Striped Bass  Pages 71 - 83

Striped Bass Life History Notes

Striped bass is a relatively long lived species and the population therefore is made up of fish of many ages, as compared to salmon, for instance, which generally have a 3 to 5 year life cycle. Stripers may live as long as 20 years or more.

Time of Run. The adults begin to enter Carquinez Strait from the Bay and ocean about August; the run usually peaks in October, and tapers off rather abruptly. They spread out over the entire Delta for the winter season. Angling is excellent during October and November throughout the Delta and as far north as the Feather River. With decreasing water temperatures, angling drops off to a very low point in January and February.

Spawning Conditions. About March or April the fish become active again to provide a short period of good angling. Potential spawners move up into the fresh water of the sloughs and rivers of the Delta system and begin to spawn in March or April. Spawning usually reaches a peak in May depending on water temperatures, and continues through most of June.

Temperature: Water temperature appears to exert an important influence on the time at which striped bass spawn. Raney (1952) summarizing the data of several investigators lists temperatures from 54° F. to 71° F. as being the known range at which they have been observed spawning. Scofield, working with this species here in California, found sperm viable at a temperature ranging from freezing to 90° F. He found the sperm most active at 68° F., sluggish below 42° F. and died at 100-110° F. Spermatazoa were found to remain active after 24 hours between 54 and 68 degrees in a 0.05 percent salt solution. He found that the sperm were active for about 3 minutes in water, after which time their swimming motion ceased.

In the Delta, spawning generally does not begin until temperatures reach 59° or 60° F. The optimum temperature appears to be 64 to 68 degrees.

Salinity: Spawning occurs in essentially fresh water. Larval bass and eggs are found in brackish water, but evidence has not yet been uncovered to show that spawning actually takes place in brackish water. Woodhull (1947) states that in the area which he observed them spawning (San Joaquin River), the salinity (in terms of chlorides) varied from 1 to 7 parts of chlorine per 100,000 of water.

Spawning Activities. Several authors have described the activities involved in the spawning process. Woodhull (op. cit.) observed them on the San Joaquin River in the vicinity of Venice Island. According to his description innumerable groups of fish gathered at the surface of the water for a distance of 3 miles along the river on a flood tide. The fish began to roll over on their sides at a 45 degree angle near the surface and splashed about with their caudal fins. This activity continued for several hours. During the process he used a plankton net to collect eggs not yet water hardened to corroborate the fact that the fish were spawning. Morgan and Gerlach (1950) observed a similar situation in the Coos River, Oregon.

Fecundity. Several investigators have estimated the egg production of female striped bass. The number is correlated with the size of the fish and in general, it may be said that this species is extremely prolific. This phase of their life history has not been specifically explored for California striped bass, therefore, the data presented are from observations elsewhere. Merriman (1941) found that the number of eggs ranged from 11,000 to 1,215,000 with the majority of fish yielding 180,000 to 700,000 each. Jackson and Tiller (1952) found the number to vary from 68,000 in a 4 year old fish weighing 4.4 pounds to 4,536,000 in a 14 year old fish weighing 35 pounds. Morgan and Gerlach (op. cit.) found that Coos Bay striped bass produced about 1 million eggs when they reached 10 pounds and that this figure reached almost 5 million for fish weighing between 30 and 50 pounds.

Spawning Locations. In California a few striped bass spawn in the larger coastal rivers, the Russian River particularly, and formerly the Salinas River. A few apparently persist in Elkhorn Slough, which enters Monterey Bay, and spawn there also. The major tributaries to San Francisco Bay are the principal spawning grounds, however, particularly those above Antioch and Collinsville.

Strong currents appear to be absolutely necessary for the development of striped bass eggs. They have not been found in stagnant water, nor have the adults been observed spawning under lacustrine conditions. The tidal action in the Delta seems to be particularly favored.

Since 1946, a considerable amount of effort has been expended to determine spawning locations. Sampling with plankton nets for eggs has indicated the San Joaquin River below Stockton and many of the sloughs in that portion of the Delta to be the major spawning area.

