CBP/TRS 125/94
December 1994
903R94020
Chesapeake Bay and
Atlantic Coast
King and Spanish Mackerel
Fishery Management Plan
Agreement Commitment Report 1994
Chesapeake Bay Program
Printed on
Recycled Paper
-------
Chesapeake Bay and Atlantic Coast
King and Spanish Mackerel
Fishery Management Plan
Agreement Commitment Report
October 1994
Edited By Lewis Gillingham and Tom O'Connell
Printed by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency for the Chesapeake Bay Program
-------
Adoption Statement
We, the undersigned, adopt the 1994 Chesapeake Bay & Atlantic Coast King & Spanish
Mackerel Management Plan. The Plan is in fulfillment of the 1987 Chesapeake Bay Agreement
to develop and adopt a series of baywide fishery management plans for commercially,
recreationally, and selected ecologically valuable species.
We agree to accept the 1994 King & Spanish Mackerel Management Plan as a guide to
enhancing and protecting king and Spanish mackerel resources for long-term ecological,
economic and social benefits. We further agree to work together to implement, by the dates set
forth in the Plan, the management actions recommended to address stock status, monitoring of
catch and quotas, research needs, waste/sublegal bycatch, hook and release mortalities, and
habitat degradation. •
We recognize the need to commit long-term, stable, financial support and human
resources to the task of managing king and Spanish mackerel stocks. In addition, we direct the
Living Resources Subcommittee to periodically review and update the Plan and report on
progress made in achieving the Plan's management recommendations.
Signatures
For the Commonwealth of Virginia
For the State of Maryland
For the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania
For the United States of America
For the District of Columbia
For the Chesapeake Bay Commission
-------
TABLE OF CONTENTS
LIST OF TABLES AND FIGURES i
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ii
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ill
THE FISHERY MANAGEMENT PLAN PROCESS V
SECTION 1. BACKGROUND 1
Biological Background 1
King Mackerel 1
Spanish Mackerel 2
Biological Profile 3
Habitat Issues 6
Fisheries 7
King Mackerel 7
Spanish Mackerel 8
Fishery Parameters 10
Resource Status 12
King Mackerel 13
Spanish Mackerel 13
Current Laws and Regulations 14
Status of Traditional Fishery Management Approaches 16
Research Needs 17
References 18
SECTION 2. King and Spanish Mackerel Management 32
Fishery Management Plan: Status and Management Unit 32
A. Goal Statement and Obj ectives 33
B. Problems Areas and Management Strategies 33
1. Stock Status 33
2. Monitoring Catch and Quotas, and Research Needs. 35
3. Waste/Sublegal Bycatch and Hook and Release
Mortalities 35
4 . Habitat Issues 36
C. Implementation Matrix 38
-------
LIST OF TABLES AND FIGURES
Tables
1. Schedule For Reviewing Fishery Management Plans vii
Figures
1. Virginia Commercial King Mackerel Landings By Year 21
2. Virginia Commercial King Mackerel Landings By Gear 22
3. Virginia Commercial King Mackerel Landings By Area 23
4. Virginia Commercial King Mackerel Landings By Area and
Year 24
5. Maryland Commercial King and Spanish Mackerel Landings By
Year 25
6. Maryland Spanish Mackerel Commercial Landings and Dockside
Value By Year 26
7. Virginia King Mackerel Citations by Year 27
8. Virginia Commercial Spanish Mackerel Landings By Year 28
9. Virginia Commercial Spanish Mackerel Landings By Gear 29
10. Virginia Commercial Spanish Mackerel Landings By Area.... 30
11. Virginia Commercial Spanish Mackerel Landings By Area
and Year 31
-------
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
The Chesapeake Bay and Atlantic Coast King and Spanish
Mackerel Management Plan was developed under the direction of the
Fisheries Management Plan Workgroup. Staff from the Virginia Marine
Resources Commission (VMRC), Plans and Statistics Department,
Fisheries Management Division and the Maryland Department of
Natural Resources (MDNR), Tidewater Administration, Fisheries
Division were responsible for writing the plan. Comments on the
draft versions were addressed by MDNR staff. Thanks are due to
members of the Living Resources Sucommittee for reviewing and
commenting on the plan.
Members of the Fisheries Management Workgroup were:
Mr. K.A. Carpenter, Potomac River Fisheries Commission
Mr. James O. Drummond, Maryland citizen representative
Mr. William Goldsborough, Chesapeake Bay Foundation
Dr. Edward Houde, UMCEES/Chesapeake Biological Laboratory
Mr. W. Pete Jensen, Chair, Maryland Department of Natural Resources
Dr. R. Jesien, Horn Point Environmental Lab
Dr. Ron Klauda, MDNR, Chesapeake Bay Research and Monitoring
Ms. Anne Lange, NOAA Chesapeake Bay Office
Mr. Richard Novotny, Maryland Saltwater Sportfishermen's Assoc.
Mr. Ed O'Brien, Maryland Charter Boat Association
Mr. Ira Palmer, D.C. Department of Consumer and Regulatory Affairs
Mr. Larry Simns, Maryland Watermen's Association
Mr. Jack Travelstead, Virginia Marine Resources Commission
Ms. Mary Roe Walkup, Citizen's Advisory Committee
Col. Franklin I. Wood, MDNR Natural Resources Police
Staff to the Fisheries Management Workgroup were:
Ms. Nancy Butowski, MNDR
Ms. Sonya Davis, VMRC
Mr. Lewis Gillingham, VMRC
Mr. Roy Insley, VMRC
Mr. Thomas O'Connell, MDNR
Mr. Harley Speir, MDNR
11
-------
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Introduction
One of the strategies for implementing the Living Resources
Commitments of the 1987 Chesapeake Bay Agreement is to develop and
adopt a series of baywide fishery management plans (FMPs) for
commercially, recreationally, and selected ecologically valuable
species. The FMPs are to be implemented by the Commonwealth of
Pennsylvania, Commonwealth of Virginia, District of Columbia,
Potomac River Fisheries Commission, and State of Maryland as
appropriate. The original FMP development schedule was amended to
include king and Spanish mackerel with a completion date of 1994.
The King and Spanish Mackerel FMP was drafted by staff from the
Maryland Department of Natural Resources (MDNR) with support from
the Virginia Marine Resources Commission (VMRC) staff. A FMP
workgroup consisting of members from government agencies, the
academic community, the fishing industry and public interest groups
reviewed and commented on the plan. The management plan contains
a summary of the fishery under consideration, a discussion of
problems and issues that have arisen, and recommended management
actions.
Goal and Objectives
The goal of the King and Spanish Mackerel Fishery Management
Plan is:
Enhance and perpetuate king and Spanish mackerel stocks in the
Chesapeake Bay and its tributaries, and throughout their
Atlantic coast range, so as to generate optimum long-term
ecological, social and economic benefits from their commercial
and recreational harvest and utilization over time.
In order to meet this goal, a number of objectives must be
met. These objectives are incorporated into the are.as of concern
and management strategies summarized below.
Areas of Concern and Management Strategies
Stock Status: King and Spanish mackerel stocks are currently
managed under the Coastal Pelagics FMP and by individual states.
Recent stock assessments indicate that management measures in the
South Atlantic have been effective in rebuilding stocks. Mackerel
stocks have been expanding their range and increasing in abundance
in areas where they historically occurred but had declined or
disappeared. To continue the efforts put forth by the SAFMC
compatible and coordinated interjurisdictional management is
essential. The states will adopt size and creel limits consistent
with the recommendations of the South Atlantic Fishery Management
111
-------
Council (SAFMC) and in effect in Federal waters. In addition,
Maryland and Virginia will close their respective king and Spanish
mackerel recreational and commercial fisheries when such closures
are in effect in Federal waters.
Monitoring Catch and Quotas, and Research Needs: The Coastal
Pelagics FMP manages King and Spanish mackerel stocks through a
quota. In order for this approach to succeed, cooperative
interstate research and comprehensive monitoring are essential.
The states will track the commercial and recreational harvest of
king and Spanish mackerel, provide such information to the SAFMC on
a timely basis and support research needs.
Waste/Sublegal Bycatch and Hook and Release Mortalities: King and
Spanish mackerel are delicate fish that handle poorly and do not
survive long out of the water. Commercial fishermen catch sublegal
Spanish mackerel, and occassionally king mackerel in commercial
gear set for mixed species. Recreational fishermen catch and
release king and Spanish mackerel when they are under size or their
bag limit has been reached. The states will investigate means of
reducing undersized bycatch in the commercial fisheries and hook
and release mortalities in the recreational fisheries.
Habitat Issues: Increasing urbanization and industrial development
of the Atlantic coastal plain has led to a decrease in the
environmental quality of many estuarine 'communities. Estuarine
habitat loss and degradation in the Chesapeake Bay may have adverse
effects on king and Spanish mackerel stocks. The jurisdictions
will continue to refine their water quality and habitat programs to
improve the environmental quality of the Bay.
IV
-------
THE FISHERY MANAGEMENT PLAN PROCESS
What is a fishery management plan?
