NOAA Technical Memorandum NMFS-NE-174

Essential Fish Habitat Source Document:

Clearnose Skate, Raja eglanteria,

Life History and Habitat Characteristics

U. S. DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration

National Marine Fisheries Service

Northeast Region

Northeast Fisheries Science Center

Woods Hole, Massachusetts

March 2003
155. Food of Northwest Atlantic Fishes and Two Common Species of Squid. By Ray E. Bowman, Charles E. Stillwell, William

L. Michaels, and Marvin D. Grosslein. January 2000. xiv + 138 p., 1 fig., 7 tables, 2 app. NTIS Access. No. PB2000-106735.

156. Proceedings of the Summer Flounder Aging Workshop, 1-2 February 1999, Woods Hole, Massachusetts. By George

R. Bolz, James Patrick Monaghan, Jr., Kathy L. Lang, Randall W. Gregory, and Jay M. Burnett. May 2000. v + 15 p., 5 figs.,

5 tables. NTIS Access. No. PB2000-107403.

157. Contaminant Levels in Muscle of Four Species of Recreational Fish from the New York Bight Apex. By Ashok D.

Deshpande, Andrew F.J. Draxler, Vincent S. Zdanowicz, Mary E. Schrock, Anthony J. Paulson, Thomas W. Finneran, Beth

L. Sharack, Kathy Corbo, Linda Arlen, Elizabeth A. Leimburg, Bruce W. Dockum, Robert A. Pikanowski, Brian May, and

Lisa B. Rosman. June 2000. xxii + 99 p., 6 figs., 80 tables, 3 app., glossary. NTIS Access. No. PB2001-107346.

158. A Framework for Monitoring and Assessing Socioeconomics and Governance of Large Marine Ecosystems. By

Jon G. Sutinen, editor, with contributors (listed alphabetically) Patricia Clay, Christopher L. Dyer, Steven F. Edwards, John

Gates, Tom A. Grigalunas, Timothy Hennessey, Lawrence Juda, Andrew W. Kitts, Philip N. Logan, John J. Poggie, Jr.,

Barbara Pollard Rountree, Scott R. Steinback, Eric M. Thunberg, Harold F. Upton, and John B. Walden. August 2000. v

+ 32 p., 4 figs., 1 table, glossary. NTIS Access. No. PB2001-106847.

159. An Overview and History of the Food Web Dynamics Program of the Northeast Fisheries Science Center, Woods

Hole, Massachusetts. By Jason S. Link and Frank P. Almeida. October 2000. iv + 60 p., 20 figs., 18 tables, 1 app. NTIS

Access. No. PB2001-103996.

160. Measuring Technical Efficiency and Capacity in Fisheries by Data Envelopment Analysis Using the General

Algebraic Modeling System (GAMS): A Workbook. By John B. Walden and James E. Kirkley. October 2000. iii + 15 p.,

9 figs., 5 tables. NTIS Access. No. PB2001-106502.

161. Demersal Fish and American Lobster Diets in the Lower Hudson - Raritan Estuary. By Frank W. Steimle, Robert

A. Pikanowski, Donald G. McMillan, Christine A. Zetlin, and Stuart J. Wilk. November 2000. vii + 106 p., 24 figs., 51 tables.

NTIS Access. No. PB2002-105456.

162. U.S. Atlantic and Gulf of Mexico Marine Mammal Stock Assessments – 2000. Edited by Gordon T. Waring, Janeen

M. Quintal, and Steven L. Swartz, with contributions from (listed alphabetically) Neilo B. Barros, Phillip J. Clapham, Timothy

V.N. Cole, Carol P. Fairfield, Larry J. Hansen, Keith D. Mullin, Daniel K. Odell, Debra L. Palka, Marjorie C. Rossman, U.S.

Fish and Wildlife Service, Randall S. Wells, and Cynthia Yeung. November 2000. ix + 303 p., 43 figs., 55 tables, 3 app. NTIS

Access. No. PB2001-104091.

163. Essential Fish Habitat Source Document: Red Deepsea Crab, Chaceon (Geryon) quinquedens, Life History and

Habitat Characteristics. By Frank W. Steimle, Christine A. Zetlin, and Sukwoo Chang. January 2001. v + 27 p., 8 figs.,

1 table. NTIS Access. No. PB2001-103542.

164. An Overview of the Social and Economic Survey Administered during Round II of the Northeast Multispecies Fishery

Disaster Assistance Program. By Julia Olson and Patricia M. Clay. December 2001. v + 69 p., 3 figs., 18 tables, 2 app.

NTIS Access. No. PB2002-105406.

165. A Baseline Socioeconomic Study of Massachusetts’ Marine Recreational Fisheries. By Ronald J. Salz, David K.

Loomis, Michael R. Ross, and Scott R. Steinback. December 2001. viii + 129 p., 1 fig., 81 tables, 4 app. NTIS Access. No.

PB2002-108348.

166. Report on the Third Northwest Atlantic Herring Acoustic Workshop, University of Maine Darling Marine Center,

Walpole, Maine, March 13-14, 2001. By William L. Michaels, editor and coconvenor, and Philip Yund, coconvenor.

December 2001. iv + 18 p., 14 figs., 2 app. NTIS Access. No. PB2003-101556.

Recent Issues in This Series:
U. S. DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

Donald L. Evans, Secretary

National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration

Vice Admiral Conrad C. Lautenbacher, Jr., USN (ret.), Administrator

National Marine Fisheries Service

William T. Hogarth, Assistant Administrator for Fisheries

Northeast Region

Northeast Fisheries Science Center

Woods Hole, Massachusetts

March 2003

Essential Fish Habitat Source Document:

Clearnose Skate, Raja eglanteria,

Life History and Habitat Characteristics

David B. Packer, Christine A. Zetlin, and Joseph J. Vitaliano

National Marine Fisheries Serv., James J. Howard Marine Sciences Lab., 74 Magruder Rd., Highlands, NJ 07732

This series represents a secondary level of scientific publishing. All issues employ

thorough internal scientific review; some issues employ external scientific review.

Reviews are -- by design -- transparent collegial reviews, not anonymous peer

reviews. All issues may be cited in formal scientific communications.

NOAA Technical Memorandum NMFS-NE-174
Editorial Notes on Issues 122-152, 163, and 173-179

in the

NOAA Technical Memorandum NMFS-NE Series

Editorial Production

For Issues 122-152, 163, and 173-179, staff of the Northeast Fisheries Science Center's (NEFSC's) Ecosystems Processes

Division have largely assumed the role of staff of the NEFSC's Editorial Office for technical and copy editing, type

composition, and page layout. Other than the four covers (inside and outside, front and back) and first two preliminary

pages, all preprinting editorial production has been performed by, and all credit for such production rightfully belongs

to, the staff of the Ecosystems Processes Division.

Internet Availability

Issues 122-152, 163, and 173-179 have been copublished, i.e., both as paper copies and as Web postings. All Web postings

are available at: www.nefsc.noaa.gov/nefsc/habitat/efh. Also, all Web postings are in "PDF" format.

Information Updating

By federal regulation, all information specific to Issues 122-152, 163, and 173-179 must be updated at least every five years.

All official updates will appear in the Web postings. Paper copies will be reissued only when and if new information

associated with Issues 122-152, 163, and 173-179 is significant enough to warrant a reprinting of a given issue. All updated

and/or reprinted issues will retain the original issue number, but bear a "Revised (Month Year)" label.

Species Names

The NMFS Northeast Region’s policy on the use of species names in all technical communications is generally to follow

the American Fisheries Society’s lists of scientific and common names for fishes (i.e., Robins et al. 1991a

), mollusks (i.e.,

Turgeon et al. 1998b), and decapod crustaceans (i.e., Williams et al. 1989c), and to follow the Society for Marine

Mammalogy's guidance on scientific and common names for marine mammals (i.e., Rice 1998d

). Exceptions to this policy

occur when there are subsequent compelling revisions in the classifications of species, resulting in changes in the names

of species (e.g., Cooper and Chapleau 1998e

; McEachran and Dunn 1998f).

a

Robins, C.R. (chair); Bailey, R.M.; Bond, C.E.; Brooker, J.R.; Lachner, E.A.; Lea, R.N.; Scott, W.B. 1991. Common and scientific names

of fishes from the United States and Canada. 5th ed. Amer. Fish. Soc. Spec. Publ. 20; 183 p. b

Turgeon, D.D. (chair); Quinn, J.F., Jr.; Bogan, A.E.; Coan, E.V.; Hochberg, F.G.; Lyons, W.G.; Mikkelsen, P.M.; Neves, R.J.; Roper, C.F.E.;

Rosenberg, G.; Roth, B.; Scheltema, A.; Thompson, F.G.; Vecchione, M.; Williams, J.D. 1998. Common and scientific names of aquatic

invertebrates from the United States and Canada: mollusks. 2nd ed. Amer. Fish. Soc. Spec. Publ. 26; 526 p. c

Williams, A.B. (chair); Abele, L.G.; Felder, D.L.; Hobbs, H.H., Jr.; Manning, R.B.; McLaughlin, P.A.; Pérez Farfante, I. 1989. Common

and scientific names of aquatic invertebrates from the United States and Canada: decapod crustaceans. Amer. Fish. Soc. Spec. Publ.

17; 77 p. d

Rice, D.W. 1998. Marine mammals of the world: systematics and distribution. Soc. Mar. Mammal. Spec. Publ. 4; 231 p. e

Cooper, J.A.; Chapleau, F. 1998. Monophyly and interrelationships of the family Pleuronectidae (Pleuronectiformes), with a revised

classification. Fish. Bull. (U.S.) 96:686-726. f

McEachran, J.D.; Dunn, K.A. 1998. Phylogenetic analysis of skates, a morphologically conservative clade of elasmobranchs

(Chondrichthyes: Rajidae). Copeia 1998(2):271-290.
Page iii 

FOREWORD 

One of the greatest long-term threats to the viability of 

commercial and recreational fisheries is the continuing 

loss of marine, estuarine, and other aquatic habitats. 

Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and 

Management Act (October 11, 1996) 

The long-term viability of living marine resources 

depends on protection of their habitat. 

NMFS Strategic Plan for Fisheries 

Research (February 1998) 

The Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and 

Management Act (MSFCMA), which was reauthorized 

and amended by the Sustainable Fisheries Act (1996), 

requires the eight regional fishery management councils 

to describe and identify essential fish habitat (EFH) in 

their respective regions, to specify actions to conserve 

and enhance that EFH, and to minimize the adverse 

effects of fishing on EFH. Congress defined EFH as 

“those waters and substrate necessary to fish for 

spawning, breeding, feeding or growth to maturity.” The 

MSFCMA requires NMFS to assist the regional fishery 

management councils in the implementation of EFH in 

their respective fishery management plans. 

NMFS has taken a broad view of habitat as the area 

used by fish throughout their life cycle. Fish use habitat 

for spawning, feeding, nursery, migration, and shelter, but 

most habitats provide only a subset of these functions. 

Fish may change habitats with changes in life history 

stage, seasonal and geographic distributions, abundance, 

and interactions with other species. The type of habitat, 

as well as its attributes and functions, are important for 

sustaining the production of managed species. 

The Northeast Fisheries Science Center compiled the 

available information on the distribution, abundance, and 

habitat requirements for each of the species managed by 

the New England and Mid-Atlantic Fishery Management 

Councils. That information is presented in this series of 

38 EFH species reports (plus one consolidated methods 

report). The EFH species reports are a survey of the 

important literature as well as original analyses of fisheryJAMES J. HOWARD MARINE SCIENCES LABORATORY

HIGHLANDS, NEW JERSEY

SEPTEMBER 1999 

independent data sets from NMFS and several coastal 

states. The species reports are also the source for the 

current EFH designations by the New England and MidAtlantic Fishery Management Councils, and 

understandably have begun to be referred to as the “EFH 

source documents.” 

