THE GEEMAN CARP IN THE UNITED STATES. 635 



and that that one fish was of more value than the two carp which have 

 taken its place. This is especial!}^ true of such waters as the Great 

 Lakes, and others that were well supplied with good native fish. 

 Furthermore, the sportsmen and others claim that in various ways the 

 carp does more than enough damage to offset its value in other respects. 

 By these persons it is made responsible especially for the great 

 decrease of water-fowl in recent years. These and other charges 

 have been considered in the body of the report, and need not be dis- 

 cussed in detail here. In most cases the reported damage has been either 

 greatly exaggerated or is entirely unfounded. Thus it was found 

 that carp probably have little or no share in causing the decrease of 

 the native fishes commonl}^ taken for sport or for food; and that in 

 the case of the black bass, at least, there is evidence indicating just 

 the opposite — that the bass have actually increased in numbers in 

 some places from having the 3^oung carp to feed upon. In the matter 

 of uprooting vegetation, making the water continually roil}-, and 

 injuring — possibly even completely destroying in some cases — the 

 regular feeding grounds of the migrating ducks — in these cases the 

 evidence goes very largely against the carp, though its effects have 

 undoubtedly, in man}^ instances, been greatly exaggerated, and more 

 has been charged against the fish than it rightfully deserves. In cer- 

 tain places, such as reservoirs and lakes supplying water to cities, etc., 

 there is no doubt that the carp is an unmitigated nuisance, and that 

 its presence is undesirable. Nor can it be considered suitable for the 

 cold, clear lakes of the north, such as are found in northern Wiscon- 

 sin and in Canada; and fortunately the conditions in these are so 

 unfavorable that it will probably never become so abundant in them 

 as to cause much damage by destroying- vegetation and roiling the 

 waters. 



Against these charges as to its detrimental influence must be set the 

 things in its favor. Chief among these is that already mentioned — 

 the value of the carp as a source of revenue to the fishermen in the 

 regions where it occurs, and as a cheap food for the poorer class of peo- 

 ple who can not afford a better fish. It is impossible to express in 

 dollars and cents the beneficial results and the damage done and thus 

 to compare them directl3\ The value of the carp fisheries of Lake 

 Erie and the Illinois River region for 1901 was estimated at $342,000 

 (p. 619, footnote); but there were no data for the rest of the United 

 States. And no monetary value at all can be fixed for the damage 

 done. It seems quite safe to say, however, that if the question were 

 to be considered in this manner the benefits would far surpass the 

 damage. Two other claims in the carp's behalf, which may prove to be 

 of considerable importance, ought also to be mentioned. These are its 

 destruction of the fluke- worm {Fasciohi hepatica)^ and of the larvae of 

 noxious insects, especially mosquitoes. It is possible also that in 