A Chesapeake Bay fishery management plan provides a framework
for the Bay jurisdictions to take compatible, coordinated
management measures to conserve and utilize a fishery resource. A
management plan includes pertinent background information,
management strategies, recommended actions, and an implementation
date.
A fishery management plan is not an endpoint in the management
of a fishery but part of a dynamic, changing process consisting of
several steps. The first step consists of analyzing the complex
biological, economic and social aspects of a particular finfish or
shellfish fishery. The second step includes defining the concerns
of a fishery, identifying potential solutions, and choosing
appropriate management strategies. Once specific goals have been
defined, it is important to measure progress towards meeting the
goals, establish accountability and engage the general public.
Plans must be adaptive and flexible to meet the changing needs of
a particular resource. They are annually reviewed and updated in
order to respond to the most current information on the fishery.
Management Plan Background
As part of the 1987 Chesapeake Bay Agreement's commitment to
protect and manage the natural resources of the Chesapeake Bay, the
Bay jurisdictions developed a series of fishery management plans
for commercially, recreationally, and selected ecologically
valuable species. A comprehensive and coordinated approach by the
various local, state and federal groups in the Chesapeake Bay
watershed is necessary for successful fishery management. Bay
fisheries are traditionally managed separately by Pennsylvania,
Maryland, Virginia, the District of Columbia, and the Potomac River
Fisheries Commission. There is also a federal Mid-Atlantic Fishery
Management Council (MAFMC) which has management jurisdiction for
offshore fisheries (3-200 miles), and a coastwide organization, the
Atlantic States Marine Fisheries Commission (ASMFC), which
coordinates the management of migratory species in state waters
(internal waters to 3 miles offshore) from Maine to Florida.
A Fisheries Management Workgroup, under the auspices of the
Chesapeake Bay Program's Living Resources Subcommittee, was formed
to develop baywide fishery management plans. The workgroup's
members represent fishery management agencies from the District of
Columbia, Maryland, Pennsylvania, the Potomac River Fisheries
Commission, Virginia, and the federal government; the Bay area
academic community; the fishing industry; conservation groups; and
interested citizens. Establishing Chesapeake Bay FMPs, in addition
-------
to coastal FMPs, creates a forum to specifically address problems
that are unique to the Chesapeake Bay. They also serve as the basis
for implementing regulations in the Bay jurisdictions.
The Chesapeake Bay Program's Fishery Management Planning Process
The planning process starts with initial input by the
Fisheries Management Workgroup and development of a draft plan.
This is followed by a review of the management proposals by Bay
Program committees, other scientists and resource managers, and the
public. Comments are incorporated into a final draft of the
management plan. It is endorsed by the Chesapeake Bay Program's
Living Resources Subcommittee (LRSC), the Implementation Committee
.(1C), and the Principal Staff Committee (PSC). The plan is sent to
the Executive Committee (EC) for adoption.
Upon adoption by the EC, the appropriate management agencies
implement the plan. In 1990, the Maryland legislature approved
Section 4-215 of the Natural Resource Article giving the Maryland
Department of Natural Resources authority to regulate a fishery
once a FMP has been adopted by regulation. In Virginia, FMP
recommendations are pursued either by legislative changes or
through a public regulatory process conducted by the Commission. A
periodic review of each FMP is conducted by the Fisheries
Management Workgroup to incorporate new information and to update
management strategies as needed.
The first group of fishery management plans was completed in
1989. Additional plans have been completed each year encompassing
16 finfish and shellfish species. With time and changes, it became
apparent that a substantive review of each FMP at regular intervals
would be necessary. The FMP workgroup developed a review schedule
to upgrade each plan (Table 1) . The revised FMP must be sent
through the regular Chesapeake Bay Program's fishery management
planning and adoption process. Since the major review schedule
extends over a 5-year period, important minor changes are addressed
through an amendment procedure. This entails developing a
description of the proposed changes and sending it through the FMP
workgroup for endorsement. The amendment must be published for
public comment and reviewed by the LRSC and the 1C for their
comment and approval. The PSC has been given authority by the EC to
approve amendment changes.
VI
-------
Table 1. Schedule for reviewing fishery management plans
SPECIES
Shad/Herring
Blue Crab
Oysters
Striped Bass
Weakf ish/Seatrout.
Bluefish
Croaker / Spot
American Eel
Summer Flounder
Black Drum
Red Drum
Catfish
Mackerel
Black Sea Bass
Tautog
Horseshoe Crabs
ADOPTION
DATE
1989
1989
1989
1989
1990
1990
1991
1991
1991
1993
1993
July 1995
1994
July 1995
December
1995
1994
REVIEW DATE
June 1995
1994
1994
August 1995
March 1996
June 1995
1996
1996
March 1996
1997
2000
1998
2000
2000
1999
Vll
-------
Section 1. BACKGROUND
BIOLOGICAL BACKGROUND
The king mackerel, Scomberomorus cavalla. and Spanish
mackerel, Scomberomorus maculatus are members of the mackerel
family, Scombridae. Both species support major commercial and
sport fisheries along the Atlantic Ocean and Gulf of Mexico (NMFS
1990).
King Mackerel
King mackerel inhabit coastal waters from the Gulf of Maine to
Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, including the Gulf of Mexico (GMFMC, SAFMC
1985) . They are most commonly found from the Chesapeake Bay
southward. Adult king mackerel are pelagic and tend to be solitary
while immature fish school, sometimes mixing with schools of
Spanish mackerel of similar sizes (GMFMC, SAFMC 1985),. Tagging
studies indicate king mackerel are migratory (Powers and Eldridge
1983). Migratory patterns occur in response to water temperature
with 68° F (20° C) considered the species minimum preferred
temperature (Williams and Taylor 1986). Migratory behavior changes
with increasing size and age of king mackerel (Beaumariage 1973).
Large king mackerel migrate to a greater extent than smaller,
immature individuals (Williams, unpub. man., 1977).
Two genetic stocks of king mackerel have been identified from
allozyme frequency data. One that occurs along the western
Atlantic coast and up the western coast of Florida (Atlantic
Stock), and the other is in the western Gulf (Western Gulf Stock)
(Mackerel Stock Assessment Panel 1994). The present management
regime recognizes two migratory groups of king mackerel based on
tagging data and growth rate differences, the Atlantic migratory
group and the Gulf migratory group, although fish captured in the
eastern Gulf of Mexico off west Florida are genetically
indistinguishable from the Atlantic genetic stock.
The king mackerel Atlantic migratory group generally moves
southward, along the Atlantic coast in the fall, overwintering off
northeast Florida. During severely cold winters some mixing with
the Gulf group occurs south of Cape Canaveral. In spring, most of
these fish move northward to the northern part of their
distribution and are concentrated off the coast of the Carolinas in
the spring, summer and fall. Others remain behind and support a
summer fishery in southern Florida (Powers and Eldridge 1983).
King mackerel from the Gulf migratory group winter off
southeast Florida and Louisiana. Those wintering off southeast
Florida support a winter fishery (Powers and Eldridge 1983). In
April and May, these fish migrate through the Florida Keys and up
-------
into the Gulf of Mexico. Most of these fish are concentrated in
the northern Gulf of Mexico from Texas to northwest Florida in May
through September. Some smaller, immature individuals remain off
southwest Florida in the summer.
King mackerel exhibit protracted spawning with several
spawning peaks (Beaumariage 1973). Along the Florida west coast
spawning occurs from April through November with a peak in May
(Beaumariage 1973). On the Atlantic coast, larvae have been
collected from May through October. Larval distribution indicates
spawning occurs in the western Atlantic off the Carolinas, Cape
Canaveral and Miami (Wollam 1970, Schekter 1971 and Mayo 1973).
There does not appear to be a well defined area for spawning.
Spanish mackerel
Spanish mackerel inhabit coastal waters of the western
Atlantic Ocean from the Gulf of Maine to the Yucatan Peninsula
(Collette et al. 1978). They are schooling fish, which prefer
neritic coastal waters but freely enter tidal estuaries. Spanish
mackerel are most frequently found in water temperatures between 70
and 88° F (21 and 31° C) , rarely below 64° F. While the stock
structure of Spanish mackerel is poorly known, there is some
evidence from electrophoretic analysis of separate Gulf and South
Atlantic groups with a mixing zone off south Florida (Skow and
Chittenden 1981). Two groups of Spanish mackerel have also been
delineated based on distributional patterns, spawning areas and the
history of exploitation. Based on this information the two groups
are divided by the Dade/Monroe County line in south Florida to
facilitate management (GMFMC, SAFMC 1987).
The Atlantic migratory group of Spanish mackerel makes
seasonal migrations along the Atlantic coast and appears to be much
more abundant in Florida during the winter. They move northward
each spring and occur off the Carolinas by April or May, off
Chesapeake Bay by May or June, and some years, as. far north as
Narragansett Bay by July (Berrien and Finan 1977). Results of
tagging studies in North Carolina have confirmed a southern
movement to Florida in the winter and movement north to Virginia in
the summer and fall (Phalen 1989).
