AN ABSTRACT OF T
TISIS OF
Walter Guy Jones for the Master of Science in the
(Degree)
(Name)
Department of Fish and Game Management
(Major)
/6 7
Date thesis is presented
Title - The Mink Food Fishery of Oregon in 1953 and
195L.
Abstract approved
Signature redacted for privacy.
(Major professor)
This study was conducted to ascertain the kinds
and amounts of fish landed for mink farm use by the
Oregon otter-trawl fleet during 1953 and l95L. and to
analyze some of the important factors involved in
the expanding mink-food fishery.
The Oregon trawl fishery f or mink-food gained
impetus following World War II. The numbers of mink
on Oregon ranches increased from approximately
56,000 animals in 19L.5 to about 2OLj,000 in l95Li..
Fish carcasses from the fillet producers made up the
major part of the fish portions of ranch mink diets
until 1953. Reduction of deliveries of fish for the
fillet markets in 1953 and 195L. brought about subthe landing of whole fish for
mink-food in those years. Approximately 5.0 and
6.0 million pounds of fish were landed for minkfood in 1953 and 195L1. respectively. This amounted
to around one-half of the production for the fillet
processors in both years.
stantial increases in
The principal fish species landed for the fur
ranchers in the two years combined were as follows:
FISH
Species
Approximate Weight
in Millions of Pounds
Arrowtooth Sole, Atheresthés stomias
.,main1y
Rockfishes, Sebastodes,
Rex Sole, Glytocephalus zachirus
Dover Sole, Nicrosomus pacificus
English Sole, Paropbrys vetulus
3.0
1.6
i.li.
l.I..
1.0
(2)
Starry Flounder, Platichthys. stellatus
Bellinghain Sole, Isopotta isolepis
Petrale Sole, Eopsetta jordan!
Misc. Fish, (2 5 to 35 different species)
0.6
0.5
0.1
l.L1.
Three of the above species, Dover Sole, English
sole and petrale sole are the dominant flatfish
landed for the fillet processors. Stocks of those
species have declined on the principal trawling
grounds utilized by the Oregon fleet. The nubers
of these fish landed f or mink-food are of concern
to the fishing industry.
About 1.8 million Dover sole were landed for
mink-food. Of these 236,000 fish were smaller than
the 36 centimeter minimum size length imposed by the
fillet producers. Considerably more undersize Dover
sole were discarded at sea from fillet market fishing
than were delivered for animal food.
In 1953 and 1951i. about 1.6 million English sole
Of these 87 per cent
were landed for mink-food.
were smaller than the 33 centimeter minimum fillet
market size limit. Approximately 1.6 million English
solo were discarded at sea from the fillet market
fishery.
Neglible numbers of petrale sole were landed
for the fur farm market.
All but a very few of the Lj.0 vessels in the Oregon trawl fleet participated to some extent in the
l953-5L mink-food fishery. Four trawlers fishing exclusively for mink-food out of Newport, Oregon
accounted for approximately 6.6 million pounds of the
fish delivered for mink-food in the two year period.
At Astoria 12 vessels landed the majority of the L.3
million pounds of animal food delivered there. Only
a very few vessels fished exclusively for mink-food.
About eighty percent of the animal food was delivered
incidental to or in conjunction with fillet market
fishing.
The fishery for mink-food in 1953 and l95!. was
concentrated within a 20 to 30 mile radii of the
mouths of the Columbia and Yaquina rivers.
As a whole, the trawl fishermen in the two years
under study derived approximately one-fourth of their
fishing income through the sale of fish for minkfood.
-
THE MINK FOOD FISHERY OF OREGON IN 1953 AND 1954
by
WALTER GUY JONES
A THESIS
aubmit ted. to
OREGON STME COLLEGE
In partial fulfillment of
the requirements for the
degree of
MASTER OF SCIENCE
June 1958
ACKNOWLEDGMENT
Appreciation and thanks are expressed to Professor
B. E. Dimick, Department
of Fish and (lame Management at
Oregon State College, and to Dr. George I. Harry, Jr.,
Dirootor of Research of the Oregon Fish Oonission, for
their help and advice in the preparation of this thesis.
Gratitude is extended to S. J. Weatrheim who was in
charge of the otter-trawl investigations of the Oregon Fish
Commission at the time this material was gathered and who
assisted with the field work and the analysis of the data.
Thanks are heartily given to David Leith and to the
other biologists who helped. with the
tion of
gathering and oompila-'
the field data.
Special thanks are conveyed to Mrs. Phyllis Watt
Wustenberg and
fur farming
information about mink ranching.
to the other members of the
industry who supplied
The cooperation and patience of the members of the
fishing industry, both boat and plant operators, extended
to the biologists in the collection of the field data, is
gratefully acknowledged.
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
INTRODUCTION
1
HISTORY OF THE OREGON MINK FOOD FISHERY
.
.
.
2
METHODS AND MATERIALS .
.
.
.
5
a
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
Specific problems
Production statistics
Scientific and. ooion names of fish
species
Sampling procedure
a
S
5
6
9
Astoria sampling procedure . . .
Newport sampling procedure
Sampling procedure at other ports .
Total species composition computations
Determination of size composition of Dover,
10
11
Length-weight relationship
Length-frequency distribution .
Analyses of some effects of mink'-food
15
15
English, and petrale soles
.
fishery on the Oregon trawl fishery
Methods of comparing production of
mink-food fishery with trawl
fishery .
.
.
.
.
Computation of numbers of mink on
Oregon ranches
Computation of fish requirement of
mink ranchers
.
intensity of the
Fishing intensity by area
Fishing intensity by boat
Methods of evaluating the
mink-food fishery .
.
.
Fishing intensity on Dover, English
and potrale soles . . .
12
13
14
17
17
18
19
21
21
23
24
ECONOMIC EFFECT OF THE MINK-FOOD FISHERY ON THE
TRAWL FISHERY
26
VALIDITY OF ANALY3ES OF SAMPLING DATA
27
Production records
Reliability of samples
Projection of sampling data
Accuracy of conversion weights
27
28
29
29
TABLE OF CONTENTS (continued)
Page
RESULTS....
31
Trawl fisheries production of mink-food
Species composition of mink-food landings
Results of sampling
Total landings by species
Size composition of the Dover, English and
petrale sole
43
44
48
SOME EFFECTS OF THE MINK-FOOD FISHERY ON TOTAL
TRAWL PRODUCTION OVER A TEN YEAR PERIOD . . .
Production increase over a ten year period
Fishrequired
Numbers of mink on Oregon ranches .
Fish available
.
.
.
Intensity of the mink-food, fishery . . .
Byboatandbymonth ..
.
.
50
50
50
50
62
53
53
Incidental compared to active minkfood fishing
On fishing grounds
Intensity on Dover solo . . . . .
Intensity on English sole
Economic value of the mink-food fishery
DISCUSSION
Arrowtooth sole
Rex sole
38
43
Dover sole
English sole
Petrale sole
.
Total production
Individual species production
31
34
34
58
61
66
70
73
'75
75
.
.
.
Bellingham sole
Starry flounder
Rockfishes
Miscellaneous fishes ,
.
.
.
Size composition and numbers of principal
fillet market soles
Dover sole
English sole
Petrale sole
Boats and landings
Areas fished
Regulations
Economic effect
77
77
78
78
79
79
80
82
83
83
85
86
86
87
88
TABLE OF CONTENTS (continued)
Page
SUMMARY
89
BIBLIOGRAPHY
94
APPENDIX
97
LIST OF TABLES
Table
1
Page
Common and. scientific names of fish that
were counted in the mink-food samples,
Astoria and Newport, 1953 and 1954
.
7
Test of homogeneity of multiple samples
from individual landings of mink-food,
Astoria and Newport, 1954 . . . . . . . .
32
3
Oregon trawl landings for mink food and
markets, 1953 and 1954
33
4
Species oomposition of the fish in samples
taken of landings of mink-food, Astoria
2
fillet
and.
5
6
7
.
.
Newport, 1953
35
Species composition of the fish
in samples
taken of landings of mink-food, Astoria
and Newport, 1954
36
Calculated weights by species of the trawl
fish delivered for mink-food in Oregon,
1953
39
Calculated
weights by
species or the trawl
fish delivered for mink-food in Oregon,
40
1954
8
The computed numbers of mink on Oregon
fish
ranches and
the calculated pounds of
available and required for mink-food in
Oregon, 1945-1954
.
.
.
.
.
9
.
51
Distribution of the landings of mink-food
at Astoria and Newport, 1953 .
54
10 Distribution of the landings of mink-food
at Astoria and.
11
12
Newport, 1954
55
Average annual weight of mink-food fish
delivered by each of the Astoria trawl
vessels in 1953 and 1954 and the number
of landings by each vessel . . . . . .
.
57
The distribution by area caught of the
catch and landings of trawl fish for
minkfood, Oregon, 1953 . . . . . . .
.
62
.
LIST OF TA&S (continued)
Table
13
Page
The distribution by area caught of the
catch and landings of trawl fish for
mink-food, Oregon, 1954 . . . . . . . . .
14
Disposition of the catch at sea of the
estimated numbers of Dover solo caught
in the Oregon trawl fishery, 1953 and.
1954
, , . . . . . . . . .
15 Disposition of the catch at sea of the
estimated numbers of English sole caught
in the Oregon trawl fishery, 1953 aM 1954
16
17
63
Calculated monetary value received by the
Oregon trawl fishermen for fish delivered
in 1952, 1953 and 1954 . . . . . . . . .
68
71
74
Calculated total monetary value received by
the Oregon trawl fishermen from sale of
for mink-food,
whole fish and fillet scrap
1952, 1953 and 1954
76
Appendix Tables
I Numbers of fish by species sampled from
mink-food landings at Astoria, 1953 . . .
II Numbers of fish by species sampled from
.
.
101
Numbers of fish by species sampled from
mink-food landings at Astoria, 1954 . .
.
105
Numbers of fish by species sampled from
mink-food landings at Newport, 1954 . .
.
113
mink-food landings at Newport, 1953 .
III
IV
V
97
Length-frequency distribution of the
numbers of Dover sole in the mink-food
and fillet market samples, 1953 and 1954
119
VI Length-frequency distribution of the
numbers of English sole in the mink-food
and. fillet market samples, 1953 and 1954
122
distribution of the
numbers of petrale sole in the mink-food
and fillet market samples, 1953 and 1954
124
VII Length-frequency
LIST 0? FIGURES
Figure
1
Page
Relative length-frequency distribution
of the Dover sole measured in samples
of mink-food and fillet market
landings
45
Relative length-frequency distribution
of the English sole measured in samples
of mink-food and fillet market
landings
3
. . . . . . . .
. .. .
. . . .
46
Relative length-frequency distribution
of the petrale sole measured in samples
of mink-food and fillet market
landings
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
49
Distribution
of the proportion of
mink-food fish in total landings from
individual catches, Astoria, 1953 and
1954 . .
Relative distribution of catch and
landings of mink-food deliveries from
known areas, Oregon, 1953 and 1954 .
6
7
60
.
65
Length-frequency distribution, weighted
to catch, of the estimated numbers of
Dover sole landed in Oregon, 1963 and
...
1954
69
Length-frequency distribution, weighted
to catch, of the estimated numbers of
English sole landed in Oregon, 1953 and
S
1954 . . . . . . . I S I I I I I
72
.
TEE MINK ROOD FISHERY OF OREGON IN 1953 AND 1954
INTRODUCTION
This study was conducted to ascertain the kinds and
amounts of fishes landed for mink farm use by the Oregon
otter-trawl fleet during 1953 and 1954 and to analyze some
of the important factors involved in the expanding mink
food fishery.
It is part of an overall investigation
begun in 1948
by the Research Department of the Oregon Fish Coission to
study the effects of the Oregon ottertraw1 fishery on the
stocks of fish utilized by the Oregon trawl fleet.
The Oregon trawl fishery, also called drag or bottom
fishery, in 1953 and 1954 was conducted in waters ranging
from Cape Blanco off southern Oregon to Vancouver Island,
British Columbia, and. extending in depths from 15 to over
200 fathoms.
trawl
The type of
net most widely
fleet is known as the "Eastern"
is towed by means of wire rope
used by the Oregon
otter-trawl net and
secured from stanohions on
both sides of the stern of the vasasi.
This is a method of
trawling peculiar to the Pacific coast of the United
States, in contrast to methods used for trawling on the
east coast of the United States (13, p. 171, 172).
The
Oregon trawl vessels ranged in length from 50 to 90 feet,
with capacities from 15 to 50 tons of fish.
Many types of marine
life which inhabit the ocean
floor are vulnerable to the otter trawl fishery.
However,
totrawl fish markets
are called "Soles" and rockfiahes, in the families
the principal fish species delivered
Pleuronectidae and Soorpaenidae.
HISTORY OF T
OGON MINK FOOD FIS
The Oregon trawl fishery
began in 1936 and. with it
an incidental fishery for mink'.'food developed. The amount
of whole fish landed for minkfood was small before World
War II. Only those mink ranchers who lived on the coast
and had easy
fish.
access to the delivery ports utilized trawl
BRed meats"
obtained from horses and young dairy
calves composed the staple portion of the diets fed to
ranch mink, Mustela vison (Schreber), (9, p. 4), up to and
throughout World War II During the war, horsemeat became
increasingly difficult and expensive to obtain.
In
contrast, abundant supplies of filleted fish carcasses
(the portion remaining
after the fillet has been renved)
were available for mink food.
ranchers
Increasing numbers of
took advantage of this inexpensive
protein food.
horsomeat, more
source of
Following the war, with the scarcity of
ranchers became dependent on trawl caught
fish as the main constituent in mink diets. By 1950,
bottom fish, both whole fish and fillet carcasses, made up
from 50 to 70 per cent of the diets fed to ranch mink in
3
Orogon west of the Cascade mountains (16, p. 10).
Mink ranchers in general utilized fillet carcasses in
preference to fish largely because they wore cheaper and
easier to obtain.
Until 1953, the supplies of filleted
carcasses were usually more than adequate to supply the
demand.
However, occasional curtailment of bottom fish
production occurred due to inclement weather, strikes
within the fishing industry and the fluctuations in the
economic conditions of the fillet marketing industry.
The
production curtailment often occurred during the suimner
and fall months when the need for fish by the ranchers was
the greatest.
The mink ranchers then found it necessary to
buy more whole flab. directly from the boats.
Prior to 1951 each ranober generally made his own
arrangements with the captains of the trawl vessels for
the delivery of fish which were made at any one of several
different docks.
In order to centralize and stabilize the
supply of both whole fish and fillet carcasses, a group of
mink ranchers organized a consumers' cooperative
the Oregon Fur Producers Association.
known as
This organization
procured freezing and. storage facilities in Astoria for
receiving and holding trawl fish.
Operation of the
Astoria plant began in 1951 and in June of 1953 similar
facilities began receiving fish at Newport.
The species of bottom fish preferred prior to 1951 by
4
the ranchers were in general the same species that were
There are several reasons for
used for han consumption.
this preference, of which three principal, ones were:
(1)
the storage and. food qualities
known; (2)
of these species were
the ranchers were accustomed to feeding these
species in the form of fillet carcasses; and, (3)
these
were often the predominant species caught by the trawlers
a
the fish too small. for the fillet market could easily
be saved for mink-food.
Until 1955 there was no Oregon
trawl regulation restricting the use of any
trawl fish for
animal food.
The increasing dema
for trawl fish f or
mink-food
created.
some concern and contention among the trawl fish-
ermen.
Some of the fishermen feared that the mink-food
fishery would expand. to such an extent that the stocks of
fillet market fish, principally Dover sole,
Microstomus
pacificus (Lookington); English sole, Parophrys vetulus
Girard;
setta
and. petrale sole,
jordani (Lockington)
(5, p. 327,328, 321, 322, 316, 317), would become
depleted.
The 1953 and 1954 mink-food aspect of
investigation was
intensified
the otter-trawl
in order to evaluate the
problems involved in the mink-food fishery in relation to
the otter-trawl fishery as
a
whole.
5
METHODS AND MLTERIAL
Specific Problems
The 1953-1954 mink food fishery study was conducted
primarily to determine four factors, namely:
The annual total production of fish for minkfood taken by the Oregon trawl fleet for each
port and for the state as a whole;
The poundage of each species of whole fish
landed for mink
food;
The size composition and the numbers of the
three principal fillet market soles mentioned
above landed for the mink food market;
The effects of the mink food fishery on the
production and the economics of
the Oregon
trawl fishery.
Production Statistics
The annual total production by weight of
fish for
mink-food by the Oregon trawl fleet includes the pounds of
whole fish and fillet carcasses sold. for mink-food.
The pounds of the whole fish landed for mink-food
were compiled from reports filed monthly with the Oregon
Fish Commission by fish processing firms or persons
receiving fish for resale. The total weight of each
6
species of fish received by a
processing
plant is required
to be reported on official forms (12, p. 66, 67) for the
purpose of taxation.
The data from these reports wore
compiled, to determine the pounds of fish laded at each
port by month arid by each fishing vessel.
The amount of fillet carcasses
utilized for mink-food
is computed from the weight of trawl fish landed for the
fillet markets.
weight
Between 70 and 80 per cent of
the initial.
of the fish remains as carcass after the fillets
have been removed, depending on the size, species and con-
dition of the fish. All of the fillet carcasses were not
used for mink-food, since some of the
species were not
desirable and occasionally the carcasses, through
spoilage, could not be
utilized.
Mr. Marvin BlUe, man-
ager of the Oregon Fur Producers Association's storage
plant, estimated that about 60 per cent of the original
landed
weight
mink-food.
market fish can be
purposes of this study the
of the fillet
For the
used as
fillet
carcasses available for mink-food wore computed
cent of the production for the fi11t markets.
at 60 per
Scientific and Common Names of Fish SDeciea
The trawl fishery production of mink-food includes
wide variety of species, many of which are known by
different common names in the industry and among the
a
7
scientific personnel along the Pacific coast of North
America, depending on geographic location.
