Anadromous fisheries research program, Tar River, Pamlico River, and Northern Pamlico Sound

[From the U.S. Government Printing Office, www.gpo.gov]

ANADROMOUS FISHERIES RESEARCH PROGRAM

TAR RIVER, PAMLICO RIVER, AND NORTHERN PAMLICO SOUND

Michael D. Marshall

N. C. Division of Marine Fisheries

Morehead City, N. C. 28557

Completion Report for Project AFCS-10

15 December 1976

SH221 .5
.N67
A53
1976

ABSTRACT

Sampling of the Tar-Pamlico River and northern Pamlico Sound was carried
out using wing trawls, seines, gill nets, and egg nets from June, 1974 through
June, 1976. Field data from 126 monthly stations and numerous seasonal sampling
sites were taken to determine spawning and nursery areas. Spawning areas were
identified for river herring, American shad, hickory shad and striped bass in
the Tar River. Spawning areas were also found for river herring in tributaries
of Pamlico River. Nursery areas were determined for blueback herring, alewife,
striped bass, and American shad. Tagging studies revealed that striped bass
populations in the Pamlico River remain in the area between Washington and
Wades Point except for spawning migrations up the Tar River. Commercial catches
were sampled and a creel census was conducted to determine the extent of the
commercial and recreational fisheries, respectively. Drift gill nets accounted
for 98 percent of the effort in the recreational fishery. Other methods used
were hook-and-line for shad and striped bass and dip nets for river herring in
creeks near Washington. Commercial samples of blueback herring and hickory
shad showed the highest percentages of repeat spawners. American shad samples
were dominated by four and five year old fish and repeat spawning was moderate:
for both sexes. Virgin fish also dominated catches of alewife, particularly
those captured entering Lake Mattamuskeet. Catches of striped bass were dom-
inated by four and five year olds in 1975 and by two and three year olds in 1976.

Property of CSC Library
C"

US Department of Commerce
NOAA Coastal Services Center Library
C= 2234 South Hobson Avenue
CL
Charleston, SC 29405-2413

TABLE OF CONTENTS

INTRODUCTION ..................... so ... as* .... *.so ....... so ..... so* .... 0.66.0.0 1

LITERATURE REVIEW ...................... o ....... #............... o .............. 3

STUDY AREA.... o ......... o............. o ........................ *.so ........... 3

MATERIALS AND METHODS ......................... so .................. o..... 0.... 0 4
Spawning Area Sampling ............................... &...... 0..... 000.000 4
Nursery Area Sampling ............................... 0* ............. 5

Commercial Harvest .......... 0.0 ......... 0.............. 10

Tagging.*,.*.* ... * ..... 0 ................................................. 10

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION ............... o .............. so ........................ 12

Spawning Areas ............. 00 ......... 0...... *.so ....... so 12
River Herring ............... 0......... 0........... o...6o .......... ..... 12

Tar River ............... *.*.* ...... o 12

Pamlico River .......... %.... so.* ......o... 21

American Shad .............. *to* ............ 60 .... 0 ... 0.0 ...... 6..o.4 ....026
Hickory Shad ................ 6-0.4 ......... 0...... 0.0.00 29
Striped Bass ........... ....... 0........0 ........ 0 32
Nursery Areas ........ *0 ......................... *.*.00.04 .... of ...* 38
Blueback herring ....... 1.0 ............. 0.0 ........... *..**a .... 38
Alewife ................ 0.0 ......... &............ 0........0.... 43

American shad ......... 00 ............................ 6......... 4..... 43
Hickory shad ............. *......................... so ......... %..... 43
Striped bass ......... 0.9.0"o ...... *.*.* ....... ..... 50
Sturgeon ............. ........ *.so ... 0.6 ...... 00.60.0.00 .... 50
Adult Fish Sampling ...................................................... 50

Tar River ...................................... 0...0... so* ...*...... 50

Pamlico River and Northern Pamlico Sound ....... 0......... oo.*.0.00.. 54
Recreational Fishery..*** ........... *.* ......*...... o... **.so.* ... o...o.. 61

Commercial Harvest ........... o...o... *.so ....o...... *--o ....o...... o ... so 64
American shad.oooooo#[email protected]* ... e..oo .............. o..... 68
Hickory shad ........... 009*4.0 ....... 0.00 ... 0........ o..o..o... 68

Striped bass. .... ... oovooos 73

Tagging ..................... 6 ............... *............. 73
Striped bass ..... to .... **.to ..... 0.0 ... 00 ....... 76
American shad .......................... 0........ 4 ....0......... too. 79
Hickory shad ....... 0... 0.0 ......... 0 ............ 0... 0..... too ..... 79
River herring ............ #.......................... 0....... 0...... 79
SIT1414ARY.... ...... too ............o............ 0.... *....... 0. 86
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS ....................... o.o..o ....0.... 0 88
LITERATURE CITED .................... 4o.o.o.o..o.oo ....... o..... ... 89

INTRODUCTION

Anadromous fish resources have been and continue to be valuable to both
the commercial and recreational fisheries of North Carolina. Anadromous species
accounted for approximately 45 percent of the annual edible finfish landings
reported in North Carolina from 1960-73, and, although no estimates are avail-
able, this group of fish must be considered to contribute significantly to the
value of the recreational fishery in the estuaries and tributaries of coastal
North Carolina. Also important is their ecological role in serving as forage
for other fish and as a means of energy transfer from the estuarine to the

marine environment.
Seven species are considered to be anadromous in North Carolina: American
shad (Aloaa sapidissima), hickory shad (A. mediocris), blueback herring (A.
aestivatis), alewife (A. pseudoharengus), striped bass (Morone s=atiZi8),
Atlantic sturgeon (Acipenser oxyrhynchus), and shortnose sturgeon (Acipenser
brevirostrwn). The shortnose sturgeon is rare and probably contributes very
little to the fishery of North Carolina. All the major tributaries of North
Carolina's sounds - in particular the Neuse and Tar-Pamlico Rivers and tribu-
taries of Albemarle Sound - support both commercial and recreational fisheries
for all species except, possibly'. the shortnose sturgeon.
Information available on anadromous fish resources in North Carolina prior
to the beginning of the studies by the North Carolina Division of Marine Fisheries
in Albemarle Sound was very general and limited in its usefulness for management
purposes. North Carolina's anadromous fish research program was designed to
provide for optimum utilization and maintenance of anadroraous fish stocks. The
objectives were to identify spawning and nursery areas, determine migration per-
iods and routes, investigate distribution and relative abundance, determine year-
class composition of adults, and monitor the activities of foreign vessels which
might capture anadromous fishes while fishing in the ocean off North Carolina.
The program began in Albemarle Sound in 1971. The results of a three-year study
in that area have been reported by Street, Pate, Holland, and Powell (1975).
The results presented herein are from a two-year project in the Tar-Pamlico
River system located in the central portion of coastal North Carolina (Figure 1).

-2-

70 77 ?a

C01"'ASTAL N TH CA OUN
A vz L E

4
11P
%%%%
Q

-Z

4
Y

CD r

SCALE
fr
r 40 20 b2 40 .Lcs 34

13 30 40 $0 rMOW1145

@7 7.6

Figure I 24ap sbowing relative location of study area.

-3-

LITERATURE REVIEW

A bibliography of literature concerning anadromous fish in North Carolina
(Street and Hall, 1973) provided reference to all previous research that has
been conducted in the Tar-Pamlico River system on these species. Additional
information on nursery areas of anadromous fish in Pamlico River appeared in
a report by Spitsbergen and Wolf f (1974). In a series of stream survey reports
(Smith and Bayless, 1964 and Bayless and Shannon, 1965), the North Carolina
Wildlife Resources Commission reported all areas in the Tar-Pamlico River and
tributaries in which anadromous fish - both juveniles and adults - were found.
Maps showing locations of samples and tables with relative abundance of all
species were included.
Baker (1968) discussed the general distribution of striped bass, American
and hickory shad, blueback herring and alewife in North Carolina. An estimate
of harvest of anadromous species from Tar River and Pamlico River by sport
fishermen was made for the 1967-68 season. Results of a preliminary survey of
anadromous fish spawning areas in Tar River were presented.
More detailed studies of the spawning areas of striped bass in Tar River
have been made (Humphries, 1966 and Hassler, 1970). Spawning areas and periods
of peak spawning activity were discussed. Tobaben (1971) made a preliminary
report of the biology of striped bass populations spawning in Tar River.
A detailed study of utilization of Chicod Creek, a tributary of Tar River,
by anadromous fish was made by the U.S. Soil Conservation Service (Edwards and
Bland, 1973) to gather information for inclusion in an environmental impact
statement prepared for a proposed stream channelization project.

STUDY AREA

The Tar River rises in the west-central part of Person County about seven
miles west of Roxboro. It flows in a generally southeasterly direction through
Granville, Franklin, Nash, Edgecombe, and Pitt Counties to Vashingtou,:county
seat of Beaufort County, where it empties into Pamlico River at sea level. The

-4-

total length is 179 miles (288 km). The area of its drainage basin is ap-
proximately 3100 square miles (802,893 ha). The elevation of the source of
the stream is approximately 550 feet (167.2 m) above sea level.
Physical and chemical characteristics of the Tar River vary considerably
from the headwaters to the mouth, being determined mostly by stream gradient
and soil characteristics. Conditions range from swift, highly turbid waters
in the Piedmont to the dark, slow-moving waters in the Coastal Plain. In the
Piedmont, water levels are subject to rapid variation in response to rainfall
and run-off. Water levels of the main river and its tributaries in the Coastal
Plain portion are influenced by wind tides for a considerable distance from the

mouth.
The principal tributaries of the Tar River, as it is ascended, are as follows:
Tranters Creek, which joins it from the right bank near its mouth; Town Creek,
which joins it from the left bank at Old Sparta about eight miles (1.29 km) south
of Tarboro; Fishing Creek, its largest tributary, which joins it on the right bank
about three miles (4.83 km) northwest of Tarboro; and Swift Creek which has its
confluence with the main stream about seven miles (11.26 km) above the mouth of
Fishing Creek.
The Pamlico River is actually a continuation of the Tar River with the name
change occurring at the US 17 bridge near Washington, North Carolina. It flows
southeasterly about 33 miles (53.10 km) and empties into Pamlico Sound about 32
miles (51.49 km) west of Ocracoke Inlet. It drains an area of approximately
1,220 square miles (315,967.8 ha) including parts of Beaufort, Hyde, Pamlico,
and Washington Counties. Stream gradients of the Pamlico River are slight, and,
water levels rise and fall with shifting winds.
The principal tributaries of the Pamlico River, in addition to Tar River,
include Pungo River; Rose, Swanquarter, Juniper, and Chocowinity Bays; and Broad,
Bath, Blount, Durham, North, Goose, South, and Upper Goose Creeks.

14ATERIALS AND METHODS

Spawning Area Sampling

Sampling for fish entering the spawning areas began in mid-March and lasted
until late May. Ten and 20 m units of 63.5 mm, 72.9 mm, 82.6 mm, 123.7 mm, and

-5-

140 mm. stretched mesh sizes of gill net were set for 24 hour periods. Nets
were set in virtually all creeks and many of their upper tributaries to deter-
mine stream selectivity and limits of upstream migration. Capture of running
ripe adult females was used as one criterion for classifying a stream as a
spawning area. Fork length (FL, mm) measurements were taken on all captured
adults. All fish were examined to determine sex and spawning condition and
scale samples were taken for age determination.
Plankton net sampling for eggs and larvae was conducted from late March
to late May. A 0.5 m plankton net made of 00 Nitex mesh with a wide mouth jar
attached at the cod end was used for all samples. Fifteen minute, stationary
samples were taken whenever sufficient current flow existed. However, when
there was insufficient current, n6tsvere.'towed for five minutes at very
low speed. One unit of sampling effort consisted of either a 15 minute sta@
tionary sample or a 5 minute towed sample. Temperature, salinity, pH, and dis-
solved oxygen data were also taken with each sample. Samples were preserved
in 5 percent formalin and returned to the laboratory where eggs and lar-vae were
sorted, identified, counted, and measured. All measurements of eggs and larvae
were made under a binocular microscope fitted with an ocular micrometer.