NMFS provided guidance to the regional fishery 

management councils for identifying and describing EFH 

of their managed species. Consistent with this guidance, 

the species reports present information on current and 

historic stock sizes, geographic range, and the period and 

location of major life history stages. The habitats of 

managed species are described by the physical, chemical, 

and biological components of the ecosystem where the 

species occur. Information on the habitat requirements is 

provided for each life history stage, and it includes, where 

available, habitat and environmental variables that control 

or limit distribution, abundance, growth, reproduction, 

mortality, and productivity. 

Identifying and describing EFH are the first steps in 

the process of protecting, conserving, and enhancing 

essential habitats of the managed species. Ultimately, 

NMFS, the regional fishery management councils, fishing 

participants, Federal and state agencies, and other 

organizations will have to cooperate to achieve the habitat 

goals established by the MSFCMA. 

A historical note: the EFH species reports effectively 

recommence a series of reports published by the NMFS 

Sandy Hook (New Jersey) Laboratory (now formally 

known as the James J. Howard Marine Sciences 

Laboratory) from 1977 to 1982. These reports, which 

were formally labeled as Sandy Hook Laboratory 

Technical Series Reports, but informally known as 

“Sandy Hook Bluebooks,” summarized biological and 

fisheries data for 18 economically important species. The 

fact that the bluebooks continue to be used two decades 

after their publication persuaded us to make their 

successors – the 38 EFH source documents – available to 

the public through publication in the NOAA Technical 

Memorandum NMFS-NE series. 

JEFFREY N. CROSS, (FORMER) CHIEF

ECOSYSTEMS PROCESSES DIVISION

NORTHEAST FISHERIES SCIENCE CENTER
Page iv 
Page v 

Contents 

Introduction ...................................................................................................................................................................................... 1 

Life History ...................................................................................................................................................................................... 1 

Geographical Distribution................................................................................................................................................................. 2 

Habitat Characteristics...................................................................................................................................................................... 3 

Status of the Stocks........................................................................................................................................................................... 5 

Research Needs................................................................................................................................................................................. 6 

Acknowledgments ............................................................................................................................................................................ 6 

References Cited............................................................................................................................................................................... 6 

Tables 

Table 1. Summary of habitat parameters for clearnose skate, based on the pertinent literature .............................................8

Table 2. Summary of habitat parameters for clearnose skate, based on the most recent NEFSC and state surveys ....................9

Figures 

Figure 1. The clearnose skate, Raja eglanteria Bosc 1802 .......................................................................................................... 11 

Figure 2. Egg case of clearnose skate........................................................................................................................................... 12 

Figure 3. Abundance (% occurrence) of the major prey items of clearnose skate collected during NEFSC trawl surveys ......... 13 

Figure 4. Distribution of juvenile clearnose skate collected during winter NEFSC bottom trawl surveys................................... 14 

Figure 5. Distribution and abundance of juvenile clearnose skate collected during spring NEFSC bottom trawl surveys .......... 15 

Figure 6. Distribution of juvenile clearnose skate collected during summer NEFSC bottom trawl surveys................................ 16 

Figure 7. Distribution and abundance of juvenile clearnose skate collected during fall NEFSC bottom trawl surveys............... 17 

Figure 8. Distribution and abundance of juvenile clearnose skate in Massachusetts coastal waters ............................................ 18 

Figure 9. Distribution and abundance of juvenile and adult clearnose skate collected in Long Island Sound ............................. 20 

Figure 10. Seasonal distribution and abundance of juvenile clearnose skate in the Hudson-Raritan estuary ................................ 21 

Figure 11. Seasonal distribution and abundance of juvenile and adult clearnose skate in Delaware Bay...................................... 23 

Figure 12. Catch per unit effort for total catch of juveniles/adults in Chesapeake Bay from the VIMS trawl surveys.................. 27 

Figure 13. Seasonal distribution and abundance of juveniles/adults in Chesapeake Bay from the VIMS trawl surveys ............... 28 

Figure 14. Distribution of adult clearnose skate collected during winter NEFSC bottom trawl surveys ....................................... 29 

Figure 15. Distribution and abundance of adult clearnose skate collected during spring NEFSC bottom trawl surveys............... 30 

Figure 16. Distribution of adult clearnose skate collected during summer NEFSC bottom trawl surveys..................................... 31 

Figure 17. Distribution and abundance of adult clearnose skate collected during fall NEFSC bottom trawl surveys.................... 32 

Figure 18. Seasonal distribution and abundance of adult clearnose skate in the Hudson-Raritan estuary ..................................... 33 

Figure 19. Spring/fall distributions of juveniles relative to bottom temperature, depth, and salinity based on NEFSC surveys ... 35 

Figure 20. Seasonal distributions of juveniles relative to temperature, depth, salinity, and DO in the Hudson-Raritan estuary ... 37 

Figure 21. Seasonal distributions of juveniles and adults relative to temperature, depth, salinity, and DO in Delaware Bay ....... 40 

Figure 22. Hydrographic preferences for juveniles/adults in Chesapeake Bay from the VIMS trawl surveys............................... 44 

Figure 23. Spring/fall distributions of adults relative to bottom temperature, depth, and salinity based on NEFSC surveys ........ 45 

Figure 24. Seasonal distributions of adults relative to temperature, depth, salinity, and DO in the Hudson-Raritan estuary ........ 47 

Figure 25. NEFSC spring survey index of clearnose skate biomass and commercial landings of seven species skate complex ... 50 

Page 1 

INTRODUCTION 

The clearnose skate (Raja eglanteria Bosc 1802; 

Figure 1) occurs along the eastern United States coast 

from the Nova Scotian Shelf to northeastern Florida as 

well as in the northern Gulf of Mexico from northwestern 

Florida to Texas (Bigelow and Schroeder 1953a; 

Robinson 1969; McEachran and Musick 1975; Stehmann 

and McEachran 1978; see also Northeast Fisheries 

Science Center [NEFSC] trawl surveys, below). It is a 

southern species that is considered rare in the northern 

part of its range (Bigelow and Schroeder 1953a). 

 McEachran (2002) distinguishes clearnose skates 

from other skates in the Gulf of Maine by a combination 

of the following characters: snout acute, three rows of 

equally-sized thorns on dorsal and lateral surfaces of the 

tail, and the dorsal surface of the disc is marked with a 

series of dark spots and bars. 

LIFE HISTORY 

 The single fertilized egg is encapsulated in an amber 

to light brown egg case (Figure 2). The egg cases have 

been described from Sandy Hook Bay, New York/New 

Jersey (Breder and Nichols 1937; Breder and Atz 1938), 

Delaware Bay (Fitz and Daiber 1963), and the Gulf of 

Mexico (Luer and Gilbert 1985). The cases are 

rectangular in shape, with a relatively short, mediallycurved horn at each corner, and range in size from 60-80 

mm long and 37-51 mm wide (Fitz and Daiber 1963; Luer 

and Gilbert 1985; McEachran 2002). The horns are 

shorter than the remainder of the capsule and the anterior 

horns are longer than the posterior horns. The egg cases 

are smooth but are marked with fine longitudinal 

striations (McEachran 2002). North of Cape Hatteras the 

egg cases are deposited in the spring and summer; in 

Delaware Bay, Fitz and Daiber (1963) reported spawning 

to occur only in the spring. Off the central west coast of 

Florida, egg deposition occurs from December through 

mid-May (Luer and Gilbert 1985). Luer and Gilbert 

(1985), studying clearnose skate from Florida, found that 

they lay an average of 30 pairs of eggs in a season, 

ranging from 23-35 pairs/individual. The average interval 

between laying of successive pairs of eggs is around 4.5 

days, with most of the intervals falling in the range of 2-6 

days. 

Incubation time has been reported as about three 

months for skate eggs in Delaware Bay [Fitz and Daiber 

(1963); this time period also agrees with Breder and 

Nichols (1937)] and 63 days for eggs from a specimen off 

the Atlantic coast of Florida (Libby and Gilbert 1960). 

Fitz and Daiber (1963) reported that newly hatched 

clearnose skates appeared in Delaware Bay in July, and 

based on newly hatched juveniles collected along the east 

coast, they suggest a northward progresson in hatching 

times. In the laboratory, Luer and Gilbert (1985) allowed 

eggs laid by Gulf of Mexico skate to incubate at a 

constant temperature and photoperiod. The mean 

incubation period was around 82 days. Eggs laid initially 

in the season hatched in about 88-94 days, while those 

laid late in the season required about 77-80 days. The 

incubation periods showed a gradual decrease in duration 

from 91-77 days, correlating directly with the order of 

egg pair deposition. [For a description of hatching and 

egg deposition and development, as well as the mating 

behavior of clearnose skate, see Luer and Gilbert (1985).] 

 Age and growth of clearnose skate have been 

estimated from length frequency plots and by counting 

rings on vertebral centra (Daiber 1960; Fitz and Daiber 

1963). However, vertebrae are difficult to read (Schwartz 

1996). In Delaware Bay, Fitz and Daiber (1963) reported 

newly hatched young to be 15 cm long. They calculated 

that skates approximately 33 cm long were one year old, 

41 cm long two years old, 49 cm long three years old, and 

> 58 cm long five years old or older. Schwartz (1996) 

used disk width (DW) age designations from Fitz and 

Daiber (1963) to age fish from North Carolina. Based on 

these techniques, clearnose skate was about 21.0 cm DW 

at age I, 28.0 cm DW at age II, 34.0 cm DW at age III, 

40.0 cm DW at age IV, 42.0 cm DW at age V, and 46.0 

cm DW at age VI. 

Maximum size and size at maturity varies with 

latitude, the largest individuals occur at highest latitudes 

(McEachran 2002). The maximum size of clearnose skate 

has been previously listed as 94-95 cm TL (Bigelow and 

Schroeder 1953a; Schaefer 1967). Bigelow and Schroeder 

(1953a) report that they ordinarily grow to a length of 

76.2 cm TL. Based on the predictive equations from Frisk 

et al. (2001) and the Northeast Fisheries Science Center 

(NEFSC) survey maximum observed length of 78 cm TL, 

Lmat is estimated at 61 cm TL and Amat is estimated at 5-6 

years (Northeast Fisheries Science Center 2000b). 

 There are linear regressions defining male and female 

total length (TL)-weight relationships in North Carolina 

(Schwartz 1996): 

 log weight males = -4.9320 + 2.8808 log TL; 

 log weight females = -5.7680 + 3.1869 log TL.

 Clearnose skate feed on polychaetes, amphipods, 

mysid shrimps (e.g. Neomysis americana), the shrimp 

Crangon septemspinosa, mantis shrimps, crabs including 

Cancer, mud, hermit, and spider crabs, Ovalipes 

ocellatus, bivalves (e.g. Ensis directus), squids, and small 

fishes such as soles, weakfish, butterfish, and scup 

(Bigelow and Schroeder 1953b; Fitz and Daiber 1963; 

Stehmann and McEachran 1978; Schwartz 1996; 

Bowman et al. 2000; Figure 3). In North Carolina, fish 

prey included striped anchovy, croaker, spot, and 

blackcheek tonguefish (Schwartz 1996). 

Sharks, such as the sand tiger (Odontaspis taurus) 

regularly prey on the clearnose skate (McEachran 2002), 

and one has been found in the stomach of a greater 

amberjack (Seriola dumerili) (Rountree 2001). Boring 

snails may prey on the eggs of clearnose skate (Cox and 

Koob 1993). 
Page 2 

GEOGRAPHICAL DISTRIBUTION 

 Although clearnose skate occurs along the east coast 

from the Gulf of Maine south, it is rare in the Gulf of 

Maine and off Massachusetts (see NEFSC and 

Massachusetts trawl surveys, below). In the past it has 

been reported from Gloucester, Provincetown, and on 

Nantucket shoals (Bigelow and Schroeder 1953a). 

McEachran and Musick (1975) caught none off 

Massachusetts or in the Gulf of Maine during 1967-1970 

surveys from Nova Scotia to Cape Hatteras. 