Members of the Gulf migratory group move southward in the
fall, from the northern and eastern Gulf coast and appear abundant
off south Florida in the winter. In the spring, they migrate west
of Cape San Bias. Seasonal north-south movements of Spanish
mackerel along the Mexican and south Texan Gulf coasts are
suggested by one fish tagged in Port Aransas, Texas, which was
returned from Vera Cruz, Mexico (GMFMC, SAFMC 1985).
Spanish mackerel spawning is also protracted, occurring from
April through September (Powell 1975). The onset of spawning
-------
into the Gulf of Mexico. Most of these fish are concentrated in
the northern Gulf of Mexico from Texas to northwest Florida in May
through September. Some smaller, immature individuals remain off
southwest Florida in the summer.
King mackerel exhibit protracted spawning with several
spawning peaks (Beaumariage 1973). Along the Florida west coast
spawning occurs from April through November with a peak in May
(Beaumariage 1973). On the Atlantic coast, larvae have been
collected from May through October. Larval distribution indicates
spawning occurs in the western Atlantic off the Carolinas, Cape
Canaveral and Miami (Wollam 1970, Schekter 1971 and Mayo 1973).
There does not appear to be a well defined area for spawning.
Spanish mackerel
Spanish mackerel inhabit coastal waters of the western
Atlantic Ocean from the Gulf of Maine to the Yucatan Peninsula
(Collette et al. 1978). They are schooling fish, which prefer
neritic coastal waters but freely enter tidal estuaries. Spanish
mackerel are most frequently found in water temperatures between 70
and 88° F (21 and 31° C) , rarely below 64° Q.j While the stock
structure of Spanish mackerel is poorly known, there is some
evidence from electrophoretic analysis of separate Gulf and South
Atlantic groups with a mixing zone off south Florida (Skow and
Chittenden 1981). Two groups of Spanish mackerel have also been
delineated based on distributional patterns, spawning areas and the
history of exploitation. Based on this information the two groups
are divided by the Dade/Monroe County line in south Florida to
facilitate management (GMFMC, SAFMC 1987).
The Atlantic migratory group of Spanish mackerel makes
seasonal migrations along the Atlantic coast and appears to be much
more abundant in Florida during the winter. They move northward
each spring and occur off the Carolinas by April or May, off
Chesapeake Bay by May or June, and some years, as far north as
Narragansett Bay by July (Berrien and Finan 1977). Results of
tagging studies in North Carolina have confirmed a southern
movement to Florida in the winter and movement north to Virginia in
the summer and fall (Phalen 1989).
Members of the Gulf migratory group move southward in the
fall, from the northern and eastern Gulf coast and appear abundant
off south Florida in the winter. In the spring, they migrate west
of Cape San Bias. Seasonal north-south movements of Spanish
mackerel along the Mexican and south Texan Gulf coasts are
suggested by one fish tagged in Port Aransas, Texas, which was
returned from Vera Cruz, Mexico (GMFMC, SAFMC 1985).
Spanish mackerel spawning is also protracted, occurring from
April through September (Powell 1975). The onset of spawning
-------
progresses from south to north. In the Gulf of Mexico, larvae have
been found widely distributed from the west coast of Florida to
south Texas (Wollam 1970; Dwinell and Futch 1973; McEachran and
Finucane 1979) . Along the Atlantic coast, spawning begins in April
in the Carolinas, in mid-June in the Chesapeake Bay and from late
August to late September off Sandy Hook, New Jersey (Earll 1883;
Beaumariage 1970). Larvae have been collected from May through
mid-September from Cape Fear, North Carolina to Cape Canaveral,
Florida (Dwinell and Futch 1973). Spanish mackerel spawning area
is widely distributed but spawn much closer to shore and in more
shallow water than king mackerel (Dwinell and Futch 1973; McEachran
and Finucane 1979).
BIOLOGICAL PROFILE
Fecundity
King mackerel:
Spanish mackerel:
Age/Size At Maturity
King mackerel:
Spanish mackerel:
Longevity
King mackerel:
An age XIII, 56 Ib. (25.6 kg) female held
12,207,000 eggs while an age I, 1.5 Ib.
(0.68 kg) female had 69,000. The best
indicator of fecundity is the total weight
of the fish.
Egg number estimates for females ranging
from 12 to 26 inches FL (312 to 664 mm)
ranged from 100,000 for a 13.inch FL (328
mm, 0.30 kg) female to 2,113,000 for a 25
inch FL (626 mm, 2.4 kg) female (Finucane
and Collins 1986). A 6 Ib. (2.7 kg)
female collected from the Chesapeake Bay
contained an estimated 1.5 million eggs
(Earll 1883).
In south Florida, major spawning activity
occurs at age IV (34 inches FL (857mm))
and over in females and age III (28 inches
FL (705mm)) and over in males, although
age III females and age II males are
reproductively active (Beaumariage 1973).
Become sexually mature in their second and
third year of life (age I and II) when 10
to 14 inches FL (250 to 350 mm), although
age III and older individuals constitute
the bulk of the spawning stock.
Females live longer than males, to a
-------
maximum age of XIV years or older.
Spanish mackerel: Life span may exceed X years.
Spawning and Larval Development
Spawning Season
King mackerel:
Spanish mackerel
Spawning Area
King mackerel:
Spanish mackerel
Ran ere
King mackerel:
Spanish mackerel
Spawning is protracted. Larvae were
collected from May through October on the
Atlantic coast.
Spawning is protracted, occurring from
April to October (Finucane and Collins
1986; Collins and Stender 1987). Spawning
begins in mid-June in the Chesapeake Bay
region.
Spawning occurs over the middle to outer
continental shelf waters of the Gulf of
Mexico and South Atlantic Ocean. There
does not appear to be a well defined area
of spawning.
Spawning occurs over the inner continental
shelf, over a widely distributed area.
Larvae were found along the Atlantic coast
from Cape Canaveral, Florida to Cape
Hatteras, North Carolina (Collins and
Stenger 1987). Larval abundance was
greatest in the eastern Gulf of Mexico,
and distributed to the Texas coast
(McEachran and Finucane 1979). Spanish
mackerel supposedly spawn in the Atlantic
off the coast of North Carolina and
Virginia, however the only published
evidence of this are early larvae
collections by Earll (1883) and Ryder
(1887) .
Western Atlantic off the CaroJLinas, Gulf
of Mexico down to the Dry Tortugas.
Perhaps as far north as Delaware Bay, down
to south Florida.
-------
Salinity
King mackerel:
Spanish mackerel:
Temperature
King mackerel:
Spanish mackerel:
Young-of-Year-Juveniles
Location
King mackerel:
Spanish mackerel:
Salinity
King mackerel:
Spanish mackerel:
Temperature
King mackerel:
Spanish mackerel:
Subadults and Adults
Location
King mackerel:
25-35 ppt
30-35 ppt
Spawn above 77° F (25° C)
Spawn above 77° F (25° C)
Juveniles were found off southwest Florida
in May, in the Yucatan Channel in June and
July, off East Florida and in northern
Gulf of Mexico in September, and off Cape
Hatteras, North Carolina in August,
September and November (Wollam 1970).
Primarily utilize nearshore ocean waters
but commonly use estuaries as nursery
grounds.
26-34 ppt
13-34 ppt
72-82° F (22-28° C)
no data available
From the Continental Shelf shoreward,
occasionally moving into estuarine waters.
Schools congregate in areas of bottom
relief, and older, solitary individuals
are found around structure.
-------
Spanish mackerel: From the inner shelf shoreward, and are
common in the lower portions of large,
high salinity estuaries within their
range.
Salinity
King mackerel: 20-35 ppt
Spanish mackerel: 12-35 ppt
Temperature
King mackerel: Migration appears limited by 68° F (20° C).
Spanish mackerel: Rarely found below 63° F (17° C).
HABITAT ISSUES
Habitat of Adults
King and Spanish mackerel adults inhabit coastal waters out to
the edge of the continental shelf of the Gulf of Mexico and
Atlantic Ocean. Their distribution is believed to be primarily
dependent upon temperature and salinity. The adults spend most of
their life cycle in ocean waters where environmental conditions are
more stable, and man's effect is less severe. There appears to be
little direct effect of man on adult habitat, nor does it appear
likely that there will be a significant effect in the foreseeable
future. Habitat degradation is more likely to affect eggs and
larvae, or indirectly affect the adults through predator-prey
relations.
Habitat of Eggs and Larvae
Coastal and estuarine areas are extremely important as
spawning and nursery areas for king and Spanish mackerel. Within
the spawning area, eggs and larvae are concentrated in the surface
waters. There is, at present, no documented evidence that larval
habitat has been degraded by natural or man-made impacts to a
degree sufficient to affect recruitment; however, man's impact on
the habitat has greater potential to affect the larvae than the
adults, and the magnitude of man's impact in the spawning area has
been rapidly increasing.
Oil pollution from offshore oil spills and/or leakage or
discharge from operating oil wells is a potential danger to the
spawning grounds of king and Spanish mackerel. The water soluble
aromatic hydrocarbon components of crude oil is damaging to fish
eggs and larvae. Other pollutants such as pesticides may act
-------
synergistically with oil to produce the deleterious effects on the
young stages of fish (Struhsaker et al. 1974). Oil dispersants
with water soluble aromatic hydrocarbon fractions also have been
found to be damaging to eggs and larvae, although second generation
dispersants are less toxic, due to the reduction of aromatic
hydrocarbons (Wilson 1977).
