a1 
With our constant immigration of foreigners and the formation and growth 
in our large cities of great foreign settlements, the problem of supplying 
these multitudes with cheap yet wholesome food becomes very great, and 
anything which helps to meet this demand is of great value to the country. 
From this point of view there is no doubt of the value of the carp and the 
benefits to be derived from its introduction. To pervert a common saying, in 
those places to which it is suited it has made two fish to grow where but one 
grew before. 
But now come the sportsman and the commercial fisherman, who main- 
tain that, while all that has been stated may be true, the presence of tha 
carp is entirely supplanting the fish which was there before, and that one fish 
was of more value than the two carp which have taken its place. This is 
especially 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. 
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 commonly 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 
instead in numbers in some places from having the young carp to feed 
upon. In the matter of uprooting vegetation, making the water continually 
roily, and injuring possibly even completely destroying in some cases—the 
regular feeding ground of the migrating ducks—in these cases the evidence 
goes very largely against the carp, though its effects have undoubtedly, in 
many instances, been greatly exaggerated, and more has been charged against 
the fish than it rightfully deserves. In certain 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 Wisconsin 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 carp 
as a source of revenue to the fisherman of Illinois in the regions where it 
occurs, and as a cheap food for the poorer class of people 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 compare them directly. It seems quite 
safe to say however, that if the question were considered from the monetary 
standpoint alone, the benefits would far surpass the damage. Two other 
claims on the carps’ behalf, which may prove to be of considerable import- 
ance, ought also to be mentioned. These are the destruction of the fluke- 
worm (Fasciola hepatica), and of the larve of noxious insects, especially mos- 
quitoes. It is possible, also, that in rivers, below cities, it may do important 
service as a scavenger, destroying the germs of certain human diseases, as it | 
does the larve and encyste stages of the liver fluke. 
And when we have decided whether the carp does more harm than good, 
we still have the real question before us. The essential problem is this: The 
carp is here, and here to stay; what are we going to do with it? How can we 
make the most of its good qualities and prevent it from doing damage? Even 
- were such.a course desirable, the extermination of the carp in our waters is 
out of the question. Mr. Townsend, in some remarks before the American 
Fisheries Society (Transactions of Thirtieth Annual Meeting, 1901, p. 123) 
stated the case well when he said: 
We hear a great deal from sportsmen’s clubs and from others sources as to how 
the carp can be exterminated. It can not be exterminated. It is like the English 
sparrow, it is here to stay. At a meeting of the American Ornithqlogists’ Union a 
while ago, one of the foremost ornithologists stated that the English sparrow could 
