TECHNICAL REPORT NO. 611

Transcription

1 TECHNICAL REPORT NO. 611 Critical Evaluation of Red Drum Stock Enhancement Releases in Biscayne Bay, Florida. Florida Project, FDEP Contract No. MR 237. MML Project No Prepared for: Mr. Bill Halstead FL Department of Environmental Protection Stock Enhancement Research Facility Harlee Road Port Manatee, FL Prepared by: Nathan Brennan, MS Senior Biologist Carole Neidig, MS Senior Biologist Center for Fisheries Enhancement Stock Enhancement Program Mote Marine Laboratory 1600 Ken Thompson Parkway Sarasota, FL Dr. Kenneth M. Leber Director, Center for Fisheries Enhancement Mote Marine Laboratory November 25, 1998

2 December 2, 1998 Mr. Bill Halstead FL Department of Environmental Protection Stock Enhancement Research Facility Harlee Road Port Manatee, FL Re: Final Report: Critical Evaluation of Red Drum Stock Enhancement Releases in Biscayne Bay, Florida Project, FDEP Contract No. MR 237. MML Project No Please consider this letter and attachments as the Final Report of the above referenced project. Project activities in Biscayne Bay from November 15, 1997 through November 26, 1998 included: (1) increasing angler awareness; (2) performing creel surveys; (3) acquiring carcasses for evaluation of coded wire tag retention and genetic determination; and (4) initiation of fisheryindependent assessment work. During the report period, work was performed by Sean Maloney, Technician (MML) from January through August In October 1998, Carole Neidig, Senior Biologist (MML) began implementing a new project in Biscayne Bay under the direction of Ken Leber, Ph.D. (Director, MML Center for Fisheries Enhancement). The new project will complement and expand on work performed under MR237 to increase our information on the success of red drum stock enhancement in Biscayne Bay based on fishery-independent sampling. As part of the new project, C. Neidig will also continue to increase angler awareness and obtain carcasses for evaluation. This report summarizes the information obtained to date under MR Increased Angler Awareness Angler awareness of the red drum stock enhancement project in Biscayne Bay was poor. To better inform anglers and promote public support, many presentations were made at angling clubs around Biscayne Bay. The presentations included information on hatchery production, tagging, stocking, and recapture work. Recapture results and the need for public support were also presented and a question and answer session concluded each presentation. Information cards and maps detailing where tagged red drum had been recovered were provided to the attendees. No anglers attending the presentations had caught red drum in Biscayne Bay, and some even scoffed at the idea of trying to establish a population of red drum in Biscayne Bay. Reasons given 1

3 for these opinions were (1) insufficient and unsuitable habitat, and (2) frequent fresh water delivery into the bay prevents fish from remaining in the area. Many anglers believed that the South Florida Water Management District did not consider the needs of marine fisheries to be a high priority when scheduling artificial fresh water control regimes. They voiced the opinion that the fish are driven out by fresh water floods when the gates are opened and left open in irregular 'out of season' patterns. Fishing guides working in Biscayne Bay were also sought to assist in recovering red drum. Bait and Tackle shops that offered guide services were helpful in relaying information to the guides who worked in the area. None of the guides contacted had caught red drum in Biscayne Bay, and most believed that these fish did not exist in large enough numbers to make fishing for them worthwhile. When informed of the recovery of legal sized hatchery red drum in Biscayne Bay, they wanted to know the catch locations. However, the perception remained that these catches were exceptions and that red drum were too scarce in Biscayne Bay to be targeted. This perception will unlikely change unless it can be demonstrated that hatchery releases are significantly increasing or establishing a red drum fishery in Biscayne Bay. Contact interviews of fishermen in situ were an excellent way to inform anglers of ongoing research and elicit continued support. During this project, contact interviews included the distribution of customized business cards (Figure 1) which included (1) phone numbers and other important contact information, (2) specific questions regarding red drum catches, and (3) detailed protocols for handling tissue and red drum heads/carcasses donated to the tag recovery program. The cards were convenient for the interviewer to produce and for the anglers to carry. When interviewing anglers, one card was given to the primary operator of the boat, and additional cards were distributed if the angler knew others who would be interested in aiding the research effort. Cards were also distributed to interested anglers at presentations, bait and tackle shops, and at boat shows. A information pamphlet in both English and Spanish was designed to increase public awareness. The pamphlet contained information on red drum culture, tagging, stocking, as well as preliminary results. Critical contact information, protocols for handling donated red drum heads and carcasses, and drop-off locations were included. The pamphlet was submitted by Sean Maloney to Ken Leber (MML) and Bill Halstead (DEP). In October, Carole Neidig attended a two day Florida Sportsmen Fishing Show in Miami. A number of fishing guides and recreational anglers were informed of the new red drum assessment project to be conducted in Biscayne Bay. In addition, information was obtained on red drum captures and sightings and assistance was procured in locating red drum. In October and November angler supply stores, bait and tackle shops, marina shops, and dock masters were visited to inquire about red drum captures and to gain their participation in the new project. Over fifty anglers aboard boats at the Black Point and Homestead Bayfront Park were also informed about the new study and asked for any red drum information they could provide. Responses concerning the new project were generally positive. Based on information gathered from these 2