Habitat of Prey Species
King and Spanish mackerel migrate and feed on seasonally
abundant local resources. Many of these prey species are estuarine
dependent, in that they spend all or part of their lives in
estuaries. Accordingly, king and Spanish mackerel are to some
degree dependent upon estuaries as a source of prey. The
degradation of estuaries through landfill, dredging and run-off of
domestic and/or industrial wastes will certainly have negative
effects on prey stocks, ultimately affecting king and Spanish
mackerel stocks.
THE FISHERIES
King mackerel
King mackerel support an important commercial fishery along
the Gulf of Mexico and South Atlantic coasts. In recent years,
king mackerel have been primarily caught commercially in south
Florida and to an increasing extent off North Carolina and
Louisiana. Historically, there was a small commercial fishery for
king mackerel in the Chesapeake Bay with the introduction of pound
nets and gill nets in the 1880's. Large scale commercial
exploitation in Florida did not begin until the early 1900's.
Total commercial catch appears to have averaged 4 million pounds
during the 1920's and 1930's. Commercial landings trended
downward, averaging 2.5 million pounds in the 1950's, increasing to
8 million pounds in the mid-1970's. Catches declined to 5 million
pounds in 1978 and 1979, then increased to over 8 million pounds in
1982 (GMFAC, SAFMC 1985). The coastal fishery has been quota
managed since 1985 and catches have averaged 3.5 million pounds.
In Virginia, commercial landings of king mackerel are
incidental, although a small, directed hook and line fishery exists
in some years. Commercial landings of king mackerel from 1982
through 1992 ranged from less than 2,000 pounds in 1983 to slightly
over 14,000 pounds in 1988 (Figure 1). Pound nets (39%), hook and
line (32%) and gill nets (23%) accounted for 94% of the ten year
catch (Figure 2) . For the same period, 54% of the commercial catch
came from ocean waters while 46% of the landings were made inside
the Bay (Figure 3). Predominance of ocean and Bay catches varied
by year (Figure 4) . Maryland's commercial landings of king
mackerel are insignificant in most years (Figure 5).
-------
In the recreational fishery, king mackerel are a major target
species for the private boat and charter boat fleet along a
widespread area of the Gulf of Mexico and South Atlantic regions.
The Marine Recreational Fishery Statistics Survey (MRFSS) has
estimated recreational king mackerel landings for the Atlantic and
Gulf of Mexico regions since 1979. Total recreational landings
averaged 1.8 million king mackerel from 1979 through 1984. Since
1985, the fishery has been quota-managed through size and bag
limits. Within this framework, recreational catches have averaged
1 million king mackerel.
Virginia and Maryland's recreational landings of king mackerel
are incidental, less than 30,000 fish combined annually from 1979
through 1993 (MRFSS data). In Virginia, king mackerel first appear
in charter and private boat catches in June, are taken incidentally
through the summer months and into October. In some years,
sufficient numbers of king mackerel are available and directed
trips are made during the fall. In the Virginia Saltwater Fishing
Tournament, it takes a 20 pound king mackerel to qualify for a
Citation. The number of Citations recorded between 1982 and 1993
have increased slightly (Figure 7) although effort information is
not available. The Virginia State record was landed in 1991 and
weighed 51 pounds.
Maryland has very limited data on its recreational harvest of
king mackerel. Prior to 1986, the MRFSS either did not have any
reports of king mackerel being landed or had combined king mackerel
landings with other mackerel species into one category.
Preliminary MRFSS estimates of king mackerel landings for Maryland
waters during 1992 and 1993 were 8,916 and 1,389 fish,
respectively. Data from charter boat logbooks indicate king
mackerel have been available to anglers during July and August.
The recreational charter boat harvest over the last three years
(1991 - 1993) has ranged from 20 pounds (2 fish) to 1,492 pounds
(275 fish) and is believed to occur entirely from Maryland's
Atlantic coast. King mackerel have generally averaged between 5
and 10 pounds. In Maryland's Sport Fishing Tournament a 15 pound
king mackerel qualifies for a Citation, though few have been
issued. Maryland's state record was caught in 1985 at 47 pounds.
Spanish mackerel
The Spanish mackerel commercial fishery began about 1850 along
the Long Island and New Jersey coasts, and was well established in
the mid-Atlantic and Chesapeake Bay area by the late 1870's. In
1880, the Chesapeake Bay area produced 86% of the total coastal
catch of 1.9 million pounds, while less than 2% of this catch was
recorded from the South Atlantic and Gulf of Mexico. By 1887, the
areas of major production had changed and about 64% of the total
production occurred in these regions. This trend continued, and
from 1950 through 1985 Florida accounted for more than 92% of the
Spanish mackerel commercial landings. Since 1986, Florida's
8
-------
contribution to the commercial harvest has been decreasing due to
increased landings along the South and mid-Atlantic. Total
commercial landings ranged between 5.0 million pounds (1955, 1978)
and 18.0 million pounds (1976), and averaged approximately 8
million pounds during a period from 1950-1983. The coastal fishery
has been quota managed since 1986.
Atlantic coast landings fluctuated between 1.9 million pounds
in 1967 and 11.0 million pounds in 1977 (1950-1988). In 1986, a
quota system was implemented and landings dropped from an average
of 5.1 to 4.0 million pounds along the Atlantic coast for a period
from 1978 through 1988 (ASFMC 1990 Spanish mackerel report data).
Spanish mackerel is of major importance to the gill net fishery in
south Florida where the main fishing areas are the Florida Keys and
Atlantic coast between Palm Beach and Cape Canaveral. Smaller
fisheries involve incidental catches in the North Carolina and
Virginia pound net fisheries, the North Carolina long haul seine
fishery and to a lesser extent in Georgia and South Carolina's
shrimp trawl fishery. A small directed gill net fishery exists off
the coast of North Carolina.
Spanish mackerel primarily occur in the lower Chesapeake Bay,
Virginia, but may penetrate into Maryland waters, at least in years
of abundance. Virginia's commercial landings of Spanish mackerel
have increased dramatically since 1986. Between 1986 and 1992,
landings ranged from a low of 168,609 pounds in 1986 to a high of
slightly over 0.5 million pounds in 1990 (Figure 8). During this
time period, pound nets accounted for over 80% of the landings
(Figure 9) and 90% of the landings came from within the Bay (Figure
10) with little fluctuation from year to year (Figure 11).
Prior to 1983, Spanish mackerel landings did not appear in
Maryland's commercial statistics. Since then, commercial landings
have been gradually increasing and exceeded 36,000 pounds in 1991
(Figure 5). Pound nets account for the majority of landings.
A significant recreational fishery for Spanish mackerel exists
coastwide. The fishery is primarily conducted by private and
charter boat fishermen from the mouth of the bays to about 15 miles
offshore. A small boat fishery exists inside bays and sounds, and
good catches are made from fishing piers.
From 1979 through 1991, estimated recreational landings of
Spanish mackerel along the Atlantic and Gulf of Mexico have
averaged 3.5 million fish, without any apparent trend (MRFSS data).
Estimated annual catches along the Atlantic coast ranged from a low
of 122,000 fish in 1983 to a high of 1.9 million fish in 1988
(MRFSS data). Following the initiation of the MRFSS in 1979,
Spanish mackerel landings were not reported in the Mid-Atlantic
region until 1986. Recreational landings in the Mid-Atlantic
region have increased dramatically since.
-------
Recreational landings were first reported in Virginia in 1986,
but were below 30,000 fish for 1986 and 1987. Landings increased
sharply, averaging 116,000 fish from 1988 through 1991 (MRFSS
data). A directed recreational fishery for Spanish mackerel
recently evolved in Virginia due to an increase in their abundance.
The dramatic increase in Virginia's recreational fishery parallels
the commercial landings shown in Figure 8. Spanish mackerel become
available in mid-to-late May at the mouth of the Bay, are caught-
throughout the Bay during the summer, and are concentrated at the
mouth of the Bay and inshore coastal waters in September and early
October. Due to the increased abundance and interest in Spanish
mackerel, the Virginia Saltwater Fishing Tournament added this
species to their Citation list in 1991, with a five pound minimum
qualifying weight. Virginia's current State record was established
in 1993 at nine pounds and thirteen ounces.
In Maryland, data on the recreational catch of Spanish
mackerel is limited. Landings were first reported in 1986 and
fluctuated between 0 and 41,000 Spanish mackerel from 1986 through
1993 (MRFSS data). Landings from charter boat logbooks indicate a
minimum catch between 8,000 and 15,700 pounds (1991-1993) . Average
weight of Spanish mackerel by charter boat anglers was 2 pounds.
The recreational catch in Maryland waters is dependent on
availability which varies from year to year. A 5 pound Spanish
mackerel qualifies for a Citation in Maryland's Sport Fishing
Tournament, though few have been issued.
