35 resultados para New England Historic Genealogical Society.
Resumo:
Understanding how well National Marine Sanctuaries and other marine protected areas represent the diversity of species present within and among the biogeographic regions where they occur is essential for assessing their conservation value and identifying gaps in the protection of biological diversity. One of the first steps in any such assessment should be the development of clearly defined and scientifically justified planning boundaries representing distinct oceanographic conditions and faunal assemblages. Here, we propose a set of boundaries for the continental shelf of northeastern North America defined by subdivisions of the Eastern Temperate Province, based on a review and synthesis (i.e. meta-analysis) of the scientific literature. According to this review, the Eastern Temperate Province is generally divided into the Acadian and Virginian Subprovinces. Broad agreement places the Scotian Shelf, Gulf of Maine, and Bay of Fundy within the Acadian Subprovince. The proper association of Georges Bank is less clear; some investigators consider it part of the Acadian and others part of the Virginian. Disparate perspectives emerge from the analysis of different groups of organisms. Further, while some studies suggest a distinction between the Southern New England shelf and the rest of the Mid-Atlantic Bight, others describe the region as a broad transition zone with no unique characteristics of its own. We suggest there exists sufficient evidence to consider the Scotian Shelf, Gulf of Maine, Georges Bank, Southern New England, and Southern Mid-Atlantic Bight as distinct biogeographic regions from a conservation planning perspective, and present a set of proposed mapped boundaries. (PDF contains 23 pages.)
Resumo:
From the mid-1950's to the mid-1960's a series of quantitative surveys of the macrobenthic invertebrate fauna were conducted in the offshore New England region (Maine to Long Island, New York). The surveys were designed to 1) obtain measures of macrobenthic standing crop expressed in terms of density and biomass; 2) determine the taxonomic composition of the fauna (ca. 567 species); 3) map the general features of macrobenthic distribution; and 4) evaluate the fauna's relationships to water depth, bottom type, temperature range, and sediment organic carbon content. A total of 1,076 samples, ranging from 3 to 3,974 m in depth, were obtained and analyzed. The aggregate macrobenthic fauna consists of 44 major taxonomic groups (phyla, classes, orders). A striking fact is that only five of those groups (belonging to four phyla) account for over 80% of both total biomass and number of individuals of the macrobenthos. The five dominant groups are Bivalvia, Annelida, Amphipoda, Echninoidea, and Holothuroidea. Other salient features pertaining to the macrobenthos of the region are the following: substantial differences in quantity exist among different geographic subareas within the region, but with a general trend that both density and biomass increase from northeast to southwest; both density and biomass decrease with increasing depth; the composition of the bottom sediments significantly influences both the kind and quantity of macrobenthic invertebrates, the largest quantities of both measures of abundance occurring in the coarser grained sediments and diminishing with decreasing particle size; areas with marked seasonal changes in water temperature support an abundant and diverse fauna, whereas a uniform temperature regime is associated with a sparse, less diverse fauna; and no detectable trends are evident in the quantitative composition of the macrobenthos in relation to sediment organic carbon content. (PDF file contains 246 pages.)
Resumo:
The crinoid fauna of the continental margin (0-1500 m) of northeastern North America (Georgia to Canada) includes 14 species in 13 genera and 5 families. We introduce the external morphology and natural history of crinoids and include a glossary of terms, an illustrated key to local taxa, annotated systematic list, and an index. The fauna includes 2 species found no further south than New England and 8 that occur no further north than the Carolinas and Blake Plateau. Comactinia meridionalis (Agassiz) is the only species commonly found in shallow water «50 m). No taxa are endemic to the area. (PDF file contains 34 pages.)