 North of Cape Hatteras, it moves inshore and 

northward along the continental shelf during the spring 

and early summer, and offshore and southward during 

autumn and early winter when water temperatures cool to 

13-16EC (Bigelow and Schroeder 1953b, McEachran 

1973; McEachran and Musick 1975; see also NEFSC 

surveys, below). Bigelow and Schroeder (1953b) reported 

that it appears inshore between Chesapeake Bay and 

Delaware Bay in April, occurs off New Jersey and New 

York from late April-May to October-November, and is 

found off southern Massachusetts from July until 

September. Schaefer (1967) collected clearnose skate in 

the surf zone of Long Island from May to November 

while Gottschall et al. (2000), based on surveys from 

1984-1994 (see below), found them in Long Island Sound 

mostly in September and October. Jivoff and Able (2001) 

found it in the deep channels of Little Egg Harbor in New 

Jersey in April and May. Fitz and Daiber (1963) found 

that it appeared in Delaware Bay during April-November. 

Clearnose skate has been found in Chesapeake Bay from 

April to December (Massman 1962; Geer 2002, see also 

Figure 12) and in Chinocoteague, Virginia, and 

Sinepuxent Bays, Maryland from May to November 

(Schwartz 1961). In Georgia estuaries, Dahlberg and 

Odum (1970) reported that it was a year-round resident. 

JUVENILES 

 NEFSC bottom trawl surveys [see Reid et al. (1999) 

for details] captured juvenile (< 60 cm TL) clearnose 

skate year-round and show some of the seasonal 

onshore/offshore movements mentioned above. (Note that 

winter and summer distributions are presented as 

presence/absence data, precluding a discussion of 

abundances.) In winter, the densest concentrations of 

juveniles occurred on the Continental Shelf from the 

Delmarva Peninsula to Cape Hatteras out to the 200 m 

depth contour. Scattered individuals were also found near 

the Hudson Canyon (Figure 4). In spring they were 

concentrated inshore from the Delmarva Peninsula to 

south of Cape Hatteras, with scattered numbers farther 

out on the continental shelf (Figure 5). In summer they 

occurred inshore from the New Jersey coast to around 

Cape Hatteras, with a very limited presence off Cape Cod 

(Figure 6). In the fall heavy concentrations were found 

along the coast from Sandy Hook, New Jersey to south of 

Cape Hatteras (Figure 7). 

 The spring and fall 1978-2002 Massachusetts inshore 

trawl surveys [see Reid et al. (1999) for details] show a 

few scattered juveniles around Cape Cod, in 

Massachusetts Bay, and around Cape Ann (Figure 8). 

The distributions and abundances of both juvenile 

and adult clearnose skate in Long Island Sound from 

April to November 1984-1994, based on the Connecticut 

Fisheries Division bottom trawl surveys, are shown in 

Figure 9. The following description of their distributions 

is taken verbatim from Gottschall et al. (2000). 

 Clearnose skate is a relatively rare species in the 

Sound (only 29 observed), were most often taken during 

September and October (Figure 9). They were distributed 

primarily on the sand and transitional bottom of the 

Mattituck Sill and Eastern Basin. Only five clearnose 

skate were observed west of the Sill, four of with were in 

depths > 18 m on mud bottom (Gottschall et al. 2000). 

 Occurrence of juveniles in the Hudson-Raritan 

estuary [based on Hudson-Raritan trawl surveys; see Reid 

et al. (1999) for details] appears to have the same 

seasonal pattern noted above; i.e., generally there are 

fewer in the estuary during the cooler months. Only one 

juvenile was found in the estuary during the winter 

(Figure 10). In spring small numbers were scattered 

throughout the estuary. The largest numbers were 

captured in the summer, particularly in or near the two 

channels and south of Coney Island. In the fall, small 

numbers of juveniles were again found throughout the 

Hudson-Raritan estuary (Figure 10). 

The 1966-1999 Delaware Bay trawl surveys (adults 

and juveniles combined; Figure 11) also confirm the 

seasonal trends noted previously for clearnose skate. The 

greatest abundances occurred in the summer and fall, and 

they were almost completely absent in the winter. In the 

spring they were mostly found in the lower Bay, more 

toward the Delaware side (Figure 11). In summer, 

increased numbers were found in the center of the lower 

Bay and particularly near Cape Henlopen. In the fall, the 

greatest numbers were caught in the center of lower 

Delaware Bay, at the mouth and near Cape Henlopen 

(Figure 11). 

 The 1988-1999 Virginia Institute of Marine Science 

(VIMS) trawl surveys of Chesapeake Bay show that most 

juvenile and adult clearnose skate appear in catches 

between April and December with peak catch per unit 

effort between May and August (Figure 12; Geer [2002]). 

They were most abundant near the Bay mouth during 

spring and summer, but appeared throughout the Bay 

during all four seasons, and rarely appeared in the 

tributaries (Figure 13; Geer [2002]). A few were caught 

by seine in the 1990s along the seaside of the Eastern 

Shore of Virginia (Geer 2002). 
Page 3 

ADULTS 

 NEFSC bottom trawl surveys captured adult 

clearnose skate (> 61 cm TL) during all seasons, and 

again showed some of the seasonal onshore/offshore 

movements mentioned above. (Again, winter and summer 

distributions are presented as presence/absence data, 

precluding a discussion of abundances.) In winter, adults 

were concentrated offshore on the Continental Shelf out 

to the 200 m depth contour from the near the Hudson 

Canyon to Cape Hatteras, with the heaviest 

concentrations from Delaware Bay to the Cape (Figure 

14). In spring small numbers were concentrated inshore 

and out to the 200 m contour from Delaware to south of 

Cape Hatteras (Figure 15). In summer small 

concentrations were found mostly inshore from Cape 

May to Cape Hatteras (Figure 16). Small numbers of 

adult clearnose skate were concentrated inshore from 

Long Island to Cape Hatteras in the fall (Figure 17). 

 Only one adult was caught during the fall 

Massachusetts inshore trawl surveys (not shown). 

 The distribution and abundance of both adults and 

juveniles in Long Island Sound were discussed previously 

(Figure 9; Gottschall et al. [2000]). 

 As with the juveniles, adult clearnose skate in the 

Hudson-Raritan estuary were most abundant during the 

summer months, particularly near the channels (Figure 

18). 

 The seasonal distribution and abundance of both 

adults and juveniles in Delaware and Chesapeake Bays 

were discussed previously (Figures 11, 12 and 13). 

HABITAT CHARACTERISTICS 

 Information on the habitat requirements and 

preferences of clearnose skate (based on both the 

pertinent literature and the most recent NEFSC and state 

surveys) are presented here and summarized in Tables 1 

and 2. 

 The clearnose skate is found on soft bottoms along 

the continental shelf, but also occurs on rocky or gravelly 

bottoms (Bullis and Thompson 1965; Struhsaker 1969). It 

has been captured from shore in the northern part of its 

range to 329 m (McEachran and Musick 1975). Bigelow 

and Schroeder (1953b) stated it was abundant from the 

sublittoral zone to around 55 m. Edwards et al. (1962) 

captured it at 280 m and 329 m off of Cape May, New 

Jersey in the winter. Schwartz (1996), in 1993-1994, 

captured it at depths of 20 m off Shackleford Banks, 

North Carolina. However, overall it is most abundant at 

depths < 111 m (McEachran and Musick 1975). 

McEachran and Musick (1975) report that during surveys 

of the Chesapeake Bight, clearnose skate was more 

abundant in shallow water during spring and summer than 

during autumn and winter and was more abundant in the 

Bight during the summer and autumn than in the winter 

and spring. The spring and fall 1963-2002 NEFSC trawl 

surveys from the Gulf of Maine to Cape Hatteras (see 

below) indicated that both juveniles and adults were 

found over a depth range during spring of between 1-300 

m, and during the fall between about 1-80 m for the 

juveniles or 1-50 m for the adults. Most, however, were 

found at shallow depths of around 1-30 m during both 

seasons (Figures 19 and 23). The 1992-1997 HudsonRaritan estuary trawl surveys (see below) showed that 

most juveniles were found at around 5-7 m (Figure 20); 

most adults were captured at 5-8 m (Figure 24). The 

1966-1999 Delaware Bay trawl surveys (see below; 

Figure 21) showed that both juveniles and adults were 

found over a range of approximately 5-24 m. The 1988-

1999 VIMS Chesapeake Bay trawl surveys caught both 

juveniles and adults over a depth range of 1-33 m, with 

most between about 7-15 m (see below, Figure 22). 

 Clearnose skate occurs over a temperature range of 

9-30EC, but is most abundant between 9-20EC in the 

northern part of its range (McEachran and Musick 1975) 

and 19-30EC in North Carolina (Schwartz 1996). Fitz and 

Daiber (1963) found that it appeared in Delaware Bay at 

temperatures above 9EC (about April-November); the 

Delaware Bay trawl surveys (see below) show that this is 

generally true. The VIMS trawl surveys caught them in 

Chesapeake Bay at temperatures between 8-24EC (see 

below). It has been captured between 5-26EC in the 

Chesapeake Bight and 9-27EC south of Cape Hatteras 

(McEachran and Musick 1975). As state previously, north 

of Cape Hatteras, it moves inshore and northward along 

the continental shelf during the spring and early summer, 

and offshore and southward during autumn and early 

winter when water temperatures cool to 13-16EC 

(Bigelow and Schroeder 1953b, Schwartz 1961; Massman 

1962; Fitz and Daiber 1963; Schaefer 1967; McEachran 

1973; McEachran and Musick 1975). The spring and fall 

1963-2002 NEFSC trawl surveys from the Gulf of Maine 

to Cape Hatteras (see below and Figure 19) collected 

juvenile little skate over a temperatures range of 4-27EC, 

with most fish found at cooler temperatures in the spring 

(around 7-16EC), as opposed to the fall (around 18-

22EC). Adults were found over a temperature range of 4-

25EC, and like the juveniles, most fish were found at 

cooler temperatures in the spring than in the fall (Figure 

23). The 1992-1997 Hudson-Raritan estuary trawl 

surveys (see below) showed that the juveniles were found 

between 13-24EC (Figure 20) and adults between 9-24EC 

(Figure 24). Breder (1924) had reported that clearnose 

skate was not found in Sandy Hook Bay below a 

temperature of 14.4EC. The 1966-1999 Delaware Bay 

trawl surveys (see below; Figure 21) showed that both 

juveniles and adults were found over a range of 

approximately 6-27EC. 

 Fitz and Daiber (1963) reported clearnose skate in 

areas of Delaware Bay where the salinity was as low as 

20 ppt, the Delaware Bay trawl surveys found a few of 

them at even lower salinities (see below). In Chesapeake 
Page 4 

Bay, Geer (2002) reported that most clearnose skate were 

caught during the VIMS trawl surveys at salinities > 22 

ppt (see below). Schwartz (1996) captured them off 

Shackleford Banks, North Carolina at salinities of 32-34 

ppt.. The spring and fall 1963-2002 NEFSC trawl surveys 

from the Gulf of Maine to Cape Hatteras (see below and 

Figures 19 and 23) collected juveniles and adults between 

salinities of about 26-36 ppt, with most found between 

32-35 ppt in the spring and 31-32 ppt in the fall. 

EGGS 

As noted previously, in the laboratory, Luer and 

Gilbert (1985) allowed eggs laid by Gulf of Mexico skate 

to incubate at a constant temperature of 20-22EC and 

photoperiod of 12 hours light/12 hours dark. Eggs laid 

initially in the season hatched in about 88-94 days, while 

those laid late in the season required about 77-80 days. 

The incubation periods showed a gradual decrease in 

duration from 91-77 days, correlating directly with the 

order of egg pair deposition. The mean incubation period 

obtained at constant temperature and photoperiod was 

82.2"3.6 days. 

JUVENILES 

 The spring and fall distributions of juvenile clearnose 

skate relative to bottom water temperature, depth, and 

salinity based on 1963-2002 NEFSC bottom trawl 

surveys from the Gulf of Maine to Cape Hatteras are 

shown in Figure 19. In spring, they were found in waters 

between 4-21EC, the majority were spread between about 

7-16EC. Their depth range during that season was 

between about 1-300 m, with most between 1-30 m. Their 

salinity range extended from 26-36 ppt, with the majority 

found between 32-35 ppt. During the fall, juvenile 

clearnose skate were found over a temperature range of 

about 7-27EC, with most spread between about 18-22EC 

and with peaks at 20-21EC. They were found over a depth 

range of about 1-80 m, with around 60% found between 

11-20 m. They were found in salinities of between 27-36 

ppt, with the majority found at 31-32 ppt. 