FISHERY PARAMETERS - ATLANTIC COAST STOCK
Status of Exploitation
King mackerel:
Not overfished, fishing mortality rate is
less than F^,, SPR and spawning stock appears
to be adequate (Mackerel Stock Assessment
Panel 1994).
Spanish mackerel:
Long Term Potential
King mackerel:
Spanish mackerel:
Not overfished, fishing mortality rate is
less than Fx%SfR and spawning stock appears
to be adequate (Mackerel Stock Assessment
Panel 1994).
MSY is 26.2 million pounds (Atlantic and
Gulf combined) (GMFMC, SAFMC 1985).
MSY is 18.0 million pounds (Atlantic and
Gulf combined) (GMFMC, SAFMC 1987).
10
-------
Importance of the
Commercial Fishery
King mackerel:
Spanish mackerel,
Importance of the
Recreational Fishery
King mackerel:
Spanish mackerel:
Extremely important in Florida, which
historically produced 90% of the total
commercial landings.
In Virginia, king mackerel landings 'are
incidental except for the few commercial
hook and line fishermen, who fish in
Federal waters. Dockside prices averaged
slightly over $1.00 per pound in 1992.
In Maryland, king mackerel
landings are insignificant.
commercial
Extremely important to Florida fishermen
who have dominated the fishery in recent
times.
In Virginia, Spanish mackerel commercial
landings have increased dramatically since
1985, peaking at just over 500,000 pounds
in 1990. Dockside prices averaged $0.52
per pound in 1993.
In Maryland, Spanish mackerel commercial
landings have been gradually increasing.
In 1991, over 36,000 pounds were reported.
Dockside prices averaged $0.52 per pound
in 1993.
Highly regarded as a sport fish.
Particularly important to the charter boat
and offshore private boat fleets.
In Virginia, king mackerel recreational
landings are incidental. In some years,
a small directed fishery exists when
sufficient numbers of fish appear.
In Maryland, king mackerel recreational
landings are incidental. Very limited
data on recreational harvest is available.
A significant Spanish mackerel private and
charter boat sport fishery exists along
the Atlantic and Gulf coasts. Most
anglers who target Spanish mackerel fish
11
-------
from private boats, but significant
catches are also made from charter boats,
fishing piers and shore.
In Virginia, a directed sport fishery for
Spanish mackerel has recently evolved as
the stocks have been re-built.
In Maryland, Spanish mackerel recreational
catch depends on availability.
Fishing Mortality Rates
King mackerel: F = 0.12 (age 3+ fish) (Mackerel Stock
Assessment Panel 1994).
Spanish mackerel: F = 0.18 (age 2+ fish) (Mackerel Stock
Assessment Panel 1994).
Spawning Potential Ratio (SPR)
King mackerel: SPR = 45% (Mackerel Stock Assessment Panel
1994).
Spanish mackerel: SPR = 42%* (Mackerel Stock Assessment Panel
1994).
May be overestimated due to low bycatch estimates.
Fishing Mortality Rate SPR 30%
King mackerel: Fx%SfR = 0.29 (Mackerel Stock Assessment
Panel 1994).
Spanish mackerel: Fx%sn = 0.71 (Mackerel Stock Assessment
Panel 1994).
RESOURCE STATUS
The Coastal Pelagics FMP (GMFMC, SAFMC 1989 and GMFMC, SAFMC 1992)
defines overfishing as follows:
a) A mackerel stock shall be considered overfished if the
spawning potential ratio (SPR) is less than the target level
percentage recommended by the assessment group, approved by
the Scientific and Statistical Committee (SSC), and adopted by
the Councils. The target level percentage shall not be less
than 30 percent.
b) When a stock is overfished (as defined in (a)), the act of
12
-------
fishing is defined as harvesting at a rate that is not
consistent with a program to rebuild the stock to the target
level percentage, and the assessment group will develop ABC
ranges for recovery periods with a program to rebuild an
overfished stock.
c) When a stock is not overfished (as defined in (a)), the
act of overfishing is defined as a harvest rate that if
continued would lead to a state of the stock that would not at
least allow a harvest of Optimum Yield (OY) on a continuing
basis, and the assessment group will develop Allowable
Biological Catch (ABC) ranges based upon OY (currently Maximum
Sustainable Yield (MSY)).
King Mackerel
The Atlantic migratory group of king mackerel has continued to
recover and is not considered overfished. Catches have remained
relatively stable since 1981. Estimates of catch-at-age indicate
that recruitment in recent years was higher than mid-1980 estimated
levels. These year classes are beginning to enter the fishery in
significant numbers as shown by Virtual Population Analysis (VPA)
results and the basic catch-at-age data. There appears to be an
adequate spawning biomass present which should continue to increase
in the future if increases in fishing mortality rate do not occur.
Current fishing mortality rates are below Fy,%SfK levels and SPR is
at 45% (1992-93).
The Stock Assessment Panel still evaluates the Gulf migratory
group as being overfished. Recent estimates indicate fishing
mortality rates are above Fa,,, SPR levels and SPR is below 30%. SPR
has been improving, although continued overage of catches will
increase the risk of not reaching the SPR goal of 30% by the target
recovery year of 1997.
Spanish Mackerel
The Stock Assessment Panel recently agreed that the Atlantic
migratory group of Spanish mackerel is not currently overfished.
Since the coastal fishery became fully regulated in 1986-87, the
condition of the fishery began improving. Fishing mortality rates
dropped below F^,,^ levels and SPR increased above 30%. Recruitment
appears to be strong and if allowed to survive could further
benefit the spawning biomass.
The Gulf migratory group has not recovered as well, and is
currently considered overfished. Fishing mortality rates have not
been controlled and continue to exceed F^,^. As a result SPR has
remained below 30%. A primary concern .is the level at which
bycatch is occurring within the Gulf. If not reduced SPR will
likely be prevented from ever achieving 30%.
13
-------
CURRENT LAWS AND REGULATIONS
Limited Entry.
Minimum Size Limit:
Creel Limit:
The Virginia Marine Resources Commission
has the power to limit entry into a
fishery and has limited entry into the
pound net fishery. Entry in the
commercial king and Spanish mackerel
fishery in the Exclusive Economic Zone
(EEZ) is controlled by a Federal vessel
permit. Annual permits issued by NMFS are
required for charter boats fishing for
Spanish or king mackerel for hire in
federal waters.
Maryland's limited entry law, effective 1
April 1994, limits the number of
commercial tidal fish licenses available
to individuals who can commercially
harvest finfish in tidal waters of
Maryland. Individuals who currently have
licenses and people who applied for
licenses before April 1, 1994 will be able
to retain their licenses. Waiting lists
will be used to issue new licenses, but no
new licenses will be issued until the
number of licenses is more in balance with
the harvestable resource.
14-inch TL for Spanish mackerel in
Maryland's recreational and commercial
fisheries and Virginia's recreational
fisheries.
14-inch TL for king mackerel in Virginia's
recreational fishery and no minimum size
limit in Virginia and Maryland's
commercial fisheries or Maryland's
recreational fishery.
5 king mackerel/person/day in Virginia's
recreational fishery, and no recreational
creel limit in Maryland.
10 Spanish mackerel/person/day in Maryland
and Virginia's recreational fishery.
Harvest Quotas (Atlantic
coast):
King mackerel: 10 million pounds (1994-
95).
Spanish mackerel:
(1994-95).
14
9.2 million pounds
-------
Allocations (Atlantic
coast):
Bycatch Restrictions:
Season:
Gear Area Restrictions:
Virginia:
Maryland:
Potomac River:
King mackerel: Commercial - 37.1%
Recreational - 62.9%
Spanish mackerel:Commercial - 50%
Recreational - 50%
Licensed Virginia pound net fishermen,
fishing in Virginia waters, are exempt
from king and Spanish mackerel minimum
sizes.
There are no bycatch restrictions in
Maryland waters.
Open year-round in state waters of
Maryland and Virginia.
In the EEZ (3-200 miles offshore),
commercial and recreational fishing is
closed when the quota has been reached.
Trawling is prohibited in the Chesapeake
Bay and Territorial Sea. It is unlawful
to set, place or fish a fixed fishing
device of any type within 300 yards of the
Chesapeake Tunnel. Also, Sections 28.1-52
and 28.1-53 of the Code of Virginia
outline placement, total length and
distance requirements for fishing
structures.
Purse seines, trawls, trammel nets and
mono-filament gill nets are prohibited
(otter and beam trawls are legal on the
Atlantic coast at distances of one mile or
more offshore). Prohibition on gill
netting in most areas of Chesapeake Bay
and its tributaries during the summer.
Current moratorium on any new gill net,
pound net, or hook and line licenses. The
use of a purse net, beam trawl, otter
trawl or trammel net are prohibited.
Length restrictions for various gear types
exist. Gill nets are restricted to a mesh
size of 5.0 to 7.0 inches. Seasonal
restrictions for gill net are: anchor or
15
-------
stake gill net, June 1 through Nov. 30,
drift gill net, closed.