Eggs were found in greatest abundance in an area extending upstream from the Antioch Bridge to Venice Island and Salmon Slough. The Old River and Middle River systems are perhaps the next most important followed by the Sacramento River system, the San Joaquin River above Salmon Slough and the Mokelumne River. These can be considered the most important year after year, but conditions from year to year may change the sequence. In wet years, for example, spawning may occur below Pittsburg.

Striped bass were formerly reported to spawn in the Napa River. A special trip to collect eggs there during 1957 was unsuccessful, although large, ripe fish were known to be present in the river just previous to the sampling period.

Embryology. The eggs of this species are small (16 to the inch) and transparent at the time of expulsion, but they enlarge to about twice this size upon water hardening. They are very similar to shad eggs, and because both species spawn in the same places and at the same time, the two are easily confused. Striped bass eggs, however, can usually be differentiated by a relatively large oil globule which is not so apparent in shad eggs. Once the eggs are spawned, they are left to drift freely with the currents: Because of the oil globule, they are only slightly heavier than water and are kept suspended by the slightest current. The eggs develop while thus suspended. On the San Joaquin side of the Delta, they are flushed back and forth by the currents and their movement downstream is somewhat restricted. The opposite situation exists in the Sacramento River. Eggs spawned as far up as the Feather River or beyond are moved down into the Delta rather rapidly until they reach the Rio Vista area where they come under the oscillating influence of the tides.

The incubation period is influenced by temperature, higher temperatures being conducive to faster hatching. The known range has varied from 74 hours at 58° F. to 30 hours at 72° F. Hatching occurs in about 48 hours at 67° F. In our waters the temperature is usually in the vicinity of 62 to 68 degrees and the normal incubation period from 48 to 60 hours.

The larvae at hatching are about 0.1-0.2 inch (3-5mm.) in length. They subsist on the yolk material for the first 200 hours while being carried by currents. If they encounter still water, the larvae may settle to the bottom and die. According to Pearson (1938), if food is not available by the time they reach 6mm. (about 0.25 inches), they soon begin to die. This is perhaps the most critical stage in the life history of this species. At this small size they are almost completely at the mercy of the tides and predators.

Postlarval Stage. A great deal of work has been done in the Bay and Delta in sampling the abundance and distribution of small fry. Calhoun and Woodhull (1948), Calhoun, Woodhull and Johnson (1950), Calhoun (1953), Skinner (1955), Hatton (1940), Hatton and Clark (1942), and Erkkila et al. (1950), have all investigated the subject, chiefly because of the presence of millions of these small fish in the vicinity of large industrial and irrigation diversions and sewage and industrial waste discharges; Skinner and later Chadwick (unpublished data) have continued the work.

Surveys have been conducted almost annually since 1946 to obtain a measure of the distribution and abundance of bass fry over the Bay and Delta Area where they are widely distributed. Calhoun (1953) in conjunction with personnel from the U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service divided the entire area into 67 different sections, sampled each to obtain the density of fry per thousand cubic feet of water strained, and projected the result to the approximate volume of water within each section. They derived an estimate of 35 million fry during 'mid-July of 1951 and a second estimate of 20 million for late July.

Fry were found in greatest abundance in Honker, Grizzly and Suisun bays and in the main channels of the Sacramento and San Joaquin rivers in the Delta, particularly heavy concentrations were found in Honker Bay and in the San Joaquin River between Pittsburg and Antioch.

The surveys since 1951 have not been as extensive as in that year, but they indicate that a similar distributional pattern has prevailed each year since. Between 1953 and 1956 the surveys were conducted under identical conditions to obtain continuity for year-to-year comparisons of fry abundance. Five stations were selected and sampled on minus tides, when the fry reached a mean length of one inch in the vicinity of Antioch.

It appears that reproduction was exceptionally good in 1953 and 1954 with progressively poorer years in 1955 and 1956. Unfortunately, statistical procedures have revealed certain discrepancies in the sampling methods which limit the usefulness of past surveys as indices of abundance. A new approach is being employed which it is hoped will yield more useful data.

