Comparison of Standard Length, Fork Length, and Total Length for Measuring West Coast Marine Fishes

Measurements of adult marine fishes on the U.S. west coast are usually made using one of three methods: standard length, fork length, or total length. Each method has advantages and disadvantages. In this paper we attempt to determine whether one method is faster and/or more reliable than the other methods. We found that all three methods were comparable. There was no appreciable difference in the time it took to measure fish using the different methods. Fork length had the most reproducible results; however, it had the highest level of bias between researchers. We therefore suggest that selection of measurement type be based on what other researchers have used for the species under study. The best improvement in measurement reliability probably occurs by adequate training of personnel and not type of measurement used.

A Comparison of Two Stratification Schemes Used in Sampling Canadian Atlantic Cod, Gadus morhua

Sampling is a key element in the assessment of any fish stock. It is often one of the most expensive activities of the management process; thus, improved efficiency can result in significant cost savings. In most cases a two-phase sampling strategy is employed. Two commonly used versions of such stratified random schemes were simulated using a test population based on Atlantic cod, Gadus morhua. A 1 otolith per 1 cm length frequency currently used for many flatfish and some smaller gadoids and a 3 otolith per 3 cm length frequency currently used for many of the larger gadoids. No difference was detected in the age composition or mean length at age for either scheme; however, 10 percent fewer otoliths were collected in 1 for 1 sampling than 3 for 3. There was an improvement of between 30 and 60 percent in the coefficient of variation of the estimated catch numbers at age using the 1 for 1 compared with the 3 for 3 stratified sampling. For these reasons and other operational considerations, the 1 for 1 stratified random design of sampling appears to be superior.