TABLE I
COMMON AND SCIENTIFIC NAMES OF FISH THAT WERE COUNTED
IN THE MINK FOOD SAMPLES, ASTORIA AN]) NiW1ORT, 1953 AN])
1954.
American
Scientific Names
Oregon
Fisheries Society Fish Commission
Common Names *
Common Names
Flatfish
Atberethe
stomias
Arrowtoothed Halibut
Arrowtootb
Sole,
Turbot
Sand Dab
Citharicbthys a ordidue
Pacific Sand Dab
Bopeetta jordani
Roundnose Flounder Petrale Sole
G1ptocephalus
Longfin Flounder
Rex Sole
Flathoad Flounder
Flathead Sole
Isopsetta isolepis
Scalyf in Flounder
Lepidopetta bum'-
Rock Flounder
Bellingham Sole
Rock Sole
Slender F1ouner
Slender Sole
zachirus
Ltippogloaa oides
elas sodon
eata
Lyoisetta exilis
Micros tomus Dacificus Slippery Flounder
Paroithrys ye tulus
Lemon Flounder
Platichthys stellatus Starry Flounder
Peotticlithys
melanostietus
Sand Flounder
Dover Sole
English Sole
Starry Flounder
Sand Sole
TABLE I (continued)
Miscellaneous Fish
Shad
A1084 sapidiasima
American Shad
Anopoloma fimbria
Sable
Agonidae species
Poachers
Sea Poachers
Cottidae species
Seulpin
Zoarcidae species
Eel Pout
Seulpin
Eel Pout
Gadus macrocehalus
Pacific Cod
True Cod
Hydro].agus colliei
Ratfish
Ratfish
Hake
Mi croadus t,roximus
Pacific Hake
Pacific Tom Cod
Opbiodon elongatus
Ljng Cod
Ling Cod
Ra1a
Skate
Skate
Pacific Spiny
Dogfish
Dogfish
Merluocius produc tue
.
SQualus auchleyi
fish
Trachurus symmetricus Horse Mackerel
Black Cod,
Sablofi eli
Tom Cod
Jack Mackerel
Rookti eli
Sebastodes alutus
Longjaw Rockfiah
Pacific Ocean
Perch,
Rosofish
S. brevispinis
Shortapine Rockfish Grouper, Salmon
Rockfish
S. orameri
Blackmouth Rockfish Blaekmouth
Rookfish
.
diploproa,
Lobejaw Rockfish
Two Button
Rockfish
TABI
1 (continued)
S. melanops
Greenstriped
Greenstripod
Rockfish
Rockfish
Yellowtail Rockfish Yellowtail
Rockfish
Green Rockfish
Chiuipepper
Chili -pepper
Black Rockfish
Black Rookfish
S. mystinus
Priestfi ah
Gray Rockfish
. paucispinis
Booacoio
Bocaocio,
Salmon Grouper
. pinniqo)?
Orange Roekfish
Bed Snapper
Flag Rockfish
Hollywood
Rockfiah
Popeye Rockfish
Slim Thornhead.,
Channel Rockfish
Rosefish
S. elongatus
. flavidus
. poodie
S.
rubrivinctus
. saxicola
Sebastolobus
alascanus
Idiotfish
* If the common name of a fish was not listed in the
American Fisheries Society's Special Publication No.
the cornn name listed in current Pacific Coast
publications was used.
1,
Sam1ig Procedure
The equipment used for
was as follows:
(1)
a two
sampling the
wheeled
from 1000 to 1500 pounds of fish;.
minkfood fish
metal cart which held
(2) a "pugh
(a one
pronged pitchfork) which was used for separating the
10
species of fish; (3) a measuring board
calibrated in
centimeters; (4) a clipboard, pencil, and tabulating paper
for recording
data; and. (5) spring weighing scales.
A method of unloading trawl fish in general use at
Oregon docks allowed about the same sampling technique to
be used at Astoria and Newport in 1953 and 1954. When a
boat is to be unloaded, a wooden box which holds between
500 and 900 pounds of fish, is lowered by means of a
mechanical hoist from the dock into the hold.
crew then rakes, shovels or
"pugha"
The boat
the fish from one or
two of the several bins in the hold of the boat into the
box.
The full box of fish is then hoisted
and dumped Into
a cart.
Astoria Sampling Procedure
To obtain a sample of fish landed for minkfood at
Astoria, the bioloiat in charge, with the
permi8sion of
the plant foreman, selected one or two of the boxes
unloaded.
being
An effort was made to select fish which cane
from the middle twothirda of a bin in the hold or were
mixed from two or more bins.
obtain as random a sample as
This was done in order to
practical. The fish were
then spilled into a cart which was weighed and. taken to
an out of the way part of the plant where the fish were
dwed on the floor to facilitate sampling.
The biologist
11
counted and recorded al]. of the fish in the sample by
species as they were "pughed" back into the cart, with the
exception of Dover, English and petrale soles which were
put aside for measurement.
In most cases, each fish of
these three species thus separated were measured (fork
length) to
the nearest
which measured 29,8
29 centimeters.
lower centimeter; i.e., a fish
centimeters in length was recorded as
Measurements to the nearest lower eenti
meter were taken to facilitate measuring arid, to reduce
possible bias by the samplers.
In addition to the data derived from the samples,
average weights of
most of
the species were obtained.
This was accomplished by weighing from 10 to 100 fish of
a species
from
as many samples as practical throughout
the suninor.
Newport Sampling Procedure
Approximately the same tech
que was used for
obtaining samples of the mink'.food landings at Newport.
An exception was that when a cart could not
be used, the
individual boxes of fish were not weighed.
The unloading
procedure at
the Newport docks
was to dump the box of fish
into a hopper from which the fish were conveyed through a
washing operation and then into a truck.
A box of fish
Was selected in the same manner as at Astoria.
The fish
12
were dumped on the dock next to the hopper and the
samp].ing proceeded the same as at Astoria.
8amp1in Procedure at Other Ports
The fish sampled in the Coos Bay area in 1953 were
not counted or measured in the same mAnner as at the other
ports.
Instead, a biolOgist stationed in the area obtained
a visual estimate of the per cent composition in numbers
of each species as the fish were loaded into the fur
ranchers' trucks.
In 1954 there were no samples taken in
the Coos Bay area, since biologists could not be spared
from other projects.
The small
amount of fish landed for
mink-food in the Coos Bay area did not warrant the expense
of sending a biologist from Astoria to sample the relatively few landings there.
Comparatively small landings of mink-food were also
made by a trawler operating out of Tillamook Bay.
It was
not practical to take samples landed there but the
unloading operations were observed by biologists and notes
taken as to the approximate species composition.
For this analysis all fish landed for mink-food at
ports south of Astoria are included in the Newport landings unless noted otherwise.
This procedure was necessary
as it is the policy of the Oregon Fish Coisaion not to
publish information concerning individual landings
13
assignable to any particular boat. The grouping of the
landings at Coos Bay and. Tillamook Bay with those from
Newport has little if any effect on the species composition analysis, since the deliveries at these two ports
amounted to less than one per cent of the
total landings.
Total Species Composition Computations
The species composition of the total mink-food
production was computed from the data obtained in the
samples and landing records,
counted in the
numbers were
The numbers of each speoies
samples were totaled by port.
Total fish
then converted to total weight of each
species by means of conversion weights with the exception
of Dover, English and petrale soles. The total weights
of each of the latter speolea were computed, wherever
possible, from length-weight relationship tables as
explained in a following section.
The conversion weight
used for each species, except as noted, was the mean of
the average
weights
taken of each species in the samples
and are shown in Appendix tables I, II, III and IV.
The per cent composition of the total weight of each
species in the samples at
each port was computed for 1953
and 1954, Appendix tables V and VI. The per cent composi-
tion obtained was then applied to the total annual
production of each port where applicable
for computing the
14
total pOunds of each species landed. The total annual
production of each species for the state was then obtained
by adding the port totals for each species. For example,
the total number of arrowtooth soles counted in the mink'
food samples taken at Astoria in 1954
was 2,311 fish.
The
average weight of arrowtooth soles was found to be 3.0
pounds, resulting in a total
weight
of 6,933 pounds.
This
was 29 per cent of the 23,594 pounds of fish sampled at
Astoria.
The total annual production of arrowtooth sole
landed at Astoria in 1954 was computed as 29 per cent of
all the mink-food
delivered, to that port.
The same pro-
cedure was used. to ascertain the pounds of this species
landed at Newport.
The two part totals were then added to
obtain the annual production of arrowtooth soles for
Oregon.
Determination of Size Composition of Dover, English
Petrale Soles
The measurements taken of the three major fillet
market soles found in the mink-food samples were applied
to compute the total numbers and weight of each species
landed for mink-food at each port, and to construct a
relative length-frequency distribution curve of the fish
measured in the samples.
15
Length-Weight Relationship
the
three species it was first necessary to compute the weight
of the sampled fish. This was done by applying lengthweight tables to the total length-frequency distributions
compiled from the samples. The formtilas as determined from
research in previous years (10, p. 49) employed to derive
To determine
the total
landed weight of
each of
the length-weight tables used in this analysis
sole, W - 0.0000205L3°18; for English
follows:
for Dover
sole, w
o.O000].].OL
:
O.0000050L3459.
were as
187; and for petrale sole,
The weights at each oentiter
interval were totaled to obtain the total
The total woight8 of the
weight
sampled.
petrale soles
Astoria and at
Dover, English and
sampled in the mink-food landings at
Newport were applied in a similar manner as explained
ax'rowtooth sole to calculate the total annual weight
for
landed.
Length-Frequency Distribution
Distribution curves were constructed for oomparteon
of the relative length-frequency distributions by numbers
of the three fillet market
soles landed for mink-food, at
the two major ports and. with those species landed for the
fillet markets
in Astoria.
Length-frequency distribution#
compiled from the mink-food samples and from samples of
16
the three species landed. for the fillet markets were
utilized for this purpose.
Sampling of fillet market
Dover sole landings for age and. size composition by sex
was conducted throughout the summers of 1953 and 1954.
No
market samples, however, were taken of English and. petrale
soles during these two years, but these species were
sampled. in 1948 through 1951.
For this analysis, the
length-frequency distributions of these two species were
oompiled from the four years sampled and were combined
and used as the -best estimate available of the sizes of
these fish landed for the fillet markets in 1953 and 1954.
In order to smooth out the size distribution curves,
the
imbera of fish measured at each length were grouped.
numbered centinster size intervals. The
the total sampled at each size interval was
by twos at even
percentage of
computed and. utilized for constructing the relative
length-frequency curves.
The total numbers of Dover, English and petrale soles
at each size interval taken for the mink-food and. fillet
markets were computed by weighting the sample distributions to the total catch.
The factor used to project
sample numbers to total numbers at each size interval was
determined. by dividing the total weight
of the species
landed. annually by the weight of the species in the
sa1ea. Totaling the projected numbers of fish at each
17
size interval
produced the estimated total number of each
species landed annually.
This total was checked by
employing the ratio TN * Sn x T
, where TN is the total
number of fish landed annually, Sn is the numbers sampled,
is the total weight of fish landed annuaUy, and
the total
Analyses
weight
SW
is
of the fish sampled.
Mink-food Fishery
Some Effects
Oregon Trawl Fishery
The analyses presented in evaluating the effects of
the mink-food fishery on the trawl fishery are of
necessity of a gross nature.
Available time and assist-
ance were too limited to permit a thoroughly detailed
analysis of the mink-food fishery.
Nevertheless, some
measure of the effects of the mink-food fishery on the
otter trawl fishery can be attained from the following
information:
(1) total Oregon trawl production, (2) the
intensity of the trawl mink-food fishery as measured by
production by
area and month fished. and by boat, and
(3) some of the effects of the mink-food fishery on the
economics of the trawl fishery.
Methods of Comparing
Production of Mink-Food Fishery
with Trawl Fishery
The effect of the mink-food fishery on the total
18
Oregon trawl production was measured by a comparison
covering the ten year period from 1945 to 1954 of the
fillet
market production
(whole fish and
fillet scrap), to
the mink-food whole fish production, the numbers of Oregon
ranch mink, and the estimated amount of fish required for
mink food.
The method of finding the fillet market production of
whole fish and of fillet scrap used. f or mink-food has been
explained as has the method
of determining the production
of whole fish for mink-food. in.1953 and 1954.
Prior to
1953 landings of fish fox' mink-food were not reported
separately to the Oregon Fish
the production for the
Coiasion; consequently,
years 1948 through 1952 are esti
mates obtained from questionnaires sent to Oregon fur
ranchers (10, p
311-31?).
Computation of Numbers of Mink on
Oregon Ranches
The numbers of mink on Oregon ranches were calculated.
from information
derived from a bulletin
and letters
received from the Statistical Division of the National
Board of Fur Farm Organizations
and from the Oregon Exten-
sion Service at Oregon State College (6, p. 4).
data the numbers of
From these
mink kits produced on Oregon ranches
and the numbers of adult breeders used to produce them
were estimated.
In some years only the mink kit
19
production was recorded.
In these circumstances the total
number of mink on Oregon ranches was calculated by the
formula:
tion) -
Total Number of Mink
(Mink kit production)
3.25
(mink kit produc-
(Mink kit production)
.25
4
The constant 3.25 is the average number of kits (immature
mink) produced by each adult
female as was determined from
the average kit production per female in those years when
the numbers of adult females ard the kit productions were
available.
The mink kit production divided by the number
of kits per female gives an estimate of the number of
adult female mink.
The ratio of adult male mink to adult
female mink is approximately one to four according to
in interviews with mink ranchers.
The number of adult female mink divided by four then gives
information gathered
an estimate of the numbers of adult male mink on Oregon
ranches.
Computation of Fish Requirement of Mink Ranchers
The estimated amount of fish required for mink-food
was computed from the numbers of mink on Oregon ranches
and. the estimated average pounds of fish (76.4 pounds)
consumed each year by a ranch mink.
The number of pounds
of fish estimated to be consumed a year by one ranch mink
was calculated on'the assumptions that a mink is fed an
20
average of eight ounces of feed a day according t
information received from mink ranchers, and that 65 per
cent of the daily ration is fish cn a yearly average (16,
p. 9, 10) on ranches west of the Cascade mountains.
The
breeder mink are led daily, as a rule, throughout the year
and. the mink to be pelted are fed for approximately six
months.
A "family unit" (so called for ease of exp1ana
tion) consisting of 18 mink (one male, four females and
13 kits) will be fed approximately 2,116 pounds of feed in
a year of which 1,375 pounds (2,116 x .65) will be fish.
It follows then that the average consumption of fish per
mink on Oregon ranches is estimated as 175 : 76.4 pounds.
18
The amount of fish estimated to be required for feed
for Oregon mink is very probably a mini.niuu figure.
The
estimated annual requirement of fish does not take into
consideration the increase of breeder stock held over
each year in the expanding Oregon mink farming industry,
nor does it allow for any wastage of fish by the
ranchers.
Some of these factors would probably be
balanced out by the use of less fish by ranchers east of
the Cascade mountains but there are comparatively few
mink ranches in that area.
21
Methods of Evaluating the Intensity of
Mink-Food
Fi shel7
The intensity of the mink-food fishery was measured
in three waya
First, the pounds of mink-food fish caught
in a specified area, the number of landings of mink-food
made from that area, and the number of boats that fished
each specified area; second, the pounds of mink-food fish
landed by each vessel, the number of landings of mink-food
made by each vessel, and whether or not a vessel was
actively fishing for mink-food; and, third, the concen-
tration of the fleet on fishing for certain species for
mink-food.
Fishing Intensity by Area
The fishing area where each landing of mink-food was
caught was determined from interviews with the boat
captains.
Frequently the catch was made in more than one
area in which case the captain usually reported the area
where most of the fish were obtained.
The area system
employed by the Fish Conission biologists was established
in 1948 and was a modification of the California block
system (3, p. 37-39).
In this system the fishing grounds
are divided into approximately ten mile square blocks.
The sides of the blocks coorm with the minute latitude
and longitude lines.
Since each
block is numbered, the
22
captain usually reported the numbers of the blocks in
which he fished.
The position on the fishing grounds was
determined by moans of loran bearings In conjunction with
fathometer readings.
The areas fished by individual fishermen were kept
confidential.
FOr this reason it Is believed that most
of the fishermen generally accurately reported the areas
in which they fished.
A few fishermen either gave no
information or inaccurate records concerning the area
fished.
Occasionally when this condition occurred cross
checks with other fishermen would indloate the general
area
in which the wary boat operators were fishing.
For this particular study a more general area system
was devised iü which the trawling grounds off Oregon and.
Washington coasts were divided into five sections.
These
areas were defined by prominent headlands or other land-
marks and each molded a particular fishing
utilized by the Oregon
fleet.
from Area I north of the
ound
The areas were numbered
mouth of Willapa Bay in Wash-
ington, to Area V south of Heceta Head in Oregon.
bases for
The
the boundary lines of the areas in between were
Tillamook Rock and. Cascade Head.
The pounds of fish
landed for mink-food and the numbers of landings from each
of these general areas were compiled to indicate the
intensity of the mink-food. fishery In each area.
23
Fishing Intensity by Boat
The pounds of mink-food landed and
the number of
landings made by each boat were compiled and compared to
indicate some measure of the intensity of the mink-food
fishing between boats for each of the two years included
The comparison of the number of boats
in this study.
actively fishing for minkfood and boat8 catching minkfood incidental to fillet market fishing should show some
indication of the intenSity of the mink-food
relation to the fillet market fishery.
fishery in
The problem
involved in such a comparison is to differentiate between
active and incidental fishing
for mink-food. A boat was
considered to be incidentally fishing for mink-food then
saved for mink-food which would ordinarily
only fish- was
be discarded
market.
in a normal fishing trip for
the
fillet
The amount of fish discarded varied with the
demand by the fillet markets, the type and mesh
the trawl net used, the 8pecios of fish caught,
and the
owever, according to data gathered while
grounds fished.
sampling trawl
size of
catches at sea in 1950, the average discard
at sea from a normal fillet market
estimated as 56
fishing
operation was
per cent of the total catch (10, p. 264).