Resumo:
This study aims to reconstruct the history of shore whaling in the southeastern United States, emphasizing statistics on the catch of right whales, Eubalaena glacialis, the preferred targets. The earliest record of whaling in North Carolina is of a proposed voyage from New York in 1667. Early settlers on the Outer Banks utilized whale strandings by trying out the blubber of carcasses that came ashore, and some whale oil was exported from the 1660s onward. New England whalemen whaled along the North Carolina coast during the 1720s, and possibly earlier. As some of the whalemen from the northern colonies moved to Nortb Carolina, a shore-based whale fishery developed. This activity apparently continued without interruption until the War of Independence in 1776, and continued or was reestablished after the war. The methods and techniques of the North Carolina shore whalers changed slowly: as late as the 1890s they used a drogue at the end of the harpoon line and refrained from staying fast to the harpooned whale, they seldom employed harpoon guns, and then only during the waning years of the fishery. The whaling season extended from late December to May, most successfully between February and May. Whalers believed they were intercepting whales migrating north along the coast. Although some whaling occurred as far north as Cape Hatteras, it centered on the outer coasts of Core, Shackleford, and Bogue banks, particularly near Cape Lookout. The capture of whales other than right whales was a rare event. The number of boat crews probably remained fairly stable during much of the 19th century, with some increase in effort in the late 1870s and early 1880s when numbers of boat crews reached 12 to 18. Then by the late 1880s and 1890s only about 6 crews were active. North Carolina whaling had become desultory by the early 1900s, and ended completely in 1917. Judging by export and tax records, some ocean-going vessels made good catches off this coast in about 1715-30, including an estimated 13 whales in 1719, 15 in one year during the early 1720s, 5-6 in a three-year period of the mid to late 1720s, 8 by one ship's crew in 1727, 17 by one group of whalers in 1728-29, and 8-9 by two boats working from Ocracoke prior to 1730. It is impossible to know how representative these fragmentary records are for the period as a whole. The Carolina coast declined in importance as a cruising ground for pelagic whalers by the 1740s or 1750s. Thereafter, shore whaling probably accounted for most of the (poorly documented) catch. Lifetime catches by individual whalemen on Shackleford Banks suggest that the average annual catch was at least one to two whales during 1830·80, perhaps about four during the late 1870s and early 1880s, and declining to about one by the late 1880s. Data are insufficient to estimate the hunting loss rate in the Outer Banks whale fishery. North Carolina is the only state south of New Jersey known to have had a long and well established shore whaling industry. Some whaling took place in Chesapeake Bay and along the coast of Virginia during the late 17th and early 18th centuries, but it is poorly documented. Most of the rigbt whales taken off South Carolina, Georgia, and northern Florida during the 19th century were killed by pelagic whalers. Florida is the only southeastern state with evidence of an aboriginal (pre-contact) whale fishery. Right whale calves may have been among the aboriginal whalers' principal targets. (PDF file contains 34 pages.)
Resumo:
Horseshoe crabs (Limulus polyphemus) are valued by many stakeholders, including the commercial fishing industry, biomedical companies, and environmental interest groups. We designed a study to test the accuracy of the conversion factors that were used by NOAA Fisheries and state agencies to estimate horseshoe crab landings before mandatory reporting that began in 1998. Our results indicate that the NOAA Fisheries conversion factor consistently overestimates the weight of male horseshoe crabs, particularly those from New England populations. Because of the inaccuracy of this and other conversion factors, states are now mandated to report the number (not biomass) and sex of landed horseshoe crabs. However, accurate estimates of biomass are still necessary for use in prediction models that are being developed to better manage the horseshoe crab fishery. We recommend that managers use the conversion factors presented in this study to convert current landing data from numbers to biomass of harvested horseshoe crabs for future assessments.
Resumo:
The red deepsea crab (Chaceon quinquedens (Smith, 1879)) has supported a commercial fishery off the coast of New England since the 1970s (Wigley et al., 1975) and has had annual harvests from 400 metric tons (t) (1996) to 4000 t (2001) (NEFMC, 2002). In 2002, a fishery management plan for the northeast fishery on the Atlantic coast was implemented and total allowable catch was reduced to approximately 2500 t (NEFMC, 2002). Although there are management plans for the golden crab (C. fenneri) and the red deep sea crab for Atlantic coast regions, there is no fishery management plan for red deepsea crabs in the Gulf of Mexico. Successful management for sustainable harvests should be based on a knowledge of the life history of the species, but C. quinquedens has been a difficult species for which to obtain life history and abundance information because of its deep distribution.