NurstEy Area Sampling

Preliminary nursery area sampling was conducted during May and June, 1974
using a 3.95 m headrope shrimp trawl, 18.29 m bag seines, and an 8 m headrope
Carolina wing trawl which was a scaled-down version of the net described by
Street, tt. al. (1975). Both trawls and seines were fitted with bags of 3.18 mm
bar mesh to allow for the capture of prejuvenile fishes.
One hundred and twenty-six stations chosen from the initial -survey were
sampled monthly from July, 1974 to June, 1975 (Figure 2). This number was re-
duced to 54 stations which were sampled from July, 1975 to June, 1976. Trawls
were fished on the bottom where there was little vegetation and few obstructions.
Surface trawling gear was used in Tranters Creek and Tar River stations. Sample
time varied from one to five minutes depending on the area being sampled and the
season. A one minute tow was considered one unit-of-effort. Seines were pulled
in a maximum depth of 0.91 m to 1.52 m for a distance of 45.7 m at each station.

One seine tow was considered one unit-of-effort.

Tarboro

GREENVILLE

0 -Stations sampled from June., 1974
to June 1975-
w-Stations sampled from Juneo 1974
to JuBe 1976

Figure 2- Map showing monthly sampling stations

ASHINGTO BELHAVEN\,

PU NGO

0
0 c

RrE
0
cREE

0 0
Stations,sampled from June, 1974 C@k
to June,':.1975
ns sampled from June, 1 4
Static,
to June 1976

URORA

Figure 2-- Continued

NJ e

K E M/f T-T AM L/J.@ E

ose
BOY

Bluff Boy
Npc

PAMLICO Sta .tions sampled fr
to June, 1975
Stations sampled fr
to June 1976

Figure 2--Continued

Stations sampled from June, 19.74
to June, 1975
Stations sampled from June, 1974
to June 1976

Z
r4

IA K E MA 7 r A M US KE Er
@A7 r A M US KE Cr
D) '-q @KE'@
4k.", '.Z@

Figure 2--Continued

_10-

All species were identified and counted in each sample. A maximum of 30
fish per species were measured at each station. All samples were worked up in
the field. Unknown specimens were returned to the laboratory for identification.
Water temperature and salinity were measured with each sample with a YSI salinity-
conductivity meter. Depth and bottom type were also noted at each station.

Commercial Harvest

Commercial landings were sampled at six locations in western Pamlico Sound
and Pamlico River to determine species composition, sex ratios, and age class
structure of anadromous fishes. The principal gear used in the study area was
gill nets set primarily for American shad and striped bass. Few hickory shad
and river herring were sampled at the dealer sites. Samples taken at these six
locations were considered to be representative of the entire study area.
Unculled catches were sampled whenever thay were available. However, most
samples were taken after culling had taken place to limit interference with the
daily-operations of fishermen and dealers. Sample size varied wit@ the number
of fish available on a given day and the time permitted for sampling.
Data were recorded in fork lengths (FL), measured to the nearest millimeter,
and sex of each fish. Scales of Alosids were taken on the left side, below the
insertion of the dorsal fin, and just above the mid-line as suggested by Rothschild
(1963) and-Mdicy (1969). Striped bass scales were taken just behind the tip of the
pectoral fin. Approximately 20 scales were taken from each fish to avoid loss of
data due to a high incidence of regenerated scales.
Scales were read on an Eberbach scale projector. At least three of the most
legible scales were read by two observers. Agreement was reached on all samples
used in the data. The scale.-.edge was counted as a year mark as it was assumed
that each f ish had completed a full year's growth at the time of capture.

Tagging

Tagging efforts were begun in September, 1974, using a 16 m Carolina wing
trawl to capture striped bass (Street, et. al., 1975). However, open water trawling
with this gear failed to produce any specimens for tagging, and it was abandoned

in favor of a drop net. This method of capturing striped bass had been used
successfully by local fishermen in the Pamlico River and by Tobaben (1971) in
the Neuse River, The drop net was 365.7 m long and made of 101.6 mm stretched
mesh nylon webbing hung on 12.7 mm polypropylene float line. The net was de-
ployed in a U-shaped pattern encircling a point of land. The set was accomplished
by dropping the net from the bow of a boat traveling in reverse. Both ends of
the net were anchored near shore, thus encircling the fish. The striped bass
were then driven into the net by producing a disturbance within the encircled
area. This tagging method was used most effectively during October, November,
and December. Drops were made at night when there was little wind, and in

areas where there was little current.
Tagging during the spring spawning run was accomplished by the capture of
anadromous fish in stake gill nets in the Pamlico River below Washington. Nets
were set perpendicular to the shoreline in 20 m units. Six sizes of stretched
mesh monofilament webbing were used: 63.5 mm, 72.90 mm, 82.55 mm, 101.60 um,
123.70 mm, and 139.70 mm. Nets were fished daily during the period February
through March. The nets were checked as early as possible each day to ensure
maximum survival. Only fish in good condition were tagged and released.
The presence of numerous river herring in good tagging condition in our
spawning area samples provided an additional opportunity for tagging these fish.
Spawning area nets were also fished every 24 hours and only vigorous specimens
were tagged. Herring were tagged in this manner from mid-March through April
during our 1976 sampling.
All fish were tagged with Floy FD-68B anchor tags inserted below the dorsal
fin. Each fish was measured (FL, mm) and scales were taken from striped bass,
American shad, and hickory shad for age determination. Alewife and bluebacks
were not hardy enough to withstand excessive handling. Therefore, no scale
samples were taken from tagged river herring and only sex and spawning condition
were noted. Sex and spawning condition were--also noted for American shad and
hickory shad.
The tagging program was publicized by press relea es, posters, and personal
communications throughout the study area. Rewards of $1.00, $5.00, $10,00 and
$25.00 were offered for returned tags.

-12-

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

Spawning Areas

Spawning areas of anadromous fish in Tar and Pamlico Rivers were identified
based onany one orall of the following criteria: (1) capture of eggs or recently
hatched larvae, (2) capture of running-ripe females, and (3) observation of actual
spawning activity. Eggs and larvae were identified based on criteria established
by Mansuetti and Hardy (1967) and Lippson and Moran (1974). Eggs and larvae of
alewife and blueback herring are reported together as river herring since eggs of
these two species cannot be differentiated. However, most of the eggs and larvae
taken in Tar River samples were probably blueback herring since this species com-
prised almost 100 percent of our gill net catches in that area. Eggs and larvae
taken in Pamlico River tributaries are more mixed and probably follow a distri-
bution similar to that discussed under adult fish sampling.
Results of egg net sampling in Tar River, Pamlico River, and all tributaries

are summa ized in Table 1.

River Herring

Tar River

Blueback herring were found to spawn between 25 March and 7 May at a temper-
ature range of 12 0- 190C. Collections of river herring eggs:and larvAe did not in-
dicate penetration of the Tar River system as far as that reported by Baker (1968).
Relying on personal interviews with area residents, Baker reported herring migra-
tions as far as the resevoir dam at Rocky Mount. However, we collected no eggs
or larvae beyond Town Creek at river mile 42. Herring eggs and larvae were col-
lected in nearly all tributaries between the mouth of Tar River and Town Creek
(Figure 3).
Tranters Creek, the largest tributary entering the Tar River in the lower
Coastal Plain, was by far the most important spawning area for river herring.
Thirty samples were taken at ten locations (Figure 3) for a total sampling time

of 1515 minutes.
One herring egg was collected in the first sample (25 March) when the water
temperature was 150C. The temperature fell sharply after this, and, no other eggs
were collected until the temperature rose to 130C. Highest catch-per-unit-of-
effort (CPUE) values occurred on 23 April at 18 0C.

-13-

Below N.C. 33, Tranters,,Creek flowed through a well-defined channel with
little or no flooding of the adjacent lands. Above N.C. 33, the creek left its
banks and flooded the low-lying hardwood swampsoften making the main channel
indistinguishable. Herring were able to migrate through this area to a point
approximately four miles above the bridge where their upstream progress seemed
to be impeded by numerous log jams.
The flooded portion of Tranters Creek apparently provided the most favorable
spawning habitat for river herring. CPUE values of herring eggs at N.C. 33 were
consistently higher than those in the downstream areas indicating that most of
the spawning activity was upstream of the bridge.
The only running-ripe females captured in Tranters Creek were taken above
N.C. 33. These were caught in gill nets which were set in the flowing water
adjacent to the natural channel at temperatures of 12 0 to 180C.
Cherry Run, a tributary of Tranters Creek, was also an important spawning
area even though there was little flooding or stream flow during the spawning
period. No eggs were collected in this creek - probably due to low flow which
hampered plankton net sampling - however, it produced the largest catches of
herring larvae. The highest CPUE value was 187 larvae/min. at a water temper-
ature of 17 0C. The highest value in Tranters Creek was 58 larvae/min. in a
sample taken near its mouth at a water temperature of 180C.
Running-ripe female herring were also collected from upper Bear Creek at
temperatures of 12 0, 13 0, and 180C - the earliest captured on 28 March; and Chicod
Creek just below US 264 (14 0C).
River herring eggs and larvae were collected in other tributaries of Tar
River but not in sufficient numbers to indicate a spawning peak or spawning dur-
ation (Table 1).
The exact location of spawning areas of alewife could not be determined since
alewife eggs and very early larvae cannot be accurately separated from those of
blueback herring. Only two adult alewife were captured in the spawning areas in
Tar River even though they were frequently captured in the Pamlico River below
Washington. Edwards and Bland (1973) collected alewife from Chicod Creek from
mid-May to late May only. Frankensteen (personal communication) 1 also found that
alewife do not enter Chicod Creek until late May.

'David Frankensteen, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Wilmington District

TABLE l.--Location and results of egg net samples.in Tar River, Tar River tributaries and Pamlico River tributaries.
Unless otherwise indicated Tar River Samples were taken in 1975, Pamlico River/Sound samples were taken 1976.

TOTAL SAMPLE EGGS LARVAE
SAMPLE SITE TIVE (MIN.) SPECIES N EGGS/MIN. N LARVAE/MIN.

TAR RIVER (main Stem)
HWY 97 90 Striped bass 3 0.03
American shad 5 0.06 3 0.03
SR 1243 105 American shad 2 0.02 4 0.04
1975 1976 1975 1976 1975 1976
SR 1252 285 45 Striped bass 5 0.11
American shad 33 1 0.12 0.02 2 .0.01
Hickory shad 3 2 0.01 0.04
NC 44, Tarboro 360 45 Striped bass 269 210 0.75 4.67
American shad 41 2 0.11 0.04 4 0.01
Business US 64, Tarboro 285 45 Striped bass 19 0.42
American shad 25 0.09 3 .0.01
Hickory shad 1 0.02
NC 42 180 45 Striped bass 323 166 1.79 3.69 3 0.02
American shad 10 4 0.06 0.09
Hickory shad 1 30 -0.006 0.67
Herring 1 18 0.006 0.40
SR 1400, Falkland 45 45 Striped bass 5 60 0.11 1.33
American shad 3 22 0.07 0.49 1 0.02
Herring 1 0.02

US 264 Bypass, Greenville 60 Hickory shad 13 0.22
American shad 3 0.05
Herring 5 0.08
Striped bass 4 0.07
SR 1565 45 Hickory shad 2 0.04
Herring 6 0.13
Channel Marker 32 75 American shad 3 0.04
Striped bass 2 0.03 31 0.41
Herring 4 0.05
Bear Creek (Mouth) 15 No catch

Channel 7,8,9 30 No catch

TABLE l.--Continued

TOTAL SAIIPLE EGGS LARVAE
SAMPLE SITE TIME (HIN.) SPECIES N EGGS/MIN. N LARVAE/MIN.