Experimental data indicate the fry are usually located nearer the surface than the bottom, although a recent series of tests designed to determine their vertical distribution, showed the reverse to be true on at least one occasion. Chadwick (unpublished data) conducted tests in the summer of 1957 which showed that the smaller fish are found in greater numbers near the shoreline than in mid-channel. As they approach two inches in length, they are found more evenly dispersed throughout the channel. Evidently, even fry less than an inch in length have some control over their movements despite rapid tidal currents. His findings agree with observations made by the writer in 1954 and 1955 while engaged in this work.

Juveniles. By early summer young fish are scattered throughout all parts of the Delta and at least as far downstream as San Pablo Bay. Apparently, all fry are not carried into the Delta because they can be found far up the Sacramento and San Joaquin Rivers in the late summer and fall. It seems rather improbable that they return upstream after having once gone down. Juvenile fish have been seined all along the Sacramento and San Joaquin rivers and at least as far down as Point Wilson in San Pablo Bay.

During seining operations during the fall (October) of 1956 and 1957, throughout the Bay and Delta, fish with mean lengths ranging from 2.9 to 4.0 inches were taken. The overall average is probably about 3.5 inches. There does not appear to be any perceptible difference of growth pattern in any particular part of the area covered. Growth ceases, or at least is greatly diminished from October until the following March. Juvenile fish apparently remain principally in the Delta for two to three years before moving into San Francisco Bay or the ocean. During this period they tend to be gregarious, moving about in scattered schools.

Fish up to 16 inches may be found anywhere throughout most of the year, but certain areas seem to be more favorable than others. Such juveniles are almost always present in San Pablo Bay in the vicinity of Mare Island, the Napa River, Suisun Bay, and in a number of localities in the Delta.

Raney (1952) states: "During the first and second years they remain in small schools or feeding groups, but it has been observed that they exist in large schools by the end of the second summer."

The age at which they first begin their annual migrations between fresh and salt water has not been positively established on the West Coast. Most fish, it is thought, undertake them in the third year though many unquestionably begin in the second and others probably wait until their fourth year or later. Inherent differences between fishes, and sexual differences, are likely factors influencing the age at which they move into salt water. The proportion of adults making these annual excursions is not known; however, since large fish are very scarce in the Delta during the summer, it may be concluded that the great majority are involved.

Migrations. Clark (1934 and 1936) and Calhoun (1952) are responsible for most of our present knowledge on striped bass migrations in California. Both have conducted tagging experiments showing the migratory patterns. A third study, by Chadwick, was underway at the writing of this report.

Clark reported the results of tagging 1,544 bass, mostly small ones (mean length 11 inches), and found that they did not move in a well defined migration but more or less diffused out of the tagging area.

Calhoun's work was with legal sized fish (then 12 inches and over), of which he tagged more than 4,000. He found that unlike the smaller fish, the adults did undertake well defined seasonal migrations. Recoveries of tagged fish by sportsmen and gill net fishermen showed that the adults move upstream into San Pablo Bay and Carquinez Strait in the fall, then into the Delta in the winter, spread out and ascend the tributary rivers in the spring, and move down to the Bay again by early summer.

Their movement to and in the ocean is not yet understood, although a fair number appear to enter the ocean each year. Occasionally, good catches are made by surf casters off San Francisco beaches. Although stripers are seldom taken off shore, the party boat fleet made good catches of striped bass in the ocean during 1956. On the Atlantic Coast extensive north-south ocean migrations are made, presumably for feeding purposes. This phenomenon has not been observed to occur here.

Food Habits. Scofield (1911) found that fish up to four inches, in Napa Creek, relied on marine worms (50 percent) crustaceans (48 percent) and small fish (2 percent). The items are listed in Table 25.

Hatton (1940), in a collection of 76 fish ranging from one to six inches in length taken at Martinez, found that 69.4 percent of all stomachs contained crustaceans. The percentage of stomachs containing each item found is shown in Table 26.