Only part of the discarded catch from a fillet
fishing operation could be used for mink-food.
species are not generally
Some
accepted by the mink ranchers.
24
Interviews with the fishermen have indicated that usually
between 40 and. 80 per cent by weight, with an average of
about 60 pox' cent, of the discard at sea is of fish which
could. be sold for mink-food.
Thus, if 56 per cent of the
catch from a fillet market fishing trip is discarded and
if 60 per cent of the discard could be sold for mink-food,
then for every 100 pounds of fi3h caught, 44 pounds are
fillet market fish, 34 pounds may be used. for mink-food,
and 12 pounds would be discarded.
Ba8ed. on this assumption, a trawl vessel could be
considered actively fishing
for mink-food if the fish
delivered for the fur farmers amounted to 43
(34
78) or more
single trip.
per cent
by weight of all the fish landed from a
The mink-food
portion, in
per cent, of the
total landings from a fishing trip wore calculated for the
Astoria mink-food landings.
The landings were grouped by
five percentage points and a distribution curve constructed, figure 4, of the grouped frequencies.
This
distribution tends to substantiate the above assumption
as
will be explained in
a following
800tiOfl.
Fishing Intensity on Dover, English, and. Petrale Soles
The effect of
the mink-food fishery on
the numbers
of fish of all species landed by the trawl fishery is
certainly worthy of note but of primary interest in this
25
study are the total number8 of Dover, English and petrale
sole s landed for mink-food and human consumption, and
those discarded at sea from fillet market fishing.
An explanation of the procedure employed to find the
market soles landed for
mink-food er4 human consumption from the length-frequency
total numbers of the three fillet
The
distributions has been given in a previous section.
distribution tables were also utilized to compute the
estimated numbers of each species landed for the fur
rancher markets which were smaller than the minimum size
generally accepted by the fillet markets.
These minimum
sizes are as follows: Dover solo, 36 centimeters
(approximately 14 inches); and English and petrale soles,
33 centimeters (13 inches).
It was found that petrale
sole contributed only about one per cent of the mink-food
deliveries, so it was excluded from this part of the
analysis.
The best estimates available of the numbers of Dover
and English soles discarded at sea from fillet market
fishing were the results of several samplings at sea trips
conducted in 1950 (10, p
260-264) o
The numbers of Dover
and English soles discarded from these trips were
estimated at 20.4 and 50.]. per cent, respectively.
From
the information obtained of the total numbers caught for
the fillet market, the numbers of Dover sole discarded
26
were computed from the formula:
Discard a Number of fillet market Dover x 20.4.
The estimated
79.6
numbers of English sole
discarded at sea
were approximately the same as the numbers delivered for
the fillet market.
Not all of the Dover and English sole estimated
to
have been discarded at sea were thrown overboard, however.
Some of these fish were
saved for mink-food, but not
enough information is available to determine the amount.
Boats that made fishing trips primarily for the fillet
markets often
saved mink-food, from the last day or two of
a three to five day fishing trip. For this
analysis the
amounts of Dover and English sole saved for mink-food from
the
discard
at
sea were not estimated.
ECONOMIC EFFECT OF THE MIIK-FO0D FISHERY
ON THE TRAWL FISHERY
The mo8t obvious and easiest measured economic effect
of the mink-food fishery on the trawl fishery as a whole
is the additional income received by the fishermen from
at two and a half cents a
pound. An indirect effect is the increase in price the
fishermen receive for fish delivered to the fillet markets
the sale of mink-food fish
through the sale of fillet scrap f or mink-food.
This
increase is estimated to be approximately one-half cent
a pound.
Less tangible effects of the mink-food fishery, both
beneficial and
detrimental, are
not measurable.
believed to occur but are
These will be discussed briefly in
another section.
VALIDITY OF ANALYSIS OF SAMPLING DATA
From the foregoing it is obvious that the value of
the results of the analysis of the
mink-food
landings
depends on whether the samples were representative of the
mink-food landings, on how accurate were the production
records, and on the validity of the tecbnique used for
analysis.
Production Recor
The production records can be presumed to be fairly
accurate since they are a part of the official records of
the Fish Commission of Oregon, although, they no doubt
present the very minimum figures of the actual landings
of the trawl fishery.
The landing records are required
mainly for the purpose of taxation and only the minimum
poundages could be expected to be
reported. It is known
that there were a number of landings of mink-food in both
1953 and
1954 which did not appear on the official records.
28
No attempt has been made to include an estimate of such
landings in this report.
Reliability of Samples
The mink-food sampling program was initiated mainly
the fish lande4
for mink-food and the size composition of the three
to determine the species composition of
principal fillet market fish.
The hypothesis was that the
species composition of the samples taken was
representa-
tive of the species composition of the fish lauded for
mink-food. The principal assumptions were that the
samples were randomly selected from a normal population.
Dual samples were takon of son
of the mink-food
landings in 1954 to determine if the percentage composi-
tion of each species was the same in both samples.
Two
such samples were taken at Astoria and seven at Newport.
More dual samples would have been desirable at
Astoria but
usually time and assistance were limiting factors.
Contingency ohi-square tests (8, p. 187-190) were performed to teat the hypothesis that each set of dual samples
came from the same population.
significance was chosen.
A five per cent level of
The results of the ehi-square
tests are shown in table 2. In only three of the nine
tests was the hypothesis accepted that the dual samples
came from the
same population. This meant that many of
29
the samples could not necessarily be considered repre-
sentative of the landing from which they were taken.
However, this does not void the premise that all of the
samples together might be representative, or nearly so,
of the total landings of mink-food during the sampling
period.
It was assumed that if enough samples could be
taken from as many landings by different
boats as possible
that the total species and size composition of the fish in
the samples would be representative of the species and
size composition
landings.
of the fish in the total mink-food
Projection of Samplin& Data
A valid question could be raised as to the advisability of expanding the data derived from sampling in the
summer months to cover the entire year.
It is readill
admitted that there is some difference in the species
composition of the fish landed in the spring
months.
and summer
However, this difference is probably reduced in
that a little over two-thirds of the total minkfood.
landings were delivered during the sampling period in
both 1953 and 1954.
Accuracy of Conversion Weigts
Another question might be raised about the accuracy
30
of the average weightings used to convert numbers of fish
to pounds of fish,
may vary
from
(the weights of each species of fish
season to season and from area to area).
A test of the accuracy of the weights can be made by
comparing the total observed weight of the samples with
the computed
weight. The
observed weight of a sample is
the weight of the box of fish at the time of sampling loss
a certain percentage, usually five per cent, that is
deducted for ice and slime.
total of the converted
sample.
The computed weight was the
weights
of all the species in the
The difference of the computed sample
weights
from the observed sample weights at Astoria in 1953 and
1954 was 3.7 per cent and 2.? per cent, respectively, of
the sample weights.
At Newport in 1953 this difference
the difference amounted to
cent. however, the samples taken at Newport were
was 1.3 per cent but in 1954
19.5 per
not actually weighed.
The average
weight per
as estimated by the plant foreman was used.
box of fish
This could
easily lead to an error in cases of observed sample
weights.
Since the average weights in the Astoria samples
appeared reliable, it was decided to use the Newport
computed sample weights for analysis.
It should be emphasized that much of the data
presented in this study were computed
estimates derived
from as much information as could be obtained
under the
31
circumstances. Although the specific information concern-
ing the fish species should not be taken as absolute, the
data does indicate the magnitude of the mink-food fishery
as a whole and the relative
within the fishery.
magnitude of the species
It is realized that, if future studies
can be greatly improved
to give a wider range of data and more specific information which would in turn improve the analysis techniques.
warrant it, the sampling program
RESULTS
Trawl Fisheries Production of Mink-foo4
Approximately 5.0 million pounds of whole trawl
caught fish were delivered for mink-food at Oregon ports
in 1953, table 3.
Of this amount 42 per cent, 2.1 million
and 58 per cent, 2.9
million pounds, at Newport and other ports. In the same
pounds, was delivered at Astoria
year
approximately 10.4 million pounds of trawl fish were
fillet markets, principally at Astoria.
Sixty per cent, 6.2 million pounds, of the landed weight
of the fillet market fish was available for mink-food as
fillet scrap. The total amount of fish available for
delivered for the
million pounds.
In 1954 the landings of whole fish f or mink-food in
Oregon amounted to approximately 6.0 million pounds,
mink-food was estimated to be 11.2
32
TABLE 2
TEST OF HOMOGENEITY OF MULTIPLE SAMPLES FROM INDIVIDUAL
LANDINGS OF MINK FOOD, ASTORIA AND NEWPORT, 1954
Computed
Sample
Numbers
Location
of Samples
Ciii -Sqare
Ciii -Square
Value
D. F.
Value
at 5% Level
2A.-2B
Astoria
273.8
7
14.07
5A5B
Astoria
51.0
8
15.51
lA-lB
Newport
59.4
5
11.07
3A-3B
Newport
11.7*
6
12.59
4A-4B
Newport
8.8*
5
11.07
7A-7B
Newport
1.0*
4
9.49
9A-9B
Newport
21.3
5
11.07
bA-lOB
Newport
180.4
7
14.0?
ilL-biB
Newport
94.9
6
12.59
* Not significant.
table 3, an increase of over a million pounds from thu
1953 landings.
The Astoria percentage of the total
landings decreased to 39 per cent, 2.4 million pounds,
while Newport and other ports received 61 per cent, 3.7
million pounds, of the mink-food whole fish.
The
increased landings of mink-food at Newport in 1954 were
due mainly to 12 months of operation by the Oregon Fur
Producers Association's plant.
In 1953 the plant did not
TABLE 3
OREGON TRAWL LNDINGS FOR MINK FOOD AND FTr.TET MARKETS, 1953 AN]) 1954
Whole Fish Landed for
Fillet
Mink Food
Fillet Scrap
Available for
Newport and
Total
Market
Landings
Pounds
Pounds
Pounds
Po'unds
Pounds
1953
2,100,000
2,900,000
5,000,000
1954
2,300,000
3,700,000
6,000,000
10,400,000
12,000,000
6,200,000
?,200,000
Year
Astoria
Other Ports*
* Tillamook Bay ax Coos Bay
Mink Food
34
begin receiving mink-food fish until June.
The fillet markets received 12 million pounds of fish
in 1954, an increase of 1.6 million pounds over 1953 landinga.
This made approximately /.2 million pounds of
fillet scrap available for mink-food, again principally
in the Astoria area, with a total of 1.3 million pounds
of whole fish and fillet scrap available to the fur
ranchers.
Species Composition of the Mink-Food Landin
Results of Sampling
Twenty-one sampleawere taken of fish landed for the
mink-food markets at Astoria and Newport in 1953 during
the months of May through September.
Thirteen of these
were obtained from nine boats at Astoria and seven from
tour boats at Newport.
In 1954 a total of 40 samples was obtained from June
through September at the two ports.
Twenty-one samples
were from 19 landings of seven boats at Astoria, while at
Newport twelve landings made by four boats contributed
19 samples.
The numbers and weights of each species in the
individual samples are shown in Appendixes I through IV.
In order to facilitate the analysis of the data, all the
rookfisbes were grouped together and the fishes which
TABLE 4
SPECIES COMPOSITION OF THE FISH IN SAMPLES TAKEN OF LANDINGS OF MINK FOOD,
ASTORIA AND NEWPORT, 1953
Fish Species
Numbers of Fish in Mink Food. Samples Computed. Weight of Fish in Mink
Food Samples
Astoria
Numbers
Astoria
Newport
Newport
Per Cent Numbers Per Cent Pounds Per Cent Pounds Per Cent
1,020
1,843
8
907
14
1,110
8
998
19
14
1,676
26
1,44?
11
837
16
6?
1
99
2
59
*Traoe
90
2
Arrowtooth Solo
1,608
12
120
2
4,824
36
720
13
Bellinghsm Sole
Rex Sole
2,108
16
636
10
8
318
6
4,911
3?
1,916
30
3.8
958
18
Starry Flounder
550
4
6
1,012
2,455
1,375
42
*Trace
156
3
85
1
350
7
8
840
3.3
1,099
8
1,013
19
Dover Sole
igliah Sole
Petrale Sole
Rockfiehos
Misc. Fishes
Total
1,023
13,172
* Trace-less than 0.5 per cent
6,356
*Traoe
13,466
10
15 *Trace
5,299
TABLE 5
SPECIES COMPOSITION OF TBE FISH IN SAMPLES TAKEN OF LANDINGS OF MINK FOOD,
ASTORIA AND NwkORT, 1954
Fish Species
Numbers of Fish in Mink Food Samples
Astoria
Numbers Per Cent
Newport
Numbers Per Cent
Computed Weight of Fish in Mink
Food Samples
Astoria
Newport
Pounds Per Cent Pounds Per Cent
11
12
1,560
2,8'TO
3
421
9
2,026
Dover Sole
2,298
11
1,019
11
English Sole
2,356
11
925
10
Petrale Sole
1'?'?
1
92
1
194
1
88
1
Arrowtooth Sole
2,311
11
2,594
27
6,930
29
4,669
35
Belllngham Sole
5
1,533
16
522
2
460
3
Rex Sole
1,045
8,455
41
619
6
18
248
2
Starry Flounder
1,526
7
7
13
29
raoe
Rockfishee
1,256
6
1,930
20
6
Misc. Fishes
1,588
7
913
9
4,228
3,052
1,335
2,439
4,804
1,943
Total
20, 812
* Trace--less than 0.5 per cent
9,632
raee
23,594
10
14,222
33
14
37
generally amounted to less than five per cent of the total
number, with the exception of petrale sole, were grouped
as miscellaneous fish.
A eunmiary of the numbers and.
weights of the major species and. groups of species
compiled from the samples in 1953 and 1954 are given in
tables 4 and 5.
In 1953 at Astoria, 13,172 fish comprising 29
species were counted in the samples.
Of these, rex sole
amounted to 3? per cent of the total, more than twice the
next most numerous species, Bellingham sole.
third of the sample
weights,
Over one
13,466 pounds, was attributed
to arrowtooth sole which amounted to twice the
weight,
18 per cent of the total, for rex sole, second in rank by
weight.
The Newport samples in 1953 were composed of 28
species totaling 6,356 fish.
A
at Astoria, rex sole was
most numerous, 30 per cent, followed by English sole,
26 per cent.
By
weight,
Dover sole was the dominant
single species with 19 per cent of the 5,299 pounds
sampled.
Rex sole and English sole contributed almost as
much with 18 and 16 per cent of the weight sampled.
The sampling program expanded
in 1954, resulting in
a total of 20,812 fish of 38 species counted. in Astoria.
Again rex sole was found to be the most numerous species,
accounting for 41 per cent of the total, which amounted
38
to almost four times the number8 of each of the three next
most numerous species, Dover, Engll8h, and arrowtooth
solos each comprising 11 per cent of the fish sampled..
Despite the large numbers of rex sole, they amounted to
only 18 per cent of the 23,594 pounds of fish sampled.
Arrowtooth sole, larger in
size than rex sole, contributed
29 per cent, Dover sole, 12 per cent, and.
ng1i8h sole,
nine per cent.
Fewer samples were obtained. at Newport where 9,632
representing 30 species of which
sole and assorted rockfiabes totaled 27 and 20
fish were counted.,
arrowtooth
per cent respectively
of the numbers
counted.
These fish
accounted f or two-thirds of the weight of' the 8amplea with
the rockfishea being slightly greater.
Total Landings by Species
The number of pounds for each of the major species
landed. for mink-food in Oregon in 1963 and 1954 as
computed. from the samples are shown in tables 6 and 7,
respectively.
Over a million pounds of arrowtooth sole, 22.7 per
cent of the total landings, was sold for mink-food in
1953.
In 1954 almost two million pounds of arrowtooth
sole wore landed. for mink-food with an increase to 31.5
per cent of the total landings. This
species was
39
TABLE 6
CAIULATED WEIGHTS BY SPECIES OF THE TRAWL FISH
DELIVERED FOR MINK FOOD IN OREGON, 1953
Species
Astoria
Newport
and Others
Total
Pounds
Pounds
Pounds
Per Cent
Dover Sole
167,065
547,090
714,155
English Sole
229,714
460,707
690,421
14.7
13.9
Petrale Sole
8,355
57,588
65,943
1.3
Arrowtooth Sole 751,791
Bellingbm Sole 167,065
375,895
Rex Sole
374,325
22.7
172,765
1,126,116
339,830
518,296
894,191
18.0
Starry Flounder 208,830
20,883
Rockfishes
158,710
Misc. Fishes
8,638
217,468
201,559
222.442
4.4
4.5
538.453
697,163
14 0
2,088,308
2,879,421
4,967,729
Total
6.8
40
TABLE
17
CALCULATED WEIGHTS BY SPECIES OF THE TR&WL FISH
DELTJERED FOR MINK FOOD IN OREGON, 1954
Species
Astoria
Newport
and Others
Total
Pounds
Pounds
Pounds
Per Cent
Dover Sole
2'?6 ,555
411,854
688,409
English Sole
207,416
112,324
319,740
11.4
5.3
Petrale Sole
23,046
37,441
60,487
1.0
Arrowtooth Sole 668,342
Bellingham Sole 46,093
1,235,563
1,903,905
112, 324
158,417
414,83
74,883
489,716
31.5
2.6
8.1
Starry Flounder 299,602
7,488
307,090
Rockfishos
138,277
1,235,562
Misc. Fishes
230,463
516,690
1,373,839
747,153
2,304,627
3,744,129
6,048,756
Rex Sole
Total
5.1
22.7
12.4
41
dominant in the Astoria landings for both years and in
Newport during 1954.
The most numerous species of fish landed for minkfood at Astoria in 1953 and 1954 and at Newport in 1953
was rex sole.
By weight it ranked second in the total
landings in 1953 with 894,000 pounds, 18.0 per cent.