Too few juveniles were found in the spring and fall 

Massachusetts inshore trawl surveys to plot their 

distributions relative to habitat parameters. 

The seasonal distributions of juveniles in the 

Hudson-Raritan estuary relative to bottom water 

temperature, depth, salinity, and dissolved oxygen based 

on 1992-1997 Hudson-Raritan trawl surveys are shown in 

Figure 20. The surveys show that during the spring 

juveniles were found mostly between 13-18EC, with the 

majority at 16EC. Their depth range during that season 

was between 5 m to around 14 m, with most found at 5-7 

m. Their salinities ranged between 22-30 ppt, with peaks 

at 25 ppt and 27 ppt. They were found over a range of 

dissolved oxygen levels of between 8-10 ppm with 

around 50% at 8 ppm. In summer, clearnose skate were 

found over a temperature range of between 17-24EC, with 

most between 20-22EC. Their depth range was between 4 

m to about 26 m, with most found between 5-8 m. Their 

salinities ranged between 23-31 ppt. They were found 

over a range of dissolved oxygen levels of between 3-9 

ppm with most between 6-7 ppm. In the fall, their 

temperature distribution was between 13-18EC, with 

about 50% at 16EC. They were found between 5-14 m 

deep, with most between 5-7 m. Their salinities ranged 

between 20-31 ppt, with a peak at 21 ppt. They were 

found over a range of dissolved oxygen levels of between 

5-8 ppm with most between 7-8 ppm. 

The seasonal distributions of both juveniles and 

adults in Delaware Bay relative to bottom water 

temperature, depth, salinity, and dissolved oxygen based 

on 1966-1999 Delaware Division of Fish and Wildlife 

bottom trawl surveys are shown in Figure 21. Very few 

were found in winter; their temperature range was 

between 7-8EC, and they were found at depths of 8 m, 13 

m, and especially 18 m. They were found at salinities of 

24 ppt, 28-29 ppt, and at 34 ppt. They were found over a 

range of dissolved oxygen levels of between 9-10 ppm. In 

spring, they were found over a wider temperature range 

of between 6-20EC, most occurred or were caught 

between 9-18EC. Their depth range was between 7-22 m, 

with a few at 4 m and 28 m, and peaks at 8-9 m and 13 m. 

Their salinities ranged between 17-33 ppt, with peaks at 

26-27 ppt and 30 ppt. They were found over a range of 

dissolved oxygen levels of between 6-15 ppm, most were 

found between 8-10 ppm. In summer, clearnose skate 

were found over a higher temperatures range of between 

14-27EC. They generally occurred or were caught with 

increasing frequency from 16EC to about 22-23EC. They 

had a roughly bimodal depth distribution of 

approximately 5-23 m, the peaks were at about 7-8 m and 

13-14 m. Their salinities ranged between about 19-32 ppt, 

with a few at 12-13 ppt, and a peak at 30 ppt. They were 

found over a range of dissolved oxygen levels of between 

5-10 ppm; the majority were between 6-7 ppm. During 

fall they were found between 8-24EC, with most found 

between about 16-21EC. Their depth range during that 

season was between 6-21 m with a few at 24 m, most 

were found between about 8-14 m. There was a peak 

(about 20%) at 8 m. Their salinities were spread between 

approximately 15-32 ppt, with the majority between 28-

30 ppt. They were found over a range of dissolved 

oxygen levels of between 6-11 ppm, with the majority at 

6-8 ppm. 

The hydrographic preferences of both juvenile and 

adult clearnose skate in Chesapeake Bay from the 1988-

1999 VIMS trawl surveys are shown in Figure 22 (all 

years and months combined). Geer (2002) suggests that 

since they are present in the Bay for all but the coldest 

months, there appears to be little relationship with catch 

and temperature, with catches common between 8-24EC 

(Figure 22). However, Geer (2002) does suggest that 
Page 5 

there is a clear relationship with salinity, with > 85% of 

the catch at > 22 ppt. Their depth range was from 1-33 m, 

with most between about 7-15 m. 

ADULTS 

 The spring and fall distributions of adult clearnose 

skate relative to bottom water temperature, depth, and 

salinity based on 1963-2002 NEFSC bottom trawl 

surveys from the Gulf of Maine to Cape Hatteras are 

shown in Figure 23. In spring, they were found at 

temperatures between 4-22EC, with most spread between 

about 6-15EC. During that period they were found at a 

depth range of about 1-300 m, with the majority at 11-30 

m. They were found over a salinity range of between 26-

36 ppt, with the majority between 32-35 ppt. During the 

fall, they were distributed over a temperature range of 10-

25EC, with most found between 18-22EC. They were 

found over a depth range of 1-50 m with approximately 

60% between 11-20 m. Their salinity range during that 

season was between 27-35 ppt, with the majority at 31-32 

ppt. 

 The seasonal distributions of adults in the HudsonRaritan estuary relative to bottom water temperature, 

depth, salinity, and dissolved oxygen are shown in Figure 

24. During the spring adults were found over a 

temperature range of about 9-21EC, with most between 

15-17EC and about 45% at 16EC. Their depth range 

during that season was between 5-16 m, with most found 

between 5-8 m. Their salinities during that period ranged 

between 23-30 ppt, with peaks at 25 and 27 ppt. They 

were found over a range of dissolved oxygen levels of 

between 6-11 ppm, with the majority between 7-9 ppm. 

In summer, adult clearnose skate were found over a 

temperature range of between 17-24EC, with a peak at 

22EC. Their depth range was between 4 m to about 26 m, 

with most found between 5-8 m. Their salinities during 

that period ranged between 23-31 ppt, with peaks at 27 

and 29 ppt. They were found over a range of dissolved 

oxygen levels of between 3-10 ppm, with the majority 

between 6-7 ppm. In the fall, their temperature 

distribution was between about 12-18EC (a few were at 

9EC), with most at 16-17EC. They were found between 4 

m to about 17 m deep, with most between 5-8 m. Their 

salinities during that period ranged between 20-32 ppt, 

with most between 26-30 ppt. They were found over a 

range of dissolved oxygen levels of between 5-10 ppm, 

with the majority between 6-8 ppm. 

The seasonal distributions of both juveniles and 

adults in Delaware Bay relative to bottom water 

temperature, depth, salinity, and dissolved oxygen based 

on Delaware Division of Fish and Wildlife bottom trawl 

surveys were discussed previously (Figure 21). 

The hydrographic preferences of both juvenile and 

adult clearnose skate in Chesapeake Bay from the 1988-

1999 VIMS trawl surveys were discussed previously 

(Figure 22).

STATUS OF THE STOCKS 

The following section is based on Northeast Fisheries 

Science Center (2000a, b). 

 The principal commercial fishing method used to 

catch all seven species of skates [clearnose, little

(Leucoraja erinacea), barndoor (Dipturus laevis), winter 

(Leucoraja ocellata), thorny, (Raja eglanteria), rosette 

(Leucoraja garmani), smooth (Malacoraja senta)] is otter 

trawling. Skates are frequently taken as bycatch during 

groundfish trawling and scallop dredge operations and 

discarded recreational and foreign landings are currently 

insignificant, at < 1% of the total fishery landings. 

 Skates have been reported in New England fishery 

landings since the late 1800s. However, commercial 

fishery landings, primarily from off Rhode Island, never 

exceeded several hundred metric tons until the advent of 

distant-water fleets during the 1960s. Landings are not 

reported by species, with over 99% of the landings 

reported as “unclassified skates.” Skate landings reached 

9,500 mt in 1969, but declined quickly during the 1970s, 

falling to 800 mt in 1981 (Figure 25). Landings have 

since increased substantially, partially in response to 

increased demand for lobster bait, and more significantly, 

to the increased export market for skate wings. Wings are 

taken from winter and thorny skates, the two species 

currently used for human consumption. Bait landings are 

presumed to be primarily from little skate, based on areas 

fished and known species distribution patterns. Landings 

for all skates increased to 12,900 mt in 1993 and then 

declined somewhat to 7,200 mt in 1995. Landings have 

increased again since 1995, and the 1998 reported 

commercial landings of 17,000 mt were the highest on 

record (Figure 25). In terms of total recreational landings 

for clearnose skate, they varied between 2000 and 

145,000 fish, equivalent to 2 to 232 mt, during 1981-

1998. 

 The biomass for the seven skate species is at a 

medium level of abundance. For the aggregate complex, 

the NEFSC spring survey index of biomass was relatively 

constant from 1968-1980, then increased significantly to 

peak levels in the mid- to late 1980s. The index of skate 

complex biomass then declined steadily until 1994, but 

has recently increased again. The large increase in skate 

biomass in the mid- to late 1980s was dominated by little 

and winter skate. The abundance of clearnose skate has 

been increasing since the mid-1980s (Figure 25), 

although the recent increase in aggregate skate biomass 

has been due to an increase in all the small sized skates (< 

100 cm max. length: clearnose, little, rosette, and 

smooth), primarily little skate. Clearnose skate is not 

considered to be overfished (Northeast Fisheries Science 

Center 2000a, b). 
Page 6 

RESEARCH NEEDS 

 Imprecise reporting of fishery statistics where several 

skate species are lumped together under one category 

(e.g., “unclassified skates” or “skates spp.”) can mask 

basic changes in community structure and profound 

reduction in populations of larger, slower growing species 

(Dulvy et al. 2000; Musick et al. 2000). Thus, it is 

important to have fishery-independent data on skates 

where the individual species are reported. 

 Northeast Fisheries Science Center (2000b) also 

suggests the following research needs: 

• More life history studies (including age, growth, 

maturity, and fecundity studies) are necessary. 

• Studies of stock structure are needed to identify unit 

stocks. 

• Explore possible stock-recruit relationships by 

examination of NEFSC survey data. 

• Investigate trophic interactions between skate species 

in the complex, and between skates and other 

groundfish. 

• Investigate the influence of annual changes in water 

temperature or other environmental factors on shifts 

in the range and distribution of the species in the 

skate complex, and establish the bathymetric 

distribution of the species in the complex in the 

northwest Atlantic. 

• Investigate historical NEFSC survey data from the 

R/V Albatross III during 1948-1962 when they 

become available, as they may provide valuable 

historical context for long-term trends in skate 

biomass. 

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS 

 The authors thank Barry Shafer, John McCarthy, 

Tom Finneran, Annette Kalbach, and Meredith Lock for 

producing the maps and graphics. Thanks also to Claire 

Steimle and Judy Berrien for literature reviews and 

interlibrary loans. Frank Almeida and Kathy Sosebee of 

the NEFSC Woods Hole provided much needed 

information, input, and reviews. 

REFERENCES CITED 

Bigelow, H.B. and W.C. Schroeder. 1953a. Fishes of the 

Gulf of Maine. U.S. Fish Wildl. Serv., Fish. Bull. 53. 

577 p. 

Bigelow, H.B. and W.C. Schroeder. 1953b. Fishes of the 

western North Atlantic. Part 2. Sawfishes, 

guitarfishes, skates, and rays [and] chimaeroids. Mem. 

Sears Foundation Mar. Res., Yale Univ. 1. 588 p. 

Bowman, R.E., C.E. Stillwell, W.L. Michaels, and M.D. 

Grosslein. 2000. Food of northwest Atlantic fishes 

and two species of squid. NOAA Tech. Mem. NMFSNE-155. 138 p. 

Breder, C.M. 1924. Nineteen twenty-three fish notes from 

Sandy Hook Bay. Copeia 127: 27-32. 

Breder, C.M. and J.W. Atz. 1938. Further notes on the 

eggs of Raja eglanteria Bosc. Copeia 1938: 145-146. 

