in the winter than in the summer; and the per- 

 centage of northern pike dropped in the winter . 



Table 7 shows that for pool 4-L (Lake 

 Pepin) both the summer and winter catch ran 

 largely to walleye and sauger. Here also the 

 proportion of sauger to walleye was much great- 

 er in the winter, being about 2: 1 in favor of 

 sauger in the winter catch, and 1:9 in the sum- 

 mer catch (1945). The substantial percentage 

 in the "all other" classification in the summer 

 fishery (29 percent) was heavily contributed to 

 by the catch of carp. 



The catch of pool 10 (table 8) showed 

 relatively much less fluctuation from summer to 

 winter. In both the summer and winter seasons, 

 well over half of the total catch was bluegill . 

 This reflects the presence of a remarkable blue- 

 gill fishery at one particular locality (Winter 

 Creek), which will be discussed in more detail 

 below. Walleye made up a very small part of 

 the catch and the number of sauger was almost 

 zero. In the "all other" category was included 

 a substantial number of black bass . Here again 

 a single locality (in this instance Gremore Lake) 

 was the principal factor. In this lake black bass 

 (largemouth) are caught in goodly numbers in 

 the winter as well as in the summer fishing. 

 This is unusual, there being only a few other 

 localities in the river where black bass are taken 

 by ice fishing. 



Tables 9 and 10 give the species percent- 

 age composition of the catch by pools for the 

 summer of 1945 and the winter of 1944-45. (The 

 census of the summer of 1944 involved only 

 pool 8 and part of pool 7; and the census of the 

 winter of 1945-46 included only pools 4-L, 8, 

 and 10, the figures for which may be obtained 

 from tables 6 to 8.) 



In the summer fishery, bluegill and crap- 

 pie were important species in all of the pools 

 except pool 4 -R and pool 4-L. There was, how- 

 ever, considerable variation in the percentage 

 numbers of these two species from pool to pool. 

 Walleye and sauger proved to be the dominant 

 species for pools 4-R and 4-L but were far below 

 the numbers of bluegill and crappie in the re- 

 mainder of the pools . Northern pike loomed 

 relatively large in pools 5A to 8; catfish appeared 



in good numbers in pools 8 to 11; and bullhead 

 came into its own in pool 9 where a heavy local 

 concentration of bullhead caused it to dominate 

 the entire catch. Various other species also 

 showed considerable variation from pool to pool. 



In the winter catch (1944-45), as shown 

 in table 10, the bluegill -crappie combination led 

 all other species combined in all pools except 

 pool 4-L (Lake Pepin). Within this combination, 

 however, there was considerable variation in 

 percentage. For instance, pools 4-R, 5A, and 

 7 produced several times as many crappie as 

 bluegill, while in pool 10, as mentioned above, 

 the winter catch ran very heavily to bluegill . 

 The winter catch of walleye and sauger was al- 

 most inconsequential for all of the pools except 

 4-R and 4-L. Northern pike showed up in their 

 greatest percentage numbers in pools 4-R and 6; 

 and black bass entered the winter fishery in sub- 

 stantial numbers only in pool 10. 



Table 11 gives the species composition 

 of the catch (by percentages) for several im - 

 portant localities in the summer of 1945. The 

 localities are grouped in this table according to 

 the species, or species combinations, which 

 dominate the catch . In the localities in Group I 

 the catch was made up largely of the bluegill - 

 crappie combination; the localities of Group II 

 had a catch made up mostly of walleye and sauger; 

 in Group III the catch was mostly of species other 

 than bluegill, crappie, walleye, and sauger; and 

 in Group IV the catch was of mixed species with 

 no clear dominance . Thus, although several 

 general areas tended toward production of a 

 specialized catch (such as walleye and sauger in 

 Lake Pepin), other general areas such as pool 8 

 and pool 10 offered several kinds of fishing with- 

 in the area, and varied from one locality to 

 another. Thus in pool 8, Black River produced 

 mostly crappie and bluegill, while Dresbach Dam 

 had a mixed catch; and in pool 10 several local- 

 ities were of the bluegill -crappie category, and 

 others, such as the "Pool above the Dam", pro- 

 duced catfish or other species. An even greater 

 degree of segregation of localities by catch 

 composition was shown in the winter fishing 

 (1944-45), as listed in table 12. The localities 

 in Lake Pepin (Group C) produced almost no other 

 kinds of fish besides walleye and sauger. Many 

 localities furnished specialized fishing for blue- 



17 