In
1954 the total landings of rex sole were reduced to
490,000 pounds, contributing only 8.1 per cent to the
total landings.
This was due to the decrease In the
landings of this species at Newport.
Dover sole regularly occurred in the mink-food
landings in the two years studied.
In 1953, 714,000
pounds were landed, 14.7 per cent of the total; and. in
1954, 688,000 pounds, 11.4 per cent of the total, were
landed.
English sole accounted
for a
little more than
690,000 pounds, 13.9 per cent, of the 1953 mink-food
landings but dropped to about 320,000 pounds, 5. per
cent, in 1954. The results of the samples showed a
decrease in English sole in the mink-food landings at
both Astoria and Newport in 1954, but moat of the decrease
was due to the reduction in Newport landings. Probably
ire English solo were landed at Newport than is indicated
here, but insufficient samples were obtained to
substantiate this supposition.
42
Starry flounder was noted
deliveries at Astoria.
primarily in the mink-food
The total for both ports accounted
for 4.4 per cent, 217,468 pounds in 1953
and for 5.1 per
cent in 1964, 307,090 pounds.
Bellingham sole accounted for 6.8 per cent, 340,000
pounds of the fish landed in 1953, with approximately
equal amounts delivered to both ports.
In 1954 less
Bellingham sole was found in the mink-food landed at
Astoria, 46,000 pounds, than at Newport, 112,000 pounds.
The total landings of Be].lingham sole in 1954 amounted to
a little over 158,000 pounds, 2.6 per cent.
Rockfishes were of considerably more importance in
the Newport mink-food landings than at Astoria. Only
21,000 pounds were delivered at
Astoria in
1953 while
about 202,000 pounds were landed at Newport. In 1954
the
although the Astoria landings
increased to 138,000 pounds while those at Newport jumped
to 1,236,000 pounds.
The total landings of miscellaneous fish amounted to
about 700,000 pounds, 14.0 per cent, in 1953 and to about
same pattern prevailed
750,000 pounds, 12.4 per cent, in 1954.
By weight the
Newport landings of miscellaneous fish in the mink-food
deliveries amounted to considerably more than twice the
weight
of miscellaneous fish landed at Astoria.
43
Size Composition of the Dover, English az. Petrale Soles
The 1953-54 relative length-frequency distribution
of the Dover sole measured in the samples of mink-food
landings at Astoria and Newport and the fillet market
landings of Dover sole are presented in Appendix V. These
distributions are graphically compared in figure 1. Only
15 Dover sole from one sa1e were measured at Newport in
1953 and. these were not included in the graph.
Dover Sole
The Dover sole in the mink-food landings at Astoria
in 1953 ranged from 18 to 60 centimeters in length with
the mode at 36 centimeters. A considerable proportion,
48 per cent, of the total numbers of mink-food Dover solo
was smaller than the minimum size required by the fillet
markets.
A small proportion, 11 per cent, of the
fillet
market fish was also smaller than the discard length since
some marginal fish are unavoidably kept by the fishermen
while sorting the fish at sea. The fillet market fish
ranged from 28 to 66 centimeters in length with the mode
between 38 nd 40 centimeters.
The Dover 8010 in the 1964 mink-food samples were a
little larger than in 1953 with the mode at 38 centimeters. The range was about the same, 18 to 62 centimeters.
Only 29 per cent of the fish measured were
44
smaller than the discard length.
The fillet market Dover
8010 were also slightly larger with the mode at 40 centimeters.
The size distribution curve of the Dover sole
measured in the uiink-food samples at Newport in 1954
corresponds roughly to the size distribution ofthie
species delivered to the Astoria fillet markets.
The size
range, 24 to 60 centimeters, of the Newport fish is from
one to two centimeters to the left of that found in the
Astoria fillet market fish as depicted in the graph.
English Sole
The 1953-54 relative length-frequency distribution
of the English sole measured in the samples of mink-food
landings at Astoria and Newport are graphically compared
in figure 2, with the combined relative length-frequency
distribution of the fillet market samples of English sole
taken in 1948 through 1951 as applied to the numbers of
English sole landed in 1963 and 1954.
This graph was
drawn from the size distributions as compiled in
Appendix VI.
The size range of the English sole in the Astoria
mink-food in 1953 ranged from 14 to 51 centimeters as
compared to the 22 to 54 centimeter size range of the
fillet market fish.
The English sole measured in the
Newport samples were considerably smaller, 16 to 40
45
Maod Lsth
1953
As tarts )tnk Food
0
Aatcria lust Fish
P?,695
S
0
16
20
24
2
40
32
4
44
56
52
Astoria fink Food
12,298
1954
15
0
.
Aatoria
64
0-
--0--
fink Food
.p .I.port
N1,016
0o
.
60
Fillet Fi.h.o..
N5,16
d
'I'40
'4'O
'9
'S
'S
I
lb
0's'
24
2
'I'4'.
.
F
O%.O.
I
32
36
I
I
40
44
"a
I
52
56
Lsgth in C.tin.t.rs
Length-Prsqusb M.tributios,
(houp.d by Two's, of th. Du Sole ssanr.d in
Sanpi.. of fink Food and Fillet )rket Landings.
P1gm. 1. Rolsti
-
.,
60 64
47
centimeters, than those measured in the Astoria mink-food.
It should be noted, however, that the English sole in only
one sample were measured at Newport in 1953.
This
distribution is bimodal at 20 and 26 centimeters as
compared to
the single mode at 32
centimeters in the size
The
distribution of the Astoria mink-food English sole.
modes in both of these distributions are several centi-
meters less than the mode at 36 centimeters of the
fillet-market English sole.
This is further emphasized
when it is noted that about 61 per cent of the Astoria
mink-food English sole and 96 per cent of the Newport
mink-food English sole wore smaller
fillet market discard length.
fillet-market English
than the 3 centimeter
Sixteen per cent of
the
sole were also smaller than the
discard length.
The size range
of the English sole delivered for the
fur ranchers in the samples taken at Astoria in 1954 were
shorter, 20 to 50 centimeters, than those measured in
1953.
This species in the Newport samples in 1954,
however,
ranged from 14 to 52 centimeters in length.
The
Newport size distribution was again bimodal as in 1953 but
the modes at 22 and
30 centimeters
fish than was the case in 1953.
were caused by larger
The mode of the Astoria
mink-food English sole distribution, between 32 and 34
centimeters, likewise shows an increase in the aizi of
48
the English sole in the 1954 samples over those sampled
in 1953. This 1. reflected in the smaller percentage, 47
per cent at Astoria and 82 per cent at Newport, of the
numbers of English solo smaller than the discard size.
Petrale Sole
Comparatively few petrale sole
wore measured in the
mink-food samples at Astoria and Newport in 1953 and 1954
as can be seen in Appendix VII.
Because of thIs the
distribution curve Is erratic as illustrated In figure 3.
Nevertheless, a rough estimation can be made of
the size
distribution of petralo sole measured in the mink-food
samples. The fillet market size distribution is of
petrale sole sampled in 1948 through 1951.
in the mink-food samples taken at
Those measured
Astoria indicated a mode
of 30 eentiters on the distribution curve with approximately 73 per cent of the fish less than the 33 centimeter
discard size.
The peak of the fillet market distribution
curve occurs at 38 centimeters with 10 per cent of the
fjah less than the discard length.
measured in the
The petral. sole
1954 mink-food samples at Astoria were
larger in size as was noted to be true of the Dover and
English sole in the 1954 samples.
The mode of the petrale
sole measured In the 1954 mink-food samples occurred at
52 centimeters and only 52 per cent were smaller
than the
49
30
Disod L.ngth
2?
£atsrts E
1953
24.
7.Sd
*
I'
21
t
M
1z14a flhl$ Ttsh ....
S
0
0'
.
S
4
o
S
S
.
I
.
I
S
0S
4
S
So.
0
6
I
I
0S
\
:3
-S
0
21
S
ie
24 a 32
20
16
I
0.0
40
36
52
56
60
4
I.,p.rt Mink Food
oS
12
'I
3
149.
6.
3.
:
'.
S
istaria Piil.t Fish "o"
(194$.1951)
.
I
I
I
S
5)
I
S
p
0
4
44
A.tcri* Mink Food
195.4
J15
04
\b'!0c.O
/1
I
Pr.
I, S
S
0
S
.01
. 0,
0
S
'#S
.A
:
I
16 2O242S%4O444
L.mgth in C.ntia.tars
52
56
60
Figurs 3 Rdativ L.t.h-7rsqnsocy Diatribstion, Grouped by No' a, of
Petrel. Sole Ns..nr.d in $i.. of Mink Food and Filist rk.t landings.
50
minimum fillet aizø.
The petra].. sole in the Newport
mink-food samples in 1953 and 1954 appeared to have a
fairly wide distribution generally between 16 and. 52
centimeters.
SOME EFFECTS OF THE MINK-FOOD FISHERY ON THE TRAWL FISHERY
PRODUCTION OVER A TEN YEAR PERIOD
Production Increase Over a Ten Year Period
Fish Required
The amount of fish, whole flab and fillet scrap
required for mink-food Is in direct proportion to the
numbers of ranch mink produced in the state.
The amount
of whole fish required by fur ranchers depends to a large
extent on the amount of fillet scrap available for minkfood.
The relationship of these factors over a ten year
period, 1945 through 1954, are shown in table 8.
Numbers of Mink on Oregon Ranches
The numbers of mink
on Oregon
ranches have almost
quadrupled. from an estimated 56,300 in 1945 to about
204,000 in 1954.
The landings of fillet market fish bye
fluctuated from a high of 26.0 million pounds In 1945 to
a low of 10.4 million pounds in 1953.
The amount of
available fillet scrap varies directly with the amount of
TABLE 8
THE OOMPuTu NUMBERS OF MINK ON OREGON RINCHES AND TIrE CALCULATED POUNDS
OF FISH AVAILABLE AND REQUIRED FOR MINK FOOD IN OREGON, 1945 - 1954
Year
Thousands
of
Mink
Millions of
Fillet Fish Landed
Pounds of Whole
Millions of Pounds of Pish
Available for Mink Food
Fillet
Whole
Total
Unknown
Unknown
25.5
14.1
20.1
16.0
15.6
15.3
8.5
12.1
9.6
Unknown
Unknown
20.2
22.0
21.3
12.1
13.2
12.8
10.4
12.0
6.2
7.2
Scrap
1949
56 3
68.5
79.0
90.6
91.4
1950
99.9
1951
1952
128.2
141.3
1953
171.6
1954
203.5
1945
1946
194'?
1948
26 0
Fish
2.8
3.3
4.5
2.0
2.0
2.0
5.0
6.2
11.3
15.4
14.1
14.1
15.2
14.8
11.2
13.4
Calculated
Millions of Pounds
of Fish Required
for Mink Food
43
5.2
6.0
6.9
7.0
7.6
9.8
10.8
13.1
15.5
52
the fillet landings.
Until 1953 the fillet scrap alone
would have been adequate provided the supply was constant,
However, some whole fish were needed to fill in the
periods of short supply of fillet scrap and to balance
adequately the diets of mink.
A few fur ranchers
preferred to use only whole fish whenever possible.
Fish Available
Fish delivered for mink-food was not reported as such
before 1953.
The estimates of whole fish available for
mink-food for 194'? through 1952 were computed primarily
from the results of questionnaires submitted to the mink
ranchers (10, p. 311-317).
two and four and a half
These indicate that between
million pounds of
delivered for mink-food in those years.
whole fish were
It can be noted
that the amount of whole fish required by the fur ranchers
is in inverse proportion to the amount of fillet scrap
available.
The total pounds
of fish required for mink-food are
calculated estimates as explained previously.
subject to some errors, one
They are
of which is that the same
proportion of fish was computed as used in the mink diets
in all ten years.
This is somewhat doubtful for the
years previous to 1950.
It is believed, however, that
the estimates from 1950 through 1954 are reasonably
53
accurate.
This being the case, it appears that there were
insufficient amounts of fish, about two million pounds
each year, delivered for mink-food in 1955-54. It is
known that some fish was imported. for mink-food in those
years, but probably not the amount ind.icated. An
alternative explanation was that not all of the mink-food
whole fish was reported to the state. This was known to
be the case.
Intensity of the Mink Food Fishery
By Boat and. By Month
All but two vessels of the Oregon trawl fleet of
40 boats in 1953 reported at least one landing of whole
fish for mink-food. There were 34 boats fishing regularly out of other Oregon ports, mainly Newport The
boats delivered the mink-food to borne ports except for
three Astoria boats which were forced into Newport by
storms and made one landing each there.
the landings
of rnink.food at Astoria and. Newport are presented in
table 9. About 92 per cent of the mink-food was landed
from April through October. The Newport boats did not
start fishing regularly for mink-food until June and no
landings were made in December. The four boats fishing
The 1953 distributions, by month, of
out of Newport, with the three deliveries of the Astoria
TABLE 9
DISTRIBUTION OF THE LAiDINGS OF MINK FOOD BY MONTH
AT ASTORIA AND NEWPORT, 1953
Month
Number of Boats
Landing Mink Food
Number of Landings
of Mink Food
Astoria
Astoria
Newport
Newport
Pounds of Mink Food Landed
Astoria
Newport
Total
Per Cent
Trace
Jan.
2
2
8,460
None
8,460
Feb.
7
13
69,095
None
69,095
1
Mar.
20
39
201,540
None
201,540
4
Apr.
25
59
450,905
None
450,905
9
May
15
36
394,928
None
394,928
8
June
16
6
35
14
263,063
12
July
10
4
11
25
56,830
306,333 596,396
726,689 783,519
Aug.
11
5
24
25
135,565
16
Sept.
7
4
21
22
209,360
Oct.
11
4
30
18
205,271
632,942 768,507
540,944 750,304
577,176 782,447
Nov.
7
4
11
1
71,761
29,380 101,141
2
Dec.
7
21,530
21,530
Total
10
291
105
2,088,308 2,813,464 4,901,772
16
15
16
Trace
TABLE 10
DISTRIBUTION OF THE LA1DINGS OF MINK FOOD BY MONTH
AT ASTORIA AND NEWPORT, 1954
Month
Number of Boats Number of Landings
Landing Mink Food
of Mink Food
Astoria
Newport
Astoria
Newport
2
Pounds of Mink Food Landed
Total Per Cent
Astoria
Newport
105,255
87,765
193 020
3
219,294
4
157,961
3
108,902
2
Jan.
9
2
12
Feb.
18
1
32
2
213,'759
Mar.
11
1
21
3
73,138
Apr.
6
4
9
8
20,267
5,535
84,823
88,635
May
5
4
7
22
30,850
519,270
550,120
9
June
6
4
19
23
121,698
54,395
656,093
1].
July
8
5
21
21
370,578
544,850
915,428
15
Aug.
9
4
46
24
953,583
715,097
1,868,680
28
Sept.
5
4
21
21
292,976
559,810
852,786
14
Oct.
4
4
8
7
109,138
172,455
281,593
5
Nov.
3
3
8
6
235,663
4
Dec.
6
1
12
3.
140
101,650
5,941,190
2
216
188,390
40,465
61,185
2,399,700 3,541,490
Total
47,273
56
boats there, made 105 landings totaling a little over
2.8 million pOund8 of fish.
At Astoria 32 boats made
291 landings totaling about 2.1 million pounds of fish
for mink-food.
The Astoria boats averaged a little over
7,000 pounds per landing compared to about 27,000 pounds
per lathing by the Newport boats.
In 1954 landings of mink-food were mad. throughout
the year at both Astoria and Newport but due to poor
fishing weather a smaller proportion of the landings were
made in April and October
as shown in table 10. Eighty-
four per cent of the mink-food fish was landed from April
through October with approximately twice as many fish
landed in August as in any other month.
At Astoria 26 boats made 216 landings of mink-food
totaling about 2.4 million pounds in 1954.
As in 1953
the four Newport boats landed substantially more mink-
food, 3.5 million pounds in 140 landings, than the Astoria
boats.
There were two deliveries at Newport by Astoria
boats.
The average weight of the Astoria landings
increased to 11,000 pounds, while the Newport average
pounds per trip decreased to 25,000 pounds.
The total pounds of mink-food landed by each boat
that delivered mink-food in the Astoria area in 1953 and.
1954 are shown in table 11.
The largest annual landing
by a single boat in 1953 was about 175,000 pounds while
57
TABLE 31
AVERAGE ANNUAL WEIGHT OF MINX FOOD FISH LANDED BY EACH OF
THE ASTORIA TRAWL VESSELS IN 1953 AND 1954 AND THE
NUMBER OF LANDINGS BY EACH VESSEL
Boat No.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
2?
28
29
30
31
32
33
Pouzs of Mink
Number of
Landinga
Food. Landed
1954
1953
118,205
15,900
90,950
39,820
48,719
17,935
7,125
15,785
81,380
122,287
125,140
29,163
34,008
7,620
112,362
69,543
25,585
74,630
174,625
65,150
105,188
15,255
12,015
104,155
24,500
12,200
140,775
130,863
37,665
96,606
33,550
99,604
13,695
0
0
31,478
87,010
15,789
0
0
69,510
15,000
0
23,600
0
72,772
645,973
22,852
0
204,452
418,068
234,380
34,730
9,134
33,195
41,223
25,261
57,603.
2,368
112,280
0
1954
1953
1954
10
4
0
0
3
11
7
0
0
2
1
11,821
5,300
11,369
6,655
5,412
8,967
7,125
3,944
13,563
13,563
17,87?
5,832
5,668
3,810
10,215
3,660
8,528
5,331
10,272
5,429
6,574
3,814
2,403
4,166
8,167
12,200
12,798
4,362
7,533
5,367
11,183
5,534
3,423
3
8
4
9
2
1
4
6
9
7
5
6
2
11
19
3
14
1
12
16
4
5
25
3
1
11
30
5
18
89,790
21,205
10,105
18
0
0
Total 2,088,308 2,399,700
34
35
0
0
0
2,862
Landinga
1953
84,36?