Hatton points out that the items were found during September and November while the water at Martinez was brackish.

Under freshwater conditions in this area, during the spring, the amphipods and isopods disappear, and the small fish were found to be feeding almost exclusively on a species of Mysidacea (Neomysis mercedis).

The writer has on several occasions while checking the stomachs of young-of-the-year bass (2 to 4 inches) from the San Joaquin River and Suisun Bay during the summer also found that mysid shrimp {Neomysis mercedis) was by far the major item in the diet. Some of the stomachs examined were simply packed with them. Each spring and summer the River and Delta abound with these small crustaceans.

Messrs. Fisk and McCammon of the Department, who have studied the food habits of the white catfish in the Delta, observed that amphipods (Corophium spinicorne) were the most important organism utilized by catfish. Hatton's work seems to confirm the importance of it in the diet of small bass. Unfortunately, data are meager on feeding habits of small bass from the time they begin to feed until they are through the first year.

On the East Coast, freshwater shrimp (Gammarus), and Dipterid (chironomid) larvae were found to be major food items.

Striped bass become piscivorous [ Habitually feeding on fish; fish-eating.] at least by thetime they reach 6 inches and perhaps earlier. Their diet from this size on is extremely varied, and appears to depend upon the forage available. The larger fish appear to have a proportionately larger percentage of fish in the diet but even the largest specimens were found to contain crustaceans.

Bay shrimp (Crago sp.) appears to be one of the most common items, along with Neomysis mercedis and the small forage fishes found in the Bay, such as smelt, herring and anchovy. Hatton (op cit) examined 224 stomachs of adult bass taken near Pittsburg between March 13 and May 4, 1939 and found 56.6 percent to be empty (during the spawning season). His findings are summarized in Table 27.

Johnson and Calhoun (1952) examined 387 stomachs of adult bass collected during a period of a year. All fish were over 12 inches in length. One group of 229 was collected between San Rafael and Martinez during the summer and fall, while the other lot of 158 was taken from the Delta portion of the San Joaquin River between Antioch and the mouth of Middle River between November 1947 and June 1948.

Shrimp (Crago sp.) were the most numerous item and comprised the largest volume of all organisms found in the summer group. It occurred in 35 percent of all stomachs examined and formed 53 percent of the volume of all foods. Anchovies, the next most important item, occurred in 11 percent of the stomachs and comprised 39 percent of the food volume Isopods, crabs, mysid shrimp, and other fish were also found but none occurred more than six times or formed more than 2 percent of the total volume. Of this group of fish 28 percent of the stomachs examined were empty.

Their winter sample, the one from the Delta, contained 66 individual fish (42 percent of the sample) with empty stomachs. Neomysid shrimp occurred in more stomachs than any other item and formed, surprisingly enough for large fish, 20 percent of the total volume. Small fish, however, were the most frequent item and accounted for the greatest volume (64 peicent). Bay shrimp (Crago sp.) accounted for 13 percent of the volume.

Shapovalov (1936) examined the stomachs of 47 striped bass taken from the mouth of Waddell Creek, Santa Cruz County. He found a large variety of items, with crustaceans predominating in the small bass, and other fish being the principal food of the larger bass.

Bass are obviously omnivorous feeders; quoting Scofield (1931): "Practically every marine form common to the San Francisco Bay region has been found in their stomachs. Their food includes fishes, such as small Pacific herring, smelt, anchovies, split-tails, striped bass, shad, gobies, carp and perch; crustaceans and mollusks—crabs, shrimps, periwinkles, clams; and various other forms such as worms, copepods and vellella."

From the available data, it may be concluded that the very young fish at first depend on the microcrustacea, diatoms and other minute invertebrates. From one to four inches they depend heavily on larger crustaceans, Neomysis mercedis, Crago sp., aquatic isopods, amphipods, and marine worms. During succeeding years their diet becomes largely piscivorous, although crustaceans continue to be important.