SWIFT CREEK
SR 1404 60 No catch
SR 1409 120 American shad 3 0.03
Hickory shad 1 0.001
HWY 97 105 American shad 2 0.02
SR 1253 255 American shad 7 0.03
Hickory shad 2 0.01

FISHING CREEK
US 301 135 American shad 5 0.04 1 0.01
SR 1418 210 American shad 4 0.02 4 0.02
SR 1429 165 American shad 7 0.04 2 0.01
HWY 97 210 American shad 7 0.03 8 0.04
Hickory shad 3 0.01
SR 1500 165 American shad 16 0.10 7 0.04
Hickory shad 4 0.02

DEEP CREEK
SR 1506 30 No catch
SR 1505 30 American shad 1 0.03
US 258 105 No catch

TOWN CREEK
HWY 43 30 No catch
SR 1202 75 No catch
SR 1200 120 Herring 1 0.01
HWY 258 15 No catch
SR 1601 225 Hickory shad 3 0.01

OTTER CREEK
HWY 43 90 Hickory shad 5 0.06
Herring 6 0.07
KITTEN CREEK
SR 1251 60 No catch

CONETOE CREEK

SR 1001 30 No catch
PR 1407 30 No catch

Ln
I

TABLE l.-Continued

TOTAL SAMPLE EGGS LARVAE
SAMPLE SITE TIME (MIN.) SPECIES N EGGS/MIN. N LARVAE/MIN.

TYSON CREEK
HWY 43 15 No catch
SR 1255 60 Herring 3 0.05

HARDEE CREEK
HWY 264 45 Herring 12 0.27

HORSEPEN SWANP
SR 1001 15 No catch

CANNONS SWAMP
Mouth 6 No catch

CHICOD CREEK
SR 1760 30 No catch
HWY 264 105 Herring 2 0.03 10 0.33
3% mile from mouth 60 Herring 4 0.07

GRINDLE'l- TREEK
Mouth 75 Herring 1 0.01
New Grindle-NC 33 Bridge 60 No catch

BEAR CREEK

Upper portion 120 Herring 22 0.18 9 0.08
Mouth 30 No catch

TRANTERS CREEK
Mouth 45 Herring 1 0.02 1753 38.96
SR 1157 30 No catch
SR 1549 15 Herring 3 0.20
SR 1416 45 No catch
SR 1414 60 No catch
3 miles above HWY 33 30 Herring 20 0.67
mile above HWY 33 1095 Herring 5 0.005
mile below RR Hickory shad 16 0.12
30 Herring 1 0.03
American shad 1 0.03
NC.33 135 Herring 480 3.56 4 0.03
5 miles below NC 33 30 Herring 52 1.73

TABLE l.-Continued

TOTAL SAMPLE EGGS LARVAE
SAMPLE SITE TIME (MIN.) SPECIES N EGGS/MIN. N LARVAE/MIN.

;.AGGIE RUN
SR 1410 90 Herring 37 0.41
45 Herring 16 0.36

CHERRY RUN
All locations 75 Herring 2918 38.91
Hickory shad 3 0.04
PAMLICO fffVfti

RUNYON CREEK
US 264 28 Herring 1 0.04

CHOCOWINITY CREEK
Upper portion 33 Herring 20 0.61 3 0.09

HILLS CREEK
Upper portion 35 No catch

BROAD CREEK
1 mile above SR 1325 26 Herring 45 1.73 8 0.31

BLOUNTS CREEK
Below SR 1110 47 Herring 4 0.09
Herring run 45 Herring 183 4.10 9 0.2
Nancy run 38 Herring 3 0.08
Sheppard run 35 No catch

UPPER GOOSE CREEK
Upper portion 38 Herring 26 0.68

NEVIL CREEK
Upper portion 45 Herring 93 2.07 4 0.09

MALLARD CREEK
Upper portion 20 No catch

DUCK CREEK
;4 mile above SR 1336 14 No catch

BATH CREEK
Tankard Creek 15 No catch
Harvey Creek 10 No catch
Boyd Creek 5 No catch
Rowland Creek 13 No catch

TABLE l.-Continued

TOTAL SAMPLE EGGS LARVAE
SAMPLE SITE TINE (MIN.) SPECIES N EGGS/MIN. N LARVAE/MIN.

DURHAM CREEK
Upper portion 55 Herring 40 0.73 6 0.11
Tan Swamp 13 No catch

ST. CLAIR CREEK
Below HWY 92 39 No catch

NORTH CREEK
Bailey Creek 39 No catch

SOUTH CREEK
Above SR 1924 10 No catch

PA14LICO SOUND

ROSE BAY
Canal to lake 10 No catch

JUNIPER BAY
Upper portion @..10 No catch

WYSOCKING BAY
Lake Landing Canal 10 No catch

FAR CREEK
Waupoppin Canal 10 No catch

00
I

-19-

lls

jCR

65;z

NCq7

JAX
3 J@

s.s R IX43

qj
Tarbor, us C-4-

RUDICKY Wi UNT

Qo
)IC4
C. .4C-11
I?
.. ..... .........

T-0 W A

creek
tic "13 It 1+47
SS q 14
01
Rmfl

.......... Spawning area boundary
Tyson

Figure 3.- Spawning areas of river herring in Tar River as indicated by
collections of eggs and larvae (Numbers indicate highway bridges
where samples were.taken)

Tra n.terj-
"C'
SS i? 15,41

5:5 614i4

-4,
Sq!,\, T03
S
0,

.. .. ..........
Lk S 1@-' -
ZL f,
.0, -Grimeflard
C,
75R t"

Figure Continued (Dots show- locations of sample sites other than bridges)

-21-

Pamlico River

River herring spawned in Pamlico River tributaries at a temperature range
of 130 to 250C. The first indication of spawning activity was the capture of
a running-ripe blueback herring in Durhams Creek on 23 March 1976. However,
our first river herring egg was not collected until 7 April in Chocowinity Creek
at a temperature of 15 0C. No river herring eggs were collected after 3 May 1976.
Egg and larval sampling with towed @ meter plankton nets in the still waters
of the Pamlico River tributaries did not prove to be a very effective quantita-
tive indicator of spawning activity (Figure 4). The eggs tended to settle
rapidly in vegetation near the bank, often under brush where it was impossible
for us to sample. Our best CPUE was 163 herring eggs in a five minute tow through
vigorously spawning fish in Herring Run. A quart jar half full of vegetation
from under the bank in the same area produced 1360 eggs.
Highest CPUE values occurred on 9 April in Durham Creek (7 eggs/min. at
140C), on 15 April in Broad Creek and Herring Run (5.2 and 32.6 eggs/min. at 16 0
and 190C, respectively), and on 20 April in Nevil Creek (8.8 eggs/min. at 17 0C)
(Figure 4).
Only 37 river herring larvae were captured in 130 plankton net samples taken
in the Pamlico River system. Highest CPUE values occurred on 29 April in Broad
Creek (1.4 larvae/min. at 18 0C) and on 27 May in Herring Run (1.8 larvae/min. at
180C).
No eggs or larvae were taken from samples in tributaries of northern Pamlico
Sound. Tyus (1971) found alewife that enter the canals that drain Lake Mattamus-
keet spawned in the lake (Figure 5). He also found that juveniles may remain in
the area until they are ready to migrate to the ocean. The lack of eggs and
larvae in these tributaries and the capture of juveniles in this area during
January and February agree closely with his findings.
Runing-ripe river herring were captured from 23 March until 21 April. Running-
ripe blueback herring were captured in Durham@ Creek at water temperatures of 13 0
170, and 19 0C; in upper Blounts Creek at 140C; in Nancy Run at 17 0C; in Herring
Run at 140C; and in Nevi-1 Creek at 180C. Herring Run and Nancy Run are both tri-

butaries of Blounts Creek.

Spawning area boundar7

Probable spawning area

A SH)N 0
BELHAVEN

0
I-b

CD
P
0 41@
CD ".*a

Ift

URORA

C+ L
A-

t,,&cOaI

L49E A1,4TTAML1-SXZ

70
Ose

bay

Probable spawning ar

Figure 4.-Continued

19
IL K HA 7 r A M US KE rr

Probable spawning area
t' @D ]KIE
, fn@

,Olt

Pig-are 4.--Continued

CaAa/

VI Y ...............

CO
'A
CT
LA K 'A A TTA /0 ()S K
A

00% wygockij
0 Cky

P, Or e
ay

Rgure 5--Ganals draining Lake Mattamuskeet, that serve as passageways for spawning river herring.

-26-

Runing-ripe alewife were captured in three tributaries of Pamlico River.
One was taken in Durham Creek on I April, one in Blounts Creek on 6 April, and
one in Chocowinity Creek on 14 April. All were taken at a water temperature of
160C. (Figure 4).
Spawning activity of river herring was observed on 13-15 April in Blounts
Creek from a point about 200 yards below Herring Run to the NC 1110 bridge near
Cox Crossroads. Spawning occurred during the late morning hours from around ten
until 12 o'clock at a water temperature of 190 C. Spawning activity was also noted
in Broad Creek on 23 April at a water temperature of 22 0C. Spawning occurred from
about 2000 yards above the NC 1325 bridge in a section of the creek that diverges
from the channelized portion to a point where it was blocked by numerous fallen
trees and log jams. No fish were observed spawning in the channelized portion

of the creek.
Both of the spawning sites in Blounts and Broad Creek offer the black, swamp-
water drainage that characterize spawning areas of river herring in Tar River.
These two observed spawning sites as well as those that are indicated by our
sampling show a preference for deep water creeks draining hardwood swamps. These
creeks are also characterized by low salinity (0-2%), a slight acidity (pH 6.4-
6.8), and little current.

American Shad

American shad were found to spawn mainly in Tar River from Rocky Mount to
Tarboro, in Fishing Creek below US 301 and in Swift Creek below SSR 1409 (Figure 6).
American shad eggs were first collected at SR 1252 from Tar River on 31 March at
a water temperature of 120C. This was the date of our first sample and some
spawning could have occurred prior to this time. Spawning continued until 14 May
when the water temperature was 230C.
Samples taken at ten locations on Tar River from Rocky Mount to Grimesland
yielded 125 American shad eggs in a total sampling time of 1530 minutes. Egg
catches were relatively low - 10 was the n-,ximum in any one sample - making re-
cognition of a spawning peak difficult. The highest CPUE (0.66 eggs/min.) occurred
at NC 44 on 21 March at a temperature of 160C.
No shad larvae were caught in Tar River until 17 April when one was collected
at NC 97 at a water temperature of 150C. Shad larvae were collected through 14
May when the water temperature was 190C. No larvae were collected above SR 1252

on Tar River.

-27-

LI -1

Cre e
..,S5
................

0*0, N
67

rb
Ncq7

""C
2.,r3A
%.....

Tarboro

ROCKY NPUNT

ZK
A

-Old _@s a
To Wn

c-reek
e, s;t 1"7
SS R 14-0-
Spawning area boundary ce-.
............. 0.

and
Figure Spawning areas of Ametica@n shad based on collections of'eg6s
larvae (Numbers indicate -highway bridge:s where samples were taken)

-2f -
N

!,SR iK 7
TrC Cr

czk, SSR 14-ff-

R
SS R 14t+ -A

,Pic 36
IA:33
C Y,-C C

UiR-!:Fi\VILLF

... . . .....