Resumo:
This article covers the biology and the history of the bay scallop habitats and fishery from Massachusetts to North Carolina. The scallop species that ranges from Massachusetts to New York is Argopecten irradians irradians. In New Jersey, this species grades into A. i. concentricus, which then ranges from Maryland though North Carolina. Bay scallops inhabit broad, shallow bays usually containing eelgrass meadows, an important component in their habitat. Eelgrass appears to be a factor in the production of scallop larvae and also the protection of juveniles, especially, from predation. Bay scallops spawn during the warm months and live for 18–30 months. Only two generations of scallops are present at any time. The abundances of each vary widely among bays and years. Scallops were harvested along with other mollusks on a small scale by Native Americans. During most of the 1800’s, people of European descent gathered them at wading depths or from beaches where storms had washed them ashore. Scallop shells were also and continue to be commonly used in ornaments. Some fishing for bay scallops began in the 1850’s and 1860’s, when the A-frame dredge became available and markets were being developed for the large, white, tasty scallop adductor muscles, and by the 1870’s commercial-scale fishing was underway. This has always been a cold-season fishery: scallops achieve full size by late fall, and the eyes or hearts (adductor muscles) remain preserved in the cold weather while enroute by trains and trucks to city markets. The first boats used were sailing catboats and sloops in New England and New York. To a lesser extent, scallops probably were also harvested by using push nets, picking them up with scoop nets, and anchor-roading. In the 1910’s and 1920’s, the sails on catboats were replaced with gasoline engines. By the mid 1940’s, outboard motors became more available and with them the numbers of fishermen increased. The increases consisted of parttimers who took leaves of 2–4 weeks from their regular jobs to earn extra money. In the years when scallops were abundant on local beds, the fishery employed as many as 10–50% of the towns’ workforces for a month or two. As scallops are a higher-priced commodity, the fishery could bring a substantial amount of money into the local economies. Massachusetts was the leading state in scallop landings. In the early 1980’s, its annual landings averaged about 190,000 bu/yr, while New York and North Carolina each landed about 45,000 bu/yr. Landings in the other states in earlier years were much smaller than in these three states. Bay scallop landings from Massachusetts to New York have fallen sharply since 1985, when a picoplankton, termed “brown tide,” bloomed densely and killed most scallops as well as extensive meadows of eelgrass. The landings have remained low, large meadows of eelgrass have declined in size, apparently the species of phytoplankton the scallops use as food has changed in composition and in seasonal abundance, and the abundances of predators have increased. The North Carolina landings have fallen since cownose rays, Rhinoptera bonsais, became abundant and consumed most scallops every year before the fishermen could harvest them. The only areas where the scallop fishery remains consistently viable, though smaller by 60–70%, are Martha’s Vineyard, Nantucket, Mass., and inside the coastal inlets in southwestern Long Island, N.Y.
Resumo:
The northern quahog, Mercenaria mercenaria, ranges along the Atlantic Coast of North America from the Canadian Maritimes to Florida, while the southern quahog, M. campechiensis, ranges mostly from Florida to southern Mexico. The northern quahog was fished by native North Americans during prehistoric periods. They used the meats as food and the shells as scrapers and as utensils. The European colonists copied the Indians treading method, and they also used short rakes for harvesting quahogs. The Indians of southern New England and Long Island, N.Y., made wampum from quahog shells, used it for ornaments and sold it to the colonists, who, in turn, traded it to other Indians for furs. During the late 1600’s, 1700’s, and 1800’s, wampum was made in small factories for eventual trading with Indians farther west for furs. The quahoging industry has provided people in many coastal communities with a means of earning a livelihood and has given consumers a tasty, wholesome food whether eaten raw, steamed, cooked in chowders, or as stuffed quahogs. More than a dozen methods and types of gear have been used in the last two centuries for harvesting quahogs. They include treading and using various types of rakes and dredges, both of which have undergone continuous improvements in design. Modern dredges are equipped with hydraulic jets and one type has an escalator to bring the quahogs continuously to the boats. In the early 1900’s, most provinces and states established regulations to conserve and maximize yields of their quahog stocks. They include a minimum size, now almost universally a 38-mm shell width, and can include gear limitations and daily quotas. The United States produces far more quahogs than either Canada or Mexico. The leading producer in Canada is Prince Edward Island. In the United States, New York, New Jersey, and Rhode Island lead in quahog production in the north, while Virginia and North Carolina lead in the south. Connecticut and Florida were large producers in the 1990’s. The State of Tabasco leads in Mexican production. In the northeastern United States, the bays with large openings, and thus large exchanges of bay waters with ocean waters, have much larger stocks of quahogs and fisheries than bays with small openings and water exchanges. Quahog stocks in certified beds have been enhanced by transplanting stocks to them from stocks in uncertified waters and by planting seed grown in hatcheries, which grew in number from Massachusetts to Florida in the 1980’s and 1990’s.