Growth. The growth rate and relationship between age, length and weight was first worked out by Scofield (1931) for California striped bass. Robinson (1960) recently completed another study of the subject to determine if any appreciable change had occurred over the intervening 30 years. Both studies show a rapid gain in length for the first 4 years of life after which the rate becomes progressively less. Robinson, however, found that growth both in length and weight was more rapid than shown by Scofield, the difference being about 10 percent greater length and 25 percent greater weight by the end of the 7th or 8th years of life. Difficulty in aging specimens after their 7th year of life precluded accurate interpretations beyond this age without a great deal of careful study. Stripers reach a length of about 32 inches and a weight of 14 pounds by their 9th year of life. The maximum length attained in California may exceed 50 inches while the maximum weight may exceed 60 pounds (a 63 pound striped bass has been recorded). Fish attaining the above dimensions are most likely 20 years of age or over. Stripers gain weight at a relatively constant rate after their fifth year of life; the gain may be in excess of 2 pounds per year.

Age to Maturity. Scofield (op. cit.) made a careful study of maturing bass and came to the conclusion that 35 percent of the females mature by their fourth year, 87 percent by the fifth year, 98 percent spawn in their sixth year and 100 percent thereafter. Males mature earlier, many spawning while only 2 years old and most by the time they are three. Morgan and Gerlach (1950) reported mature male fish at one year of age. Males may be scarcely more than 10 inches in length by the time they mature. Females, on the other hand, are generally more than 18 inches long.

Artificial Propagation. In California, between 1907 and 1910, a brief attempt was made to propagate this species artificially. A small hatchery was built on Bouldin Island and operations were carried on for several seasons but the difficulties encountered, particularly the inability to collect ripe spawn, resulted in the abandonment of operations.

On the Atlantic Coast there still exists a hatchery at Weldon, North Carolina for this purpose.

Striped bass are extremely prolific and attempts to propagate them artificially are unwarranted. So many fry are produced through natural propagation that almost any contribution from artificial sources would be superfluous. Once established in an area any decline in the population is most likely the result of environmental factors rather than insufficient natural propagation.

Sources of Mortality. This phase of the life history of striped bass requires more investigation. Information simply is not available concerning the ages at which various types of mortality occur. Several earlier attempts to obtain data on angler haryest were attempted, but these met with difficulties.

An unknown proportion of the eggs deposited by the female are not fertilized. Losses occur while the eggs and larvae develop in their hazardous position of drifting in the river or tidal currents. Predation, sudden changes in temperature, pollution, and a number of other factors must also take a tremendous toll of eggs and larvae. As the yolk material is used up the larval fish must begin to fend for themselves, and it is at this stage that perhaps the greatest losses occur. Those which survive are continually subjected to predation, diversions and pollution, each of which could account for significant losses. Predation is everywhere apparent, but losses to pollution and water diversions occur at specific locations.

Losses at diversions are similar to those previously described for king salmon and need not be repeated here, except to say that the magnitude of striped bass losses at diversions far exceeds those of any other species in the Bay and Delta area. Some idea of the numbers involved can be obtained from recent tests at two major water diversions in the Delta.

The Contra Costa Steam Plant of the Pacific Gas and Electric Company located near Antioch requires 868 cubic feet of water per second for cooling purposes at peak capacity. Screening small fish from this amount of water presented a formidable problem but one which was eventually overcome by research and cooperation between the Pacific Gas and Electric Company and the Department of Fish and Game. This plant alone, it was estimated, could conceivably affect 10 percent of the annual striped bass fry population which, it will be recalled, was estimated at 35 million fish in 1951. Fortunately, salvage operations have greatly reduced the numbers of small fish destroyed at the installation.