4 anglers there are four groups of fishers: those who (1) fish offshore and have not seen or caught red drum, (2) fish in the Bay and have not seen or caught red drum, (3) fish in the Bay and have caught red drum but were targeting snook or permit, and (4) fish in the Bay for red drum (two anglers). 2. Creel Surveys Mote Marine Laboratory's Sean Malony conducted in situ creel surveys at boat ramps, docks and other angler concentration sites from Oleta River in north Biscayne Bay to the Homestead Canals in south Biscayne Bay (Table 1) (Figure 1). Selection of these sites for creel interviews was based on fishermen's reports of red drum sightings, capture areas of tagged red drum returns, proximity to juvenile red drum release sites, and level of angler activity. To better quantify the creel surveys, the number of people on a boat that had fished were counted and each was considered a single interview. Because of high numbers of boaters and fishers on weekend days and holidays, a special effort was made to perform surveys on these days, although all days of the week were surveyed. From January 1, 1998 to November 25, % of all survey days were on weekends and holidays. Individual creel surveys consisted of the interviewer: 1) targeting boats with anglers, 2) asking the fishers weather they fished within Biscayne Bay or fished outside of Biscayne Bay, 3) asking if the fishers were targeting red drum, or if not, then what species was targeted, 4) asking if the fishers had caught any red drum on this trip or on previous trips, 5) asking the fishers if they had seen any red drum on this trip or on previous trips. If the fishers had caught or seen red drum (either currently or previously) the interviewer: 1) asked where these had been caught or sighted, 2) asked how many were caught or sighted 3) asked if the red drum were tagged. If anglers had caught or seen red drum, the interviewer asked for the approximate location, number captured or sighted, and asked if the red drum had an external tag. From January 1, 1998 to August 31, ,631 contact interviews were officially conducted by MML personnel. Of these, 2,567 interviews pertain to fishermen who had fished within Biscayne Bay and 3,064 to those who had fished outside of Biscayne Bay (Table 1). The majority of the interviews (88%) were conducted at the Black Point boat ramps (3,139 interviews) and the Homestead Bayfront boat ramps (1,805 interviews) (Figure 2). Greatest interview effort was performed at Black Point (55%) followed by Homestead Bayfront (31 %), and Mattheson Hammock (7%). Previous creel surveys conducted in this project at sites in north Biscayne Bay did not yield as many interviews with fishermen, therefore, sampling effort during this period was more efficiently matched to boat ramp sites with highest fishing activity (ie. at southern sites) (Figure 2). 3