Resumo:
The northern quahog, Mercenaria mercenaria, ranges along the Atlantic Coast of North America from the Canadian Maritimes to Florida, while the southern quahog, M. campechiensis, ranges mostly from Florida to southern Mexico. The northern quahog was fished by native North Americans during prehistoric periods. They used the meats as food and the shells as scrapers and as utensils. The European colonists copied the Indians treading method, and they also used short rakes for harvesting quahogs. The Indians of southern New England made wampum from quahog shells, used it for ornaments and sold it to the colonists, who, in turn, traded it to other Indians for furs. During the late 1600’s, 1700’s, and 1800’s, wampum was made in small factories for eventual trading with Indians farther west for furs. The quahoging industry has provided people in many coastal communities with a means of earning a livelihood and has provided consumers with a tasty, wholesome food whether eaten raw, steamed, cooked in chowders, or as stuffed quahogs. More than a dozen methods and types of gear have been used in the last two centuries for harvesting quahogs. They include treading and using various types of rakes and dredges, both of which have undergone continuous improvements in design. Modern dredges are equipped with hydraulic jets and one type has an escalator to bring the quahogs continuously to the boats. In the early 1900’s, most provinces and states established regulations to conserve and maximize yields of their quahog stocks. They include a minimum size, now almost universally a 38-mm shell width, and can include gear limitations and daily quotas. The United States produces far more quahogs than either Canada or Mexico. The leading producer in Canada is Prince Edward Island. In the United States, New York, New Jersey, and Rhode Island lead in quahog production in the north, while Virginia and North Carolina lead in the south. Connecticut and Florida were large producers in the 1990’s. The State of Campeche leads in Mexican production. In the northeastern United States, the bays with large openings, and thus large exchanges of bay waters with ocean waters, have much larger stocks of quahogs and fisheries than bays with small openings and water exchanges. Quahog stocks in certifi ed beds have been enhanced by transplanting stocks to them from stocks in uncertified waters and by planting seed grown in hatcheries, which grew in number from Massachusetts to Florida in the 1980’s and 1990’s.
Resumo:
The history of whaling in the Gulf of Maine was reviewed primarily to estimate removals of humpback whales, Megaptera novaeangliae, especially during the 19th century. In the decades from 1800 to 1860, whaling effort consisted of a few localized, small-scale, shore-based enterprises on the coast of Maine and Cape Cod, Mass. Provincetown and Nantucket schooners occasionally conducted short cruises for humpback whales in New England waters. With the development of bomb-lance technology at mid century, the ease of killing humpback whales and fin whales, Balaenoptera physalus, increased. As a result, by the 1870’s there was considerable local interest in hunting rorquals (baleen whales in the family Balaenopteridae, which include the humpback and fin whales) in the Gulf of Maine. A few schooners were specially outfitted to take rorquals in the late 1870’s and 1880’s although their combined annual take was probably no more than a few tens of whales. Also in about 1880, fishing steamers began to be used to hunt whales in the Gulf of Maine. This steamer fishery grew to include about five vessels regularly engaged in whaling by the mid 1880’s but dwindled to only one vessel by the end of the decade. Fin whales constituted at least half of the catch, which exceeded 100 animals in some years. In the late 1880’s and thereafter, few whales were taken by whaling vessels in the Gulf of Maine.
Resumo:
One particular habitat type in the Middle Atlantic Bight is not well recognized among fishery scientists and managers, although it is will known and used by recreational and commercial fisheries. This habitat consists of a variety of hard-surface, elevated relief "reef" or reef-like environments that are widely distributed across the predominantly flat or undulating, sandy areas of the Bight and include both natural rocky areas and man-made structures, e.g. shipwrecks and artificial reefs. Although there are natural rock and shellfish reefs in southern New England coastal waters and estuaries throughout the Bight, most reef habitats in the region appear to be man-made reef habitat modification/creation may be increasing. Very little effort has been devoted to the study of this habitat's distribution, abundance, use by living marine resources and associated biological communities (except on estuarine oyster reefs) and fishery value or management. This poorly studied and surveyed habitat can provide fish refuge from trawls and can be a factor in studies of the distribution and abundance of a variety of reef-associated fishery resources. This review provides a preliminary summary of information found on relative distribution and abundance of reef habitat in the Bight, the living marine resources and biological communities that commonly use it, threats to this habitat and its biological resources, and the value or potential value of artificial reefs to fishery or habitat and its biological resources, and the value or potential value of artificial reefs to fishery or habitat managers. The purpose of the review is to initiate an awareness among resource managers about this habitat, its role in resource management, and the need for research.