0
Average Weight of
0
5
0
19
31
4
0
24
20
10
3
3
8
10
4
6
2
9
0
3
13
0
0
2
5
291
216
9
1
0
0
0
0
0
lO,492
7,910
2,255
0
0
34,755
15,000
0
4,720
0
3,830
20,837
5,713
0
8,519
20,903
23,438
11,57?
3,045
4,149
4,122
6,315
9,600
1,184
12,475
0
6,490
0
9,977
21,205
5,052
4,772
58
the largest in 1954 was 848,000 pounds made by another
boat. There were 12 boats in 1953
which each landed more
than 90,000 pounds of mink-food and in total accounted for
68
per cent
at Astoria. In 1954 six
of the landings
boats, landing more than 90,000 pounds each, accounted for
67 per cent of the Astoria mink-food landings.
six boats accounted for 44
food landings.
per cent of the Astoria mink-
The highest average landing per boat in
1953 was about 18,000 pounds
in 1954.
Two of the
compared with 35,000 pounds
The mink-food landings In Astoria in 1953 ranged
from 500 pounds to 40,000 pounds per trip as compared to
300 pounds to 50,000 pounds in 1954.
At Newport the
individual landings ranged from 1,000 to 65,000 pounds
with an average of 26,800 pounds in 1953, while in 1954
the landings ranged from 900 pounds to 56,000 pounds with
an average of 25,300
pounds per landing.
Incidental Compared to Active Mink-rood Fishing
As has been mentioned, the four boats fishing out of
Newport which landed nearly all of the mink-food at that
port had markets only for mink-food. None of the Astoria
boats fished exclusively for mink-food. However, many of
them actively sought mink-food In conjunction with catches
for the fIllet markets in contrast to saving mink-food
caught incidentally in the fillet market fishery. A few
59
of the Astoria boats fished exclusively tc' mink-food
during part of the year.
The distributions of the proportions of ininkfood. in
landings which contained both mink-food and fillet market
fish at Astoria are very similar for both .ara as
illustrated in figure 4.
There appears to be three groups
in the distributions as follows:
fishing,
in
incidsntal mink-food
which the mink-food amounts to less than
46 per cent of the landing (the landings are grouped by
five percentage points); actively fishing for mink-food,
in which the mink-food constituted from 51 to about 80 per
cent of the landings; and. exclusively fishing f or mink-
food, in which the
landings were composed of more than
80 per cent mink-food.
The percentages of the landings
that fall into each of the three groups are
trikingly
similar for 1953 and 1954 in that 46 and 45 per cetit,
respectively, of the mink-food landings were fish caught
incidentally during fillet market fishing; about ?5per
cent, both years, of the mink-food landings were from
fishing trips in which the animal food was actively
in conjunction with
sought
fillet market fishing; and 29 and 30
per cent, in the two respective years, of the landings
were from trips made almost exclusively for mink food.
'jO
4.
'r.tsl
Poe'
the 7rOpO
GrouPe' b yt.") h.tOt,
90
of
TrtP
.e' 1954.
61
On Fishing Grounds
The fishing ground.e utilized the heaviest for minkfood in both 1953 and 1954 were located generally within
a 20 mile radius of the mouths of the Colum.a and. Yaquina
rivers. This included area II, defined as the fishing
grounds off Astoria between the mouth of Willapa Bay and.
Tillamook Rock; and area IV off Newport, located b.tw.en
Cascade Head and Heceta Head.
Approximately 88 per cent, 1.8 million pounds, of
the fish sold for mink-food at Astoria in 1953 were taken
from area II with the remaining percentages about squally
divided among the other four areas, table 12. At Newport
in 1953, table 12, about 72 per cent, 2.0 million pounds,
of the mink-food deliveries were from catches made in
area IV. The fishing grounds south of Heceta Head,
areaV, supplied approximately one-fourth, 0.7 million
pounds, of the Newport mink-food. No Newport boats
ventured north of the Columbia river. The origin of the
catch of a little over three and one per cent of the
poundage delivered to Astoria and Newport respectively
could not be determined.
The weight percentage distributions by areas of the
mink-food delivered at Astoria in 1954, table 1, were
very similar to that in 1953. Area II produced 87 p.r
cent, 2.1 million pounds, with the other areas
TABLE 12
THE DISTRIBUTION BY AREA CAUGHT OF THE CATCH ANI) LANDI NUS OF
TRAWL FISH FOR MINI( FOOD, OREGON, 1953
Per Land- Per
Per Land- Per
Pouxda
Area I
Area II
Cent inge
Cent
Pounds
Cent ings Cent
12
4.1
1,829,780 87.6
255
87.6
30,159
1.1
70,725
Per
Pounds Cent
Land- Per
ings Cent
1.3
12
3.0
2
1.9 1,859,939 38.0
257
64.9
2.9
2.2
9
2.3
21.7
a a
3.1
64,375
Total
Newport
Astoria
*Are a
64,375
109,015
Area III
38,290
1.8
6
2.1
2.5
3
Area IV
61,935
3.0
8
2.8 2,013,464 '71.6
78
74.2 2,075,399 42.3
86
Area V
24,630
1.2
3
1.0
686,405 24.4
19
18.1
686,405 14 0
22
5.6,
Unknown
69,298
3.3
7
2.4
3
2.9
2.2
10
2.5
Total
2,088,308
291
* Area I - North of Willapa Bay
Area
Area
Area
Area
37,341
2,813,464
II - Willapa Bay to Tillamook Rook
III - Tillsmook Rook to Cascade Head.
IV - Cascade Head. to Heceta Head
V - South of Heceta Head
1.
105
106,639
4,901,772
396
TABLE 13
THE DISTRIBUTION BY AREA CAUGHT OF THE CATCH AND LANDINGS OF
TRAWL FISH FOR MINK FOOD, OREGON, 1954
Unown
Total
Newport
Astoria
Per Land Per
Per Land Per
Per Land- Per
Pounds
Cent inge Cent
Cent
Pounds
Cent
inga
Pounds Cent inge Cent
95,793 1.6 13 3.7
--- -95,793 4.0 13 6.0
1.4 2,153,783 36.2 185 52.0
68,500 1.9
2
2,085,283 86.7 183 84.7
4.2 266,675 7.5 10 7.1 332,865 5.8 19 5.3
9
66,190 2.8
0.5 2,239,427 63.2 97 69.3 2,260,632 40.0 98 27.5
1
21,205 0.9
2.3 879,123 24.8 29 20.7 981,124 16.5 34 9.6
5
102,001 4.2
7
2.0
1.4 116,993 1.9
87,765 2.5
2
2.3
5
29,228 1.2
Total
2,399,700
Area I
Area II
Area III
Area IV
Area V
216
541,490
* Area I - North of Wil].apa Bay
Area II - Willapa Bay to Tlllarnook Rook
Area III Tillamook Rock to Cascade Head
Area IV - Cascade Head to Hoceta Head
Area V - South of Heceta Head
140
5,941,190
356
64
contributing from one to 4 per cent of the volume.
The
Newport boats extended their range in 1954, principally
to the areas adjacent to area IV.
Area IV produced 63 per
oent, 2.2 millIon pounds; area III produced about 8 per
cent, 0.3 millIon pouth8; and. area V produced 25 per cent,
0.9 mIllion pounds.
The per cent by numbers of fishing trips made to each
area coincides roughly with the per cent volume from each
area in both years indicating that no particularly large
or small landings of
mink-food wore made
from any
particular area.
The relative distributions of the total catch
and
numbers of landings of mink-food delivered in 1953 and
1954 are graphically compared in figure 5. Area I
contributed 1.3 per cent of the catch and 3.0 per cent of
the landings in 1953 compared to 1.6 per cent of the catch
and 3.7 per cent of the landings in 1954. ThIrty-eight
per cent of the catch and 65 per cent of the landings were
produced from Area II In 1953. In 1954 this area produced
a slightly smaller percentage
of
the total catch, 36
per
cent, and an appreciable smaller proportion, 52 per cent,
of the landings. Area III was a middle ground for the
boats from the two ports, and only a little over 2.0 per
cent of the 1953 catch and landings compared to between
6.0 and 5.0 per cent of the catch and. landings in 1954
66
were taken in this area.
The fishing grounds producing the largest volume of
milik-food in both 1953 and. 1954 were in area IV where 42
and. 40 per cent, respectively, of the catches were made.
Landings from this area amounted to 22 and 28 per cent
respectively in the two years. Area V ranked third after
Area II in mink-food production in both years. The
fishing grounds off the entrances of the several rivers
generally fair trawling groundS
but the distances from Astoria are prohibitive for heavy
south of Heceta Head are
fishing by beats from that port, although some Newport
boats fish regularly in that location.
Fourteen per cent
of the catch and 5.6 per cent of the landings were made
from area V in 1953. In 1954 the catch from this area
increased to 16.5 per cent and the landing. to 9.6 per
cent. The areas for 2.5 per cent of landings in 1953 and
2.0 per cent of the landings in 1954 were not determined.
Intensity on Dover Bole
As has been mentioned, the total numbers of Dover and
English sole caught by the Oregon trawl fishery are of
primary interest in studying the effect of the mink-food
fishery on the stocks of these species. Of particular
importance are the total numbers of Dover and English sole
landed at Astoria for mink-food that are smaller than the
67
minimum fillet market size length of these speoles.
A little over 2.0 million Dover solo were calculated
to have been caught by the Oregon trawl fleet in 1953 as
indicated in table 14.
Approximately 1.4 million of these
were delivered to the fillet market and 375,000 were acid
for mink-food.
The remainder, 351,000, were estimated to
have been discarded at sea by the fillet market fishery
as based on studies made of discard at sea in 1950.
A total of 469,000 Dover sole which were smaller than the
discard were estimated to have been caught in 1953.
The
mink-food landings accounted for about 118,000 of these.
An estimated 351,000 fish of this species were discarded
at sea.
In 1954, approximately 3.1 million
caught by the trawl fishery.
Dover sole were
Two-thirds of these, about
2.1 million, were taken for the fillet market and the
remainder was divided between the discard at sea, 540,000,
and mink-food landings, 480,000.
The same numbers,
approximately 118,000, of Dover sole in the mink-food
landings were smaller than the discard length as in 1953.
The number of the small fish discarded at sea in 1954
increased over 1953 to about 540,000.
This was due
primarily to the increased catch for the fillet markets
in 1954.
The sire distributions
of the total numbers of
Dover
68
TABLE 14
DISPOSITION OF THE CATCH AT SEA OF THE ESTIMATED NUMBERS
OF DOVER SOLE CAUGHT IN THE OREGON TRAWL FISHERY,
1953 AND 1954
1953
Total
Numbers
Numb e i's
Sinai ler
Caught
than
Discard
Length
1954
Numbers
Total
Sinai ler
Numbers
than
Caught
Discard
Length
Astoria
Mink Food
154,000
74,000
221,000
64,000
Newport
Mink Food
221,000
44,000
269,000
54,000
2,088,000
Fillet Market 1,370,000
Discard at
Sea
Total
351,000
351,000
540,000
540,000
2,096,000
469,000
3,118,000
658,000
sole, weighted to catch, lathed for the mink-food markets
and for the fillet markets in 1953 and 1954 are illustrated in figure 6.
The numbers of Dover sole landed for
mink-food in 1953 and in 1954 amounted to approximately
one-fourth of the fillet market landings in each of the
respective years.
Thirty-two per cent of the mink-food
Dover sole landed in 1953 wore smaller in
discard length as compared to 28 per
8ize
than the
cent in 1954.
The
fillet market Dover sole in 1954 were also slightly larger
L.ngth in Cstia.t.ri
?igr. 6. Lmgth-?r.qn.noy Distributiot, Grcup.d
by Two's, and U.ight.d to h. Catch, of th. Tmtinat.d
birs of D..r
Landd in 'qon in 1953 and 1954.
70
than those landed in 1953 as indicated by the modes at
40 centimeters in the 1954 distribution and 38 centimeters in the 1953 distribution.
Intensity on English Sole
A comparison of the disposition of the total catch
of English sole landed by the Oregon trawl fisheries in
1953 and 1954 is given in table 15. In 1953 more than
three times as many
English solo were landed at Newport,
923,000, than at Astoria, 293,000, for mink-food as
compared with 831,000 landed in the fillet market.
Approximately 831,000 fish of this species were discarded
at sea.
The calculated total catch of English sole in
1953 amounted to 2.9 million fish.
About 1.9 million fish
of the total numbers caught were smaller than the discard
length of 33
centiiters.
Astoria and Newport
The mink-food landings at
accounted for 179,000 and 886,000,
respectively, of these smaller fish.
In 1954 it was estimated in comparison to
the 1953
landings that considerably fewer English solo (247,000)
were landed for mink-food at Newport, but, an increase to
about 241,000 fish was found in the Astoria
landings.
mink-food
The total numbers of English sole in the 1954
fillet market landings decreased to 725,000.
About
725,000 English sole were discarded at sea in the 1954
TABLE 15
DISPOSITION OF THE ESTIMATED NUMBEIS OF ENGLISH SOLE
CAUGHT IN ThE OREGON TRAWL FISHERY, 1953 AND 1954
1953
Total
Numbers
Caught
Numbers
Smaller
than
Discard
Length
1954
Numbers
Total
Smaller
Numbers
than
Caught
Discard
Length
Astoria
Mink Food
293,000
1'79,000
241,000
113,000
Newport
Mink Food
923,000
886,000
247,000
203,000
Fillet Market
831,000
Discard at Sea
831,000
831,000
2,878,000
1,896,000
Total
fillet market fishery.
725,000
725,000
725,000
1,938,000 1,041,000
A little over one million English
sole were smaller than the discard size in the 1954 catch
of this species. The mink-food
landings at Astoria and
Newport accounted for 113,000 and 203,000 of these undersize fish.
The size distribution of the total numbers of English
sole weighted to catch landed for mink-food and for the
fillet
market are shown in figure 7.
The smaller mode in
the bimodal distribution of the mink-food landings is due
principally to the numbers of English sole landed at
150
100
0
200
150
100
50
0
1
18 22 26 30 34 38 42 46 50..
Lsugtb 1* C.mtl..t.r.
54
P14r. 7, Latb4r.qu.b Maitio, oupsd
by Tvo' I, and V.ikt.4 to tb. Catoh, of tho ktla.t.d
Pib.rs of fr1iah 3.1. Lsnd.d in '.gon in 1953 and 154.
73
Newport.
The fish landed in 1954 were slightly larger
than in 1953 as indicated by the large mode at 32 centimeters in 1954 as compared to 30 centimeters in 1953.
Also, in 1953, 88 per cent of the English sole were
smaller than the discard length while in 1954 only 65 per
cent were smaller.
This difference is in part due to
insufficient sampling of the 1954 mink-food landings at
Newport which is refleoted in the smaller numbers of this
species calculated to
have been landed for mink-food.
Economic Value of the Mink Food Fishery
The dollar values estimated to have been received by
the trawl fishermen for whole fish delivered for mink-food
and for the fillet markets in 1952, 1953, and 1954 are
given in table 16.
The
value of the fillet market fish is
based on an average of five cents a pound and mink-food
fish was valued at two and one-half cents a pound.
In
1952, a year of comparatively high fillet market production, the fishermen grossed approximately $50,000.00 from
landings of mink-food and over one million dollars for
the fish sold for human consumption.
In 1953 the mink-
food landings were calculated to be worth $125,000.00
compared with $520,000.00 for fillet market fish.
In
1954, as in 1953, the value of the mink-food fish,
$155,000.00, amounted to approximately one-fourth of the
TABLE 16
CAIULATED MONETARY VALUE RECEIVED B THE TRAWL FISHERMEN
FOR FISH DELIVERED IN 1952, 1953, AND 1954
Computed Dollar Value
Total Pounds Landed
Market
Destination
Received by the Fishermen
1952
1953
1954
1952
1953
1954
10,400,000
5,000,000
12,000,000
6,200,000
1,065,000
50,000
520,000
600,000
Mink Food
21,300,000
2,000,000
125,000
155,000
Total
23,300,000
15,400,000
18,200,000
1,115,000
645,000
755,000
Fillet
75
fillet market fish value, *600,000.00.
As indicated in a previous section, the fishermen
derive an additional monetary value from the mink-food
market indirectly through the sale of fillet scrap for
mink-food.
It is estimated. that the fishermen receive
one-half cent a pound more for the fillet market fish
than would have been the case if there were no market for
the fillet scrap.
In 1952 the indirect value amounted to
about *106,500.00 as compared to $52,000.00 in 1955 and
$60,000.00 in 1954, table 17.
The ratio of the sale of
mink-food fish as compared to the sale of all trawl
caught
fish in 1952 was $156,500.00 to $1,115,000.00
while in 1953 and 1954 this ratio was $177,000.00 to
$645,000.00 and $215,000.00 to $755,000.Q0, respectively.
Thus in 1953 and 1954 the trawl fishermen derived about
2
per cent and. 28 per cent, respectively, of their
fishing income from the sale cf mink-food fish as
compared to 14 per cent in 1952.
DISCUSSION
Total Production
The sharp increase in landings of trawl caught whole
fish for mink-food in 1953 and 1954 was due primarily to
the decrease in the amount of fillet scrap available for
76
TABLE 17
CALCULATED TOTAL MONETARY VALUE RECEIVED BY TEE OREGON
TRAWL FISKER14E1 FROM SALE OF WHOLE FISH AND FITTET SCRAP
FOR MINK FOOD, 1952, 1953, AND 1954
Dollars Received.
1953
1952
*Direct Value
*Indirect Value
Total
1954
$ 50,000
$125,000
$155,000
106,500
52,000
60,000
156,500
177,000
215,000
* Pounds of Whole Mink Food. x 2i
*I Pounds
mink-food.
of Fillet Market Fish x
The fillet market landings in 1953 and 1954
dropped to about half of what they were in 1951 and 1952
which was due in part to economic conditions within the
fillet marketing industry.
The increase in the numbers
of mink produced. by ranchers in Oregon and other western
states also contributed to the increased demand for trawl
fish as mink-food..