STATUS OF TRADITIONAL FISHERY MANAGEMENT APPROACHES
The following definitions have been adapted from the
documents, "Status of the Fishery Resources Off the Northeastern
United States" for 1989 and 1990 (NOAA Technical Memoranda NMFS-
F/NEC-72 and 81) . For a more thorough review of fisheries
terminology, refer to this document under the section "Definitions
of Technical Terms".
Catch-Per-Unit-Effort (CPUE); Defined as the number or weight of
fish caught during a specific unit of fishing time and
considered a basic measure of abundance or stock density.
Estimates of Mortality; A mortality rate is the rate at which fish
die from natural causes or fishing. Mortality rates can be
expressed in terms of instantaneous or annual mortality.
Instantaneous rates are used extensively in fisheries
management for ease in comparing the relative importance of
different sources of mortality. Annual mortality rates can
easily be converted to percentages, while instantaneous rates
cannot. The instantaneous total mortality rate (Z) is the
natural logarithm of the ratio of the number of fish alive at
the beginning of the same period of time. Fishing mortality
is usually expressed in terms of an instantaneous rate (F) , as
is natural mortality (M) . For example, an instantaneous total
mortality rate (Z) of 1.5 equals annual mortality rate of 0.78
or 78% annual total mortality. Instantaneous mortality rates
are additive, but annual rates are not.
Yield-Per-Recruit (YPR); The theoretical yield that would be
obtained from a group of fish of one year-class if harvested
according to a certain exploitation rate over the life-span of
the fish.
Spawning Stock Biomass (SSB) and Spawning Stock Biomass Per Recruit
(SSBR); SSB is the weight of all adult females in the population,
calculated as the remaining number of individual females in
each year-class, times the percent that are mature, times
their average weight. SSBR is the total contribution of a
cohort (year-class) to the SSB over its lifetime, determined
by summing its contribution at each age.
Stock-Recruitment: The relationship between the adult stock size
and subsequent recruitment (fish that reach a certain size or
age in a specific year).
Maximum Sustainable Yield (MSY): The largest average catch that
can be continuously taken from a stock under existing
16
-------
environmental conditions, while maintaining stock size.
Virtual Population Analysis (VPA); An analysis of the catches from
a given year-class over its life in the 'fishery.
RESEARCH NEEDS
Improved management of the Chesapeake Bay and Atlantic Coast King
and Spanish Mackerel FMP will result as new research information
becomes available. The following items of research proposed by the
Coastal Pelagics FMP and ASFMC Spanish Mackerel FMP are applicable
to this plan.
1) Provide better estimates of recruitment, natural mortality
rates, fishing mortality rates, and standing stock. Specific
information should include an estimate of total amount caught
and distribution of catch by area, season, and type of gear.
2) Research on the consequences and estimation of bycatch
needs to be completed.
3) Conduct migration studies to determine normal migration
routes and changes therein, and the climatic or other factors
responsible for changes in the environmental and habitat
conditions which may affect the habitat and availability of
stocks.
4) Evaluate size at age of both king and Spanish mackerel.
17
-------
REFERENCES
Beaumariage, D. S. 1970. Current status of biological
investigations of Florida's mackerel fisheries. Proc. Gulf
and Caribb. Fish. Inst. 22nd Annual Meeting, 1969, p. 79-86.
1973. Age, growth, and reproduction of king mackerel,
Scomberomorus cavalla, in Florida. Fla. Dept. Nat. Resour.
Mar. Res. Lab., Florida Marine Research Publication No. 1.
45pp.
Berrien, P. and D. Finan. 1977. Biological and fisheries data on
king mackerel, Scomberomorus cavalla (Culver). Nat. Mar.
Fish. Serv., Sandy Hook Laboratory, Highlands, New Jersey,
Tech. Ser. Rep. No. 8. 42pp.
Collette, B. B., J. L. Russo, and L. A. Zavaia-Camin. 1978.
Scomberomorus brasillensis. a new species of Spanish mackerel
from the Western Atlantic. U.., Nat. Mar. Fish. Serv., Fish.
Bull. 76: 273-280.
Collins, M. R., and B. W. Stenger. 1987. Larval king mackerel
(Scomberomorus cavalla), Spanish mackerel (Scomberomorus
maculatus), and bluefish (Pomatomus saltatrix) off the
southeast coast of the United States, 1973-1980. Bui. Mar.
Sci. 41(3): 822-834.
Dwinell, S. E. and C. R. Futch. 1973. Spanish mackerel and king
mackerel larvae and juveniles in the northeastern Gulf of
Mexico, June through October, 1969. Fla. Dept. Nat. Resour.
Mar. Res. Lab. Leafl. Ser. Vol. 4, Pt. 1, No. 24. 14pp.
Earll, R. E. 1883. The Spanish mackerel, Cvbium maculatum
(Mitch.) ; Its natural history and artificial propagation, with
an account of the origin and development of the fishery. U.S.
Commissioner of Fish and Fisheries, Report for 1880, p. 395-
426.
Finucane, T. H., and L.A. Collins. 1986. Reproduction of Spanish
mackerel, Scomberomorus maculatus. from the southeastern
United States. Northeast Gulf Sci. 8(2): 97-106.
Gulf of Mexico Fishery Management Council (GMFMC), and South
Atlantic Fishery Management Council (SAFMC). 1985. Final
amendment 1, fishery management plan, environmental impact
statement for the coastal migratory pelagic resource
(mackerels). GMFMC, Tampa, FL and SAFMC, Charleston, SC.
GMFMC, and SAFMC. 1987. Revised amendment 2 to the fishery
management plan for the coastal migratory pelagic resources
(mackerels). GMFMC, Tampa, FL and SAFMC, Charleston, SC.
18
-------
GMFMC, and SAFMC. 1989. Final amendment 3 to the fishery
management plan for the coastal migratory pelagic resources
(mackerels) of the Gulf of Mexico and the South Atlantic.
GMFMC, Tampa, FL and SAFMC, Charleston, SC.
GMFMC, and SAFMC. 1989. Final amendment 4 to the fishery
management plan for the coastal migratory pelagic resources
(mackerels) of the Gulf of Mexico and the South Atlantic.
GMFMC, Tampa, FL and SAFMC, Charleston, SC.
GMFMC, and SAFMC. 1990. Amendment 5 to the fishery management
plan for the coastal migratory pelagic resources (mackerels).
GMFMC, Tampa, FL and SAFMC, Charleston, SC.
GMFMC, and SAFMC. 1992. Amendment 6 to the fishery management
plan for coastal migratory pelagics in the Gulf of Mexico and
South Atlantic. GMFMC, Tampa, FL and SAFMC, Charleston, SC.
GMFMC, and SAFMC. 1994. Amendment 7 to the fishery management
plan for coastal migratory pelagic resources in the Gulf of
Mexico and South Atlantic. GMFMC, Tampa, FL and SAFMC,
Charleston, SC.
Mackerel Stock Assessment Panel. 1994. 1994 Report of the
mackerel stock assessment panel. U.S. Dept. of Com., NOAA,
Nat. Mar. Fish. Ser., SE Fish. Center, Miami, FL. 20pp.
Mayo, D. A. 1973. Rearing, growth, and development of the eggs
and larvae of seven scombrid fishes from the Straits of
Florida. Ph. D. dissertation, University of Miami, Coral
Cables, Florida. 138pp.
McEachran, J. D. and J. H. Finucane. 1979. (Abstract).
Distribution, seasonality, and abundance of larval king and
Spanish mackerels in the northwestern Gulf of Mexico. In:
Nakamura and Buills, (eds.), Proceedings: Colloquium on the
Spanish and King Mackerel Resources of the Gulf of Mexico.
Gulf States Marine Fisheries Commission, No. 4. p. 59. Gulf
States Marine Fisheries Commission, P.O. Box 726, Ocean
Springs, Mississippi.
McEachran, J. D., J. H. Finucane, and L. S. Hall. 1980.
Distribution, seasonality and abundance of king and Spanish
mackerel larvae in the northwestern Gulf of Mexico (Pices:
Scombridae). Northeast Gulf Sci. 4(1): 1-16.
Mercer, L. P., L. R. Phalen and J. R. Maiolo. 1990. Fishery
management plan for Spanish mackerel. Fishery management
report no. 18 of the Atl. Sta. Mar. Fish. Comm. (ASFMC) .
ASFMC, Washington, D.C., 20036. 78pp.
19
-------
Phalen, L. R. 1989. Spanish mackerel, p. 8-12, In; Marine
• Fisheries Research, N.C. Div. Mar. Fish. Ann. Prog. Rep. Proj.
F-29-3.
Powell, D. 1975. Age, growth, and reproduction in Florida stocks
of Spanish mackerel, Scoroberomorus maculatus. Fla. Dept. Nat.
Resour. Mar. Res. Lab., Fla. Mar. Res. Publ. No. 5, 21pp.
Powers, J. E. and P. Eldridge. 1983. A preliminary assessment of
king mackerel resources of the southeast United States. 38pp.
Nat. Mar. Fish. Serv., Southeast Fisheries Center, 75 Virginia
Beach Drive, Miami, Florida.