Breder, C.M. and J.T. Nichols. 1937. The eggs of Raja 

eglanteria Bosc, with a key to the shells of the New 

York species. Copeia 1937: 181-184. 

Bullis, H.R., Jr. and J.R. Thompson. 1965. Collections by 

the exploratory fishing vessels Oregon, Silver Bay, 

Combat, and Pelican made during 1956-1960 in the 

southwestern North Atlantic. U.S. Fish Wildl. Serv. 

Spec. Sci. Rep. Fish. 510. 130 p. 

Cox, D.L. and T.J. Koob. 1993. Predation on 

elasmobranch eggs. Environ. Biol. Fish. 38: 117-125. 

Dahlberg, M.D. and E.P. Odum. 1970. Annual cycles of 

species occurrence, abundance, and diversity in 

Georgia estuarine fish populations. Am. Midland 

Naturalist 83: 382-392. 

Daiber, F.C. 1960. A technique for age determination in 

the skate Raja eglanteria. Copeia 1960: 258-260. 

Dulvy, N.K., J.D. Metcalfe, J. Glanville, M.G. Pawson, 

and J.D. Reynolds. 2000. Fishery stability, local 

extinctions, and shifts in community structure in 

skates. Conserv. Biol. 14: 283-293. 

Edwards, R.L., R. Livingstone, Jr., and P.E. Hamer. 1962. 

Winter water temperatures and an annotated list of 

fishes - Nantucket Shoals to Cape Hatteras. Albatross 

III Cruise no. 126. U.S. Fish Wildl. Serv. Spec. Sci. 

Rep. Fish. 397. 31 p. 

Fitz, E.S., Jr. and F.C. Daiber. 1963. An introduction to 

the biology of Raja eglanteria Bosc 1802 and Raja 

erinacea Mitchill 1825 as they occur in Delaware 

Bay. Bull. Bingham Oceanogr. Collect., Yale Univ. 

18 (3): 69-97. 

Frisk, M.G., T.J. Miller, and M.J. Fogarty. 2001. 

Estimation and analysis of biological parameters in 

elasmobranch fishes: a comparative life history study. 

Can. J. Fish. Aquat. Sci. 58: 969-981. 

Geer, P.J. 2002. Summary of essential fish habitat 

description and identification for Federally managed 

species inhabiting Virginia waters of Chesapeake 

Bay 1988-1999. Virginia Mar. Res. Rep. VMRR 

2001-03, Jan. 2001, Revised June 2002. 169 p. 

Gottschall, K, M.W. Johnson, and D.G. Simpson. 2000. 

The distribution and size composition of finfish, 

American lobster, and long-finned squid in Long 

Island Sound based on the Connecticut Fisheries 

Division Bottom Trawl Survey, 1984-1994. NOAA 

Tech. Rep. NMFS 148. 195 p. 

Jivoff, P. and K. Able. 2001. Characterization of the fish 

and selected decapods in Little Egg Harbor. J. Coast. 

Res. 32: 178-196. 

Libby, E.L. and P.W. Gilbert. 1960. Reproduction in the 

clearnosed skate, Raja eglanteria. Anat. Rec. 138: 

365. 
Page 7 

Luer, C.A. 1999 Dec. 3. The skate. Mote Marine 

Laboratory. <http://www.mote.org/SKATE.phtml>. 

Accessed 2001 Feb. 15. 

Luer, C.A. and P.W. Gilbert. 1985. Mating behavior, egg 

deposition, incubation period, and hatching in the 

clearnose skate, Raja eglanteria. Environ. Biol. Fish. 

13: 161-171. 

Massmann, W.H. 1962. Water temperatures, salinities, 

and fishes collected during trawl surveys of 

Chesapeake Bay and York and Pamunkey rivers, 

1956-1959. Virginia Inst. Mar. Sci. Spec. Sci. Rep. 

27. 51 p. 

McEachran, J.D. 1973. Biology of seven species of skates 

(Pisces: Rajidae). Ph.D. dissertation, Coll. William 

and Mary, Williamsburg, VA. 127 p. 

McEachran, J.D. 2002. Skates. Family Rajidae. In B.B. 

Collette and G. Klein-MacPhee eds. Bigelow and 

Schroeder’s fishes of the Gulf of Maine. 3rd Edition. 

p. 60-75. Smithsonian Institution Press, Washington, 

DC. 748 p. 

McEachran, J.D. and J.A. Musick. 1975. Distribution and 

relative abundance of seven species of skates (Pisces: 

Rajidae) which occur between Nova Scotia and Cape 

Hatteras. Fish. Bull. (U.S.) 73: 110-136. 

Michels, S.F. and M.J. Greco. 2000. Coastal finfish 

assessment survey – annual report. Delaware Div. 

Fish Wildl., Proj. F-42-R-11, Dover, DE. 72 p. 

Musick, J.A., G. Burgess, G. Cailliet, M. Camhi, and S. 

Fordham. 2000. Management of sharks and their 

relatives (Elasmobranchii). Fisheries 25: 9-13. 

Northeast Fisheries Science Center. 2000a. Report of the 

30th Northeast Regional Stock Assessment Workshop 

(30th SAW): Public Review Workshop. Northeast 

Fish. Sci. Cent. Ref. Doc. 00-04. 53 p. 

Northeast Fisheries Science Center. 2000b. Report of the 

30th Northeast Regional Stock Assessment Workshop 

(30th SAW): Stock Assessment Review Committee 

(SARC) consensus summary of assessments. 

Northeast Fish. Sci. Cent. Ref. Doc. 00-03. 

Reid, R., F. Almeida, and C. Zetlin. 1999. Essential fish 

habitat source document: Fishery independent 

surveys, data sources, and methods. NOAA Tech. 

Mem. NMFS-NE-122. 40 p. 

Robinson, M.C. 1969. Elasmobranch records and range 

extensions for the Texas gulf coast. Texas. J. Sci. 21: 

235-236. 

Rountree, R.A. 2001 Dec. 28. Diets of NW Atlantic 

fishes and squid. <http://www.fishecology.org/diets/

summary.htm>. Accessed 2002 July 18. 

Schaefer, R.H. 1967. Species composition, size and 

seasonal abundance of fish in the surf waters of Long 

Island. N.Y. Fish Game J. 14: 1-46. 

Schwartz, F.J. 1961. Fishes of Chincoteague and 

Sinepuxent bays. Am. Midland Naturalist 65: 384-

408. 

Schwartz, F.J. 1996. Biology of the clearnose skate, Raja 

eglanteria, from North Carolina. Fla. Sci. 59: 82-95. 

Stehmann, M. and J.D. McEachran. 1978. Rajidae. In

FAO species identifcation sheets for fishery purposes. 

Western Central Atlantic (Fishing Area 31). W. 

Fischer ed. FAO, Rome. 

Struhsaker, P. 1969. Demersal fish resources: 

Composition, distribution, and commercial potential 

of the Continental Shelf stocks off Southeastern 

United States. U.S. Fish Wildl. Serv. Fish. Ind. Res. 4: 

261-300.
Page 8 

Table 1. Summary of habitat parameters for clearnose skate, based on the pertinent literature1

. 

Depth Temperature Substrate/Salinity Predators Prey 

Captured from 

shore in the 

northern part of its 

range to 329 m. 

Most abundant at 

depths < 111 m. 

Captured at 280 m 

and 329 m off of 

Cape May, New 

Jersey in the winter. 

In the Chesapeake 

Bight, it was more 

abundant in shallow 

water during spring 

and summer than 

during autumn and 

winter and was 

more abundant in 

the Bight during 

summer and autumn 

than in winter and 

spring. Captured at 

depths of 20 m off 

Shackleford Banks, 

North Carolina in 

1993-1994. 

 

Occurs over a 

temperature range of 9-

30EC, but is most 

abundant between 9-

20EC in northern part 

of range and 19-30EC 

in North Carolina. 

Appeared in Delaware 

Bay at temperatures 

above 9EC (about 

April-November). Has 

been captured between 

5-26EC in the 

Chesapeake Bight and 

9-27EC south of Cape 

Hatteras. North of Cape 

Hatteras, it moves 

inshore and northward 

along the continental 

shelf during spring and 

early summer, and 

offshore and southward 

during autumn and 

early winter when 

water temperatures 

cool to 13-16EC. 

In the lab, eggs from 

Gulf of Mexico skate 

hatched after a mean 

time of 82.2"3.6 days 

when incubated at a 

constant temperature of 

20-22EC and 

photoperiod of 12 

hours light/12 hours 

dark. Eggs laid initially 

in the season hatched in 

about 88-94 days, those 

laid later required 

about 77-80 days. 

Incubation periods 

showed a gradual 

decrease in duration 

from 91-77 days, 

correlating directly 

with order of egg pair 

deposition.

Found on soft 

bottoms along the 

continental shelf, 

but also occurs on 

rocky or gravelly 

bottoms. 

In Long Island 

Sound during 1984-

1994, they were 

distributed 

primarily on the 

sand and 

transitional bottom 

of the Mattituck Sill 

and Eastern Basin. 

Only five skate 

observed west of 

the Sill, four of with 

were in depths > 18 

m on mud bottom. 

Reported in areas of 

Delaware Bay 

where the salinity 

was as low as 20 

ppt, the Delaware 

Bay trawl surveys 

found a few of them 

at even lower 

salinities (see 

below). Captured 

off Shackleford 

Banks, North 

Carolina at 

salinities of 32-34 

ppt. 

Sharks, such as the 

sand tiger 

(Odontaspis 

taurus). One found 

in the stomach of a 

greater amberjack 

(Seriola dumerili). 

Boring snails may 

prey on the eggs. 

Polychaetes, 

amphipods, mysid 

shrimps (e.g. 

Neomysis

americana), the 

shrimp Crangon 

septemspinosa, 

crabs including 

Cancer, mud, 

hermit, and spider 

crabs, Ovalipes 

ocellatus, bivalves 

(e.g. Ensis 

directus), squids, 

and small fishes 

such as soles, 

weakfish, 

butterfish, and scup. 

In North Carolina, 

fish prey included 

striped anchovy, 

croaker, spot, 

blackcheek 

tonguefish. 

1

Bigelow and Schroeder (1953b); Edwards et al. (1962); Massman (1962); Fitz and Daiber (1963); Bullis and Thompson 

(1965); Schaefer (1967); Struhsaker (1969); McEachran (1973); McEachran and Musick (1975); Stehmann and 

McEachran (1978); Schwartz (1961, 1996); Luer and Gilbert (1985); Cox and Koob (1993); Bowman et al. (2000); 

Gottschall et al. (2000); Rountree (2001); McEachran (2002).
Page 9 

Table 2. Summary of habitat parameters for clearnose skate, based on the most recent NEFSC and state surveys 

mentioned in the text. 

Life Stage Survey Depth Temperature Salinity/DO 

1963-2002 NEFSC 

trawl surveys from 

Gulf of Maine to 

Cape Hatteras. 

Spring: range of about 1-300 

m, most between 1-30 m. 

Fall: range of about 1-80 m, 

around 60% found between 

11-20 m. 

Spring: range of 4-21EC, 

majority spread between about 

7-16EC. 

Fall: range of about 7-27EC, 

most spread between about 18-

22EC, peaks at 20-21EC. 

Spring: range of 26-36 ppt, 

majority between 32-35 ppt. 

Fall: range of 27-36 ppt, 

majority at 31-32 ppt. 

1992-1997 NEFSC 

trawl surveys of the 

Hudson-Raritan 

estuary. 

Spring: range of 5 to around 

14 m, most at 5-7 m. 

Summer: range of 4 m to about 

26 m, most between 5-8 m. 

Fall: range of 5-14 m, most 

between 5-7 m.

Spring: range of 13-18EC, 

majority at 16EC. 

Summer: range of 17-24EC, 

most between 20-22EC. 

Fall: range of 13-18EC, about 

50% at 16EC.

Spring: range of 22-30 ppt, 

peaks at 25 ppt and 27 ppt / 

range of 8-10 ppm, around 

50% at 8 ppm. 

Summer: range of 23-31 ppt / 

range of 3-9 ppm, most 

between 6-7 ppm. 