Similarly, but on a more gigantic scale, the Tracy Pumping Plant of the Central Valley Project draws water from Old River and pumps it into the Delta- Mendota Canal for irrigation purposes in the San Joaquin Valley. A very conservative estimate of fry under the influence of this large diversion (designed to draw 4,600 cfs at peak periods) would be 10 to 15 percent of the population each year. Research by the Bureau of Reclamation and the Fish and Wildlife Service in cooperation with the Department, resulted in a revolutionary new type of salvage facility termed the "louver facility". Up to 98 percent of fish one inch or more in length have been successfully deflected from the diversion by it. From March through August of 1957, the completed structure bypassed over 1,750,- 000 striped bass, 217,800 salmon and steelhead, 1,187,- 000 catfish, and 261,800 miscellaneous fish.

Pollution affects fish in several ways: the most obvious, of course, is the direct lethal action of toxic substances which results in mass kills but which is seldom detected. Small fish under the influence of tidal currents are carried in the vicinity of toxic discharges which they might otherwise avoid. Even the adults are sometimes caught in particularly toxic discharges as in the case of the Stauffer Chemical Company fish kill in San Francisco Bay in May of 1957 and the Napa River die-off of several years ago.

Usually, however, polluting substances destroy the bottom fauna or food organisms upon which fish depend, or set up a barrier in the form of odors, acidity, temperature or some other condition which is detected by the fish and which they avoid. The latter two are not sources of mortality but they restrict the habitat and result in loss to the fishery.

Predation undoubtedly causes large losses among striped bass under 12 inches in length. After this, however, they themselves are predators and are pretty well removed from the forage class.

Old age, diseases, and parasites also take their toll of fish. Little work has been done concerning the former two. The author has observed striped bass completely riddled with the larval form of a cestode of the order Trypanorhynca. It is thought to be of the genus Gymnorhynchus. Striped bass are the intermediate host of this parasite which has as its definitive host certain sharks, skates and rays. Another common parasite observed was the nematode Contracaecum, of undetermined species.

Scofield (1929) reported injuries to striped bass from lampreys, presumably the Pacific lamprey (Entosphenus tridentatus). The author has observed a large number of striped bass with lamprey scars, and in a few instances with fairly fresh wounds. The effects of predation by lampreys cannot be assessed at this time without considerable conjecture; nevertheless, it is thought that lampreys are not a particularly important source of mortality.

Commercial exploitation was prohibited by law in 1935 largely eliminating this source of mortality. However, studies by the writer (Skinner, 1957) from 1954 to 1957 showed that a considerable number of striped bass were destroyed incidental to commercial shad and salmon netting operations. At a minimal estimate, 22,000 fish weighing about 250,000 pounds were destroyed in netting operations during the fall of 1955 and the spring of 1956. The total poundage destroyed each year by this method could easily have amounted to 500,000 pounds. By law, fish taken by the netters had to be returned to the water upon removal from the nets whether dead or alive. Legislation in 1957 prohibited all gill and trammel netting within the Golden Gate, thus eliminating such losses in the future.

Prior to 1935 striped bass were taken commercially. The amount taken each year is described in an earlier section of this report.

The next and probably the greatest single source of mortality among legal size fish is incurred from angling. Tagging studies aimed at measuring the exploitation from this source have not been wholly successful. Clark's tagging study (1934 and 1936) was not intended for this purpose primarily and certain deficiencies in it do not permit application of the results to the fishery in general. He recovered about 10 percent of the fish he tagged within one year of the date of release.

A very intensive tagging program conducted by Alex Calhoun of the Department of Fish and Game was specifically designed to measure the proportion of the population caught by anglers. It soon became apparent, however, that the commercial gill net fishery in the Delta and Suisun Bay region was seriously interfering with the study. The gill netters removed the tagged fish before the anglers had the opportunity to catch them and furthermore, the placement of tags on the fish was found to increase the chances of a fish being captured by the gill nets. Other adverse factors included the reluctance of sport and commercial fishermen to return tags from captured fish. Because of these conditions only the roughest sort of estimate was possible regarding the proportion taken by anglers. The writer made a brief study of tag returns from the above program and concluded that the proportion exploited by both sources, anglers and gill nets, was in excess of 25 percent of the legal population annually. Chadwick, (unpublished data) in a later review estimated a minimal annual rate of exploitation of 10 percent. Anglers, of course, were presumed to catch the greater share by quite a large margin.