In 1953 and 1954 a limited amount,
how much is not 1own exactly, of trawl fish, principally
fillet scrap, was shipped to out-of-state mink ranchers,
but most of the fish was utilized by ranchers within
Oregon.
The increased. landings of whole fish for mink-food
Pr?
caused considerable controversy among the
fishermen about
the effect of the mink-food fishery on the stocks of fish
used for
the fillet market.
critical view of other
for animal food.
A few fishermen took a
fishermen who would deliver fish
The restricted market for fillet fish
in 1953 end 1954 caused many of the fishermen to deliver
fish for mink-food, sometimes in opposition to their
viewpoints.
Individual Species Production
Arrowtooth Sole
Little or no concern was felt over
arrowtooth sole (turbot) for mink-food.
in considerable quantities for
the deliveries of
Although caught
the fillet market in 1943
and 1949 (4, p. 24), it has not since then been used by
the fillet markets.
Arrowtootb sole was little used for
mink-food before 1952 as mink ranchers considered it too
studies involving
fed to mink on the experimental fur farm at
College in 1950 (16, p. 81-85) and subsequent
soft for good mink-food.
this species
Oregon State
However, diet
years (1) (7), indicated that up to 50 per cent arrowtooth
sole could be satisfactorily included in mink diets.
These experiments were in part responsible for the
dominance by weight of this species in the 1953 and 1954
landings of mink-food.
Arrowtooth sole is found in large
78
quantities and at times it is considered a nuisance to the
fishermen, on moat of the trawl fishing grounds oft the
Oregon and. Washington coasts. The use of thi8 fish for
mink-food insures the mink rancher of a stable supply of
fish and allows the fishermen to sell greater proportions
of their catches.
Rox Sole
Rex sole, the species most numerous in the mink-food
landings, is involved to a certain extent in the minkfood versus fillet market controversy. Although rex sole
therefore
It was accepted only in compara-
is an excellent eating fish, it is thin and
difficult to fillet.
tively small quantities, less than 400,000 pounds, in
each 1953 and. 1954, by the fresh fish fillet producers.
Rex sole appears to be abundant in shallower
(less than 50 fathoms) off the Oregon coast.
sought after for minkfood.
waters,
It is
ich
Bellingham Sole
The Bellingham sole
taken In Oregon
waters does not
large enough sizó to be attractive to the fillet
producers. It is a good quality mink-food fish but is
somewhat seasonal in occurrence since it is present in
largest quantity during the summer months in shallow
attain a
79
waters, usually less than 30 fathoms.
18 generally avoided
badly in the nets.
Bollingham sole
by the fishermen since it gills
It has not been fully utilized for
mink-rood.
Starry Flounder
Starry flounder
accessible to the
trawl fishery
appear to occur in greatest abundance near the mouths of
the
larger coastal rivers.
It Is considered by SOme &8
a good quality fresh fillet market fish but is not oh
sought after by the Oregon fillet producers. Flounder is
also considered a good quality mink-food fish although
somewhat difficult to process because of its size and
inflexibility.
Rookflsh
Most of the several species of rookfishea d.liv.r.d
for mink-food are palatable for h'ø
consumption but
only Pacific ocean perch, Sebastodes, alutus (Gilbert)
(5, p. 215-216), orange rockfish, Sebastodea, pinniger
(Gill) (5, p. 210-212), and the
green rookfisb,
Sobastodes flavidus Ayres (5, p. 207-208), are extensively used for filleting.
Of these three species, the
orange rockfish and Pacific ocean perch along with the
spiny obeeked rockfish, Sebastolobus alascamis Bean
80
230, 231), and the split-nose rockfish, Sebastodes
d.i1oproa (Gilbert) (5, p. 217-219), were moat prominent
(5,
p
among the rockfishes landed
for mink-food.
Moat mink ranchers consider rockfish
constituent of mink-food rations.
a very desirable
In the Astoria area
this need is supplied to a large extent by fillet
A
carcasses although some whole rockfiab are utilized.
certain amount of reluctance is displayed by many of the
Astoria fishermen in delivering the important fillet
market rockflshea for mink-food.
This accounts in part
for the smaller landings of rookfishea at Astoria.
The
Newport trawl boats fish grounds on which rookfiah species
appear to be more diversified and abundant, which accounts
for
the dominance of rock.flsbes
in the deliveries of
mink-food fish there.
Miscellaneous Fishes
The miscellaneous group of fishes noted in th. minkfood landings contained several species of fish also used
to a limited extent by the fillet processors in Oregon.
Notable of these are black cod (sablefish), Anoplopoma
fimbria (Pallas) (14, p. 170), hug cod, Ophiodon
elongtu8 Girard (14, p. 172), and true cod, Gadus
macrocephalus Tilesius (14, p. 154).
None of these
species are prominent in the annual total landings of
81
mink-food.
Occasionally, hug cod or black cod. is
prominent in an
individual landing.
Small black cod,
less than 30 inches, are sometimes very susceptible to the
otter trawl fishery (2, P. 44) but moat mink ranchers do
not like black cod for mink-food because of its extreme
oiliness.
None of the miscellaneous soles listed in the minkfood samples are used in Oregon for fillet fish.
Most of
them are not caught in any quantity by the trawl
fishermen.
Sand dab, Citharichthys sordidas (Girard)
(5, p. 308, 309), and slender sole,
Lyosetta exilis
(Jordan and. Gilbert) (5, p. 314, 315), are too small in
size to interest the Oregon fillet processors.
Hake, skates
abundance by the
and. dogfish are obtainable
trawl fishery,
in great
but are not used. for
mink-food except in very limited quantities.
As yet
experiments with these species in the diets of mink on
the Oregon
State College
experimental fur farms have not
proven entirely successful (1, p. 3 and '7, p. 3).
However, studies are continuing and it is
hoped that
ways may be found. to use more of the large
potential
source of animal protein that could be provided by hake,
skates and dogfish.
82
Size Composition and Numbers of
Principal Fillet Market
Soles
The principal
cause of the mink-food versus
fillet
market fish controversy is the quantities of Dover,
English and petrale soles included in the minkfood
landings. The stocks of Dover, English and petrale $0108
have declined in the "local area" off the Columbia river
(11, p. 11).
This area is heavily fished by both the
mink-food fishery and the fillet market fishery out of
Astoria.
The numbers of Dover, English and petrale soles
caught by the otter-trawl fishery are of concern to the
biologists but
of particular interest is the catch
fish smaller than the minimum fillet sizes.
of
The fish in
these size ranges form the source from which breeding
stocks are recruited.
It is not likely that any
one
species of ocean bottom fish can be completely annihilated
because, principally, oven though otter-trawling is a
very efficient fishing method, there are always areas of
rough grounds not accessible to
trawling.
However, the
fishery itself can be destroyed, or nearly so, if the
stocks of fish are reduced to the point where it is not
economically practical to fish. This is the reason for
which many of the fishermen object to deliveries of
fillet market species for mink-food.
83
Dover Sole
As noted in table 14, the numbers of Dover sole
delivered for mink-food which were smaller than the
discard length amounted to about one-third of the numbers
estimated to have been
market fishery.
discarded at sea from the fillet
All of the Newport landings of Dover
sole enter the mink-food fishery.
Thus for the two years
under study approximately 236,000 Dover sole smaller than
length were accounted for by
fishery. This amounted to about '7.0 per
the discard
numbers of Dover sole
the mink-food
cent of the
delivered to the fillet markets.
English Sole
If a similar analysis is performed on the numbers of
English sole delivered to the trawl markets in 1963 and
1954, table 15, it will be found that approximately 2.9
million English solo smaller than
caught by
the discard size were
the trawl fishery for the two years combined.
1.4 million of these were due to the, minkfood fishery. This amounts to about 89 per cent of the
Approximately
numbers taken in
the fillet market fishery. A large
majority of the small English sole landed f or mink-food
in the two years under study can be attributed to
landings of one or two boats at Newport. These boats
fished close inshore where large numbers of small English
84
sole wer, congregated..
it should be noted, however, that the maximum size
attained by male
English sole
off Oregon is generally
smaller than the discard length imposed by the Oregon
fillet processors (10, P. 299, 300).
Also, the males
often outnimbor the females in the English sole landed.
for mink-food.
According to two samples of English sole
taken in 1953 and to samples taken in 1949 through 1952
(10, p. 306), the sex ratio was
at often about 2 males
to 1 female, Thus, it is possible that
two-thirds of the small English
ole
from one-half to
landed for mink-food
would not attain filletable size if the 2:1 sex ratio
constant.
throughout the
were
Such a sex ratio is probably not constant
year in the trawl fishery, but if it were,
and the males were deducted from the small English sole
attributed to the mink-food fishery, there would still be
over 500,000 small English sole taken by the mink-food
fishery which could be regarded as potential fillet
market fish.
The actual discard at sea of the Dover and English
soles may be less
than the numbers presented in tables 14
and 15 as an unknown number of each species were saved
for mink-food from the discard from fillet market fishing.
Therefore, the estimates of
the numbers of the species
smaller than the minimum fillet size which were delivered
85
for the mink-food markets should be considered maximum
figures and are probably less than
indicated.
Even so,
it is evident that considerable numbers of these species
are used for animal food which would have been available
to the fillet market fishery in a few years.
other hand,
a large quantity of
On the
Dover and. English sole
are discarded at sea, usually dead, which could be better
used as animal food if the fishermen could be persuaded
to save them.
Petrale Sole
Petrale sole composed only a small portion of the
mink-food catch and the numbers of this species in the
mink-food landings are inconsequential compared. to the
numbers landed
for
the fillet market and discarded at sea.
Petrale sole is the moat sought after species by the
fishermen of all the fillet market
soles" since the
fishermen receive from one and a half to three cents a
pound more for this species on the fillet market.
One
of the reasons f or the small quantities of petrale solo
found in the
mink-food is a 8elf-imposed restriction by
the fishermen against delivering this species for mink-
food.
Other possible causes
petrale
sole in
the
for the
comparatively few
mink-food landings is that there
simply were not as many available to the fishery, and the
86
fishermen sort the fish closer.
Small petrale sole
landed for mink-food other than from fillet market
fishing contributes to the decline in the stocks of this
species, which are considered in poor condition.
Boats and Lax4ins
The Oregon mink-food fishery was shared In by prac-
tically all of the Oregon trawl fleet In both 1953 and
1954. The major difference was that in 1953 the catch
was more evenly divided among more boats than in 1954.
In 1954 a few boats out of Astoria
fished mainly for
mink-food, at least part of the time, thus accounting for
fewer numbers of landings while delivering more
mink-food
fish than in 1953.
Areas Fished
The boats that fished exclusively for mink-food, such
as at Newport, worked on grounds as close to port as
possible in order to reduce trip expenses. This was also
true of boats out of Astoria that fished both mink-food
fish and fillet market fish. Some boats that made longer
trips out of Astoria for fillet fish would often make a
tow or two for mink-food
were coming to port.
off the Columbia river as they
For these reasons most of the mink-
food fish was caught within a 20 to 30 mile
radius of the
87
mouths of the Columbia and Yaquina rivers.
Since there was no fillet market at Newport of any
consequence, there was no competition between fillet
market and mink-food fisheries. The "local area" off the
Columbia river is rather intensively fished for the fillet
markets.
The competition offered by Astoria boats fishing
mainly for mink-food, particularly in 1954 somewhat
increased the mink-food versus fillet market controversy
whioh seemed to reach a peak in 1954.
Regulations
As has been mentioned previously the main concern of
Oregon Fish Commission biologists involved with trawl
research was the condition of the stocks of the Dover,
English and petrale soles. Although it is not a part of
this particular study, it should. be mentioned that
recommendations
for the
were drawn up by the biologists in 1954
of the mesh size of the nets used by
the amount of Dover, English and petrale
regulation
trawlers and for
for mink-food. These recommendations were based in part on the 1953-1954 mink-food
study. In 1955 the Oregon Fish Commission effected mesh
soles to be delivered
size regulations on the trawl fishery (Fish Commission
General Order No. XX) and. restricted the landings of
Dover, English and. petrale soles for mink-food, (Fish
88
Commission General Order No.
WI) to 20 per cent of the
mink-food landing. This was changed in 1958 to include
the total landings from a fishing trip.
Economic Effect
The mink-food fishery in 1953 and 1954 contributed
substantially to the income of many of the trawl fishermen and in lesser amounts to others. For some it Was
their main income, and for others it meant the difference
between profit and loss.
Several species
of the bottom fish not used for
human consumption have been consumed in the mink-food
market.
This allowed for better utilization of the catch
and reduced the waste at sea of discarded fish.
On the other hand, the mink-food fishery may have
partly contributed to the depletion of stocks of Dover,
English and petrale
soles, particularly in the "local
area" off the Columbia river.
In general the Oregon mink-food fishery had a bene-
ficial effect on the Oregon trawl fishery in 1953 and
1954.
It is
believed that possible deleterious effects
can be reduced through
regulations.
It is hoped that the
beneficial effects can be Increased through the use of
more of the so-called "scrap" fishes for mink-food and
through greater utilization of desirable mink-food species
89
that are discarded at sea from fillet market fishing
operations.
SUMMARY
This stdy was conducted primarily to obtain a
quantitative and qualitative analysis of the landings of
whole fish for mink-food, by the Oregon trawl fleet in
1953 and 1954.
The Oregon trawl fishery for mink-food developed
along with the trawl fishery for the fillet market but
remained only of very minor importance until after World
War II.
After 1945, mink ranching in Oregon began to
expand and by 1954 estimated numbers of mink on Oregon
ranches had increased to about 204,000 from approxi-
mately 56,000 in 1946.
In their search for an inexpen8ive
source of animal protein mink
ranchers found
an
adequate
and stable supply in the fillet scrap. The fillet scrap
supplemented with some whole trawl caught fish was more
than adequate to supply the mink ranchers' needs until
1953. In 1953 and 1954 the Oregon trawl landings for the
fillet markets dropped to between 10 and 12 million
pounds, about half the poundage landed in previous years.
The consequent
continuing increase
decrease in fillet scrap and the
in fur farm mink
produotion caused an
increase in the demand for whole fish from the trawl
90
fishery. The production of whole fish for mink-food
increased from approximately 2.0 million pounds in 1952
to 5.0 million pounds and. 6.0 million pounds in 1953 and
1954, respectively. More whole fish was landed for
mink-food at Newport, where there were practically no
fillet markets, than at Astoria in both 1953 and 1954.
The species composition of the trawl land.ing8 for
mink-food in the two years under study was computed from
data found In official reoois or Oregon
trawl landings
and from data obtained by sampling landings of trawl
fish for mink-food at Astoria and Newport. Analysis of
these data showed that a large variety of fish species
were landed for mink-food but that a few species were
dominant as follows:
Arrowtootb sole (turbot) -
Predominant by
total
weight landed in both 1953 and 1954.
Rex sole - Predominant by numbers landed, but
econd in importance by total weight
landed in 1953 and. fourth in 1954 with
a greater dominance in the Astoria
landings.
Dover sole - Third in importance by total weight
landed in 1953 and in 1954.
English sole - Fourth in importanO by total
weight in 1953 but decreased to fifth in
rank by 1954.
Be11ingha
sole - Fifth in importance by total
weight in 1953 but decreased to seventh
in rank by weight in 1954.
Rockfishes (a variety of species) - Sixth in
importance in total weight landed in
9].
1953 but increased to second in importance
in the 1964 landings, primarily due to the
landings of these species at Newport.
Starry flounder - Seventh in importance in 1953
and sixth in importance by total weight
landed in 1954.
Petra].e sole - Eighth in importance by total
weight landed in 1953 and 1954.
Three of the above species of fish, Dover, English
and petrale soles are the dominant "soiea
landed for
the fillet market. The size composition of these species
included in the mink-food landings was determined
from
measurements of the three apeoie8 in the mink-food
samples.
The Dover sole landed
from 18
for mink-food
ranged in size
to 62 centimeters; the size of the English sole
ranged from 14 to 52 centimeters; and the petrale sole
ranged in size from 16 to 52 centimeters.
It was estimated that approximately 5.2 million
Dover sole were caught by the trawl fishery in 1953 and
1954 combined.
Of these, roughly two-thirds, 3.4
million, were delivere4 to the fillet markets and the
remaining third, 1.8 million, about equally divided
between the mink-food
market and
the discard at sea of
fish too small, less than 36 centimaters in length, to
process for human consumption.
A little over one-
fourth, 236,000, of the Doter sole delivered for mink-
food were
smaller than
the fillet
market discard length.
92
Approximately 4.8 million English sole were caught
by the trawl fishery in the combined two years.
The
fillet market fishery, the mink-food fishery, and the
discard at sea of fish le8a than
3
oentimeters in length
each accounted for roughly 1.6 million fish.
About 87
per cent of the English sole delivered for mink-food were
smaller than the discard length.
in the Oregon trawl
in the 1953-54 mink-food fishery.
All but a very few of the boats
fleet participated
The Newport
trawlers delivered fish exclusively
ranchers. At Astoria many boats
for fur
fished mink-food
incidentally to fillet market fishing; some boats
actively fished for mink-food and fillet market fish; and
a few fished exclusively for the animal food
time.
part of the
The boats in the latter group landed the majority
of the fish, particularly in 1954.
The fishery for
concentrated
mink-food in 1953 and. 1954 was
within a 20 to 30 mile radii of the mouths
of the Columbia and Yaquina rivers.
Each of these areas
contributed between 36 and 42 per cent, respectively,
of the trawl fish landed for mink-food.
The trawl fishermen in both 1953 and 1954 derived
approximately one-fourth of their income from fishing
tbrough the sale of minkfood.
In addition, the fishery
for mink-food allowed the fishermen to make
better
utilization of the total catch.
94
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Adair, John.
1955.
5 P.
station.
Progress
Mink nutrition research.
(Oregon.
Corvallis,
Agricultural experiment
Department of Fish and Game Management.
report No. 5)
Bell, Heward F. and Alonzo T. Prutor. The
Oregon eablefish fishery. Portland,
Oregon, Pacific Marine Fisheries Commission, 1954.