Fall: range of 20-31 ppt, peak 

at 21 ppt / range of 5-8 ppm, 

most between 7-8 ppm.

1966-1999 

Delaware Division 

of Fish and Wildlife 

bottom trawl 

surveys of 

Delaware Bay 

(juveniles and 

adults combined). 

Winter: very few found, at 8 

m, 13 m, and especially 18 m. 

Spring: range of 7-22 m, a few 

at 4 m and 28 m, peaks at 8-9 

m and 13 m. 

Summer: roughly bimodal 

distribution of approximately 

5-23 m, peaks at about 7-8 m 

and 13-14 m. 

Fall: range of 6-21 m, a few at 

24 m, most between about 8-

14 m; peak (about 20%) at 8 

m.

Winter: very few found, range 

of 7-8EC. 

Spring: range of 6-20EC, most 

between 9-18EC. 

Summer: range of 14-27EC, 

generally occurred or were 

caught with increasing 

frequency from 16EC to about 

22-23EC. 

Fall: range of 8-24EC, most 

between about 16-21EC.

Winter: very few found, at 24 

ppt, 28-29 ppt, and at 34 ppt / 

range of 9-10 ppm. 

Spring: range of 17-33 ppt, 

peaks at 26-27 ppt and 30 ppt / 

range of 6-15 ppm, most 

between 8-10 ppm.

Summer: range of about 19-32 

ppt, a few at 12-13 ppt, a peak 

at 30 ppt / range of 5-10 ppm, 

majority between 6-7 ppm.

Fall: range of approximately 

15-32 ppt, majority between 

28-30 ppt / range of 6-11 ppm, 

majority at 6-8 ppm.

Juveniles

1988-1999 Virginia 

Institute of Marine 

Science (VIMS) 

trawl surveys of 

Chesapeake Bay 

(juveniles and 

adults combined). 

Range from 1-33 m, most 

between about 7-15 m. 

Catches common between 8-

24EC.

> 85% of the catch at > 22 ppt.
Page 10 

Table 2. cont’d. 

Life Stage Survey Depth Temperature Salinity/DO 

1963-2002 NEFSC 

trawl surveys from 

Gulf of Maine to 

Cape Hatteras. 

Spring: range of about 1-300 

m, majority at 11-30 m. 

Fall: range of about 1-50 m, 

with approximately 60% 

between 11-20 m. 

Spring: range of 4-22EC, most 

spread between about 6-15EC. 

Fall: range of 10-25EC, most 

between 18-22EC. 

Spring: range of 26-36 ppt, 

majority between 32-35 ppt. 

Fall: range between 27-35 ppt, 

majority at 31-32 ppt.

1992-1997 NEFSC 

trawl surveys of the 

Hudson-Raritan 

estuary. 

Spring: range of 5-16 m, most 

between 5-8 m. 

Summer: range of 4 m to about 

26 m, most found between 5-8 

m. 

Fall: range of 4 m to about 17 

m, most between 5-8 m.

Spring: range of about 9-

21EC, most between 15-17EC, 

about 45% at 16EC. 

Summer: range of 17-24EC, 

peak at 22EC. 

Fall: range of about 12-18EC 

(a few at 9EC), most at 16-

17EC.

Spring: range of 23-30 ppt, 

peaks at 25 and 27 ppt / range 

of 6-11 ppm, majority between 

7-9 ppm. 

Summer: range of 23-31 ppt, 

peaks at 27 and 29 ppt / range 

of 3-10 ppm, majority between 

6-7 ppm. 

Fall: range of 20-32 ppt, most 

between 26-30 ppt / range of 

5-10 ppm, majority between 6-

8 ppm. 

1966-1999 

Delaware Division 

of Fish and Wildlife 

bottom trawl 

surveys of 

Delaware Bay 

(juveniles and 

adults combined). 

See juveniles. See juveniles. See juveniles. 

Adults

1988-1999 Virginia 

Institute of Marine 

Science (VIMS) 

trawl surveys of 

Chesapeake Bay 

(juveniles and 

adults combined). 

See juveniles. See juveniles. See juveniles. 
Page 11 

Figure 1. The clearnose skate, Raja eglanteria Bosc 1802. Top: male, from Murdy et al. (1997). Bottom: female, from 

Bigelow and Schroeder (1953b).
Page 12 

Figure 2. Egg case of clearnose skate, from Luer (1999).
Page 13 

Figure 3. Abundance (% occurrence) of the major prey items of clearnose skate collected during NEFSC bottom trawl 

surveys from 1973-1980 and 1981-1990. Methods for sampling, processing, and analysis of samples differed between 

the time periods [see Reid et al. (1999) for details]. 

Crustacea shrimp 4.9%

Amphipoda 6.5%

Polychaeta 3.9%

Crustacea 9.1%

Fish 15.6 %

Decapoda 51.9 %

Mollusca 7.8 %

1973 – 1980 

n = 38

Other prey phyla 5.2 %

Polychaeta 4.1%

Crustacea 4.9%

Decapoda 47.2 %

1981 – 1990 

n = 86

Fish 29.3 %

Mollusca 8.1 %

Other prey phyla 1.6 %
Page 14 

Clearnose Skate

NEFSC Bottom Trawl Surveys

(1964 - 2002)

Number per tow Winter/juveniles

(<= 60 cm)

Present

Figure 4. Distribution of juvenile clearnose skate collected during winter NEFSC bottom trawl surveys [1964-2002, all 

years combined; see Reid et al. (1999) for details]. Survey stations where juveniles were not found are not shown. 
Page 15 

Clearnose Skate

NEFSC Bottom Trawl Surveys

(1968 - 2002)

Spring/juveniles

(<= 60 cm)

NPTOW

1 - 10

11 - 100

101 - 1000

> 1000

Number per tow

Figure 5. Distribution and abundance of juvenile clearnose skate collected during spring NEFSC bottom trawl surveys 

[1968-2002, all years combined; see Reid et al. (1999) for details].
Page 16 

Clearnose Skate

NEFSC Bottom Trawl Surveys

(1963 - 1995)

Summer/juveniles

 (<= 60 cm)

Present

Figure 6. Distribution of juvenile clearnose skate collected during summer NEFSC bottom trawl surveys [1963-1995, all 

years combined; see Reid et al. (1999) for details]. Survey stations where juveniles were not found are not shown.
Page 17 

Clearnose Skate

NEFSC Bottom Trawl Surveys

(1963 - 2001)

Fall/juveniles

(<= 60 cm)

NPTOW

1 - 10

11 - 100

101 - 1000

> 1000

Number per tow

Figure 7. Distribution and abundance of juvenile clearnose skate collected during fall NEFSC bottom trawl surveys 

[1963-2001, all years combined; see Reid et al. (1999) for details]. 
Page 18 

New Hampshire

Cape Ann

Massachusetts

Cape Cod

Martha's

Vineyard

Nantucket

Spring/juveniles

NPTOW

1 - 10

Clearnose Skate

Massachusetts Inshore

Trawl Survey

(1978 - 2002)

Spring/juveniles

(<= 60 cm)

 Number per tow

Figure 8. Distribution and abundance of juvenile clearnose skate in Massachusetts coastal waters collected during the 

spring and autumn Massachusetts inshore trawl surveys [1978-2002, all years combined; see Reid et al. (1999) for 

details].
Page 19 

New Hampshire

Cape Ann

Massachusetts

Cape Cod

Martha's

Vineyard

Nantucket

Spring/juveniles

NPTOW

1 - 10

Clearnose Skate

Massachusetts Inshore

Trawl Survey

(1978 - 2001)

Fall/juveniles

(<= 60 cm)

 Number per tow

Figure 8. cont’d.
Page 20 

Figure 9. Distribution and abundance of juvenile and adult clearnose skate collected in Long Island Sound, based on the 

finfish surveys of the Connecticut Fisheries Division, 1984-1994 (from Gottschall et al. [2000]). Circle diameter is 

proportional to the number of fish caught, and is scaled to the maximum catch (indicated by “max =”). Collections were 

made with a 14 m otter trawl at about 40 stations chosen by stratified random design.
Page 21 

Figure 10. Seasonal distribution and abundance of juvenile clearnose skate in the Hudson-Raritan estuary, based on 

Hudson-Raritan trawl surveys, 1992-1997 [see Reid et al. (1999) for details]. 
Page 22 

Figure 10. cont’d. 
Page 23 

Figure 11. Seasonal distribution and abundance of juvenile and adult clearnose skate in Delaware Bay, based on 

Delaware Division of Fish and Wildlife bottom trawl surveys from 1966-1999 (all years combined). Surveys were 

conducted monthly at 9-14 fixed stations, using a 9.1 m otter trawl towed for 20-30 min (for methods see Michels and 

Greco 2000). 
Page 24 

Figure 11. cont’d. 
Page 25 

Figure 11. cont’d. 
Page 26 

Figure 11. cont’d.
Page 27 

Figure 12. Catch per unit effort for total catch of juvenile and adult clearnose skate in Chesapeake Bay, from the Virginia 

Institute of Marine Science’s (VIMS) trawl surveys, 1988-1999 (all years combined). Monthly surveys were conducted 

using a random stratified design of the main stem of the Bay using a 9.1 m semi-balloon otter trawl with 38 mm mesh 

and 6.4 mm cod end with a tow duration of five minutes. Adapted from Geer (2002).

0.00

0.05

0.10

0.15

0.20

0.25

0.30

J F MAMJ J ASOND

Month

Catch Per Trawl

0.00

0.05

0.10

0.15

0.20

0.25

0.30

J F MAMJ J ASOND

Month

Catch Per Trawl
Page 28 

Figure 13. Seasonal distribution and abundance of juvenile and adult clearnose skate in Chesapeake Bay, from the VIMS 

trawl surveys, 1988-1999 (all years combined). Adapted from Geer (2002). 

Catch Key: 

1 - 5 

6 - 10 

26 - 50 

11 - 25 

> 50 

N
Page 29 

Clearnose Skate

NEFSC Bottom Trawl Surveys

(1964 - 2002)

Number per tow

Winter/adults

 (> 60 cm)

Present

Figure 14. Distribution of adult clearnose skate collected during winter NEFSC bottom trawl surveys [1964-2002, all 

years combined; see Reid et al. (1999) for details]. Survey stations where adults were not found are not shown. 
Page 30 

Clearnose Skate

NEFSC Bottom Trawl Surveys

(1968 - 2002)

Spring/adults

(> 60 cm)

NPTOW

1 - 10

11 - 100

101 - 1000

> 1000

Number per tow

Figure 15. Distribution and abundance of adult clearnose skate collected during spring NEFSC bottom trawl surveys 

[1968-2002, all years combined; see Reid et al. (1999) for details].
Page 31 

Clearnose Skate

NEFSC Bottom Trawl Surveys

(1963 - 1995)

Number per tow

Summer/adults

 (> 60 cm)

Present

Figure 16. Distribution of adult clearnose skate collected during summer NEFSC bottom trawl surveys [1963-1995, all 

years combined; see Reid et al. (1999) for details]. Survey stations where adults were not found are not shown.
Page 32 

Fall/adults

(> 60 cm)

NPTOW

1 - 10

11 - 100

101 - 1000

> 1000

Clearnose Skate

NEFSC Bottom Trawl Surveys

(1963 - 2001)

Number per tow

Figure 17. Distribution and abundance of adult clearnose skate collected during fall NEFSC bottom trawl surveys [1963-

2001, all years combined; see Reid et al. (1999) for details]. 
Page 33 

Figure 18. Seasonal distribution and abundance of adult clearnose skate in the Hudson-Raritan estuary, based on 

Hudson-Raritan trawl surveys, 1992-1997 [see Reid et al. (1999) for details]. 
Page 34 

Figure 18. cont’d. 
Page 35 

0

5

10

15

20

25

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23

Bottom Temperature (°C)

Percent

Trawls N=10537

Occurrence N=376

Catch N=1850

0

10

20

30

40

1-10

11-2021-3031-4041-5051-6061-7071-8081-90

91-100

101-120121-140141-160161-180181-200201-300301-400401-500

Bottom Depth (m)

Percent

Trawls N=12193

Occurrence N=417

Catch N=1936

0

10

20

30

40

26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37

Salinity (PPT)

Percent

Trawls N=1959

Occurrence N=80

Catch N=184

Clearnose Skate

NEFSC Bottom Trawl Survey 

Spring/Juveniles

Figure 19. Spring and fall distributions of juvenile clearnose skate and trawls relative to bottom water temperature, 

depth, and salinity based on NEFSC bottom trawl surveys (1963-2002; all years combined). White bars give the 

distribution of all the trawls, black bars give the distribution of all trawls in which clearnose skate occurred, and gray 

bars represent, within each interval, the percentage of the total number of clearnose skate caught. 
Page 36 

0

5

10

15

20

2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28

Bottom Temperature (°C)

Percent

Trawls N=11844

Occurrence N=696

Catch N=1821

0

20

40

60

80

1-10

11-2021-3031-4041-5051-6061-7071-8081-90

91-100

101-120121-140141-160161-180181-200201-300301-400401-500

>500

Bottom Depth (m)

Percent

Trawls N=13543

Occurrence N=779

Catch N=1974

0

10

20

30

40

50

27 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37

Salinity (PPT)

Percent

Trawls N=1956

Occurrence N=158

Catch N=334

Clearnose Skate

NEFSC Bottom Trawl Survey 

Fall/Juveniles

Figure 19. cont’d. 
Page 37 

Figure 20. Seasonal distributions of juvenile clearnose skate and trawls relative to bottom water temperature, depth, 

salinity, and dissolved oxygen based on NEFSC Hudson-Raritan estuary trawl surveys (1992-1997; all years combined). 