T.
GrItnesland

Figure'6..- Continued (Dots show location of sample- sites other than bridges).

-29-

Shad eggs were collected at all stations in Fishing Creek (Figure 6) from
1 April to 7 May when water temperatures ranged from 14 0 to 180C. Peak catches
occurred at 120C on 16 April. No larvae were collected in Fishing Creek until
21 April when waters had warmed to 17 0C. Larvae were collected through 29 May.
Shad eggs were collected at all stations on Swift Creek except the upper-
most station at SR 1404. Eggs first appeared in samples on 31 March at 14 0C.
Water temperature dropped to 10 0C one week later; however, we continued to catch
shad eggs through this period of cold weather. Larvae were collected only at
the lowest station (SR 1253), the first being collected when the water had warmed
to 17 0C. No eggs or larvae were collected after 12 May.
One shad egg was collected from Deep Creek (SR 1505) on 1 April at 14 0C.
This was the only shad egg collected from this tributary in nine 15-minute samples
taken from 1 April to 30 April. Water levels were higher during early April
allowing shad to ascend this small tributary and spawn. Waters soon receded ex-
posing physical barriers which prevented any further migrations by shad.
One shad egg was collected from Tranters Creek on 27 March at 14 0C. This
was the only egg collected from 30 samples taken from 25 March to 21 May even
though shad were present on the spawning grounds throughout this period. Local
fishermen reported taking male and female shad in skim nets from an area of
Tranters Creek approximately one mile upstream from NC 33.

Hickory Shad

Egg sampling in Tar River and tributaries yielded only 55 eggs and 3 identi-
iable larvae of hickory shad. Based on these collections the spawning areas of
hickory shad in Tar River have been identified (Figure 7).
Spawning occurred principally in Tar River from SSR 1252 to US 264 east of
Greenville. Eggs were also collected from Swift Creek at all stations below and
including SSR 1409; Fishing Creek at all stations below and including NC 97; Town
Creek at SSR 1601; Otter Creek at NC 43; and Tranters Creek at NC 33. The only
hickory shad larvae collected viere.found at the mouth of Cherry Run, a tributary
of Tranters Creek. These fish were probably spawned in Tranters Creek since the
flow of Cherry Run was probably never sufficient to encourage migration of hickory

shad.

-30-

14-2 q

SSR SO?
Isos

1600 US
Ds ft

sS;k 12.+3
'Ic 4+

Tarboro UI (.4.

ROCKY MOUNT

]DO
)K4
K Lis
+1 . Q

TO WA DIJ Sporfcl -

creek .**,X s;k 1"7
5S it 1+ alp
............ Spawning area boundary

Y'ron

Figure Spawning area of hickory shad based on collections of eggs And.larvae
(Numbers indicate highway.bridges where samples were -taken)

-31-

LSrR P@7

S5;t

Grndl

30
Cc;, M Ij

VIAS-Wi%:GM
VI I LF

u L.. 'S :1
a,4

Figure7-- Continued (Dots show location of sample sites other than bridges)

-32-

Hickory shad spawning occurred from 28 March to 6 May at temperatures of
14 0- 190C. Temperatures are similar to those reported by Street, et. -41. (1975),
but the spawning duration was approximately two weeks shorter than that in Albe-
marle Sound. Pate (1972) reported hickory shad spawning in Neuse River, N.C. to
occur from early April through early May at 9.5 a - 20.60C.

Str12ed Bass

Even though Tar River ranks second only to Roanoke River in striped bass
production in North Carolina, little information is available on spawning popu-
lations and harvest rates during spawning migrations.
The location of spawning grounds of striped bass in Tar River was first
reported by Humphries (1966). By backstaging eggs in relation to age and trans-
port rate, he concluded that spawning occurred upstream from SSR 1400 at river
mile 30 to a point approximately 50 miles upstream. Peak spawning activity was
estimated to occur in a 20 mile area centered around the NC 44 bridge when water
temperatures were 180 to 210C.
We collected striped bass eggs at every station:-from NC 97 at Rocky Mount
to one mile below SSR 1565 at Grimesland (Figure 8). Spawning began I April at
a surface water temperature of 140C. Temperatures declined to 120C shortly after
this, and, no eggs were collected until 15 April when waters warmed to 16 0C.
Spawning continued until 29 May when one egg was collected at US 64 at a tempera-
ture of 240C.
Samples taken at SR 1252, NC 44, and US 64 are used as a comparison to data
collected by Humphries who sampled spawning activity at NC 44 and US 64 in 1965
Spawning duration and times of peak spawning activity are similar to those found
in 1965 (Figures 9 and 10). Generally, spawning peaked earlier in 1965 because
water temperatures were consistently higher than on corresponding dates In 1975.
Since 1965, egg production 'in Tar River appears to have increased significantly.
The best sample in 1965 produced approximately 74 eggs per minute at NC 44 and
8.5 eggs per minute at US 64. The best samples in 1975 produced 183.6 eggs per
minute at NC 44 and 48.4 eggs per minute at US 64.

1Comparative data presented herein were collected by James W. Kornegay, student,
NC Wesleyan College, and presented in an unpublished report entitled "Spawning
Grounds of the Striped Bass ftrone sa=tilis) in the Tar River, N.C. A Ten-year
Comparative Study", 22p.

.-33-

CrL.

55R
14-

C 91

5 R
ISO:,
q

;5X1;Lf3.
+4

lit q7.
SSR 12.1@iL
Tarbarro :*4.

ROCKY MOUNT

LIS

S'SP I z
S

0IJ 5 P C L- Fck-
7own

Creek

........ Spawning area boundary AC

Figure Spawning areas of striped bass in Tar River based on collections.of
eggs and larvae (Numbers indicate highway bridg*es where samples were
taken)

-34-

_k
va LX

A.,C 36
31
r_"P

U S a

Figure B.-Continued (Dots show location of sample -sites other t1han bridges)

0 8' C)
200, 1 c)65
N.G

---,1975

150
(170 C)

100

0
C)

(V
CJ ('V (14 (N C"I C-4 Cq NN N (14 CV (V CV

APRTL MAY

Figure 9'.- Comparison of stripe&bass spai-Tning activity in Tar. River at NC 44 after a.ten-year interval.

50-- (170 C)

U.S. 64
-1965

---1975
40--

30--

20--

(170 C) 80 C)
10.-

.00
,0 r_ to C@ C; C@ It Ir, 10 t- -,t '0 L-' t@ 0, C@M to G-, 0
N CV N C\I CNI (14 (N CV CIq CIq CV

APRIL MAY

Figure 10- Comparison of spawning activity in Tar River at US 64 af ter a ten-year interval

-37-

Three spawning peaks were detected at NC 44 in 1975. One at 118.6 eggs/min.
occurred on 25 April at 170C; 183.6 eggs/min. on 7 May at 18 0C; and 62.1 eggs/
min. on 17 May at 200C. Corresponding peaks occurred at US 64 except that the
catch per minute was considerably lower. One peak of 9.3 eggs/min. occurred on
25 April at 170C; one of 48.5 eggs/min. occurred on 7 May at 170 C; and one of
11.2 eggs/min. occurred on 12 May at 18 0C.
Spawning began at all three stations on 21 April when surface water tempera-
tures reached 15.50C. This corresponds closely to the starting date reported by
Humphries for 1965 (15 April and 160 C). Spawning in Roanoke River, NC generally
occurs from mid-April through early June at temperatures of 15 0 - 210C (McCoy,
1959).
Quantitative estimates of egg production have increased significantly since
1965. Estimates of eggs passing NC 44 were made using methods described by Hum-
pbries (1965) and flow data supplied by U.S. Geological Survey from their flow
gauging station at the NC 44 bridge. The only variation in methods is the net
used in this study had an opening of 0.5 meter instead of an opening.of 15-ini--hes

used in 1965.
Estimates of eggs flowing past NC 44 ranged from 1320/hr to 444,960/hr in
1965 and 4380 to 1,036,560 in 1975. This indicates a substantial increase in
egg production by striped bass in Tar River.
Hassler (1970) made quantitative estimates of striped bass spawning in Tar
River for three seasons (1967-1969). An estimated 170,000,000 eggs were spawned
in 1967; 28,645,568 in 1968; and 1,202,777 in 1969. During this same period,
egg viability declined from 85 percent - a value typical for this species - in
1967 and 1968 to 58 percent in 1969 which is well below the range observed in
other areas. No reason was presented for the precipitous decline in either egg
production or viability.
An indication that conditions of low egg viability persist is the scarcity
of recently hatched larvae in our samples. Striped bass larvae were collected
in only two samples even though sampling was frequent in areas well below the
spawning grounds. Thirty-one larvae were taken on 22 April one mile below SR
1565 at 180C and three larvae were taken on 24 April at NC 42 at 18 0C. All these
larvae were collected prior to the three peak spawning periods indicating that
survival of eggs and larvae during periods of peak production could be extremely
low.

-38-

Nursery_Areas

Blueback herring
Juvenile blueback herring generally used as nursery areas the tributaries
of Tar River below Greenville and those portions of the tributaries of Pamlico
River which provided a freshwater habitat similar to that of Tar River tributaries.
These areas are characterized by waters from 3 to 15 feet deep, black, swamp-
water drainage, little if any salinity, mud and detritus bottom, and no current
except that produced by wind tides. The tributaries drain low-lying hardwood
swamps with little or no marsh vegetation bordering the stream.
Tributaries of Pamlico River west of Bath Creek generally drain hardwood
swamp areas whereas those east of Bath Creek and the tributaries of Pamlico Sound
drain low-lying areas dominated by marsh grasses. Salinities were generally higher
than 5 ppt In the marsh areas, which could be an important factor in determining
suitable nursery habitat for blueback herring. Juvenile herring were not collected
in any significant numbers in areas where salinity exceeded 5 ppt.
A total of 8,771 blueback herring were collected from May, 1974, through
June, 1976. The largest catches were made in the months of May through August.
Based on these catches, the nursery areas of blueback herring have been mapped
(Figure 11).
Growth curves for the 1974f'75, and '76 year classes of Juvenile blueback
herring have been plotted (Figure 12). Preliminary samples from the 1976 year
class seem to conform more closely to samples taken in 1974 than 1975. Samples
from 1975 showed that mean fork lengths were considerably smaller during each
month than in 1974. However, growth rates seem to be fairly consistent for both

1974 and 1975.
Juvenile blueback herring appeared in the tributaries of northern Pamlico
Sound only during the months of December, January, and February. These ranged
in fork length from 55 to 135 mm with a mean of 61 mm. A similar trend was found
by nursery area sampling in Croatan Sound (Street, et. al., 1975) and Meuse River
(Spitsbergen and Wolff, 1974). Juvenile herring move into the high salinity (10-
20 ppt) tributaries of Pamlico Sound during winter months and remain until the
spring spawning migration of adults begins at which time the remaining juveniles
migrated to the ocean.

A Areas where juvenile b
were collected.

Figure ll.-Nursey areas of juvenile blueback herring in the Tar and Pamlico Rivers

BELHAVEN
.@y)ASHINGI*Ot

ptwc 0 _0

CI)

Ar eas where juvenile herring
were collected.
Juvenile herring reported fl
b 'ergen"a,nd Wolff
.y.1,spitsb
@'(1974),'-
UROIRA

Figure 11, 0-.Continued

A Areas wh
were cap
fA y

-42-

so-

1976 N= M

1975 N-- 3272
0 1974 P 5386

j- A 5 0 /V 0 F

Figure 12.--Mean fork length of juvenile blueback herring by year class and month,
April through March.