Washington and
Clark, G. H. Logs on California trawlers. The
commercial fish catch of California for the years
1930-1934, inclusive. Sacramento, 1935. 126 p.
(California. Bureau of Commercial Fisheries.
Division of Fish and Game. Fish Bulletin No. 44)
Cleaver, F. C.
(ed.) Fisheries etatisics of
Oregon. Portland, Oregon, Oregon Fish Commission.
(Contributions No. 16)
1951. 176 p.
Clemens, W. A. and G. V. Wilby. Fishes of the
Pacific coast of Canada. Ottawa, Fisheries Reaearch
Board, 1946. 368 p.
Dahi, F. H. Facts and figures on Oregon's
miscellaneous animals 1935-1953. Corvallis, 1954.
(Oregon State College. Extension Service.
8 P.
Extension circular 574)
Mink nutrition research.
(Oregon. Agricultural
6 P.
experiment station. Department of Fish and Game
Management. Progress report No. 4)
Davis, Kenneth G.
Corvallis, 1953.
Dixon, Wilfred J. and Frank J. Massey, Jr.
Introduction to statistical analysis. New York,
McGraw-Hill, 1951. 370 p.
Hannson, Artur. The physiology of reproduction in
mink (Muatela vison Sobreb.) with special reference
to delayed implantation. Acta Zoologica 28:1-136.
1947.
95
George Yost, III. Analysis and history of
the Oregon otter-trawl fishery. Ph.D. thesis.
328 numb.
Seattle, University of Washington, 1956.
Harry,
leaves.
MoKernan, Donald L. The biological research
(Oregon.
program. Portland, Oregon, 1948.
23 p.
Fish Commission. Research Briefs No. 1, Vol. 1)
Oregon. Fish Conunission. Oregon Commercial
Fisheries Code. Portland, the Commission, 1953-1954.
160 p.
Rounsefell, George A. and W. Harry Evsrhart.
science - its methods and applications.
John Wiley & Sons, 1953. 444 p.
Fishery
New York,
Schultz, Leonard P. Keys to the fishes of Washington, Oregon and closely adjoining regions. 3d. ed.
Seattle, University of Washington, 1948. p. 103228.
(Washington. University. Publications in
Biology, Vol. 2, No. 4)
Trossler, Donald K. and James MeW. Lemon. Marine
acquisition, handling,
products of commerce:
biological aspects and the science and technology
of their preparation and preservation. New York,
Reinhold, 1951. 782 p.
their
Watt, Phylli Ruth. The effects of certain marine
fishes in the diets of mink. Master's thesis.
Corvallis, Oregon State College, 1951. 110 rmmb.
leaves.
96
APPENDIX
9?
APPENDIX I
NUMBERS OF FISH BY SPECIES SAMPLED FROM MINK FOOD
LANDINGS AT ASTORIA, 1953
Sample Number
1
Dover sole
'73
English sole
Petrale sole
Bellingham sole
Starry flounder
Rex sole
Arrowtooth sole
Flathead. Sole
Saud dab
Sand sole
Slender sole
Black cod
Dogfish
Eel pout
Hake
Ling cod
2
2
35
685
6
2
0
1,201
O
218
668
0
8
0
O
O
0
0
7
0
0
0
56
0
0
0
0
0
0
3
4
178
165
14
63
152
30
0
591
257
449
1,141
132
0
59
0
0
0
1
5
0
0
0
0
0
Skate
0
0
True cod.
9
14
0
.0
0
Ratfish
Sea, poacher
Shad
Tom cod
Rookfishes
S. alutus
L crameri
L elongatue
S. flavidus
1
0
O
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
Number sampled
1,009
Weight of sample
Weight of lauding
. melanops
.
paucieinis
. pinniger
Date sampled
0
0
2
65
56
137
0
8?
0
0
0
0
0
5
0
34
0
2
5
10
0
0
7
0
5'
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1,969
2,055
1,397
2,261
1,107
1,117
1,066
32,397
29,045
5,075
4,980
1
5-15-53 6-17-53 7-13-53 8-19-53
98
APPENDIX I (continued)
Sample Number
Dover sole
English sole
Petrale solo
Bellingham sole
Starry flounder
Rex sole
Arrowtootb sole
Flathead sole
Saxdab
Sandsole
Slender sole
Blackeod
Dogfish
Eel pout
Hake
Lingood
Ratfish
7
8
79
10
0
131
32
13
166
0
0
0
0
0
0
5
6
89
114
1
102
160
625
20
2
163
700
25
351
39
0
2
1
0
0
0
0
1
0
33
0
8
10
0
1
0
3
0
0
25
0
0
2
1
39
31
9
24
10
0
6
2
5
0
0
0
2
0
1
5
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
545
1,002
608
937
660
607
4,935
8,160
Weight of Landing
8-20-53 8-21-53 8-24-53
Date sampled
15,740
Sea poacher
Shad
Skate
Tomcod
Truecod
Rockfishes
S.alutus
Lorarneri
S. elongatus
L flavidus
. melanops
L Daucispinis
. pinniger
Number sampled
Weight of Sample
2
0
2
0
79
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1,142
1,076
16,010
0
0
0
0
3
0
20
0
0
0
5
0
0
0
1
0
1
0
9l53
99
APPE1DIX I (continued)
1].
12
13
3
46
369
40
198
110
38
0
12
7
7
0
18
0
319
10].
127
25
288
237
0
201
100
2
0
447
34
0
0
Sample Number
9
Dover sole
English sole
Petralo sole
2?
16
22
1
Bollingham sole
Starry flounder
Rex sole
Arrowtooth sole
Flathead sole
Sand dab
Sand solo
Slender sole
10
105
0
1
0
11
119
52
93
23
2
8
0
0
0
0
0
0
4
0
0
0
5
5
5
0
0
6
0
0
0
0:
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Torn cod
0
0
0
0
0
True cod
7
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
51
2
3
Black cod
Dogfish
Eel pout
Hake
Ling cod
Ratfish
Sea poacher
Shad
Skate
0
0
0
6
0
1
1
0
0
0
80
5
4
5
2
0
0
0
2
2
18
Rockfishe a
0
0
0
0
1
1
1
1
0
0
0
1,021
901
683
511
1,203
1,192
593
8,680
14,825
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
2
0
0
3
509
329
663
Weight of Landing 9,360
L orameri
L elougatus
0
0
0
0
. flavithis
5
0
melanops
0
0
S. paucispinis
6
0
Number sampled.
Weight of Sample
S. alutus
.
!. pinnier
Date sampled
9-3-53
0
0
0
8,120
9,320
9-9-53 9-16-53 9-21-53
9-28-53
100
APPENDIX I (continued)
Species
Per
Total Per Cent Conversion Total
Weights Computed Cent
or
Numbers
Weights
of
total
Weight
Numbers
0
0
0
1,110
1,447
67
7.7
13.9
0.5
59
8.2
10.7
0.4
2,108
550
4,911
1,608
16,0
4.2
37.3
12.2
.48
2.5
0.50
3.0
1,012
1,375
2,456
4,824
7.5
10.2
18.2
35.8
0.4
2.1
0.5
0.4
29
112
0.2
0.8
Sand. sole
58
281
2
Tx'.
1.0
2
Pr.
Slender sole
130
0.9
0.2
26
0.2
83
0.6
tr.
0.6
0.1
0.1
1.0
6.5
8
0.6
0.1
0.1
0.4
Dover sole
English sole
Petrale sole
1,020
1,843
Bellingh&ni sole
Starry flounder
Rex sole
Arrowtooth sole
Flathead. sole
Sand dab
Black cod
Dogfish
Eel pout
Rake
Ling cod
Ratflah
Sea poacher
Shad
Skate
Tom cod
True cod
1
80
19
6
0
4
5
227
15
110
7
8
48
12
0
0.1
2.5
2.0
0
0
0
tx'.
0.5
2
Tx'.
2.0
10
386
2
0.1
2.9
385
2.9
1
2
Tx'.
Tx'.
3
39
3
4
33
Pr.
Pr.
1.7
0.1
0.8
1.70
0.1
3.5
Tx'.
Rockfi shea
S. alutus
. crameri
. elonatus
L flavidus
L melanops
S. pauciainis
L pinnigor
Number sampled
1
5
Tx'.
10
13
0.1
0.1
1
1
Tx'.
Tx'.
11
0.1
Pr.
0.7
0.3
0.3
3.0
3.0
4.0
3.0
13,170
Weight of sample
12,993
Computed weight of sample
13,480
Weight of landing
196,647
0.3
Pr.
Tx'.
0.2
APPENDIX II
NUIERS OF FISH BY SPECIES SAMPI
FROM MINK FOOD
LANDINGS AT NEWPORT, 1953
Sample Number
Dover sole
English sole
Petrale sole
Belllnghaa sole
Starryflounder
Rex sole
Arrowtootb sole
Rocksole
Sand dab
Sand sole
1
2
3
4
185
72
17
8
531
13
308
150
12
153
1
0
408
0
1
446
7
0
5
11
0
3
107
0
0
104
0
0
Black cod.
O
O
Jack mackeral
0
0
0
0
1
Slender sole
Hake
Ling cod.
Rattish
Sculpin
Sea poacher
Shad
Skate
Tom cod.
True cod.
O
O
0
0
0
O
O
O
0
2
2
o
13
0
0
454
5
907
173
19
5
1
3
0
0
0
0
0
95
0
0
146
1
0
0
5
0
11
0
16
3
54
0
0
36
0
0
0
0
3
0
0
12
0
0
'73
0
37
815
0
331
0
0
0
0
11
4
0
0
3
0
15
751
48
Number
1
8
0
0
0
0
7
'7
21'7
6
0
0
Total
6
0
0
0
O
0
0
5
4
0
0
0
0
4
0
1
1
0
0
0
0
0
3
0
3
227
0
44
0
2
60
14
0
6
2
0
0
16
11
0
1,676
99
636
6
1,916
120
6
602
25
1
1
6
2
0
0
49
20
3
APPE1DIX II (continued)
Sample Number
Rockfi she a
S. alutus
L brovispinis
. orameri
. diploproa
E. elongatus
L flavidu8
. goodie
. melanoa
L flryStiflU8
L paucispinis,
L Dinniger
. rubrivinotus
L saxicola
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
4
3
2
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
o
o
0
0
0
0
0;
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Total
6
5
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Number
10
2
0
0
10
9
12
0
0
9
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
18
0
0
54
0
0
0
19
0
0
0
0
0
7
0
0
0
0
0
6
Number sampled
839
1,097
1,283
1,226
251
465
1,196
Weight of Sample a
426
585
780
740
1,340
620
730
Weight of landin
Date Sampled
29,091
26,396 30,432 48,274 44,060
24,192 23,310
7-15-53 7-22-53 8-1-53 8-10-53 8-19-53 9-23-53 9-23-53
10
2
0
0
10
9
12
0
0
15
7
0
19
6,366
APPENDIX II (continued)
Species
Per Cent
of Total
Numbers
Dover sole
English sole
Petrale sole
14.3
26.4
1.6
Bellingham sole
Starry flounder
Rex sole
Arrowtooth sole
Rook sole
Sand dab
Sand sole
Slender sole
Black cod
Dogfish
10.0
0.1
30.1
1.9
Hake
Trace
Trace
Eelpout
Jack mackerel
Ling cod
Ratfish
Sculpin
Skate
Tom cod
True cod
0.1
9.5
0.4
0.3
1.1
0
0
0.6
0.].
Trace
0.8
0.3
Trace
Conversion
Total
Weights
Computed
1.1
0.5
0.9
0.5
2.5
0.5
6.0
0.5
0.4
1.0
0.2
3.0
998
838
89
0
0
2.5
2.0
6.0
2.0
0.1
1.7
0.1
3.5
Weighta
318
15
958
720
3
241
25
3
219
0
0
3
2
222
12
Trace
83
2
11
Per Cent
of
Weight
19.4
16.3
1.7
6.2
0.3
18.6
14.0
0.1
4.7
0.5
0.1
4.3
0
0
0.1
Trace
4.3
0.2
Trace
1.6
Trace
0.2
APPENDIX II (continued)
Species
Per Cent
of Total
Numbers
Rookfi she.
S. alutus
. breviapinis
, elongatua
. flavidus
L goodie
A'. auciapinis
A. pinnigr
A'. saxicola
Total numbers in samples
Recorded weight of samples
Computed Weight of samples
Total weight of landings
0.2
Trace
0.2
0.1
0.2
0.2
1.2
0.3
Conversion
Weights
0.7
0.3
3.0
0.3
4.0
3.5
0.3
Total
Computed
Weights
7
6
3
27
4
60
277
6
5,221
5,152
225,755
Per Cent
of
Weight
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
1.2
5.4
0.1
APPENDIX III
NUMBERS OF FISH BY SPECIES SAMPLED FROM MINK FOOD LANDINGS AT ASTORIA, 1954
Sample Number
Dover sole
English sole
Fetrale sole
Bollinghain sole
Starry flounder
Rex sole
Arrowtooth sole
Flathead sole
Rocksole
Sanddab
Sandsole
Slender sole
Black cod
Dogfish
Bolpout
Hake
Lingood
Ratfish
Seapoacher
Shad
Skate (large)
Skate (small)
Tomood
Truecod
1
2A
2B
3
4
20
60
0
14
199
55
0
4
2
0
1
15
36
0
0
537
211
0
0
0
0
57
212
0
0
4
7
0
0
4
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
3
0
0
O
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
7
0
0
0
0
5
0
0
0
0
0
0
3
3
91
14?
162
0
0
28
0
0
1
0
0
12
0
128
1
0
4
0
353
123
3
0
0
0
18
24
231
23
430
98
0
36
0
393
0
0
140
182
0
12
SB
88
218
129
67
1
7
9
0
0
0
0
0
5
3
0
0
0
0
4
1
0
0
8
8
1
0
0
1
6
5A
202
1
0
14
17
0
3
0
0
0
0
0
0
13
0
0
8
0
0
0
3
0
0
0
2
18
2
1
3].
26
20
0
0
0
5
0
0
0
0
20
1
8
29
20?
11
2
177
355
18
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
2
9
APPENDIX III (continued)
Sample ntunber
Rookfi she a
S. alutus
. broviapinia
L orameri
. diploproa
L. elongatus
tiavidus
. melanopa
L nyatinia
S. paucispinis
L pinnier
L rubrivinotus
L saxicola
L app.
.b. a].asoanus
Total numbers sampled
Weight of samples
Weight of landings
Date sampled
1
o
o
o
0
0
o
o
o
o
0
o
0
o
0
855
940
5,2*70
6-18-54
2A
2B
38
65
0
0
0
o
o
0
2
o
0
0
1
0
0
117
2
2
0
0.
3
0
2
1
0
533
0
0
665
1,061
3
4
0
0
0
0
0
2
0
0
0
6
0
0
7
0
7
20
0
0
0
0
5
0
0
0
5A
SB
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
879
814
13
0
0
0
0
0
0
8
301
0
0
853
1,114
'757
959
1,216
912
1,087
23,410 12,135
23,260
7-20-54 7-21-54
6-22-54
6
0
0
0
0
0
3
0
0
1
0
0
800
1,112 1,083
27,280
15,530
7-23-54
7-23-54
0
APPENDIX III (oontinued)
Sample Number
Dover tole
English sole
Petrale sole
Belling2iam sole
Starry flounder
Rex sole
Arrowtooth sole
Flatheadsole
Rookeole
Sand dab
Sandsole
Slender sole
Blaokcod
Dogfish
Belpout
Bake
Lingood
Ratfish
Seapoacher
Shad
Skate (large)
Skate (small)
Tornoôd
Truecod
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
3].
247
1
218
22
5
290
64
25
268
36
137
3
245
99
142
80
94
589
118
95
59
0
910
77
2
4
2
4
55
10
2
0
39
0
0
0
1
2
0
3
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
16
166
2
0
0
1
0
4
0
0
0
0
0
6
6
0
0
2
4
0
5
46
0
4
0
0
68
352
6
19
51
452
104
50
291
1,279
794
65
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
120
0
0
10
0
0
0
5
0
0
10
0
0
0
7
0
0
17
0
0
1
0
1
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
3
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
1
0
25
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
22
4
2
0
0
8
1
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
21
0
0
0
0
0
0
3
0
0
0
2
0
0
20
518
42
0
1
0
'7
0
0
0
18
47
4
0
APPENDIX III (continued)
Sample Number
Rookfi shea
S. alutus
L breviapinia
. arameri
. diploproa
. elongatus
S. flavidue
. melanops
L mystinis
. paucispinis
. pinniger
L rubrivinctus
L saxicola
Lspp.
eb.a1asoanua
Total Number sampled
Weight of samples
Weight of landings
Date sampled
7
o
o
0
o
2
0
0
0
0
0.
o
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
o
0
0
0
0
0
0
1,348
1,256
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
924
10
11
12
13
14
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1,305
1,121
1,007
7,000 41,650 46,670
780
1,578
1,159
1
0
0
10
0
0
91
1
0
0
0
0
0
702
0
0
1
1
2
0
5
0
0
0
0
927
986
1,120
1,263 1,168 1,149
9,940 20,000
41,890 24,410 20,200
7-26-54 7-28-54 7-30-54 8-2-54 8-4-54 8-10-54 8-12-54 8-12-54
APPENDIX III (continued)
Sample Number
Dover sole
English sole
Petrale sole
Bellingham solo
Starry flounder
Rez sole
Arrowtooth sole
Flathead solo
Rocksole
Sanddab
Sand.sole
4
206
120
216
'70
30
7
6
4
5
93
84
18
642
91
0
0
575
105
97
90
590
59
1,045
1,526
8,455
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
6
0
0
0
80
0
3
4
379
2
3
64
1
1
0
0
2
0
0
0
0
183
94
26
3
182
354
250
63
299
29
0
0
2
0
81
0
Black cod
Dogfish
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
3
0
20
0
0
0
104
0
0
20
Ratfish
Sea poacher
Shad
Skate (large)
Skate (small)
Tomcod
Truecod
2,298
2,356
117
28
171
0
Lingeod
Total
Numbers
16
Slender sole
Hake
19
15
1
Eelpout
18
17
0
0
2
2
0
0
13
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
2,311
37
3
11
0
0
5
0
0
1
0
10
1
1
2
98
456
6
21
6
51
L)
APPENDIX III (continued)
Sample Number
Rookfishe S
S. alutus
L breviepinis
L crameri
. diploproa
S. elongatus
S. flavidus
L melanope
L mystinis
. paucispinis
S. pinniger
15
16
17
o
o
o
0
0
0
0
0
0
5
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
650
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
20,815
o
o
o
o
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
19
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Total numbers sampled
936
946
1,014
944
1,157
Weight of samples
Weight of landings
973
1,035
964
1,159
1,1178
49,550
46,000
21,440
13,310
7,330
8-16-54
8-23-54
8-24-54
8-31-54
9-2-54
!. rubrivinotus
L saxicola
. app.