White bars give the distribution of all the trawls, black bars give the distribution of all trawls in which clearnose skate 

occurred, and gray bars represent, within each interval, the percentage of the total number of clearnose skate caught.

Spring 

0

10

20

30

40

50

0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28

Temperature (0C)

Percent

Trawls N=326

Occurrence N=22

Catch N=28

0

10

20

30

0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28

Depth (m)

Percent

Trawls N=330

Occurrence N=22

Catch N=28

0

10

20

30

0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28 30 32 34 36 38

Salinity (PPT)

Percent

Trawls N=326

Occurrence N=22

Catch N=28

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15

DO (PPM)

Percent

Trawls N=177

Occurrence N=9

Catch N=13

Spring 

0

10

20

30

40

50

0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28

Temperature (0C)

Percent

Trawls N=326

Occurrence N=22

Catch N=28

0

10

20

30

0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28

Depth (m)

Percent

Trawls N=330

Occurrence N=22

Catch N=28

0

10

20

30

0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28 30 32 34 36 38

Salinity (PPT)

Percent

Trawls N=326

Occurrence N=22

Catch N=28

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15

DO (PPM)

Percent

Trawls N=177

Occurrence N=9

Catch N=13
Page 38 

Figure 20. cont’d.

Summer 

0

10

20

30

40

0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28

Temperature (0C)

Percent

Trawls N=352

Occurrence N=95

Catch N=215

0

10

20

30

0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28

Depth (m)

Percent

Trawls N=356

Occurrence N=97

Catch N=222

0

10

20

30

0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28 30 32 34 36 38

Salinity (PPT)

Percent

Trawls N=347

Occurrence N=94

Catch N=214

0

10

20

30

40

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15

DO (PPM)

Percent

Trawls N=215

Occurrence N=60

Catch N=113

Summer 

0

10

20

30

40

0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28

Temperature (0C)

Percent

Trawls N=352

Occurrence N=95

Catch N=215

0

10

20

30

0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28

Depth (m)

Percent

Trawls N=356

Occurrence N=97

Catch N=222

0

10

20

30

0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28 30 32 34 36 38

Salinity (PPT)

Percent

Trawls N=347

Occurrence N=94

Catch N=214

0

10

20

30

40

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15

DO (PPM)

Percent

Trawls N=215

Occurrence N=60

Catch N=113
Page 39 

Figure 20. cont’d.

Fall 

0

10

20

30

40

50

0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28

Temperature (0C)

Percent

Trawls N=570

Occurrence N=16

Catch N=27

0

10

20

30

40

0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28

Depth (m)

Percent

Trawls N=586

Occurrence N=18

Catch N=30

0

10

20

30

40

0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28 30 32 34 36 38

Salinity (PPT)

Percent

Trawls N=532

Occurrence N=16

Catch N=27

0

10

20

30

40

50

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15

DO (PPM)

Percent

Trawls N=458

Occurrence N=7

Catch N=7

Fall 

0

10

20

30

40

50

0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28

Temperature (0C)

Percent

Trawls N=570

Occurrence N=16

Catch N=27

0

10

20

30

40

0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28

Depth (m)

Percent

Trawls N=586

Occurrence N=18

Catch N=30

0

10

20

30

40

0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28 30 32 34 36 38

Salinity (PPT)

Percent

Trawls N=532

Occurrence N=16

Catch N=27

0

10

20

30

40

50

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15

DO (PPM)

Percent

Trawls N=458

Occurrence N=7

Catch N=7
Page 40 

Figure 21. Seasonal distributions of juvenile and adult clearnose skate and trawls relative to bottom temperature, depth, 

salinity, and dissolved oxygen based on Delaware Division of Fish and Wildlife trawl surveys from 1966-1999 (all years 

combined). White bars give the distribution of all the trawls, black bars give the distribution of all trawls in which the 

skate occurred, and gray bars represent, within each interval, the percentage of the total number of skate caught. 

Winter 

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28

Temperature (0C)

Percent

Trawls N=166

Occurrence N=4

Catch N=12

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28

Depth (m)

Percent

Trawls N=166

Occurrence N=4

Catch N=12

0

10

20

30

0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28 30 32 34 36

Salinity (PPT)

Percent

Trawls N=157

Occurrence N=4

Catch N=12

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15

DO (PPM)

Percent

Trawls N=125

Occurrence N=3

Catch N=11

Winter 

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28

Temperature (0C)

Percent

Trawls N=166

Occurrence N=4

Catch N=12

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28

Depth (m)

Percent

Trawls N=166

Occurrence N=4

Catch N=12

0

10

20

30

0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28 30 32 34 36

Salinity (PPT)

Percent

Trawls N=157

Occurrence N=4

Catch N=12

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15

DO (PPM)

Percent

Trawls N=125

Occurrence N=3

Catch N=11
Page 41 

Figure 21. cont’d. 

Spring 

0

10

20

0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28

Temperature (0C)

Percent

Trawls N=373

Occurrence N=105

Catch N=585

0

10

20

30

0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28

Depth (m)

Percent

Trawls N=378

Occurrence N=105

Catch N=588

0

10

20

0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28 30 32 34 36

Salinity (PPT)

Percent

Trawls N=374

Occurrence N=105

Catch N=585

0

10

20

30

40

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15

DO (PPM)

Percent

Trawls N=312

Occurrence N=95

Catch N=514

Spring 

0

10

20

0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28

Temperature (0C)

Percent

Trawls N=373

Occurrence N=105

Catch N=585

0

10

20

30

0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28

Depth (m)

Percent

Trawls N=378

Occurrence N=105

Catch N=588

0

10

20

0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28 30 32 34 36

Salinity (PPT)

Percent

Trawls N=374

Occurrence N=105

Catch N=585

0

10

20

30

40

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15

DO (PPM)

Percent

Trawls N=312

Occurrence N=95

Catch N=514
Page 42 

Figure 21. cont’d. 

Summer 

0

10

20

30

0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28

Temperature (0C)

Percent

Trawls N=509

Occurrence N=242

Catch N=2759

0

10

20

0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28

Depth (m)

Percent

Trawls N=512

Occurrence N=242

Catch N=2759

0

10

20

30

0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28 30 32 34 36

Salinity (PPT)

Percent

Trawls N=498

Occurrence N=232

Catch N=2695

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15

DO (PPM)

Percent

Trawls N=415

Occurrence N=173

Catch N=1505

Summer 

0

10

20

30

0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28

Temperature (0C)

Percent

Trawls N=509

Occurrence N=242

Catch N=2759

0

10

20

0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28

Depth (m)

Percent

Trawls N=512

Occurrence N=242

Catch N=2759

0

10

20

30

0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28 30 32 34 36

Salinity (PPT)

Percent

Trawls N=498

Occurrence N=232

Catch N=2695

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15

DO (PPM)

Percent

Trawls N=415

Occurrence N=173

Catch N=1505
Page 43 

Figure 21. cont’d.

Fall 

0

10

20

30

0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28

Temperature (0C)

Percent

Trawls N=405

Occurrence N=175

Catch N=1302

0

10

20

30

0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28

Depth (m)

Percent

Trawls N=422

Occurrence N=185

Catch N=1313

0

10

20

30

40

0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28 30 32 34 36

Salinity (PPT)

Percent

Trawls N=399

Occurrence N=172

Catch N=1271

0

10

20

30

40

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15

DO (PPM)

Percent

Trawls N=341

Occurrence N=121

Catch N=480

Fall 

0

10

20

30

0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28

Temperature (0C)

Percent

Trawls N=405

Occurrence N=175

Catch N=1302

0

10

20

30

0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28

Depth (m)

Percent

Trawls N=422

Occurrence N=185

Catch N=1313

0

10

20

30

40

0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28 30 32 34 36

Salinity (PPT)

Percent

Trawls N=399

Occurrence N=172

Catch N=1271

0

10

20

30

40

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15

DO (PPM)

Percent

Trawls N=341

Occurrence N=121

Catch N=480
Page 44 

Figure 22. Hydrographic preferences for juvenile and adult clearnose skate in Chesapeake Bay, from the VIMS trawl 

surveys, 1988-1999 (all years combined). Adapted from Geer (2002). 

Stations

Catches

Bottom Temperature (EC)

Percent

Salinity (ppt)

Depth (m)

Stations

Catches

Bottom Temperature (EC)

Percent

Salinity (ppt)

Depth (m)
Page 45 

0

5

10

15

20

25

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23

Bottom Temperature (°C)

Percent

Trawls N=10537

Occurrence N=383

Catch N=1009

0

10

20

30

40

50

1-10

11-2021-3031-4041-5051-6061-7071-8081-90

91-100

101-120121-140141-160161-180181-200201-300301-400401-500

Bottom Depth (m)

Percent

Trawls N=12193

Occurrence N=417

Catch N=1075

0

10

20

30

40

26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37

Salinity (PPT)

Percent

Trawls N=1959

Occurrence N=133

Catch N=310

Clearnose Skate

NEFSC Bottom Trawl Survey 

Spring/Adults

Figure 23. Spring and fall distributions of adult clearnose skate and trawls relative to bottom water temperature, depth, 

and salinity based on NEFSC bottom trawl surveys (1963-2002; all years combined). White bars give the distribution of 

all the trawls, black bars give the distribution of all trawls in which clearnose skate occurred, and gray bars represent, 

within each interval, the percentage of the total number of clearnose skate caught. 
Page 46 

0

5

10

15

20

25

2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28

Bottom Temperature (°C)

Percent

Trawls N=11844

Occurrence N=416

Catch N=805

0

20

40

60

80

1-10

11-2021-3031-4041-5051-6061-7071-8081-90

91-100

101-120121-140141-160161-180181-200201-300301-400401-500

>500

Bottom Depth (m)

Percent

Trawls N=13543

Occurrence N=477

Catch N=901

0

10

20

30

40

50

27 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37

Salinity (PPT)

Percent

Trawls N=1956

Occurrence N=138

Catch N=285

Clearnose Skate

NEFSC Bottom Trawl Survey 

Fall/Adults

Figure 23. cont’d. 
Page 47 

Figure 24. Seasonal distributions of adult clearnose skate and trawls relative to bottom water temperature, depth, salinity, 

and dissolved oxygen based on NEFSC Hudson-Raritan estuary trawl surveys (1992-1997; all years combined). White 

bars give the distribution of all the trawls, black bars give the distribution of all trawls in which clearnose skate occurred,

and gray bars represent, within each interval, the percentage of the total number of clearnose skate caught. 