Chadwick (unpublished data) initiated another tagging program in the spring of 1958 after removal of the gill net fishery. Preliminary analysis of the first three years of tag returns indicate angling mortality on the order of 20 to 30 percent annually on the population over 16 inches in length.

In spite of all the factors acting against it, the natural survival of this species is obviously high. The frequency with which individuals in excess of 30 or 40 pounds (over 15 years of age) are encountered lead to the conclusion that natural mortality is low.

COMMENTS REGARDING CHANGES IN THE FISH AND WILDLIFE
RESOURCES OF THE BAY AREA

Striped Bass - Page 169

Generally speaking, this fishery has remained relatively stable. The species was completely removed from the commercial category in 1935 and since then has been subjected to hook-and-line fishing only, except for fish which were taken incidentally with shad and salmon by the gill net fishery. The sport fishery is so intense it is believed that up to 25 percent of all legal-sized fish are removed from the fishery each year.

A review of the catch records and other pertinent data revealed a decline in the fishery from 1944 through 1955. As a consequence, further restrictions in size and bag limits were put into effect to bring the fishery into balance. This appears to have been accomplished.

Under present conditions, it appears that the sport fishery is now exerting sufficient pressure to have a definite influence on striped bass stocks. The governing factor, however, lies in the change in environmental conditions. These have been modified so greatly over the past fifty years that there has been an appreciable loss in the total habitat available to striped bass.

At least three adverse factors, excluding angling, are affecting the striped bass population: reclamation, water development projects, and pollution. It would be next to impossible to evaluate the relative importance of each. Reclamation, many years ago, resulted in extensive habitat changes which removed rich nursery grounds. Water development projects have modified temperature, flow, and salinity patterns in the Delta and in spawning areas, and numerous diversions take a heavy toll of fish. Pollution has resulted in an extensive loss of habitat, destruction of forage organisms, and, frequently, in the outright killing of the fish themselves.

The absence of striped bass in many areas of the Bay may be taken as rather clear evidence of pollution. South San Francisco Bay in particular can be cited, and there are other once-favorable localities which are now similarly devoid of striped bass.

Part 3 of 3 | « Previous |  1 | 2 | 3

Citations

Calhoun, A. J.
1949 California Striped Bass Catch Records From the Party Boat Fishery; 1938-1948. California Fish and Game, Vol. 35, No. 4, pp. 211-253.
1950 California Angling Catch Records from Postal Card Surveys: 1936-1948 With an Evaluation of Postal Card Non-response. California Fish and Game, Vol. 36, No. 3, pp. 177-233.
1951 California State-Wide Angling Catch Estimates for 1949. California Fish and Game, Vol. 37, No. 1, pp. 69-75.
1952 Annual Migrations of California Striped Bass. California Fish and Game, Vol. 38, No. 3, pp. 391-403.
1953a. State-Wide California Angling Estimates for 1951. California Fish and Game, Vol. 39, No. 1, pp. 103-113.
1953b. Distribution of Striped Bass Fry in Relation to Major Water Diversions. California Fish and Game, Vol. 39, No. 3, pp. 279-299.
1957 Striped Bass Fishing Map (Revised by John E. Skinner). California Department of Fish and Game.

Calhoun, A. J., and John E. Skinner
1954 Field Tests of Stainless Steel and Tentalum Wire with Disk Tags on Striped Bass. California Fish and Game, Vol. 40, No. 3, pp. 323-328.

Calhoun, A. J., and C. A. Woodhull
1948 Progress Report on Studies of Striped Bass Reproduction in Relation to the Central Valley Project. California Fish and Game, Vol. 34, No. 4, pp. 171-187.
1950 Striped Bass Reproduction in the Sacramento River System in 1948. California Fish and Game, Vol. 36, No. 2, pp. 135-145.