5 Because most anglers were not targeting red drum, these data are somewhat biased. A high number of interviews does not necessarily mean creel interview effort effectively targeted individual fishermen who would have caught red drum, were they abundant in the Bay. Additional creel studies are needed and should concentrate on fishers who actually target red drum. Rapport between the interviewer and the local fishermen is also essential to successfully incorporate fishermen's aid in assessing the red drum status in the bay and establish confidence levels of data accuracy. These can only be developed through education of the public about the stocking program through regular presentations at local fishing clubs, news media, and familiarization ofthe fishermen with local biologists through regular contact in situ. Once fishermen appreciate the value of the stocking program to themselves, reliable contacts will be established and more accurate data may be obtained. Between January 1, 1998 and August 31, 1998 contact interviews resulted in the confirmation of only one red drum (untagged) reported caught at Bayfront Park on January 31, and in February two red drum were reported seen at Turkey Point. The lack of red drum sightings and catches reported through this creel sampling is discouraging. During this project it is clear that red drum had not yet established themselves in Biscayne Bay. This is a general perception of the fishing public in Biscayne Bay to a level where anglers were being significantly impacted. As the fishing guides have indicated, this perception will not change unless red drum catches increase significantly. Recent data from tag returns indicate that stocking red drum is contributing to the recreational catch on a small scale. However these tag returns are based on the use of internal-anchor Floy tags that have recently been documented by DEP to have a serious defect, which results in loss ofthe printed information on the external (visible) sheath. This sheath fails in pond trials and over 99% are lost within the first 12 months after fish are released. Thus the data from tag returns to DEP seriously underestimates hatchery contribution of phase III fish to the fishery. The actual contribution is likely 10 to 100 fold greater than the number of tags reported, because of this high rate of loss of the external sheath. 2. Angler Reports In addition to in situ creel surveys of anglers in Biscayne Bay, anglers also reported previous catches and sightings of red drum. These unconfirmed reports were made to MML and DEP personnel from 1 January 1998 to 25 November, 1998 and include: North Bay Oleta River, East Reynolds Park and North Bay area - - ten reports of red drum (six indicated that the fish were not tagged). Belle Island - - one report of jacks chasing red drum. Bakers Inlet, BalHarbor side - - one report of one small red drum (approx. loin). Miami Beach, South Point Park fishing jetty - - one report by wading angler. 4

6 Key Biscayne - - three reports that LARGE red drum cauld be found on the north side of the Key, near the University of Miami's Marine Stadium. South Bay Mattheson Hammock - - six reports that red drum may be found in the area. Snapper Creek. Kings Bay - - a canoe angler caught an untagged red drum. Black Point, lagoon north of marina channel. Homestead Bayfront Park - marina dock and in front of park.. Card Sound, under bridge. Arsnickers. Pelican Shoal - - one report of large red drum caught. These reports are unconfirmed and exact dates of these sightings and catches are uncertain. The timing of these reports are critical. Reports of red drum sighted soon after a release tell only of short-term, initial survival and distribution, whereas reports of red drum seen or caught in the bay long after a release indicate long-term survival and distribution. 4. Head/Carcass Returns Requests were made of anglers to turn in red drum heads and/or carcasses along with the external tag (if present), capture date, fish length, and capture location to Biscayne Bay marinas and bait shops. In addition, requests were made for anglers to remove a fin clip from fish prior to release for genetic evaluation. Under previous DEP contracts, the University of Miami posted signs with a list of eight locations where samples could be dropped off. Samples were retrieved and examined by DEP personnel. The following red drum heads/carcasses were recovered during this project: 25" specimen caught in Coral Gables Waterway. Given to Captain Jimmy Moore, then to Cliff Kunde. 27" fish caught near Homestead Bayfront Park. Picked up in Homestead. John Ransier (DEP) stated that the head was from a larger fish (approx. 40"). 20" specimen caught at Gables Estates. Caught by Kevin Phillips and turned in to UM Marine Lab. 27" specimen caught near Black Point. Turned in to Captain jimmy Moore. 27" specimen caught near Homestead Bayfront Park. Head turned in to Don's Bait and Tackle. Recovered March " specimen caught near Homestead Bayfront Park. Recovered September " specimen caught near Black Point. Recovered October " specimen caught near Black Point. Recovered November 10. No fin clips were returned. 5