-43-

The main channels of Tar River and Pamlico River and their major tribu-
taries serve as migration routes away from the principal nursery zones. Sampling
throughout the year produced no river herring except in the areas delineated in
Figure 11, thus, movement from the creeks must be rapid once the juveniles begin
to leave the nurseries in late September and early October.

Alewife

Only 109 juvenile alewife were collected during nursery area sampling. Most
of these were collected from tributaries of northern Pamlico Sound during November,
December, and January (Figure 13). Fork length range was 27 to 149 mm with a mean
of 87 mm. The areas of capture in northern Pamlico Sound are believed to be over-
wintering areas for alewife as well as blueback herring. It would seem that these
areas would be important nursery areas for alewife which are spawned in Lake
Mattamuskeet and migrate to the sound as juveniles. However, no juvenile alewife
were caught in these areas during the summer.

American shad

Juvenile American shad were not captured in sufficient numbers to accurately
map nursery areas for this species. Eleven juveniles were collected from Tar
River and the mouth of Tranters Creek (Figure 14). All were caught in June, July,
and August, except for one specimen which was collected in November. However,
this specimen had a deformed caudal peduncle which could have prevented it from
conforming to-normal migration patterns. Four more juveniles were collected in
tributaries of northern Pamlico Sound in January, 1976. Fork length range of
juveniles was 47 to 136 mm.

Hickory shad

Four hickory shad were collected from tributaries of Tar River in June, 1975
(Figure 15). Fork lengths ranged from 44-61 mm. No juvenile hickories were
collected after mid-June; further evidence to support the theory that hickory
shad migrate from the nursery areas early in the slimmer as suggested by Pate
(1972).

01
MASHINGT' DELHAVEN
?
@Lx

%4Z

AAreas where juvenile
alewife were collecteA
(e-4/9
--jAURORA

rigtlr,e 13.-Areas In Prmlico lUver, Punco rllvc@r, md.northern PmilAco Sound vhere itivenile

NEW
/-,/y /f E

K E E1y6LC1(1
A K

Areas whe
Were coll

Figure 11,- Continued

I.,,qKE MA7rAMUSKErT

4A Co

AAreas
alewi-f

Figure 13.--Continued

7- -4 -

A Areas i-ilicre juvenile
collected

Fi gur'e 4-Lo cations of collections of juvenile American shad in Tar River

D 1-4KE H147rAMUSKECT

A Areas
Americ
collec

Figuxe 14.--Continued

S/
ZA

fi/

Areas where juveni
collected

Figure '15&-Locations of collections of juvenile hickory shad from Tar River

_50-

Striped bass

Juvenile striped bass were collected only from Tar River and upper Pamlico
River (Figure 16). A total of 167 were collected from June through December, 1974
with 165 being collected in June, July, and August.
Our collections of Juvenile stripers were probably greatly influenced by a
stocking program of the North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission. They were
stocking Juvenile striped bass in the Tar River above Greenville at the same time
we were sampling nursery areas below Greenville. One-hundred thirteen stripers
were caught in Tar River in July,shortly following stocking activities in the

Falkland area.
This particular stocking program was not continued in 1975 since it was con-
fusing our attempts to estimate production by naturally spawning stocks. Since
the stocking stopped, no Juvenile striped bass have been collected.

Sturgeon

One young Atlantic sturgeon (460 mm) was collected in July from the Pamlico
River near the mouth of Blounts Bay (Figure 17). Bottom and surface temperature
was 260C and salinity was 4 ppt.

Adult Fish Sampling

Tar River

Gill net sampling for adult anadromous fish was restricted to tributaries of
Tar River below Greenville. Tributaries upstream from Greenville proved to be
too swift and loaded with debris to sample with gill nets. It was necessary to
rely on interviews with local people and collection of spawned eggs to determine
spaw@iing activities in tributaries which were not sampled with gill nets. Con-
tacts were made with" local, fisheruten% duri-ng:e g netting@, activities and-questions
were asked pertaining to anadromous fish runs into each area.
Generally, distribution of adults is the same as the designated spawning
areas, and a detailed discussion appears in the section dealing with spawning.
The occurrence of American and hickory shad in Chicod Creek and striped bass in
Fishing Creek could not be verified by collection of eggs even though Baker (1968)

AP/

GPI f0v PIXZ /,C

A Areas where juveni
collected

ocations of
Figure 1 L' collections of juvenile striped bass from Tar River and upper Paml

VASHINGTO BELHAVEN

@Y,
A C,

-Y-

A Areas where juvenile striped
bass were collected

AURORA

i c r

MASHINGTO
BELHAVEN

Area where juvenile Atlantic
sturgeon was collected

URORA
S

Figure 17. Location of-the capture of oue juvenile Atlantic sturgeon in Painlico River

-54-

reported these tributaries to be in the range of these species. Striped bass
were caught in both Bear and Chicod Creeks (one each) in early spring. Move-
ment of this species into small tributaries is probably for feeding rather
than spawning. Neither creek met the flow requirements necessary for success-
ful striped bass spawning.
Four hickory shad were taken from Bear Creek on 28 March, at 12 0C. Three
were males and one was a female; all were two years old. At the time these
fish were caught, Bear Creek was flooded and had considerable current to act
as an attractant for hickory shad. No hickories were caught in Bear Creek

after the water receded and the current slowed to little or no movement.
Blueback herring was by far the most abundant species taken in tributaries
of Tar River. A total of 528 herring were aged, measured, and examined for
spawning condition. Age groups five and six were predominant for both males
and females; however, it is probable that the gill nets were selective for the
larger, older fish (Table 2). The percent of repeat spawners occurring in
samples was high. Of the fish sampled, 71.6 percent of the males and 62.7 per-
cent of the females showed evidence of a previous spawning run. Males had as
many as three spawning marks and females had as many as four (Table 3).
The highest catches of herring per net hour were in Tranters Creek in an
area approximately one mile north of NC 33. This area probably serves as the
most important herring spawning area in the Tar River drainage. The second
highest catches per net hour were made in Chicod Creek, approximately 14 mile
downstream from US 64. This area also produced the highest catches of post-
larval herring during early stages of juvenile sampling in 1975.
Only two alewife were captured in tributaries of Tar River: one each in
Tranters and Chicod Creek. This species apparently does not utilize Tar River
as one of its major spawning areas. Frankensteen (personal communication) did
not observe alewife entering Chicad Creek until late May.

Pamlico River and Northern Pamlico Sound

Virtually all of the tributaries of Pamlico River were sampledwith gill
nets during the 1976 spawning season. Sampling was also conducted in tributaries
of northern Pamlico Sound with particular attention given to the canals that
drain Lake MattaTnuskeet (Figure 5). Adult river herring were captured in all of

-55-

these tributaries except Bath Creek and Swanquarter Bay. Goose Creek and Abels
Bay were not sampled. No other A7osa were captured in these tributaries.
The most abundant species captured in Pamlico River tributaries was blue-
back herring. However, alewife did contribute significantly to our catches
in Chocowinity Creek and those tributaries east of Core Point. Alewife were
also taken in Upper Goose, Nevil, and Blounts Creeks.
Blounts Creek was by far the most important spawning area for blueback
herring in the Pamlico River system. Catches per net hour in upper Blounts
Creek and Herring Run, a tributary of Blounts Creek, were much greater than any
of the other tributaries. Durham Creek and Nevil Creek were second in impor-
tance, far behind Blounts Creek as spawning areas for blueback herring.
All total of 571 blueback herring scale samples from the Pamlico River area
were found to be suitable for age determination. Age groups four and five were
predominant for both males and females. The percent of repeat spawners was high
and nearly equalled that of the Tar River (Table 4). Data show that 71 percent
of the males and 56 percent of the females had made previous spawning runs. One
male was seven years old and had four spawning marks while two females were eight
years old and also had four spawning marks (Table 5). Tables 6 and 7 summarize
all blueback herring adult size, age, and spawning repetition data for 1975-76.
The Pamlico River system is not utilized by alewife as a major spawning
area. Alewife do make up a significant part of the spawning population in some
creeks but they outnumbered the bluebacks only in South and North Creeks. The
size of the spawning population in the Pamlico area is insignificant when com-
pared to the number of alewives that utilize Lake Mattamuskeet.
Only 125 alewife scale samples were found suitable for age determination.
Eighty-five percent of the males taken were spawning for the first time and 75
percent of the females were also virgins. Age groups four and five were clearly
dominant for both sexes (Tables 8 and 9).
Forty-five of the samples shown in Table 9 were alewife captured entering
Lake Mattamuskeet. Twenty-nine were males ranging from three to five years of
age. Sixteen were fewles four and five years old. None were repeat spawners.
Tyus (1971) reported an age range of two to four years for alewife entering Lake
Mattamuskeet with age class three dominating.

-56-

Street,.t.t. al. (1975) reported that alewife in North Carolina may
begin spawning at age three - earlier than any location north of this state.
However, they also found that 4.6 percent of the alewife sampled spawned
more than twice with some specimens reaching eight years of age.
Tyus (1971) concluded that the age structure of alewife in Lake Matta-
muskeet might indicate overfishing. The presence of older fish and repeat
spawners in samples from other areas indicates that this may have been the
case. Based on recommendations from his report, restrictions were made pro-
hibiting dipping of alewife on Sunday, Tuesday, and Thursday nights from 1
March until 15 May in canals leading to the lake. The presence of more four
and five year old fish in our samples may be attributed to reduced fishing
pressure caused by these regulations. However, spawning runs into Lake
Mattamuskeet are still well below their former levels and the reason for the

lack of repeat spawners is unknown. At any rate, overfishing of this popu-
lation may still be a problem and failure of the predominant year class to
spawn could severely reduce the fishery.
Only six adult blueback herring were captured in tributaries of northern
Pamlico Sound during the 1976 sampling season. This represents less than
one percent of the river herring taken in our nets during sampling in this
area, and is almost a complete reversal from the composition of river herring
catches in the Tar River, where only two alewife were captured. It appears
from our data that the spawning population of river herring in the study -
area is almost exclusively blueback herring above Washington and almost ex-
clusively alewife in spawning areas of northern Pamlico Sound, with an inter-
mingling of the two species in spawning areas between Washington and Wades

Point.
Tyus (1971) found that the canals used by alewife migrating into Lake
Mattamuskeet were utilized preferentially. He reported in 1971 that-97.9
percent of the alewife entering Lake Mattamuskeet used the Lake Landing Canal.
Although our sampling was not carried out through the peak of the spawning
run, our results generally agree with his findings.

-57-

TABLE 2.--Size and age composition of adult blueback herring taken during a spawning
area survey of Tar River, 1975.

NUMBER PERCENT MEAN FORK LENGTH
AGE IN SAMPLE OF SAMPLE LENGTH (MM) RANGE (MM)

M F M F M F M F

IV 59 34 20 14 238 244 228-266 282-260
V 118 103 41 44 250 255 231-266 232-269
VI 104 68 35 29 258 266 240-276 248-282
VII 11 26 4 10 264 275 255-271 260-290
VIII 4 2 279 270-285
Ix 1 <1 291

292 236

TABLE 3.--Age and spawning frequency of blueback herring sampled from Tar River, 1975.
Numbers in parenthesis are percents of totals.