. alas canus
Date sampled.
Total
18
0
Number 8
110
1
7
20
16
10
17
93
10
13
2
9
301
APPE1DIX III (continued)
Species
Per Cent
of Total
Numbers
Dover sole
English sole
Petrale sole
Bellingkiam sole
Starry flounder
Rex sole
Arx'owtooth sole
Flathead sole
Rock sole
Sand dab
Sand 8010
Slender sole
Black ood
Dogfish
Eel pout
Rake
Ling cod
Ratfish
Sea poacher
Shad
Skate (large)
Skate (small)
Tom cod
True cod
11.0
11 3
0.9
5.0
7.3
40.6
11.1
Trace
Trace
1.8
0.2
0.3
0.9
Trace
0.1
Trace
0.2
Trace
Trace
Trace
0.5
2.2
0.1
0.3
C onve ra ion
Total
Weights
Computed
0
0
0
2,870
2,026
0.50
2.00
0.50
3.00
0.50
0.50
0.42
1.00
0.29
2.83
6.50
0
2.50
7.27
2.00
o
2.00
4.76
1.13
0.10
4.52
Weights
194
523
3,052
4,228
6,933
2
2
159
3?
19
518
20
Trace
15
371
2
Trace
4
466
515
2
307
Per Cent
of
Weight
12.2
8.6
0.8
2.2
12.9
17,9
29 4
Trace
Trace
0.7
0.2
0.1
2.2
0.1
Trace
0.1
1.6
Trace
Trace
Trace
2.0
2.2
Trace
1.3
APPENDIX III (continued)
Specie 8
Per Cent
of Total
Numbers
Rockfishe a
S. alutus
. brevispinis
S. orameri
L diploproa
. elongatus
. flavidus
. melanos
. mystini.s
L paucispinia
L pinniger
. rubrivinotus
. 'saxicola
L app.
. alasoanus
Weight of samples
Computed weight of samples
Weight of landings
0.5
Trace
Trace
0.1
0.1
Trace
0.1
0.4
Trace
0.1
Trace
3.1
Trace
1.4
Conversion
Weights
1.56
5.25
1.00
1.20
1.00
4.00
4.00
3.00
5.23
3.40
4.66
0.50
1.00
0.98
Total
Computed
Weights
172
6
7
24
16
40
68
279
52
44
9
325
9
295
22,391
23,610
456,275
Per Cent
of
Weight
0.7
Trace
Trace
0.1
0.1
0.2
0.3
1.2
0.2
0.2
Trace
1.4
Trace
1.2
APPENDIX IV
NUMBERS OF FISH BY SPECIES SAMPLED FROM MINK FOOD LANDINGS AT NEWPORT, 1954
Sample Number
lÀ
lB
2
3A
3B
4A
4B
Dover sole
53
36
0
104
0
93
110
0
0
62
1
53
0
0
0
0
0
4
66
0
0
7
0
67
0
4
1
0
24
270
0
0
0
0
0
0
4
0
2
2
8
9
0
0
0
0
English sole
Petrale sole
Bellingham sole
Starry flounder
Rex sole
Arrowtooth sole
Rook sole
Sariddab
0
1
0
0
Sea poacher
Sba.d.
Skate (medium)
Skate (small
Tomeod
True cod
0
0
123
208
87
210
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
51
62
49
10
16
32
0
0
Ratfish
0
0
22
131
268
Black cod
Dogfish
Eel pout
Ling cod.
0
2
2?
265
0
0
0
Hake
0
3
25
3ai. sole
Slender sole
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
9
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
2
0
0
0
1
0
3
0
0
0
0
5
4
0
0
0
0
2
0
0
0
0
0
0
16
7
0
0
0
0
2
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
6
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
6
6
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
3
3
0
0
5
4
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
84
16
5
59
4
9
0
0
0
2
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
APPENDIX IV (continued)
Sample Number
Roekfi shes
S. alutus
L crameri
L diploproa
L elongatus
L flaviths
!. pauciepinis
S. pinriipjer
. rubrivinctue
1A
lB
o
o
o
10
o
0
34
1
0
4
0
0
11
1
0
7
2
1
0
0
o
o
2
32
0
3A
3B
4A
4B
0
0
0
4
0
3
0
0
125
1
1'??
3
3
0
0
0
1
1
0
5
0
1
1
1
15
o
0
51
0
0
0
0
7
0
0
15
0
0
Total Number Sampled
404
443
365
529
516
Weight of Samples
Weight of Landings
Date Sampled
650
660
600
650
650
L saxioola
L spp.
eb.
alascanus
4
0
0
0
0
5
6
0
0
0
3
1
20
0
0
0
3
43
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
331
381
472
481
600
650
650
650
10
0
0
36
0
1].
0
0
437
0
2
35,140
22,070
21,645
30,470
41,360
16,980
6-11-54
6 _Q_54
'1-1-54
7-13-54
7-14-54
8-4-54
APPENDIX IV (continued)
Sample Number
7A
7B
Dover sole
21
o
o
36
0
0
0
English sole
Petrale sole
Bellingham sole
Starry flounder
Rex sole
Arrowtooth sole
Rock sole
Sand dab
Sandsole
Slender sole
Black cod.
Dogfish
Eel pout
Hake
Ling cod
Ratfish
Sea poacher
Shad.
Skate (medium)
Skate (small)
Tom cod
True cod.
8
9A
9B
1OA
573
31
31
0
4
4?
0
17
0
0
16
1,474
0
0
0
0
0
26
36
36
0
0
0
0
190
2
0
0
0
0
3
0
65
5
0
1
0
0
0
3
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
3
14
0
1
0
0
0
18
0
0
7
0
0
o
o
0
0
3
0
0
0
4
7
0
0
0
0
0
6
0
1
0
6
0
5
1
86
71
305
124
0
0
0
0
0
5
0
4
50
20
0
0
278
1
0
1
0
10
9
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
6
3
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
3
0
0
1
lOB
hA
liB
12
56
12
38
111
38
0
0
35
141
8
7T
4
0
0
0
69
132
0
0
0
0
9
0
2
0
0
1
9
0
1
0
1
1
0
35
101
1
82
0
8
1
0
0
0
2
0
0
0
5
0
0
0
0
3
0
9
26
0
6
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
1
0
0
0
1
27
0
0
0
0
5
5
0
2
0
2
0
0
0
2
0
2
0
0
6
0
APPEI1DIX IV (continued)
Sample Number
Rookfiahes
S. 91UtU8
. crameri
L diloproa
L elongatus
. flavidue
L pauoispinia
. Dinniger
L rubrivinctus
S. saxicola
S. app.
eb. alascanus
Total number sampled
Weight of samples
7A
'lB
37
2
104
0
0
2
0
34
2
150
0
0
0
0
8
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
36
59
0
0
0
0
0
0
2'78
347
550
600
7
6
2
Weight of landings
32,525
Date sampled
8-5-54
9A
9B
1OA
lOB
hA
11B
12
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
2
2
0
122
2
98
0
0
3
0
4
6
0
0
0
0
3
0
0
1
0
0
1
0
2
0
3
48
2
0
0
0
0
4
4
1
0
7
0
8
36
0
7
9
0
0
0
o
0
13
0
0
0
0
1
1I
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
2,292
513
493
262
452
327
349
397
700
650
650
500
650
600
600
650
29,680
8-6-54
35,385
20,440
8-18-54
8-19-54
24,255
8-20-54
11,600
9-8-54
APPEIDIX IV (continued)
Spocie8
Dover sole
English sole
Potrale sole
Bellingham sole
Starry flounder
Rex sole
Arrowtooth sole
Rock sole
Sai. dab
Sand sole
S1ender sole
Black cod
Dogfish
Eel pout
Hake
Ling cod.
Ratfish
Sea poacher
Shad.
Skate (medium)
Skate (snal1)
Tom cod
True cod
Total
Numbers
1,019
925
92
1,533
7
619
2,594
1
291
3
202
254
5
3
4
10
1
2
0
80
51
1
5
Per Cent
of Total
Conversion
Weights
10.6
9.6
0
0
0
Numbers
1.0
16.0
0.1
6.4
27.0
Trace
3.0
Trace
2.1
2.6
0.1
Trace
Trace
0.1
Trace
Trace
0
1.0
0.5
Trace
Trace
0.3
4.2
0.4
1.8
0.5
0.3
1.0
0.2
2.8
6.5
0
2.0
10.6
2.0
0
0
9.3
3.5
0.1
6.0
Total
Computed
Weights
Per Cent
of
Weight
1,560
10.9
3.0
0.6
460
3.2
0.2
1.7
421
88
29
248
4,669
1
8?
3
40
71].
33
0
8
106
2
0
0
744
179
0
30
32.8
Trace
0.6
Trace
0.3
5.0
0.2
0
0.1
0.?
Trace
0
0
5.2
1.3
0
0.2
APPENDIX IV (continued)
Species
Rockfi she s
Total
Numbers
S. a].utus
531
L diploroa
359
71
3
50
539
54
91
10
210
L orameri
L elontus
L flavidus
. paucispinis
. pinnier
. rubrivinotus
. saxicola
L app.
eb. alascanus
12
9,632
Total numbers sampled
Recorded weight of samples
Computed weight of samples
Weight of landings
Per Cent
of Total
Numbers
5.5
0.1
3.7
0.7
Trace
0.5
5.6
0.6
1.0
0.1
2.2
Conversion
Weights
1.6
1.0
1.2
1.1
4.0
5.2
4.9
4.7
0.5
1.0
1.0
Total
Computed
Weights
850
12
431
78
12
260
2,641
254
46
10
210
11,900
14,223
321,720
Per Cent
of
Weight
6.0
0.1
3.0
0.5
0.1
1.8
18.6
1.8
0.3
0.1
1.5
119
APPENDIX V
LENGTH-FREQUENCY DISTRIBUTION (GROUPED BY TWO' 8)
OF TKE NUMBERS OF DOVER SOLE IN MINK FOOD
AND FILLET MARKET SAMPLES, 1953 AND 1954
Astoria
Mink Food Sanlple8
1954
1953
Cm.
Numbers
Per Cent
Numbers
Per Cent
10
12
14
16
18
20
1
1
22
4
9
24
26
28
30
32
34
36
38
40
42
44
46
48
50
52
54
56
58
60
62
64
30
50
92
138
145
164
145
72
51
18
27
18
11
5
2
1
0.
1
0.].
0.1
0.4
0.9
3.1
5.1
9.3
14.0
14.7
16.7
14.7
7.3
5.2
1.8
2.7
1.8
1.1
0.5
0.2
0.1
0.0
0.].
1
3
12
21
46
91
120
172
207
313
328
304
211
163
94
80
35
33
27
20
8
8
1
66
Total
985
2,298
Trace
0.1
0.5
0.9
2.0
4.0
5.2
7.5
9.0
13.6
14.3
13.2
9.2
7.1
4.1
3.5
1.5
1.4
1.2
0.9
0.4
0.4
Trace
120
APPENDIX V (continued.)
Astoria
Fillet Market Samples
1954
1953
Cm.
Numbers
Per Cent
Numbers
0.1
0.8
2.9
7.4
12.7
14.8
14.5
12.2
9.4
7.8
5.6
3.8
2.7
2.4
1.7
0.7
0.2
0.2
Trace
Trace
13
45
140
333
559
680
742
637
525
458
380
255
150
116
80
33
17
Per Cent
10
12
14
16
18
20
22
24
26
28
30
32
34
36
38
40
42
44
46
48
50
52
54
56
58
60
62
64
66
5
58
220
572
980
1,139
1,117
942
727
603
431
291
210
182
128
56
14
1
3
1
Total 7,695
1
4
5,168
Trace
0.3
0.9
2.7
6.4
10.8
13.2
14.4
12.3
10.2
8.9
7.4
4.9
2.9
2.2
1.5
0.6
0.3
0.1
121
APPENDIX V (continued)
Newport
Mink Food Samples
1954
1953
Cm.
Numbers
Per Cent
Numbers
Per Cent
10
12
14
16
18
20
22
24
26
28
30
32
34
36
38
40
42
44
1
0
0
1
0
0
1
5
2
1
1
36
61
4
0
0
0
1
46
48
4
9
90
128
116
116
122
108
84
65
33
23
13
5
0
50
52
54
56
58
1
60
62
64
66
Total
15
1,016
0.2
0.4
0.9
3.5
6.0
8.9
12.6
11.4
11.4
12.0
10.6
8.3
6.4
3.2
2.3
1.3
0.5
0
0.1
122
APPENDIX VI
LENGTH-FREQUENCY DISTRIBUTION (GROUPED BY TWO'S)
OF THE NUMBERS 'OF ENGLISH SOLE IN MINK FOOD
AND FILLET MABItET SAMPLES*, 1953 AND 1954
Astoria
Mink Food Samples
1953
Nos.
Cm.
10
12
14
16
18
1
7
9
16
20
22
24
11
16
48
26
28
175
408
420
272
154
101
30
32
34
36
38
40
42
44
86
75
22
7
46
48
50
3
1
52
Per
Cent
1954
Nos. Per
Cent
1,832
1948-1951
Nos.
Per
Cent
Trace
0.4
0.5
0.9
0.6
0.9
2.6
9.6
22.3
22.9
14.8
8.4
5.5
4.7
4.1
1.2
0.4
0.2
Trace
2
14
36
82
164
342
473
472
313
174
110
82
53
26
11
2
54
Total
Fillet Market Samples
2,356
0.1
0.6
1.5
3.5
7.0
14.5
20.0
20.0
13.3
7.4
4.7
3.&
2.2
1.1
0.5
0.1
2
0
15
77
406
1183
1912
2030
1832
1397
888
499
200
61
12
1
1
Trace
0
0.1
0.7
3.9
11.3
18.2
19.3
17.4
13.3
8.4
4.7
1.9
0.6
0.1
Trace
Trace
10,516
* No Fillet Market Samples were taken in 1953 and 1954.
Percentage composition of the combined fillet rket
samples as obtained in 1948 through 1951 were used as
base.
123
APPEI4DIX VI (continued)
Newport
Mink Food. Samples
1954
1953
Cm.
Numbers
10
12
14
16
18
9
29
20
22
24
44
26
76
28
30
32
34
36
38
40
42
44
46
48
31
63
60
26
10
6
2
3
2
Per
Cent
2.5
8.0
12.2
8.6
17.4
21.0
16.6
7.2
2.8
1.7
0.6
0.8
0.6
Numbers
1
26
51
106
116
93
88
82
101
94
58
56
38
9
3
1
1
0
0
1
50
52
54
Total
361
925
Per
Cent
0.1
2.8
5.5
11.5
12.5
10.0
9.5
8.9
10.9
10.2
6.3
64
4.1
1.0
0.3
0.].
0.1
0
0
0.1
124
APPENDIX VII
LENGTH-FREQuENCY D ISTRIBtET ION (GROUPED BY TW' 5)
OF THE NUMBERS OF PETRALE SOLE IN M]3IK FOOD
AND FITI.RT MARKET SAMPLES*, 1953 AND 1954
Astoria
Mink Food Samples
1953
Cm.
Nos.
Per
Cent
1954
Nos. Per
Cent
Fillet Market Samples
1948-1951
Nos.
Per
2
0
1
7
64
259
Trace
Cent
16
18
20
22
24
26
28
30
32
34
36
38
40
42
44
2
2
3
13
1?
7
7
3
4
2
46
48
50
52
54
56
58
Total 60
3.3
3.3
5.0
21.7
28.3
11.7
11.7
5.0
6.7
3.3
4
5
15
32
36
23
19
12
10
9
7
1
1
2
1
2.3
2.8
8.4
18.1
20.3
13.0
10.7
6.8
5.6
5.1
4.0
0.6
0.6
1.3.
0.6
564
868
1206
1366
1264
1106
755
584
429
234
118
49
7
2
177
0
Trace
0.1
0.7
2.9
6.4
9.9
13.7
15.5
14.4
12.6
8.6
6.6
4.9
2.7
1.3
0.5
0.1
Trace
8,796
* No Fillet Market Samples were taken in 1953 and 1954.
Percentage cOmpO8itiOfl of the combined lengthfrequencies of fillet inarlcet samples as obtained in
1948 through 1951 were used as base.
125
APPEIDIX VII (continued)
Newport
Mink Food BamDlea
1954
1953
Cm.
16
18
20
22
24
26
28
30
32
34
36
38
40
42
44
46
48
50
52
54
56
58
Total
Numbers
6
4
11
9
3
3
1
3
0
4
1
0
0
1
1
0
0
1
48
Per Cent
12.5
8.3
22.9
18.7
6.2
6.2
2.1
6.2
0
8.3
2.].
0
0
2.1
2.1
0
0
Numbers
2
8
10
3
5
3
6
9
7
9
4
10
6
3
0
1
5
1
2.1
92
Per Cent
2.2
8.7
10.9
3.3
5.4
3.3
6.5
9.8
7.6
9.8
4.3
10.9
6.5
3.3
0
1.1
5.4
1.1