7 5. Conduct Fishery-Independent Assessment of Red Drum Stock Enhancement Impact in Biscayne Bay. Fishery-dependent assessment work conducted in Biscayne Bay, from the initial releases in the early 1990's through the present, has been insufficient to effectively evaluate hatcheryrelease impact on red drum survival and abundance. Emphasis on direct fishery-independent sampling will remove many of the biases associated with creel interviews, defective tags, and the voluntary tag returns that depend on those defective tags. Fishery-independent sampling will also provide better population estimates and long-term survival estimates of the various release cohorts. Fishery-independent sampling has been initiated. The startup phase of the fisheryindependent sampling is partially supported by project MR237. Beginning in 1998, subsequent work is being conducted under a new project supported through the MML-DEP partnership. The following activities describe this recent progress. Contacts were made with the Florida Marine Patrol and National Park Service offices in the Biscayne Bay area. Boat services including rentals, marinas (dry and wet slip storage), and ramps were contacted to identify their charges. Storage facilities were contacted for costs. Bait and tackle suppliers in the south Biscayne Bay area (Black Point to Barnes Sound) were identified. On September 3rd, C. Neidig submitted a written request to R. Curry (Coordinator/CaMP AM Facilitator- Biscayne National Park) for a National Park Collection Permit. Information concerning project objectives, participants, funding source, sampling gear, sampling locations, and fish to be sampled were provided. C. Neidig made phone requests to agencies in Florida, Louisiana, and Texas to post job announcements for a full-time technician to be employed by MML and stationed in Miami to work on the next phase (fishery independent sampling) of the Red Drum Stock Enhancement Project in Biscayne Bay. Announcements were sent to the following locations in Miami: Black Point Marina, Captain Cliff Kunde, Florida International University, Greater Homestead City Chamber of Commerce, Homestead Bayfront Park & Marina, Miami-Dade Community College, Miami-Dade Community Park & Recreation Service, and the University of Miami Rosenstiel School of Marine and Atmospheric Science. Information was also sent to the following in other locations in Florida: Eckerd College, Florida State University, Florida Department of Environmental Protection Florida Marine Research and Stock Enhancement Research Facility Institute, Harbor Branch Oceanographic Institution, Hillsborough Community College, Mote Marine Laboratory (in-house and web site), St. Petersburg Junior College, and the University of South Florida (Tampa and St. Petersburg). Additional locations included: Louisiana State University and Texas A&M University. Resumes were reviewed and applicants were contacted if additional information was required. Selection for this position is in progress. In September a sampling vessel was located for the project through a newspaper advertisement. The foot Tremblay with a 9-13 foot tower expandable tower and 150 hp Evinrude engine was initially examined by C. Neidig and B. Dennis (SERF). A further evaluation 6

8 of the vessel and engine operation was conducted by H. Haines (MML) and an assistant engine specialist. The vessel was purchased by Mote Marine Laboratory in October, Trips were made to the Biscayne Bay area on August 10 th through August 14th and included B. Dennis, J. Ransier (SERF) and C. Neidig. At the University of Miami the group met briefly with T. Capo and then with J. Seraphy and G. Milano to discuss the computer model developed by J. Alt, J. Jung and J. Seraphy (University of Miami). We reviewed models of current and salinity based on data taken in Biscayne Bay in We also reviewed navigation charts and discussed habitat, sampling gear, and identified where red drum had been released and recaptured. In addition, we met with C. Kunde (Atlantic Billfish Foundation) that evening. We reviewed navigation charts and plotted specific habitat and areas where red drum had recently been sighted. From August 11 th _13 th approximately 15 hrs/day were spent on the water. We started in Barnes Sound and covered shoreline habitat up to Mattheson Hammock boat ramp. Canals, creeks, and mangrove islands were investigated. To describe the habitat where net collections may be made, abiotic parameters including temperature, dissolved oxygen, and salinity were recorded. Observations on overhanging vegetation, steepness of banks, bottom type, depth, and species of fish, crustaceans, etc. were noted. In addition, we asked people fishing on the banks if they had caught red drum. One sighting of approximately adult red drum measuring inches was made at Turkey Point in a shallow embayment. We attempted to set a trammel net around the fish but they moved into a deep canal at the entrance of the Turkey Point Power Plant. Additional sightings and sampling by biologists have continued and will be reported in further fisheries-independent sampling reports of the Biscayne Bay red drum stock enhancement project which has been subcontracted by Mote Marine Laboratory as a follow-up project. That project will include sampling regimes using cast nets, trammel nets, and angling gear. Ongoing work will also include genetic evaluation of recovered red drum tissues, determination of CWT and IA T retention rates, reproductive condition of recovered hatchery fish, general health evaluation, identification of juvenile recruitment of red drum in Biscayne Bay, and improve angler awareness of the stock enhancement project in Biscayne Bay. CONCLUSIONS Project MR 237 has provided the most intensive investigation of Biscayne Bay anglers to date aimed at recovering information on the hatchery contribution to the recreational catch of red drum in the Bay. This study shows that hatchery releases by DEP have not yet had a significant impact on the general fishing population that uses the Bay either for inshore fishing (in the Bay) or for launching offshore fishing expeditions. There is little public recognition of the DEP stock 7