TIMES
SPAWNED 0 1 2 3 4 5 TOTAL

AGE M F M F M F M F M F M F M F

IV 56 34 3 59 34
V 26 53 91 50 1 118 103
VI 1 1 21 33 82 34 104 68
VII 2 2 9 9 15 11 26
VIII 3 1 4
Ix 1 1

TOTAL 83 88 115 85 85 43 9 18 2 292 236

PERCENT (28) (37) (39) (36) (26) (18) (4) (8)

-58-

TABLE 4.--Size and age composition of adult blueback herring taken during a spawning
area survey of Pamlico River, 1976.

NUMBER MEAN FORK LENGTH
AGE IN SAMPLE PERCENT OF SAMPLE LENGTH (MM) RANGE (MM)

M F M F M F M F

111 2 4 1 1 239 242 235-243 235-255
IV 77 122 34 35 242 251 230-260 237-276
V 97 159 43 46 252 259 235-268 241-275
VI 43 39 19 11 255 266 239-279 250-278
VII 7 19 3 6 262 274 257-272 261-288
VIII 2 <1 283 281@284

226 345

TABLE 5.--Age and spawning frequency of blueback herring sampled from Pamlico River,
1976. Numbers in parenthesis are percents of totals.

TIME
SPAWNED 0- 1 2 3 4 @'-TOTAL

AGE M F M F M F M F M F M F

111 2 4 2 4
IV 52 107 24 15 77 122
V 11 40 48 110 38 9 97 159
VI 1 2 3 3 32 33 7 1 43 39
VII 3 6 16 1 7 19
VIII 2 2
Ix
x

TOTAL 66 153 75 128 70 45 13 17 1 2 226 345

PERCENT (29) (44) (33) (37) (31) (13) (6) (5) (1) (1)

-59-

TABLE 6.--Size and age composition of blueback herring taken during spawning area
surveys in the Tar-Pamlico River, 1975-76.

MEAN FORK LENGTH
AGE IN SAMPLE PERCENT OF SAMPLES LENGTH (MM) RANGE (MM)

M F M F M F M F

111 2 4 <1 <1 239 242 235-243 235-255
IV 136 155 26 27 240 249 228-266 228-270
V 215 262 41 45 251 257 231-268 232-275
Vi 147 107 28 18 257 266 239-279 248-282
VII 18 45 4 8 263 275 255-272 260-290
VIII 6 1 280 270-285
Ix 1 <1 291

5ig' 581

TABLE 7.--Age and spawning frequency of blueback herring sampled in the Tar-Pamlico
River, 1975-76. Numbers in parenthesis are percents of totals.

TIHES
SPAWNED 0 1 2 3 4 TOTAL

AGE M F M F M F M F M F M F

111 2 4 2 4
IV 108 141 28 15 136 156
V 37 93 139 160 39 9 215 262
VI 2 3 24 36 114 67 7 1 147 107
VII 2 2 12 15 31 1 18 45
VIII 3 3 6
Ix 1 1

TOTAL 149 241 191 213 155 88 22 35 1 4 518 581

PERCENT (29) (41) (37) (37) (30) (15) (4) (6)

-60-

TABLE 8.--Size and age composition of alewife taken during a spawning area survey of
Pamlico River and northern Pamlico Sound, 1976.

NUMBER MEAN FORK LENGTH
AGE IN SAMPLE PERCENT OF SAMPLE LENGTH (MM) RANGE (MM)

M F M F M F M F

111 3 4 225 214-230
IV 41 16 53 33 244 244 232-260 232-257
V 27 26 35 54 249 259 233-261 240-279
vi 4 4 5 7 263 267 251-275 260-272
VII 2@ 2 3 6 268 273 268-268' 265-280

77 48

TABLE 9.--Age and spawning frequency of alewife sampled in Pamlico River and northern
Pamlico Sound, 1976. Numbers in parenthesis are percents of totals.

TIMES
SPAWNED 0 -1 2 -3 TOTAL

AGE M F M. F M F M F M F

111 3 3
IV 40 16 1 41 16
V 21 20 5 6 1 27 26
V1 1 1 3 2 1 4 4
vii 2 1 1 2 2

TOTAL 65 36 7 9 5 2 1 77 48

PERCENT (85) (75) (9) (19) (6) (4) (2)

-61-

Recreational Fishery

The recreational fishery supported by anadromous fishes in Tar and Pamlico
Rivers may be the most valuable aspect of this fishery resource. Baker (1968)
estimated that 1,087 and 3,604 fishermen fished for striped bass in Pamlico
and Tar Rivers, respectively, in the period I April 1967 to 31 March 1968. A
total of 1,401 striped bass were landed from Pamlico River and 2,088 from Tar
River during the same period.
The hook-and-line fishery for striped bass is concentrated in the upper
Pamlico and lower Tar Rivers in the area from Greenville to Washington during
fall and winter. The fishery extends to Tarboro during the spawning run with
fishing pressure being heaviest in the area near NC 42.
Recreational fishing for American and hickory shad usually begins in late
February when fishermen begin using drift gill nets in the Tar River near Grimes-
land. The hook-and-line fishery begins in early March in Fishing and Swift Creeks
and in Tar River near Rocky Mount. Baker (1968) estimated that 11,040 fishermen
fished for American and hickory shad during the period I April 1967 - 31 March
1968. During this same period, 1,087 American shad and 6,178 hickory shad were
landed from Tar River. Various types of nets (bow, dip, and skim nets, drift
and stake gill nets) account for the largest proportion of anadromous fish
(mostly river herring and American shad) taken each year from Tar River. A
total of 1,493 fishermen used nets in 1967-68 to take 50,546 anadromous fish
(excluding herring) and 312,291 pounds of herring from Tar River (Baker, 1968).
Eight locations were chosen on Tar River, Swift, and Fishing Creeks to con-
duct a creel census of fishing activity for anadromous: fish during the period
20 March to 12 May 1975. Information was requested from all boat and individual
bank fishermen who could be contacted during each site visit. Information was
requested concerning location fished, gear, effort, and catch.
A total of 47.6 percent of the fishermen contacted responded with useful
information (Table 10). Drift netting for river herring, shad, and striped bass
was concentrated in Tar River near Grimesland. Ninety-eight percent of the Grimes-
land fishermen interviewed during the study period were drift netting, with
American shad being the principal species sought. The mean fishing time for this

62-

Table 10.-Summary of creel census conducted in Tar River during spring of 1975

Number of Number of
Location Contacts Responses Summax7 of Activity
Rocky @bunt 14 9 Hook-and-line fishing for
shad and striped bass
NC 44 Bridge 15 7 Hook-and-line fishing for
shad and striped bass
us 64 Bridge 12 3 Hook-and-line fishing for
shad and striped bass
Old Sparta 33 18 Hook-and-line fishing for
shad and striped bass

Cwimesland 51 30 Drift netting for shad and
herring

Swift Creek 58 21 Hook-and-line fishing for
shad

Fishing Creek 3 0

-63-

type gear was 5.2 hr/trip resulting in a mean catch of 1.4 American shad per
hour and 5.2 river herring per hour. Only 22 hickory shad and four striped
bass were reported. One large Atlantic sturgeon - approximately 85 pounds -
was taken in a small mesh net being drifted for herring. This was the only
report of a sturgeon being taken in Tar River, although smaller specimens
were caught in Pamlico River during spring.
Recreational fishing in upper Tar River - from Old Sparta to Rocky Mount
and its tributaries - was limited-tb hook-and-line fishing for American shad,
hickory shad, and striped bass as well as "skimming" for American shad. Skim-
ming may be best described as using a fine-meshed net attached to a hoop, ap-
proximately 2 m in diameter, forming a bag-like trap. The net is suspended
just below the surface as the boat drifts downstream with the current. Fish
are felt as they enter the net and the net is pulled up.
Although we did not encounter much use of skim or bow nets - another method
very similar to skim nets - in the upper Tar River, their use is quite popular
and wide-spread in the coastal area. Baker (1968) reported 70,440 American shad
and 47,073 hickory shad taken by these methods in North Carolina in one spawning
season. Fishermen who responded to our inquiries reported a total fishing time
of 7.5 hours with this type gear and a catch of 36 American shad and one hickory
shad. Use of, and the harvest of shad by this gear in Tar River is probably more
important than our results indicate. The season during which skim nets are used
is very short and constant surveillance would be required to get an accurate es-
timate of the true extent of this fishery.
The major hook-and-line fisheries for American shad are located in Tarboro,
just below Rocky Mount, Fishing Creek, and Swift Creek. Referring to Fishing
Creek, Smith and Bayless (1964:13) stated. . ."American shad ascend this tributary
in great numbers to the Fishing Creek Hill Dam (near Enfield), and are subjected
to heavy fishing pressure downstream from this point.". The results of our spawn-
ing area survey indicate that this is the major spawning area for American shad
in Tar River; hence, it should attract the heaviest fishing pressure. Creel
census results from this tributary showed an average fishing time of 2.5 hours
per trip and an average catch of 0.78 American shad per hour. Only five hickory
shad were reported as being caught In Fishing Creek.

-64-

Fishing pressure for American shad is also heavy on Swift Creek,
particularly at SSR 1253 and at its confluence with Tar River. Forty-one
fishermen reported a total fishing time of 143.6 hours (3.5 hrs/trip) and a
total catch of 86 American shad (.60 shad/hr). Only nine hickory shad were
reported as caught in Swift Creek. One Rocky Mount resident has caught a
total of 3,624 American shad in Tar River on hook-and-line since 1953 His
best year was 1968 when he caught 366.
We were unable to confirm the presence of striped bass in Fishing and
Swift Creeks. No eggs of this species were collected, nor were any catches of
adults reported during our creel census. Baker (1968) reported that stripers
ascended Fishing Creek to the confluence of Rocky Creek. Being the largest
tributary of Tar River, it seems likely that some stripers should ascend it
during the spring even if not in great numbers. Effort by hook-and-line for
striped bass is concentrated generally in the area from Old Sparta to Rocky
Mount. Sport fishing reports showed an average catch of 0.18 striped bass/hr.
Dip-netting for river herring is a socially-significant activity which
occurs seasonally in the major tributaries of the lower Tar River and upper
Pamlico River. This activity is limited; however, by the number of tributaries
which serve as spawning areas for river herring and by access to these same
streams - access meaning bridge crossing where most of this fishing is done.
We were able to locate only five locations used by dip-netters: Chicod Creek
at US 264 bridge, upper Bear Creek, Blounts Creek at SSR 1110 bridge, Choco-
winity Creek at NC 33 bridge, and Tranters Creek north of NC 33 bridge (Figure
18). Attempts were made to obtain biological data from dip net catches of
river herring; however, the contacts with these fishermen were sporadic - as

were the catches - and insufficient data were obtained to reflect the character-
istics of the harvest by this fishery.

Commercial Harvest

The commercial fishery of Pamlico River has historically contributed only
slightly to the total landings of anadromous fish in North Carolina. The
majority of fish taken are American shad which are caught in gill nets in the

IRaleigh News and Observer, March 16, 1975

-65"

,vnc7

CR eK
R@EK cc

E, 4

41
A\ 41 >

4-j
4c
ci,

4-
CREE
23

44
0

0
AN V4
V4 C3
ci
cs 0
u
0

-66-

lower Pamlico River f@nd northern Pamlico Sound. A few American shad, hickory
shad, and striped bass are caught each year in Tar River. The season for this
fishery is short however, and the landings are insignificant relative to the

commercial harvest in Pamlico River.

