10,285 releases, 546 returns) were compiled from the NMFS ~§§§§§5::Jj]RE~W~AR![O]RFJOOOOOi2!Ei2===:::::JP~H§EON[E~800-;E4!2137]'39!B36c:::::::::Jd:=::::::J Panama City Laboratory tagging records and the NMFS Cooperative Dorsal dart (0093) Gamefish Tagging Program database. Six separate tagging experiments, con­ ducted by the NMFS from 1985 through 1993, are described here. Table 1 lists Dorsal dart (0092) the locations, dates, and release num­ bers during each experiment.