9 enhancement program in Biscayne Bay; public recognition of the project's existence is low, and recognition of any impact on fishing is lower still. The apparent lack of substantial impact of red-drum hatchery releases on fisheries landings in Biscayne Bay is due in large part to five basic factors: 1. Lack of sufficient quantitative effort to assess release impact 2. Over reliance ofdep on a head-return program, based in part on a defective tagging system, to recover information about release success 3. Lack of an adaptive-management approach to refining release strategies in Biscayne Bay until relatively recently 4. Dilution of releases over a wide range of release locations in the Bay 5. Releases into habitats that may not support the juvenile life stage of red drum very well Each of these factors is considered in more detail below: 1. Lack of sufficient quantitative effort to assess release impact a. Lack of direct sampling of fish and fishers from the onset of the stock enhancement work in Biscayne Bay has hampered progress in understanding the potential of hatchery releases to enhance red drum there. Reliance solely upon voluntary returns by fishers results in biased information. Using field biologists to help assess release impact and effectiveness is a critical aspect of the modem approach to developing and implementing stock enhancement programs. 2. Over reliance on a head return program, based in part on a defective tagging system a. A corollary of the previous factor, head returns can be very useful to help understand which fisheries are impacted by released fish. But the bias inherent in voluntary returns makes accurate assessment of release strategies unlikely via a head-return program. In this case, this bias is confounded by the use of a defective visible (internal anchor) tag. 3. Lack of an adaptive-management approach to refining release strategies in Biscayne Bay until relatively recently a. Adaptive management is a continuing assessment process that allows improvement over time of release impact on the fishery, on the wild stock, and hatchery costeffectiveness. The key to this improvement lies in having a process for changing both production and management objectives (and strategies) to control the effects of enhancement. Some minimum level of ongoing assessment is needed, superimposed over a moderate research framework that provides a constant source of new information about critical uncertainties in the program. New ideas for refining enhancement are thus constantly considered and integrated into the management process. 4. Dilution of releases over a wide range of release locations in the Bay a. Because of the sheer size of Biscayne Bay, it would be better first to document the capability to make a significant contribution to the red drum fishery on a local 8

10 basis (e.g. black point vicinity), then to scale up the magnitude of releases to affect other areas of the Bay. DEP has effectively diluted their release impact in Biscayne Bay to a point where it is difficult to assess impact, by allocating release sites along most of the eastern shore. S. Releases into habitats that may not support the juvenile life stage of red drum very well a. Evaluation ofdep's internal-anchor tags that were recovered from fishermen through the DEP tag-return reward program for Biscayne Bay showed that two of the release sites (one in the vicinity offiu, the other near Black Point) had significantly greater potential to support released red drum than any of the 20 plus other sites where fish were released. DEP's tagging program showed that many of those other release sites originally used for releases were having little or no impact on the fishery. By restricting red drum releases in Biscayne Bay to the FIU and Black Point sites (or to other sites found in the future to support similar or better survival) survival of released fish may be greatly increased. DEP adopted this recommendation in October These fish should begin to enter the fishery in 1999, which will reveal the relative effectiveness of restricting releases to these "better" release sites. b. The degree to which appropriate habitat is limiting red drum abundance in the Bay is still an unanswered question. Because red drum appear to thrive in Texas lagoons and estuaries that are hypersaline throughout much ofthe year, we question whether restricted fresh water flow into Biscayne Bay limits the amount of suitable habitat for this species. This is a critical issue in understanding the ecological basis for successful red-drum stock enhancement. Life history strategies of red drum in Texas need to be compared with those of Florida red drum in resolving this issue. It is puzzling why this species thrives in those hypersaline environments, but not in Biscayne Bay. Research by University of Miami scientists suggests that prey regimes, and their response in Biscayne Bay to fresh-water flow, may be part of the answer. Other scientists suggest that Biscayne Bay lies outside of the historical natural range of red drum in Florida (e.g., Dr. Grant Gilmore, personal communication, about the general lack of red drum from Sebastian Inlet south to Florida Bay). RECOMMENDATIONS We have the following recommendations for making rapid improvements in the DEP stock enhancement program. Most of these recommendations are already being adopted by DEP as part of the new strategic approach to stock enhancement: 1. For any area where hatchery fish are released, establish a protocol to include direct sampling of released fish by biologists as part of an assessment activity to track survival of released fish and document release contribution to the fishery. This will remove much of the bias from the evaluation process. 2. Adopt the use of pilot release experiments to determine optimal release strategy (fish size- 9