Isolating the annual commercial landings of anadromous fish in this study
region is not practical based on available statistics compiled by the National
Marine Fisheries Service. Statistics compiled on a county-by-county basis -
particularly Beaufort and Hyde Counties - include many fish which are actually
caught in Albemarle Sound, but are sold to dealers within the Pamlico River
basin and often reported to have been caught there.
The reported landings of American shad from Beaufort County, which includes
almost the entire Pamlico River basin, have comprised from less than one to 22
percent of the state total from 1889 to 1968 (Chestnut and Davis, 1975). Per-
cent of total landings from Beaufort County has increased since 1945 (Figure 19).
However, this is probably more a result of improved marketing facilities than of
increased catches. The upper waters of the Tar-Pamlico River system formerly
contained important shad fisheries (Taylor, 1951), but today most of the state's
production comes from Pamlico Sound and Neuse River.
Commercial landings of river herring in Tar-Pamlico River are insignificant
when compared to that of Albemarle Sound. Catch statistics are misleading as to
the actual pounds of river herring taken commercially in this system. The most
important fishery is located in the canals draining Lake Mattamuskeet where ale-
wife are taken by commercial and recreational fishermen using wire dip nets.
Characteristics of this fishery and its harvest were reported by Tyus (1971).
The conmercial fishery for river herring in Pamlico River is limited to a few
fishermen using stake gill nets and pound nets. A haul seine once operated in
Tar River near Grimesland, but it has not been fished for several years.
Characteristics of the commercial fishery for striped bass are similar to
those of the American shad. Most stripers are taken in the spring and fall by
fishermen using gill nets in Pamlico River and northern Pamlico Sound. As with
American shad, catch statistics report many fish which are caught in Albemarle
and Croatan Sounds but are sold to dealers in Beaufort and Hyde County.

20 &MERICAN SHAD-

STRIPED BASS----

01
a', C) CN, to M DO ON, 0 -4 N.C t- W. N.-0 C- to a- 0 C', M -t t- tAN
to C7*1 G\ 0 - CNJ Cv (V M Cn M M M M -j V,@ IrN Lr,\ VN V-A U,\ V'1% VIN VIN UN \,L) \.C) N-0 %@U Nj@, \-v NC, %,0 a%
to to to ON ON a, ON ON ON ON ON ON o" ON 0\ ON 0" ON 0% ON ON ON ON (7, ON ON ON ON ON 0" ON ON C% ON
YEAR
Figure 19 Percent of total state catch of striped bnss and American shad reported from dealers In Beaufort

-68-

American shad

Samples of the commercial harvest of American shad from northern Pamlico
Sound and Pamlico River were taken at several landings throughout the study
area each year (Figure 20). The gill net fishery in Pamlico Sound and River
accounts for approximately 95 percent of the American shad taken in that system,
the remainder being taken in pound nets.
A total of 1,013 scale samples were found suitable for age determination
(Table 11). Ages ranged from three to eight years for males and four to nine
for females. Age groups four and five comprised 90 percent of the males sampled
and 78 percent of the females sampled.
Mean lengths of age groups are compared to results of shad investigations
in Albemarle Sound and Neuse River, North Carolina and offshore North Carolina
(Table 12). Data from Albemarle Sound and Pamlico River appear to agree quite
closely. However, almost all of the older fi sh, over six years of age, came
from sampling sites along northern Pamlico Sound during the early spring. Mean
length and age data from Pamlico River more closely resemble the data from the
Neuse River area; that it, there is a distinct lack of fish over six years of
age. This difference suggests that the older fish are probably entering Albe-
marle Sound and that they are subject to lower mortality rates than fish enter-
ing the Neuse and Pamlico River systems.
The proportion of repeat spawners is fairly consistent between the Neuse,
Pamlico, and Albemarle areas. Nineteen percent of the American shad sampled in
the Pamlico River had spawned previously while 19 and 18.6 percent repeat spawners
have been estimated for the Albemarle Sound (Street, et. al.,,J975) and Neuse
River1, respectively.

Hickory shad

Scales from a total of 104 hickory shad were found suitable for age deter-
mination. Age frequency, percent frequency, mean fork lengths, and fork length
range are presented in Table 13.

1Hassler, W.W. and P.P. Pate, Jr., Unpublished data, Zoology Department, N.C.
State University at Raleigh

Sampling sites for commercial

lp-k

Figure 20.-Ioocation of sampling'sites for commercial fish harvest

-70-

TABLE ll.--Age and spawning frequency of American shad sampled in Pamlico River and
Pamlico Sound for 1975-76 combined. Numbers in parenthesis are percents
of totals.

TIMES.
SPAWNED 0 1 2 3 -4 5 TOTAL

AGE M F M F M F M F M F M F M F

111 3 3

IV 128 124 21 3 149 127

V 88 366 40 48 5 4 133 418

VI 4 90 4 17 10 12 18 119

VII 3 11 3 3 7 3 5. 9 26

VIII 1 1 1 2 1 3 3

Ix 2 2 1 5

TOTAL 226 591 65 71 19 26 3 6 2 3 1 315 698

PERCENT (72) (85) (21) (10) (6) (4) (<l) (<l) (<l) (<I)

TABLE 12.-Age and mean lengths of American shad compared to. investigations in other areas in North Carolina.

AGE 4 5 6 7 8 9

SEX M F M F M F M F M .7 M F M F

Location

Pamlico Sound and
River 334 415 445 437 481 456 494 470 489 485 522 549
Albemarle Sound, NC1 359 400 437 432 473 450 498 461 540 476 509 571
Neuse River, NC2 368 376 422 429 472 513
Neuse River, NC3 393 420 448 445 450 503
Offshore, NC4 459 451 458 467 486 488
(sexes combined)

Street, Pate, Holland, and Powell (1975)
2LaPointe, 1958, calculated fork lengths in inches converted to mm
3Hassler, W.W. and Pate, P.P., Jr. (unpublished data, Zoology Department, NC State University at Raleigh)
4Holland and Yelverton, 1973

-4

-72-

TABLE 13.--Total number, percent of total sample, mean fork length, and length range
for each age group by sex for hickory shad, 1975-76 combined.

TOTAL PERCENT OF MEAN FORK LENGTH
SEX AGE NUMBER TOTAL SAMPLE LENGTH(MM) RANGE (MM)

Female 11 2 2 290 290
111 23 27 324 294-366
IV 24 29 354 321-398
V 21 25 376 345-400
Vi 11 13 413 388-432
VII 3 4 427 418-442

Male 11 7 35 286 268-307
111 7 35 297 271-308
IV 2 10 341 338-343
V 3 15 355 338-380
VI 1 5 395 395

TABLE 14.-Age and spawning frequency of hickory shad sampled in Pamlico River and
Sound 1975-76 combined. Numbers in parenthesis are percents in totals.

TIMES
SPAWNED 0 1 2 3 TOTAL

AGE M F M F M F M Y- M F

11 7 2 7 2
111 6 22 1 1 7 23
IV 1 13 1 9 2 2 24
V 2 2 3 16 1 1 21
V1 1 11 1 11
VII 2 1 3

TOTAL 14 39 2 12 3 20 1 13 20 84

PERCENT (70) (46) (10) (14) (15) (24) (5) (16)

-73-

Ages ranged from two to six years for males and two to seven years for
females. Repeat spawning was high among hickory shad. Fifty percent of the
hickories sampled had made from one to three previous spawning runs (Table 14).
Females began spawning predominately at age three. Males also appeared to be-
gin spawning at age three although the sample is too small to be certain. Mean
fork lengths for each sex and age group are compared with previous investigations
in Albemarle Sound and Neuse River, North Carolina (Table 15).

Striped bass

.A total of 202 scale samples were found suitable for age determination.
Ninety-five scale samples were read from the 1975 season. Ages ranged from two
to eleven years with age groups four and five predominating (Table 16). The
107 samples used for age determination during the 1976 season showed an age
structure sfidlar.to that from Albemarle Sound as reported by Street, et.
11. (1975). The large fish appearing in the 1975 sample were taken from the
Stumpy Point sampling site and were captured in Pamlico Sound. The smaller fish
in both the 1975 and 1976 samples are more representative of the gill net fishery
for striped bass in the Pamlico River.

Tagging

Tagging of anadromous fish in Pamlico River began in late September, 1974,
with efforts directed toward capturing striped bass by using the drop-net method.
Based on suggestions offered by local commercial fishermen, our efforts were
concentrated in tributaries of upper Pamlico River which in the past have con-
sistently yielded good catches of striped bass during the fall season. The beat
catches were made at night in areas where large numbers of menhaden were con-
gregated - particularly on shoals and around points of land - and when water
temperature was 170C.
Striped bass could usually be captured if the menhaden could be encircled
by the drop-net. Loss of fish to suffocation was frequent due to the time they
remained in the gill net,-. We tagged and released only those fish which were
vigGrous and showed little signs of stress.

_74-

TABLE 15.--Age and mean lengths of hickory shad compared to investigations in other
areas in North Carolina.

AGE 2 3 4 5 6 7

SEX M F M F M F M F M F M F

Location

Pamlico Sound
and River 286 290 297 324 341 354 355 376 395 413 427
Albemarle Sound1
NC 289 341 325 341 350 355 371 387 360 384 365 390
Neuse River2 294 311 332 354 346 376 356 395 357 409 369 420

1Street, Pate, Holland, and Powell, 1975
2Pate, 1972

-75-

TABLE 16.--Age frequency, mean length and length range of striped bass from Pamlico
River and Sound, 1975-76.

PERCENT MEAN FORK
AGE TOTAL NUMBER OF SAMPLE LENGTH LENGTH RANGE

1975 1976 1975 1976 1975 1976 1975 1976

7 51 7 48 356 378 311-387 287-428
111 14 32 15 30 434 408 410-452 315-508

IV 28 19 29 17 499 507 442-545 470-585

V 30 3 32 3 545 523 508-595 500-545

VI 6 2 6 2 585 539 522-630 538-540

VII 2 3 614 557-670

VIII 1 1 668

Ix 2 2 840 833-846
x .4 4 872 845-890
xi 1 1 973

95 107

-76-

The drop-net method was used from late September until early December each
year. Eighty-eight striped bass were tagged and released during the fall tagging
period in 1974. Sixty-eight were tagged during the same period in 1975. Age
distribution of the fish tagged during 1974 was 32 1+, 37 11+, 8 111+, 10 IV+,
and 1 VI+. The age distribution for 1975 taggings was 53 1+, 8 11+, 4 111+, 1 IV+,
1 V+, and 1 X+. These fish were considered to still be in a growth period since
there was no evidence of annulus formation on the scale edge.
Spring tagging was begun in late December with gill nets of six varying mesh
sizes set in lower Chocowinity Bay. The sampling site was visited as soon as
possible each morning to get fish in the best condition possible. Spring tagging
was conducted from late December until mid-March each year. All fish in good
condition were tagged and released after they were measured and scale samples

were taken.
During the 1975 spring tagging period 51 striped bass, 28 American shad,
12 hickory shad, 30 blueback herring, and seven alewife were tagged. Forty-nine
striped bass, four American shad, three hickory shad, one alewife, and one blue-
back herring were tagged at the Chocowinity Bay site during the following spring.
In addition, 237 blueback herring and 55 alewife were tagged from spawning area

nets set in Pamlico River tributaries in 1976.

Striped bass

Returns from striped bass were insufficient to show any real pattern of
movement. Only 15 tags were returned from the 138 fish released in 1974-75, and
only nine were returned from the 117 fish released in 1975-76 (10.9 and 8.1 per-
cent, respectively). Most of the recaptures were made in the Pamlico River with-
in 15 miles of the tagging sites (Figure 21). Seven returns came from the 100
fish tagged in early spring - all cam from Pamlico River. Stripers tagged
during the fall showed movement up the Tar River during the spawning season -
one tag was returned from near Old Sparta and one from near Tarboro at river

mile 90.