Clark, G. H.
1929 Sacramento-San Joaquin Salmon (Oncorhynchus tshawytscha) Fishery of California. California Fish and Game, Fish Bulletin No. 17.
1932 The Striped Bass Supply of California, Past and Present California Fish and Game, Vol. 18, No. 4, pp. 297-298.
1933 Fluctuations in the Abundance of Striped Bass (Roccus lineatus) in California. California Department of Fish and Game, Fish Bulletin No. 39.
1934 Tagging of Striped Bass. California Fish and Game, Vol. 20, No. 1, pp. 14-19.
1936 A Second Report on Striped Bass Tagging. California Fish and Game, Vol. 22, No. 4, pp. 272-283.
1938 Weight and Age Determination of Striped Bass. California Fish and Game, Vol. 24, No. 2, pp. 176-177.

Cole, Charles E.
1930 Angling for Striped Bass. California Fish and Game, Vol. 16, No. 4, pp. 286-290.

Craig, J. A.
1928 The Striped Bass Supply of California. California Fish and Game, Vol. 14, No. 4, pp. 265-272. 1930 An Analysis of the Catch Statistics of the Striped Bass (Roccus lineatus) Fishery of California. California Department of Fish and Game, Fish Bulletin No. 24.

Hatton, S. Ross
1940. Progress Report on the Central Valley Fisheries Investigations, 1939. California Fish and Game, Vol. 26, No. 4, pp. 334-373.

Jackson, H. W. and R. E. Tiller
1952 Preliminary observations on spawning potential in striped bass (Roccus saxatilis). Maryland Dept. Res. and Ed., Pub. 93, pp. 1-6.

Johnson, W. C, and A. J. Calhoun
1952 Food Habits of California Striped Bass. California Fish and Game, Vol. 38, No. 4, pp. 531-533.

Morgan, Alfred R. and Arthur R. Gerlach
1950 Striped Bass Studies on Coos Bay, Oregon in 1949 and 1950. Oregon Fish Commission, Contribution No. 14.

Pearson, John C.
1938 The Life History of the Striped Bass or Rockfish, (Roccus saxatilis) (Walbaum). U. S. Department of Commerce Bureau of Fisheries, Vol. XLIX, Bulletin No. 28.

Raney, Edward C, Ernest F. Tresselt, Edgar H. Hollis, V. D. Vladykov and D. H. Wallace
1952 The Striped Bass (Roccus saxatilis). Bulletin of the Bingham Oceanographic Collection, Vol. 14, Article 1.

Scofield, N. B.
1910 Notes on striped bass in California. Biennial Report, Calif. Board of Fish and Game Commissioners for 1909-1910, pp. 104-109.

Shapovalov, Leo
1936 Food of the Striped Bass. California Fish and Game, Vol. 22, No. 4, pp. 261-270.

Skinner, John E.
1955a. California State-Wide Angling Estimates for 1953. California Fish and Game, Vol. 41, No. 1, pp. 19-32.
1955b. Observations on the Shad Gill Net Fishery in 1954. California Department of Fish and Game, Inland Fisheries Branch, Administrative Report 55-3.
1957a. Incidental losses of Striped Bass in the Sacramento River Gill Net Fisheries for Shad and Salmon. California Department of Fish and Game, Inland Fisheries Branch, Administrative Report 57-2.
1957b. Status of the Striped Bass—Sturgeon Study and Suggestions for its Future. California Department of Fish Fish and Game, Inland Fisheries Branch, Administrative Report No. 57-11.

Smith, Hugh M.
1895 The Striped Bass History and Results of Introduction. U. S. Fish Commission Bulletin, Vol. 15, pp. 449-458.

Woodhull, Chester
1947 Spawning Habits of the Striped Bass (Roccus saxatilis) in California Waters. California Fish and Game, Vol. 33, No. 2, pp. 97-101

The entire document is available in Adobe PDF format.
John E. Skinner. 1962. An Historical Review of the Fish and Wildlife Resources of the San Francisco Bay Area.
http://www.estuaryarchive.org/archive/skinner_1962/
San Francisco Estuary and Watershed Archive

07.02.27