11 at-release, release site and microhabitat, timing of releases, release magnitude) at all release locations targeted for stock enhancement. 3. Adopt adaptive management as part of the framework for managing and controlling the effectiveness ofdep's stock enhancement program. One of the most beneficial examples is: to pose a key question in every release (e.g. what size should released fish be to yield the greatest returns in the fishery per dollar spent to rear them?); use an active assessment program to document release contribution and answer the question(s) posed; modify release strategy in the following year, accordingly; use this process in every release to address critical uncertainties about controlling the effectiveness of stock enhancement. 4. To complement coded-wire tags (which are the tag of choice for implementing the latter two points above), identify and document the effectiveness of a better external tag, than the internal-anchor tag that has been used, for involving fishermen in a tag-reward program to help track release contribution, dispersal and growth of (phase-ill size) released fish. The internal anchor tags used in this study need to be greatly improved upon. As a caveat to this recommendation, convey to senior management the importance of the applied research that DEP biologists did that resulted in the realization that these tags were defective. External tags made in Australia may afford even better results than the best external tag tested by DEP to date, and should be tested eventually. 5. Focus more on developing partnerships with local fishermen / fishing groups at release locations who actually target the species subject to stock enhancement efforts, and assess (through creel samples) the impact of hatchery releases on their fishery. As a caveat to this recommendation, also identify multiple expert fishers who will work directly with the enhancement team to help voluntarily recover data to evaluate release impact on the fishery. Involve these fishers in project activities and publicly recognize the value of their assistance. Nathan Brennan and Carole Neidig Senior Biologists and Ken Leber, Senior Scientist, Stock Enhancement at the Center for Fisheries Enhancement Mote Marine Laboratory 10

12 Tablel. Creel interview sites within Biscayne Bay, Florida and the number of interviews conducted at each site by Mote Marine Laboratory personnel between 1 January 1998 and 25 November Fishennen interviewed consisted of those who fished within Biscayne bay and those who fished outside of Biscayne Bay. Nearest release sites to each creel sample station are given. No. Interviews Sample Site Nearest Release Site Fished in Bay Fished out of Bay Total Oleta River Oleta River Newport Pier N. Florida International Univ Bakers Haulover 79 th Street, Venetian Causeway Pelican Harbor 79 th Street, Venetian Causeway Little River 79 th Street, Venetian Causeway Miami Bridges, Shoreline 79 th Street, Venetian Causeway J. Tuttle Causeway 79 th Street, Venetian Causeway Government Cut Venetian Causeway, Virginia Key Key Biscayne Virginia Key, Bill Bags State Park Mattheson Hammock Mattheson Hammock Black Point Black Point Homestead Bayfront Black Point, Card Sound Homestead Canals Black Point, Card Sound Total

13 Red Drum Stock Enhancement in Biscayne Bay Tagged Red Drum - Contact Legal size is inches. ONE a day. If fish is legal, remove the head, wrap in plastic, then in tin foil and freeze. Over / under size UNTAGGED Reds - Clip one square inch of second dorsal (back) fin & release fish. Wrap fin clip in plastic, then in tin foil and freeze. Drop heads and fin clips at local bait shops. Include fish size, date and location caught, angler name and phone # with samples. YOUR catch is important. RED DRUM SIE OFFICE Figure 1. Back side of stock enhancement business card presented to interviewed fishermen in Biscayne Bay, Florida. 11

14 - I-- -I I- ~ D ~ D ~ tn o ~ W - > 600 c::: ~ 400 Z - LL 200 o ~ FISHED WITIllN D FISHED OUTSIDE INTERVIEW EFFORT BISCAYNE BAY BISCAYNE BAY (DAYS) -I- -- June - July. nl r o o..-.. C o :::p::ti ~ ~ -'"., '" C :0:- o., < '" 8 o I II - Z -f m ::0 < - m :E m." 11 o ::0 -I January - ~~ ~~ ~ _ ~ o en '-'" Figure 2. Total red drum interviews conducted at boat ramps in Biscayne Bay, Florida during January 1 through July 30, Data are given for fishermen who fished both inside and outside Biscayne Bay. Interview effort data (black bars; days per site) are shown for each site.