Generally, the tagged stripers appeared to remain in the vicinity of Wash-
ington during the winter. Fish which were captured within ten miles of the
tagging site were at large from 2 to 406 days indicating that there was little

Tarh,) ro

Fct I k Im

cl.: -

017 OREINViLLE

G
mc -5 land
Area where caggad striped bass was cnught
@,X- @,@ M-\, . I
@31 @lji@-

rigtirc2lo - Locatlon of tigging si-Les, ati('] @,,-,trlpcd bass, ti.,,, returns in 'Ear and pallilico Ri

NVASHINGTO BELHAVEN

Af-

r
Tagging site
Stx-lped Bass recapture r4
site.

URORA

Figure 21.--Continued

-79-

movement from Pamlico River except around mid-April when tagged fish began
appearing in Tar River during the spawning run. However, one fish tagged in
the fall was recaptured in the Pungo River near Belhaven in March.

American shad

American shad were tagged in Pamlico River just below Washington and in
Tar River near Grimesland. Eight of the 28 -shad tagged in'1975 were returned
from gill net catches in Pamlico River; one was caught at the tagging site near
Grimesland (Figure 22). The most significant fact about these returns is that
all but one showed movement away from the major spawning areas of Tar River.
Six of the returns were from fish tagged in Tar River and recaptured from 7 to
21 miles downstream. These fish were usually at large only I to 2 days. Even
those fish tagged in Pamlico River were captured downstream from the tagging site.
None of the tagged fish were at large more than 26 days. Their movement down-
stream was probably a reaction to handling and tagging, and does not represent a
normal migration pattern for these fish. No returns were received from the four
fish tagged in 1976.

Hickory shad

Two of the fifteen hickory shad tagged were recaptured near the tagging site
(Figure 23). Neither of these fish was at large more than one day.

River herring

Only two of the 237 blueback herring and two of the 55 alewife tagged in our
spawning area sampling were recaptured. However, these returns show a different
pattern from the American shad returns. All four returns showed movement away
from the tagging site and into other spawning areas (Figures .- 24,.Land 25). These
fish were at large for one to 14 days and traveled up to 64 miles. River herring
were handled less than any other species tagged. No scale samples were taken
from tagged fish to ensure better survival.

Tai-bbro

Old G

C"K. (;i,l 'Ile
FA1011d

OR I I NVI 1- L

0
M
Grj IYIC 10rld
Area where, togged American shad was caught
Cj
@c

Tagging site
7C

rigure 22.- Location of tagging sites nnd American shad tag returns in Tar and Pnmllco

-.WASHINGTO
BELHAVEN)
OD

.4CJ
IV

17
/C 0

rR,
7@241

-7L

CgLLK
Area where tag'
ged American shnd'
was caught
CID

Tagging. site
@TURORA

....... ..

WASHINGTON, BELHAVEN

@,7

111130

.@A?

C Y,

Area where tagged hickory shad/
was caught Q

Tagging site
,,7AURO

23j--T,o(-.,it:l.rTI Of st-to and hicl-ory slwid tip, rettiyns in Pamlico River

vt@
H I N G TO N

410

C,
C, PC
tv,/V, r /00 v

ell
rq
A

Tagging site
Mueback herring recapture
site

Figure 24.-Ioocation of tagging sites and tag return sites for bluebaCk HeMR in the Pam"

ASHINGTO BELHAVEN

M
rn
7

CREEK
Tagging site

Alewife recapture site

URORA

W9-Ure 25.-Location of tagging sites and tag return sites for alewife in Pamlico River and

-85-

oq-

<
Ld

0
Loxe

0
10

I AKE
plAT rA M L)5 1<e ET

Tagging site

Alewife recapture
Ilk
site 4j
C:
0

0)
"attetAIS N
CLO

-86-

SUMMARY

1. Blueback herring spawned at a temperature range of 120 to 190C in the Tar
River and 130 to 250 C in Pamlico River tributaries. Spawning areas were

found to be the Tar River and all its tributaries from Town Creek to Wash-
ington and tributaries of the Pamlico River including Runyon, Broad, upper
Goose, Chocowinity, Hills, Blount, Nevil, and Durham Creeks.

2. American shad eggs and larvae were collected from upper Tar River, Swift
Creek, and Fishing Creek. Spawning occurred mostly at temperatures of 14 0
to 180C.

3. Hickory shad eggs and larvae were collected from Tranters Creek, Tar River
above Greenville, and Tar River tributaries above Otter Creek. Spawning
occurred at temperatures of 14 0 to 190C.

4. Striped bass eggs and larvae were collected only from that portion of Tar
River from Grimesland to Rocky Mount. Three spawning peaks were detected:
one at 170, one at 18 0, and one at 200C. Egg production by striped bass
in Tar River showed a large increase. since a comparable study was made in
1965, but survival of young was probably quite low.

5. Nursery areas for blueback herring were found to be the tributaries of Tar
River below Greenville and, generally, those tributaries of Pamlico River

west of Bath Creek. Juvenile blueback were found to utilize tributaries
of northern Pamlico Sound during winter months.

6. Of the 109 Juvenile alewife collected, most came from tributaries of northern
Pamlico Sound during November, December, and January.

7. Eleven Juvenile American shad were captured in Tar River and Tranters Creek.
Four more were captured in tributaries of northern Pamlico Sound during
January, 1976.

8. Four Juvenile hickory shad were collected from tributaries of Tar River.

9. Juvenile striped bass were collected from Tar River and upper Pamlico River.

-87-

10. Blueback herring were by far the most abundant species of river herring
spawning in the Tar-Pamlico River system.

11. Age group five dominated gill-net samples of-adult blueback herring. Ap-
proximately 65 percent of all adults were repeat spawners. Apparent year-
class composition data were probably biased by the sampling gear utilized
gill nets.

12. The major sport fishery for striped bass and American shad is located in
upper Tar River, Fishing Creek, and Swift Creek. Dip-netting for river
herring was done mainly in tributaries of upper Pamlico River and lower

Tar River.

13. The major commercial fishery for anadromous species in Pamlico River is
the gill-net fishery for American shad and striped bass. Age groups four
and five dominated landings of American shad.

14. In 1975, age groups four and five dominated the striped bass harvest. Ages
two and three were most frequent in 1976.

15. Two-hundred forty-nine striped bass, 32 American shad, 15 hickory shad, 55
alewife, and 267 blueback herring were tagged. Tag returns from striped
bass indicated that these fish remained in the general area of upper Pam-
lico River until migrating up Tar River to spawn. Returns from other
species were insufficient for meaningful analysis.

-88-

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

Completion of this project would have been impossible without the
dedication and assistance of many Division personnel. Special thanks go
to Robert Jones and Gregory Judy, Fisheries Technicians for their excellent
field and laboratory work; to Connell E. Purvis and J. Darrell Mumford for
their assistance in field sampling; and to Elizabeth T. Wainwright for typing
the final report. Thanks also go to Research and Development Section Chief
Michael W. Street for his assistance throughout the projeci.
special appreciation is expressed to Preston P. Pate, Jr. who initiated
this project and was in charge of all activities during May 1974 - September

1975.

I would also like to thank the fishermen and dealers in the Tar-Pamlico
area for their cooperation and advice during the study.

-89-

LITERATURE CITED

Baker, W. Donald. 1968. A reconnaissance of anadromous fish runs into the
inland fishing waters of North Carolina. Completion report for project
AFS-3. North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission, Raleigh, 33p.

Bayless, Jack D., and Eugene H. Shannon. 1965. Survey and classification of
the Pamlico River and tributaries, North Carolina. Final report for
Project F-14-R, Job 1-K. North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission,
Raleigh, 12p and Appendix.

Chestnut, A.F. and Harry S. Davis. 1975. Synopsis of marine fisheries of
North Carolina, Part I. University of North Carolina Sea Grant Program,
Publication No. UNC-SG-75-12, 425p.

Edwards, Phil and Elmer Bland. 1973. Chicod Creek anadromous fish field
trial. Unpublished report, U.S. Soil Conservation Service, 6p.

Hassler, William W. 1970. The status, abundance, and exploitation of striped
bass (Roccua s=atiZis) in Roanoke River and Albemarle Sound, North
Carolina. Completion report for Project AFC-1, Zoology Department, North
Carolina State University, 63p.

Humphries, Earl Terry. 1966. Spawning grounds of the striped bass, Roccus
saxatiZis (Walbaum), in the Tar River, North Carolina. M.S. thesis,
East Carolina University, Greenville, NC, 50p.

Kornegay, James W. 1975. Spawning grounds of the striped bass (Morone
saxatiZis) in the Tar River, NC, a ten year comparative study. Unpub-
lished report, North Carolina Wesleyan College, Rocky Mount, NC

Lippson, Alice J. and R. Lynn Moran. 1974. Manual for identification of
early development stages of fishes of the Potomac River estuary. Power
plant siting program of the Maryland Department of Natural Resources, 282p.

Mansueti, Alice J. and Jerry D. Hardy, Jr. 1967. Development of fishes of the
Chesapeake Bay Region, an atlas of egg, larval, and juvenile stages, Part
I. Natural Resources Institute, Maryland, 202p.
Marcy, Barton C., Jr. 1969. Age determinations from scales of Alosa pseU4@0-
harengu8 (Wilson) and AZosa aestivalis (Mitchi.11) in Conneticut waters.
Transactions of the American Fisheries Society, 98(4):622-630.

McCoy, Edward G. 1959. Quantitative sampling of striped bass, Roccus 8=atizis
(Walbaum), eggs in the Roanoke River, North Carolina. M.S. thesis, North
Carolina State University, Raleigh, 136p.

_90-

Pate, Preston P., Jr. 1972. Life history aspects of the hickory shad, AZosa
mediocris (Mitchill), in the Neuse River, North Carolina. M.S. thesis,
North Carolina State University, Raleigh, 67p.

Rothschild, Brian J. 1963. A critique of the scale method for determining
the age of the alewife, AZosa pseudoharengus (Wilson). Transactions of
the American Fisheries Society, 92(4):409-413.

Smith, William B., and Jack D. Bayless. 1964. Survey and classification of
the Tar River and tributaries, North Carolina. Final report for Project
F-14-R, Job 1-L. North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission, Raleigh,
35p and Appendix.

Spitsbergen, Dennis L. and Maury Wolff. 1974. Survey of nursery areas in
western Pamlico Sound, North Carolina. Completion report for Project
No. 2-175-R. North Carolina Department of Natural and Economic Resources,
Division of Commercial and Sport Fisheries, Raleigh, 80p.

Street, Michael W. and Ann Bowman Hall. 1973. Annotated bibliography of ana-
dromous fishes of North Carolina through 1972. North Carolina Department
of Natural and Economic Resources, Division of Commercial and Sport
Fisheries. Special Scientific Report Number 23, 85p.

Street, Michael W., Preston P. Pate, Jr., Frank Holland, and Allyn B. Powell.
1975. Anadromous fisheries research program, northern coastal region,
North Carolina. Final report for Project AFCS-8, North Carolina Depart-
ment of Natural and Economic Resources, Division of Marine Fisheries,
Raleigh, 210p.

Taylor, Harden F. 1951. Economics and marketing of North Carolina fisheries,
p. 425-474. In Harden F. Taylor (ed.) Survey of marine fisheries of
North Carolina. University of North Carolina Press, Chapel Hill.

Tobaben, Donald J. 1971. Biology of the striped bass populations in the Tar
and Neuse Rivers. Summary report for Project F-19, Study XIII. North
Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission, Raleigh, 6p.

Tyus, Har6ld M. 1971. Population size, harvest, and movements of alewives,
AZosa pseudoharengus (Wilsnn), during spawning migrations to Lake
Mattamuskeet, North Carolina, Ph.D. thesis, North Carolina State Univer-
sity, Raleigh, 77p.

lommillmlin
3 6668-00004 8811