Resumo:
Spencer Fullerton Baird (Fig. 1), a noted systematic zoologist and builder of scientific institutions in 19th century America, persuaded the U.S. Congress to establish the United States Commission of Fish and Fisheries1 in March 1871. At that time, Baird was Assistant Secretary of the Smithsonian Institution. Following the death of Joseph Henry in 1878, he became head of the institution, a position he held until his own demise in 1887. In addition to his many duties as a Smithsonian official, including his prominent role in developing the Smithsonian’s Federally funded National Museum as the repository for governmental scientific collections, Baird directed the Fish Commission from 1871 until 1887. The Fish Commission’s original mission was to determine the reasons and remedies for the apparent decline of American fisheries off southern New England as well as other parts of the United States. In 1872, Congress further directed the Commission to begin a large fish hatching program aimed at increasing the supply of American food f
Resumo:
This study, part of a broader investigation of the history of exploitation of right whales, Balaena glacialis, in the western North Atlantic, emphasizes U.S. shore whaling from Maine to Delaware (from lat. 45°N to 38°30'N) in the period 1620–1924. Our broader study of the entire catch history is intended to provide an empirical basis for assessing past distribution and abundance of this whale population. Shore whaling may have begun at Cape Cod, Mass., in the 1620’s or 1630’s; it was certainly underway there by 1668. Right whale catches in New England waters peaked before 1725, and shore whaling at Cape Cod, Martha’s Vineyard, and Nantucket continued to decline through the rest of the 18th century. Right whales continued to be taken opportunistically in Massachusetts, however, until the early 20th century. They were hunted in Narragansett Bay, R.I., as early as 1662, and desultory whaling continued in Rhode Island until at least 1828. Shore whaling in Connecticut may have begun in the middle 1600’s, continuing there until at least 1718. Long Island shore whaling spanned the period 1650–1924. From its Dutch origins in the 1630’s, a persistent shore whaling enterprise developed in Delaware Bay and along the New Jersey shore. Although this activity was most profi table in New Jersey in the early 1700’s, it continued there until at least the 1820’s. Whaling in all areas of the northeastern United States was seasonal, with most catches in the winter and spring. Historically, right whales appear to have been essentially absent from coastal waters south of Maine during the summer and autumn. Based on documented references to specific whale kills, about 750–950 right whales were taken between Maine and Delaware, from 1620 to 1924. Using production statistics in British customs records, the estimated total secured catch of right whales in New England, New York, and Pennsylvania between 1696 and 1734 was 3,839 whales based on oil and 2,049 based on baleen. After adjusting these totals for hunting loss (loss-rate correction factor = 1.2), we estimate that 4,607 (oil) or 2,459 (baleen) right whales were removed from the stock in this region during the 38-year period 1696–1734. A cumulative catch estimate of the stock’s size in 1724 is 1,100–1,200. Although recent evidence of occurrence and movements suggests that right whales continue to use their traditional migratory corridor along the U.S. east coast, the catch history indicates that this stock was much larger in the 1600’s and early 1700’s than it is today. Right whale hunting in the eastern United States ended by the early 1900’s, and the species has been protected throughout the North Atlantic since the mid 1930’s. Among the possible reasons for the relatively slow stock recovery are: the very small number of whales that survived the whaling era to become founders, a decline in environmental carrying capacity, and, especially in recent decades, mortality from ship strikes and entanglement in fishing gear.
Resumo:
Haddock, Melanogrammus aeglefinus, is a principal commercial species distributed throughout the northwest Atlantic Ocean, with major aggregations occurring on Georges Bank and on the Scotian Shelf. This review examines all available information on stock structure of haddock to evaluate the suitability of current stock units and to investigate areas that require further research. Combined information from tag-recapture, demographic, recruitment, meristic, parasitic, and genetic studies provide evidence for the identification of haddock stocks, with major population divisions occurring between New England, Nova Scotia, and Newfoundland waters. Within each of these major divisions a number of discrete stocks appear to exist, although uncertainty remains in the amount of separation found within each region. Research utilizing more recent stock identification techniques should refine and improve our understanding of haddock stock structure in the northwest Atlantic.
Resumo:
With its genesis in New England during the 1800's, the purse seine fishery for Atlantic menhaden, Brevoortia tyrannus, expanded south and by the early 1900's ranged the length of the eastern seaboard. The purse seine fishery for Gulf menhaden. B. patronus, is of relatively recent development, exploitation of the stock beginning in the late 1940's. Landings from both fisheries annually comprise 35-40% of the total U. S. fisheries landings, ranking menhaden first in terms of volume landed. Technological advances in harvesting methods, fish-spotting capabilities, and vessel designs accelerated after World War II, resulting in larger, faster, and wider-ranging carrier vessels, improved speed and efficiency of the harvest, and reduction in labor requirements. Chief products of the menhaden industry are fish meal, fish oil, and solubles, but research into new product lines is underway. Since 1955 on the Atlantic coast and 1964 on the Gulf coast, the NMFS has monitored the fisheries for biostatistical data. Annual data summaries of numbers-of-fish-at-age harvested, catch tonnage, and fishing effort of the fleet form the basis of routine stock assessments and annual catch forecasts to industry for the upcoming fishing season. After landings declined in the 1960's, the Atlantic menhaden stock has recovered through the 1970's and 1980's. Exceptional year classes of Gulf menhaden in recent years account for record landings during the 1980's.