Spring 

0

10

20

30

40

50

0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28

Temperature (0C)

Percent

Trawls N=326

Occurrence N=42

Catch N=96

0

10

20

30

40

0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28

Depth (m)

Percent

Trawls N=330

Occurrence N=43

Catch N=97

0

10

20

30

40

0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28 30 32 34 36 38

Salinity (PPT)

Percent

Trawls N=326

Occurrence N=42

Catch N=96

0

10

20

30

40

50

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15

DO (PPM)

Percent

Trawls N=177

Occurrence N=25

Catch N=44

Spring 

0

10

20

30

40

50

0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28

Temperature (0C)

Percent

Trawls N=326

Occurrence N=42

Catch N=96

0

10

20

30

40

0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28

Depth (m)

Percent

Trawls N=330

Occurrence N=43

Catch N=97

0

10

20

30

40

0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28 30 32 34 36 38

Salinity (PPT)

Percent

Trawls N=326

Occurrence N=42

Catch N=96

0

10

20

30

40

50

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15

DO (PPM)

Percent

Trawls N=177

Occurrence N=25

Catch N=44
Page 48 

Figure 24. cont’d.

Summer 

0

10

20

30

40

0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28

Temperature (0C)

Percent

Trawls N=352

Occurrence N=151

Catch N=452

0

10

20

30

0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28

Depth (m)

Percent

Trawls N=356

Occurrence N=153

Catch N=457

0

10

20

0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28 30 32 34 36 38

Salinity (PPT)

Percent

Trawls N=347

Occurrence N=148

Catch N=443

0

10

20

30

40

50

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15

DO (PPM)

Percent

Trawls N=215

Occurrence N=106

Catch N=309

Summer 

0

10

20

30

40

0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28

Temperature (0C)

Percent

Trawls N=352

Occurrence N=151

Catch N=452

0

10

20

30

0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28

Depth (m)

Percent

Trawls N=356

Occurrence N=153

Catch N=457

0

10

20

0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28 30 32 34 36 38

Salinity (PPT)

Percent

Trawls N=347

Occurrence N=148

Catch N=443

0

10

20

30

40

50

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15

DO (PPM)

Percent

Trawls N=215

Occurrence N=106

Catch N=309
Page 49 

Figure 24. cont’d.

Fall 

0

10

20

30

40

50

0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28

Temperature (0C)

Percent

Trawls N=570

Occurrence N=48

Catch N=79

0

10

20

30

0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28

Depth (m)

Percent

Trawls N=586

Occurrence N=51

Catch N=83

0

10

20

30

0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28 30 32 34 36 38

Salinity (PPT)

Percent

Trawls N=532

Occurrence N=48

Catch N=79

0

10

20

30

40

50

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15

DO (PPM)

Percent

Trawls N=458

Occurrence N=40

Catch N=61

Fall 

0

10

20

30

40

50

0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28

Temperature (0C)

Percent

Trawls N=570

Occurrence N=48

Catch N=79

0

10

20

30

0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28

Depth (m)

Percent

Trawls N=586

Occurrence N=51

Catch N=83

0

10

20

30

0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28 30 32 34 36 38

Salinity (PPT)

Percent

Trawls N=532

Occurrence N=48

Catch N=79

0

10

20

30

40

50

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15

DO (PPM)

Percent

Trawls N=458

Occurrence N=40

Catch N=61
Page 50 

Figure 25. NEFSC spring survey index of clearnose skate biomass and commercial landings of the seven species skate 

complex from the Gulf of Maine to the Mid-Atlantic Bight. 

Gulf of Maine, Georges Bank, Southern New England, Mid-Atlantic Bight

0

2000

4000

6000

8000

10000

12000

14000

16000

18000

196019621964196619681970197219741976197819801982198419861988199019921994199619982000

Year

Landings (metric tons)

0.00

0.05

0.10

0.15

0.20

0.25

Stratified Mean Weight/Tow (kg)

Skate complex, commercial landings (mt)

Survey index of clearnose skate biomass
Publishing in NOAA Technical Memorandum NMFS-NE

Jon A. Gibson, Biological Sciences Editor & Laura S. Garner, Editor

Manuscript Qualification

This series represents a secondary level of scientific publishing in the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS). For all

issues, the series employs thorough internal scientific review, but

not necessarily external scientific review. For most issues, the

series employs rigorous technical and copy editing. Manuscripts

that may warrant a primary level of scientific publishing should

be initially submitted to one of NMFS’s primary series (i.e.,

Fishery Bulletin, NOAA Technical Report NMFS, or Marine

Fisheries Review).

Identical, or fundamentally identical, manuscripts should

not be concurrently submitted to this and any other publication

series. Manuscripts which have been rejected by any primary

series strictly because of geographic or temporal limitations may

be submitted to this series.

Manuscripts by Northeast Fisheries Science Center (NEFSC)

authors will be published in this series upon approval by the

NEFSC's Deputy Science & Research Director. Manuscripts by

non-NEFSC authors may be published in this series if: 1) the

manuscript serves the NEFSC’s mission; 2) the manuscript meets

the Deputy Science & Research Director’s approval; and 3) the

author arranges for the printing and binding funds to be transferred

to the NEFSC’s Research Communications Unit account from

another federal account. For all manuscripts submitted by nonNEFSC authors and published in this series, the NEFSC will

disavow all responsibility for the manuscripts’ contents; authors

must accept such responsibility.

The ethics of scientific research and scientific publishing are

a serious matter. All manuscripts submitted to this series are

expected to adhere -- at a minimum -- to the ethical guidelines

contained in Chapter 1 (“Ethical Conduct in Authorship and

Publication”) of the CBE Style Manual, fifth edition (Chicago, IL:

Council of Biology Editors). Copies of the manual are available

at virtually all scientific libraries.

Manuscript Preparation

Organization: Manuscripts must have an abstract, table

of contents, and -- if applicable -- lists of tables, figures, and

acronyms. As much as possible, use traditional scientific manuscript organization for sections: “Introduction,” “Study Area,”

“Methods & Materials,” “Results,” “Discussion” and/or “Conclusions,” “Acknowledgments,” and “References Cited.”

Style: All NEFSC publication and report series are obligated to conform to the style contained in the most recent edition

of the United States Government Printing Office Style Manual.

That style manual is silent on many aspects of scientific manuscripts. NEFSC publication and report series rely more on the

CBE Style Manual, fifth edition.

For in-text citations, use the name-date system. A special

effort should be made to ensure that the list of cited works contains

all necessary bibliographic information. For abbreviating serial

titles in such lists, use the most recent edition of the BIOSIS Serial

Sources (Philadelphia, PA: Biosciences Information Service).

Personal communications must include date of contact and full

name and mailing address of source.

For spelling of scientific and common names of fishes,

mollusks, and decapod crustaceans from the United States and

Canada, use Special Publications No. 20 (fishes), 26 (mollusks),

and 17 (decapod crustaceans) of the American Fisheries Society

(Bethesda, MD). For spelling of scientific and common names

of marine mammals, use Special Publication No. 4 of the Society

for Marine Mammalogy (Lawrence, KS). For spelling in general,

use the most recent edition of Webster’s Third New International

Dictionary of the English Language Unabridged (Springfield,

MA: G.&C. Merriam).

Typing text, tables, and figure captions: Text, tables, and

figure captions must be converted to the NOAA-wide standard

of WordPerfect. In general, keep text simple (e.g., don’t switch

fonts and type sizes, don’t use hard returns within paragraphs,

don’t indent except to begin paragraphs). Also, don't use the

WordPerfect automatic footnoting function; all notes should be

indicated in the text by simple numerical superscripts, and listed

together in an "Endnotes" section prior to the "References Cited"

section. Especially, don’t use the WordPerfect graphics function

for embedding tables and figures in text.

Tables may be prepared either with WordPerfect text or with

the WordPerfect table formatting function. If text is used, then

data should be assigned to columns by using all tabs or all spaces,

but not a combination of the two.

Each figure should be supplied both on paper and on disk,

unless there is no digital file of a given figure. Except under

extraordinary circumstances, color will not be used in illustrations.

Manuscript Submission

Authors must submit one paper copy of the double-spaced

manuscript, one disk copy, and original figures (if applicable).

NEFSC authors must include a completely signed-off “NEFSC

Manuscript/Abstract/Webpage Review Form.” Non-NEFSC

authors who are not federal employees will be required to sign a

“Release of Copyright” form.

Send all materials and address all correspondence to:

Jon A. Gibson (Biological Sciences Editor)

NMFS Northeast Fisheries Science Center

166 Water Street

Woods Hole, MA 02543-1026 USA.

NORTHEAST FISHERIES SCIENCE CENTER

Dr. John G. Boreman, Acting Science & Research Director

Capt. John T. Moakley, Operations, Management & Information Services Chief

Teri L. Frady, Research Communications Chief
Research Communications Unit

Northeast Fisheries Science Center

National Marine Fisheries Service, NOAA

166 Water St.

Woods Hole, MA 02543-1026

Publications and Reports

of the

Northeast Fisheries Science Center

MEDIA

 MAIL

The mission of NOAA's National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) is "stewardship of living marine resources for the benefit of the

nation through their science-based conservation and management and promotion of the health of their environment." As the research

arm of the NMFS's Northeast Region, the Northeast Fisheries Science Center (NEFSC) supports the NMFS mission by "planning,

developing, and managing multidisciplinary programs of basic and applied research to: 1) better understand the living marine resources

(including marine mammals) of the Northwest Atlantic, and the environmental quality essential for their existence and continued

productivity; and 2) describe and provide to management, industry, and the public, options for the utilization and conservation of living

marine resources and maintenance of environmental quality which are consistent with national and regional goals and needs, and with

international commitments." Results of NEFSC research are largely reported in primary scientific media (e.g., anonymously-peerreviewed scientific journals). However, to assist itself in providing data, information, and advice to its constituents, the NEFSC

occasionally releases its results in its own media. Those media are in four categories:

Northeast Fisheries Science Center Reference Document -- This series is issued irregularly. The series typically includes: data

reports on field and lab observations or experiments; progress reports on continuing experiments, monitoring, and assessments;

manuals describing routine surveying and sampling programs; background papers for, and summary reports of, scientific meetings;

and simple bibliographies. Issues receive internal scientific review, but no technical or copy editing.

Fishermen's Report -- This information report is a quick-turnaround report on the distribution and relative abundance of

commercial fisheries resources as derived from each of the NEFSC's periodic research vessel surveys of the Northeast's continental

shelf. There is no scientific review, nor any technical or copy editing, of this report.

OBTAINING A COPY: To obtain a copy of a NOAA Technical Memorandum NMFS-NE or a Northeast Fisheries Science

Center Reference Document, or to subscribe to the Fishermen's Report or the The Shark Tagger, either contact the NEFSC

Editorial Office (166 Water St., Woods Hole, MA 02543-1026; 508-495-2228) or consult the NEFSC webpage on "Reports

and Publications" (http://www.nefsc.noaa.gov/nefsc/publications/).

ANY USE OF TRADE OR BRAND NAMES IN ANY NEFSC PUBLICATION OR REPORT DOES NOT IMPLY

ENDORSEMENT.

NOAA Technical Memorandum NMFS-NE -- This series is issued irregularly. The series typically includes: data reports of

long-term or large-area studies; synthesis reports for major resources or habitats; analytical reports of environmental conditions

or phenomena; annual reports of assessment or monitoring programs; manuals describing unprecedented field and lab techniques;

literature surveys of major resource or habitat topics; proceedings and collected papers of scientific meetings; and indexed and/

or annotated bibliographies. All issues receive internal scientific review and most issues receive technical and copy editing.

The Shark Tagger -- This newsletter is an annual summary of tagging and recapture data on large pelagic sharks as derived from

the NMFS's Cooperative Shark Tagging Program; it also presents information on the biology (movement, growth, reproduction,

etc.) of these sharks as subsequently derived from the tagging and recapture data. There is internal scientific review, but no technical

or copy editing, of this newsletter.