Ryder, J. A. 1887. On the development of osseus fishes, including
marine and freshwater forms. Rep. U.S. Fish. Com. 13(1885):
489-605.
Schekter, R. C. 1971. Food habits of some larval and juvenile
fishes from the Florida current near Miami, Florida. M.S.
Thesis, University of Miami, Coral Cables. Fla. 85pp.
Skow, L. C., and M. E. Chittenden. 1981. Differences in
hemoglobin phenotypes among Spanish mackerel, Scomberomorus
maculatus. Northeast Gulf Sci. 5(1): 67-70.
Struhsaker, J. W., M. B. Eldridge and T. Echeverria. 1974.
Effects of benzene (a water-soluble component of crude oil) on
eggs and larvae of Pacific herring and northern anchovy, p.
253-2S4. Vernberg and W. B. Vernberg, eds. Academic Press,
New York.
Williams, R. O. 1977. King mackerel tagging and stock assessment
study. 3rd Annual Progress Report to National Marine
Fisheries Service from Fl. Dept. of Nat. Res., Tallahassee,
Florida, July 1, 1976 to September 30, 1977. (Unpublished
manuscript).
Williams, R. O. and R. G. Taylor. 1986. Effects of winter weather
on spring king mackerel migration along the west Florida
continental shelf. Florida Department of Natural Resources,
Marine Research Laboratory, St. Petersburg, Florida.
Wilson, K. W. 1977. Acute toxicity of oil dispersants to marine
fish larvae. Mar. Biol. 40: 65-74.
Wollam, M. B. 1970. Description and distribution of larvae and
early juveniles of king mackerel, Scomberomorus cavalla
(Cuvler), and Spanish mackerel, Scomberomorus maculatus
(Mitchell); (Pisces: scombridae): In the western North
Atlantic. Fla. Dept. Nat. Res. Mar. Res. Lab., Tech. Ser.,
No. 61. 35pp.
20
-------
Figure 1. Virginia Commercial
King Mackerel Landings
16
14
12
10
8
6
Thousands of pounds
0
1982
VA data
1984
1986
1988
1990
1992
Year
-------
Figure 2. Virginia Commercial
King Mackerel Landings By Gear
Trawl
5.0%
H&L
32.1%
N)
[O
Gill Net
23.2%
Other
0.6%
Other = haul seine, longline and weir
VAdata, 1982-1992 landings
Pound Net
39.0%
-------
Figure 3. Virginia Commercial
King Mackerel Landings
to
CO
Ocean
54.5%
Bay
45.5%
Bay vs. Ocean
VAdata, 1982-1992 landings
-------
Figure 4. Virginia Commercial
King Mackerel Landings
Thousands of pounds
ro
1982
VA data
1984
1986
1988
1990
1992
Year
I Ocean HBay nTotal
-------
Figure 5. Maryland Commercial King
and Spanish Mackerel Landings
Thousands of pounds
to
(Jl
40
30
20
10
0
1980
1982
1984
1986
Year
1988
1990
1992
iKing mackerel iHSpanish mackerel
MD data
-------
Figure 6. Maryland Spanish Mackerel
Commercial Landings & Dockside Value
Thousands of pounds/dollars
40
30
20
10
0
1984
1986 1988
Year
1990
1992
iDockside Value HiLandings
MD data, 1991 value not available
-------
Figure 7. Virginia King
Mackerel Citations
# of Citations
ro
1982
VA data
1992
-------
Figure 8. Virginia Commercial
Spanish Mackerel Landings
NJ
00
600
500
400
300
200
100
0
Thousands of pounds
1982 1984 1986 1988
Year
1990
1992
VA data
-------
Figures. Virginia Commercial
Spanish Mackerel Landings By Gear
to
vo
Pound Net
82.8%
Gill Net
16.4%
Other
0.8%
Other = fyke net, H&L, haul seine, trawl
VA data, 1986-1992 landings
-------
Figure 10. Virginia Commercial
Spanish Mackerel Landings
Bay
89.7%
Ocean
10.3%
VAdata, 1986-1992
-------
Figure 11. Virginia Commercial
Spanish Mackerel Landings
600
500
400
300
200
100
0
Thousands of pounds
1982
1984
1986 1988
Year
1990
1992
I Ocean laBay
Ocean landiings <600 Ibs.,1982-1986
VA data
-------
Section 2. KING AND SPANISH MACKEREL MANAGEMENT
COASTAL FISHERY MANAGEMENT PLAN; STATUS AND MANAGEMENT UNIT
The South Atlantic Fishery Management Council and Gulf of
Mexico Fishery Management Council prepared a joint fishery
management plan for coastal migratory pelagic resources, including
Spanish mackerel, king mackerel, cero mackerel, cobia, dolphin,
little tunny and bluefish. This plan, referred to as the Coastal
Pelagic FMP, was approved in November, 1982 and implemented by
federal regulations in February 1983. In 1985, Amendment I to the
Coastal Migratory Pelagics FMP was approved to address new problems
and issues and provide more timely management response,
particularly for king mackerel. Amendment 2, implemented in 1987,
resulted from the need to further reduce the catch of Spanish
mackerel to allow the stock to recover. Amendment 2, also
clarified the intent of the Councils to set total allowable catch
(TAG) for mackerels, revised maximum sustainable yield, modified
the fishing year, delineated Spanish mackerel groups, established
allocation procedures for Spanish mackerel, regulated fishing gear
and provided fishing permits. Amendment 3, prohibited the use of
drift gill nets in the Spanish mackerel fishery. Amendment 4,
reallocated the Atlantic migratory group of Spanish mackerel
between commercial and recreational fishermen to 50% for each group
based on catches from the mid 1970's. Amendment 5, extended the
management area of the Atlantic migratory group through the Mid-
Atlantic Council's area of jurisdiction, revised the definition of
"overfishing", redefined recreational bag limits as daily limits
instead of trip limits, required coastal pelagics with size limits
be landed with head and fins intact and established a $23 annual
fee for commercial and charter permits beginning 1 April 1991.
Amendment 6, increased the minimum size limit for king mackerel,
modified the recreational fishing year, established a specific time
period in which to rebuild overfished stocks and identified
additional problems within the fisheries. Amendment 7, proposes to
suballocate the Eastern Zone Gulf migratory group of king mackerel
commercial quota, further suballocate the quota within the two
areas between net and hook and line fishermen, and require permits
to specify gear type fished.
The Coastal Pelagics FMP and the seven amendments which have
followed, and the Atlantic States Marine Fisheries Commission
Spanish mackerel FMP (1990) provide the source documents for the
Chesapeake Bay and Atlantic Coast King and Spanish Mackerel Fishery
Management Plan.
Management strategies and actions will be implemented by the
jurisdictions to protect and enhance the stocks of king and Spanish
mackerel utilizing the Chesapeake Bay and its tributaries, and
throughout its Atlantic coast range. Existing regulations
regarding the harvest of these species will continue to be enforced
except where otherwise indicated by the plan.
32
-------
A. Goal Statement and Objectives
The goal of this plan is to:
Enhance and perpetuate king and Spanish mackerel stocks in the
Chesapeake Bay and its tributaries, and throughout their Atlantic
coast range, so as to generate optimum long-term ecological, social
and economic benefits from their commercial and recreational
harvest and utilization over time.
In order to achieve this goal, the following^ objectives must
be met:
1) Continue recovery of the king and Spanish mackerel stocks and
stabilize the stock at a level capable of producing maximum
sustainable yield.
2) Achieve compatible management throughout the range of king and
Spanish mackerel.
3) Minimize disruption of traditional fisheries and market for
king and Spanish mackerel.
4) Promote protection of the resource by maintaining a clear
distinction between conservation goals and allocation issues.
5) Promote the cooperative interstate research and comprehensive
monitoring activities that furnish information for effective
management, and establish a mandatory and timely reporting
system for monitoring catch and quotas.
6) Promote fair allocation of allowable harvest among various
components of the fishery.
7) Minimize waste in the fisheries.
8) Continue to provide guidance for the development of water
quality goals and habitat protection necessary to protect the
king and Spanish mackerel population within the Bay and
coastal waters.
B. Problem Areas and Management Strategies
Problem 1.1: Stock Status
King and Spanish mackerel are presently managed under the
Coastal Pelagics FMP and by individual states. The Coastal
Pelagics FMP states that a mackerel stock shall be considered
overfished if the SPR is less than 30%. Recent stock assessments
indicate that management measures in the South Atlantic have been
effective in rebuilding stocks. Fishing mortality rates for both
33
-------
king and Spanish mackerel Atlantic migratory groups are below Fx%SPfi
and SPR are above 30%. As a result, recovering mackerel stocks
have expanded their range and increased in abundance in areas where
they historically occurred but had declined or disappeared. The
majority of Spanish mackerel and about half of the king mackerel
harvests occur in state waters. To continue the efforts put forth
by the SAFMC compatible and coordinated interjurisdictional
management is essential.
Strategy 1.1:
The states will adopt regulations consistent with
the recommendations of the SAFMC and in effect in
Federal waters.
