THE GERMAN CARP IN THE UNITED STATES. 



Bv Leox J. Cole. 



INTRODUCTION. 



For a numben of 3^ears there appears to have been in many sections 

 of this country an increasing popular prejudice against the German 

 carp. Those fish were distributed ver}^ generally throughout the 

 United States something over twenty years ago, with the idea that 

 they would be extensively raised in ponds and so provide a supple- 

 mentary income from small inland waters which were unsuitable for 

 other fishes, or from land upon which artificial ponds could be i!on- 

 structed. It was inevitable that many of the fish should escape into 

 the natural waters of the country; and within a few years many of 

 our riv'ers and lakes were teeming with carp, for which, at that time, 

 there was little or no market. With persons who had been able to 

 obtain in abundance manj^ species of our finer native fishes, the coarser 

 flesh of the carp found little favor, and, under the circumstances, it 

 was perhaps but natural that prejudice should arise, especially because 

 the carp was supposed to be injuring the existing fisheries. In some 

 cases the adverse opinions were founded upon facts and a knowledge 

 of the habits of the fish; more often they were the repeated hearsay 

 born of suppositions and complete ignorance of the subject or of 

 misinterpreted observations. The newspapers also took the matter 

 up, and the carp was decried on all sides without stint. 



In the summer of 1901, in order to obtain evidence upon the matter, 

 the writer was appointed by the United States Bureau of Fisheries 

 (then the United States Commission of Fish and Fisheries) to make 

 an investigation of the habits of the carp and to gather any available 

 information relative to its usefulness or o])noxiousness. The work 

 was done in connection with the general biological investigation of 

 the Great Lakes under the general direction of Prof. Jacob Reighard, 

 of the Universit}^ of Michigan. Professor Reighard was not in active 

 charge of the work, however, in 1901, Prof. H. S. Jennings, then also 

 at the University ol" Michigan, acting as director during that season. 

 I take pleasure in thanking both Professor Reighard and Professor 

 Jennings for their interest in the investigation and for their readi- 

 ness at all times to do everj^thing in their power to further the work. 



525 



