BULLETIN OF THE UNITED STATES FISH COMMISSION. 113 



Vol. V, IV©. 8. Washington, D. C. April I, 1885. 



20 RESULTS OP PLANTING YOVIVG WHITEFISII « \ LAKE ERIE.- 



H'llAT TUP FIMIBERiTlEN THINK OP MIHTI-I 1X>H PROPAGATION. 



By FRANK JV. CLARK. 



After the close of the fishing season of 1884 in Lake Erie, I began 

 an inquiry to ascertain whether there had been an increase or decrease 

 in the catch of wliitefish as compared with that of former seasons. 

 The investigation was conducted by personal interviews, through a rep- 

 resentative, a practical fisherman, with the leading fishermen and deal- 

 ers, and covers most of the important fisheries of that part of the lake 

 from Erie, Pa., westward to Toledo, Ohio. The results are most grati- 

 fying, as it is conceded by all and shown by the reports that the aggre- 

 gate catch of wliitefish was considerably in excess of that of any season 

 for several years. The results are also especially encouraging to fish- 

 culturists, as all the facts and statements point to but one conclusion ; 

 namely, that the increase is due to the planting of young fish from the 

 hatcheries: 



No disappointment would have been felt had there been no percepti- 

 ble increase, as much was required to offset the extensive and exhaust- 

 ive fishing carried on all over the lake, on both the spawning and feeding 

 grounds, which was causing a gradual decrease of the catch. For many 

 years every spawning ground had been literally covered with nets dur- 

 ing the spawning season, while hundreds of gill-nets have been em- 

 ployed on the feeding grounds in deeper waters and thrown across the 

 path of the runs toward the spawning grounds. In no other of the 

 great lakes has the fishing industry been pursued with greater persist- 

 ence and skill than in Lake Erie. Notwithstanding this, however, we 

 find that not only has the decrease been arrested, but that there is a 

 tangible and satisfactory increase. 



The figures given below show in round numbers the aggregate plant- 

 ings of wliitefish fry in Lake Erie, from the beginning of the work, by 

 the United States and Ohio and Michigan Fish Commissions. Some 

 plants were also made by the Canadian Commission during the years 

 mentioned, but I am unable to give the figures : 



Spring of 1875 150, 000 



Spring of 1876 300,000 



Spring of 1877 450, 000 



Spring of 1878 12, 000, 000 



Spring of 1879 7, 000, 000 



Spring of 1880 7, 000, 000 



Spring of 1881 , 13, 000, 000 



Spring of 1882 42, 000, 000 



Bull. U. S. F. C, 85 8 