Action 1.1.1:
Action 1.1.2:
Action 1.1.3:
Action 1.1.4:
A) Virginia will continue to enforce a 14-inch
TL minimum size limit and a 10 fish/person/day
creel limit for Spanish mackerel.
B) Maryland will continue to enforce a 14-inch
TL minimum size limit for both the recreational
and commercial fisheries and a 10
fish/person/day creel limit for Spanish
mackerel.
Implementation: Continuing
A) Virginia will continue to enforce a 5
fish/person/day creel limit for king mackerel.
B) Maryland will adopt a 5 fish/person/day
creel limit for king mackerel.
Implementation: A) Continuing; B) 1995
Virginia and Maryland will adopt a 20-inch FL
(fork length) or 23-inch TL minimum size limit
for king mackerel.
Implementation: 1995
Virginia and Maryland will close their
respective commercial and recreational
fisheries for king and Spanish mackerel when
such closures are in effect in Federal waters.
Implementation: 1995
Problem 2.1: Monitoring Catch and Quotas/ and Research Needs
One of the key elements of the Coastal Pelagics FMP is
management through quotas. For this approach to succeed,
cooperative interstate research and comprehensive monitoring are
34
-------
essential.
Strategy 2.1:
The states will track the commercial and
recreational harvest of king and Spanish mackerel,
provide such information to the SAFMC on a timely
basis and support research needs.
Action 2.1.1: Virginia will continue harvester-based,
mandatory, monthly reporting of commercial
landings. Maryland will continue buyer-based,
mandatory reporting of commercial landings.
Action 2.1.2:
Action 2.1.3:
Implementation: Continuing
Virginia and Maryland will continue to
supplement the Marine Recreational Fisheries
Statistics Survey to provide more precise
estimates of recreational landings. Maryland
will continue the requirement of charter boat
logbooks.
Implementation: Continuing
The jurisdictions will support stock assessment
research for the Atlantic stocks of king and
Spanish mackerel. Virginia's Stock Assessment
Program will continue to sample Spanish
mackerel for length/weight frequencies.
Implementation: Continuing
Problem 3.1:
Mortalities
Waste/Sublegal Bycatch and Hook and Release
Sublegal Spanish mackerel, and occasionally king mackerel, are
taken in commercial gear set for mixed species such as pound nets,
haul seines, and to a lesser extent, gill nets. King and Spanish
mackerel are caught and released by recreational fishermen when
they are under the minimum size limit or the bag limit has been
reached. Both king and Spanish mackerel are delicate fish that
handle poorly. They have very small scales, thin skin and bleed
easily. Also, they are very active fish, and do not survive long
out of the water.
Strategy 3.1:
The states will investigate means of reducing
undersized bycatch in the commercial fisheries and
reducing hook and release mortalities in the
recreational fisheries.
Action 3.1.1:
Virginia will continue to evaluate the use of
escape panels as a means of reducing undersized
35
-------
Action 3.1.2:
Action 3.1.3;
bycatch in the pound net fishery and will
explore the use of panels in haul seines.
Virginia will continue a 2 7/8-inch minimum
mesh size for gill nets.
Implementation: Continuing
The jurisdictions will support angler
educational programs, such as the Chesapeake
Bay Foundation's "Careful Catch Program", which
promote proper hook and release techniques.
Implementation: Continuing
Virginia will monitor bycatch sold as crab bait
from the pound net and haul seine fisheries.
Implementation: 1994
Problem 4.1: Habitat Issues
Increasing urbanization and industrial development of the
Atlantic coastal plain has resulted in a decrease in the
environmental quality of many estuarine communities. Estuarine
habitat loss and degradation in Chesapeake Bay may have adverse
effects on king and Spanish mackerel stocks. Since the signing of
the 1987 Chesapeake Bay Agreement, the Bay jurisdictions (District
of Columbia, Environmental Protection Agency, Maryland,
Pennsylvania, the Potomac River Fisheries Commission, and Virginia)
have focused on improving water quality and habitat for living
resources.
Strategy 4.1:
The jurisdictions will continue to refine their
water quality and habitat programs to provide better
water quality and habitat for living resources in
the Bay. The following is a brief summary of each
of the Bay initiatives concerning water quality and
habitat.
Tributary Strategies - Directs the reduction in
nutrients reaching the Bay by establishing
tributary-specific strategies. The strategies
include: public participation; nutrient reduction
goals of 74 million pounds of nitrogen and 8.4
million pounds of phosphorus baywide (meets 40%
reduction); annual report of accountability; and, a
reevaluation in 1997 to ensure the reduction goals
are met by the year 2000.
Submerged Aquatic Vegetation (SAV) restoration - The
abundance of bay grasses or SAVs is an important
indicator of the Bay's health because of the link to
36
-------
water quality. SAVs also provide shelter and nursery
areas for many species of fish and wildlife. SAV
directives include: an interim goal of restoring
114,000 acres by the year 2005; restoring SAVs to
their historical levels; and, developing an
additional target for restoring SAVs to all shallow
water areas to the 1 meter depth contour.
Toxics Reduction Strategies - No evidence of a
severe, systemwide toxics problem has been found but
there are some serious localized problems. At this
time, the Elizabeth River, Baltimore Harbor and the
Anacostia River are designated as the initial
Chesapeake Bay Regions of Concern. Existing Bay
Programs are reducing toxics entering the Bay and
concentrations of toxics in fish, shellfish,
wildlife, and in the aquatic environment are
generally declining. Directives for reducing toxics
include: promoting pollution prevention through
public education and technical assistance programs;
an integrated pest management program for
controlling and minimizing pesticide usage; and,
reaffirming consistency with the requirements of the
Clean Water Act and the Clean Air Act.
Agricultural Nonpoint Source Initiative
Agriculture is a major contributor of nonpoint
source pollution to the Bay. An independent
committee was created to develop specific
recommendations to achieve greater nonpoint source
pollution reductions from agricultural sources.
Directives include: assisting farmers to develop and
implement comprehensive and integrated site-specific
management of land, water, and ecological resources;
and, assisting state and federal agencies to develop
and implement total resource management.
Action 4.1.1: The jurisdictions will continue, to work with
the Chesapeake Bay Program, the Coastal Bay
Initiative, and water quality improvement goals
for the Bay and coastal areas.
Implementation 4.1: Continuing
37
-------
IMPLEMENTAION MATRIX
FOR THE CHESAPEAKE BAY AND ATLANTIC COAST
KING AND SPANISH MACKEREL FISHERY MANAGEMENT PLAN
Problem Area
Action
Date
Comments
1. Stock Status
03
1.1.1 A) VA will enforce a
14-inch TL minimum size limit
and a 10 fish/person/day bag
limit for Spanish mackerel.
1.1.1 B) MD will enforce a
14-inch TL minimum size limit
for both the recreational and
commercial fisheries and a 10
fish/person/day bag limit for
Spanish mackerel.
1.1.2 A) VA will enforce a 5
fish/person/day bag limit for
king mackerel.
1.1.2 B) MD will enforce a 5
fish/person/day bag limit for
king mackerel.
1.1.3 VA and MD will enforce
a 20-inch FL (fork length) or
23-inch TL minimum size limit
for king mackerel.
1.1.4 VA and MD will close
their respective commercial
and recreational fisheries
for king and Spanish mackerel
when such closures are in
effect in Federal waters.
1991;
Continue
1993;
Continue
1991;
Continue
1995
1995
1995
Implementation as
early as Sept. 1995,
Implementation as
early as Sept. 1995.
Closures will be in
compliance with
South Atlantic
Fishery Management
Council (SAFMC)
recommendations.
-------
IMPLEMENTATION MATRIX CONTINUED
Problem Area
Action
Date
Comments
2. Monitoring Catch
and Quotas, and
Research Needs
2.1.1 VA and MD will require
mandatory reporting of
commercial landings.
2.1.2 VA and MD will
supplement the Marine
Recreational Statistics
Program. MD will require
charter boat logbooks.
2.1.3 Jurisdictions will
support stock assessment
research for mackerel stocks.
VA 1/1/93;
Continue
Continue
Continue
VA: Harvester-based
reporting.
MD: Buyer-based
reporting.
The coastal charter
boat logbook system
was improved in
1994.
VA will continue to
sample Spanish
mackerel for length
and weight
frequencies.
3. Waste/Sublegal
Bycatch and Hook and
Release Mortalities
3.1.1 VA will evaluate the
use of escape panels as a
means of reducing undersized
bycatch. VA will enforce a 2
7/8-inch minimum mesh size
for gill nets.
3.1.2 Jurisdictions will
support angler educational
programs.
3.1.3 VA will monitor bycatch
sold as crab bait from the
pound net and haul seine
fisheries.
Continue
VA is presently
conducting a study
of escape panels in
pound nets and will
evaluate the use of
escape vents in haul
seines.
Continue
Continue
-------
IMPLEMENTATION MATRIX CONTINUED
Problem Area
Action
Date
Comments
4. Habitat Issues
4.1.1 Jurisdictions will
continue to work with the
Chesapeake Bay Programs, the
Coastal Bay Initiative, and
water quality improvement
goals for the Bay and coastal
areas.
Continue
------- |