905975001
WATER QUALITY
BASELINE ASSESSMENT
FOR CLEVELAND AREA -
LAKE ERIE
VOLUME II - FISHES

-------
Document is available to the public through the
National Technical Information Service, Springfield,
Virginia 22151.

-------
                                              EPA-905/9-75-001
                                              February 1975
         WATER QUALITY BASELINE ASSESSMENT
         FOR THE CLEVELAND AREA - LAKE ERIE

                     VOLUME II

  The Fishes of the Cleveland Metropolitan Area
        Including the Lake Erie Shoreline
                        By

               Dr.  Andrew M.  White
          Associate Professor of Biology
             John Carroll University
                University Heights
                       Ohio

                        and

 Dr. Milton B.  Trautman             Mr.  Michael P.  Kelty
 Mr. Eric J. Foell                  Dr.  Ronald Gaby
               EPA Project G005107
               Section 108a Program
                 Project Officer

                    Max Hanok
        Office of Research and Development
 U.  S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region V
             Chicago, Illinois 60604
                   Prepared for
                City of Cleveland
                       and
     OFFICE OF THE GREAT LAKES COORDINATOR
U. S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY, REGION V
           230 SOUTH DEARBORN STREET
            CHICAGO, ILLINOIS  60604

-------
U. S. E. P. A. Review Notice

This report has been reviewed by the U. S. Environmental Protection
Agency and approved for publication.  Approval does not signify that
the contents necessarily reflect the views and policies of the
Environmental Protection Agency, nor does the mention of trade names
or commercial products constitute endorsement or recommendation for
use.
                                 ii

-------
                              ABSTRACT
 This work was part of a first phase of an environmental assessment
 for planning and evaluation in urban pollution abatement for the
 Cleveland metropolitan area.  Other areas of baseline assessment for
 the City of Cleveland were summarized in 'Volume I - Synthesis' of
 this project report series.

 This report, Volume II, presents the results of the first phase of
 the baseline study of the Cleveland metropolitan area fisheries.  The
 study investigated the past and present distributions and abundances
 of 107 species and subspecies of fishes known to have inhabited the
 Cleveland area streams and Lake Erie shoreline.   Preliminary
 investigations concerning the age and growth rates of the Yellow Perch
 in Lake Erie were undertaken.

 The study was conducted at John Carroll University by a team of
 faculty and graduate students.   Field investigations were conducted
 from July 1, 1971 through December 31,  1972.   Additional data were
 collected throughout 1973 and 1974,   portions of which are included
 in this publication.   The study area included the Lake Erie
 shoreline from the mouth of the Chagrin River to the mouth of the
 Rocky River, a distance of 35.5 kilometers.   Samples were also
 collected in the  drainages of  the three major rivers in the Cleveland
 area,  the Chagrin,  Rocky and  Cuyahoga.

 The study established  a firm baseline of  information concerning the
 presence or absence of  fish species  in  the study area.   Relative
 abundances  and  distributional patterns  of each species  were determined.
 These were  compared to  past information in order  to  determine and
 present  an  accurate evaluation  of  the series  of  events  which affected
 the local fish  populations.  Areas of habitat  degradation are discussed
 as cause and effect relationships  are presented.  Changes in fish
 population  diversity, distribution and  abundance  are  discussed.

 The study demonstrated  that the fish fauna is markedly  different than
 in  former times.  The presence of at least small, isolated  populations
 of  86 species and subspecies was documented,  and  the recovery of most
 species  to  at least a portion of their former abundance was  considered
 possible with the implementation of pollution abatement programs and
 habitat  restoration.  The study also documented significant adverse
 affects  of environmental degradation on fish populations prior to 1850.
 The causes of the change in species composition in the Cleveland area
 is attributed to several factors, among which are stream obstruction,
pollution, siltation, and the loss of aquatic vegetation.  It was
                                  iii

-------
determined that point sources of pollutants were only one of several
detrimental factors which must be considered before restoration of
the fish species can be accomplished.

This report is submitted in partial fulfillment of project number
G005107.
                                   iv

-------
Sportsmen "snagging"
Coho Salmon in the Chagrin River, Willoughby, Ohio, November, 1972.

-------
Young-of-the-year Eastern Gizzard Shad which winter-killed in the
Cleveland Harbor. This photo is a portion of a kill in 1975 which
was estimated to have contained over 150,000 individuals.  Such
winter-kills are not associated with toxins or organic pollutants
but are the result of the inability of small shad to survive the
cold winter temperatures of Lake Erie.

                              vi

-------
                            CONTENTS
Abstract

Sportsmen "snagging" Coho Salmon in the Chagrin River,
    Willoughby, Ohio, November, 1972

Young-of-the-year E. Gizzard Shad which winter-killed in the
    Cleveland Harbor.

List of Figures

List of Tables

Acknowledgements

Fish collecting Stations in Lake Erie and the Lower Rivers

Three Rivers Watershed and Vicinity Map

A 24 Hour Collection made with a 125 ft. Experimental Gill
    Net in a Cleveland Harbor Marina

A Sample of Fish Specimens Prepared for Permanent Storage

Section I      Conclusions

Section II     Recommendations

               Introduction

               Historical Review

               Methods

               Study Results and Discussion

                   Species Accounts

                      Lampreys and Sturgeons

                      Gars and Bowfin

                      Eel, Herrings and Shad

                      Salmon and Trout
                                                               Page

                                                                iii
Section III

Section IV

Section V

Section VI
   VI

   ix

  xii

 xiii

   xv

  xvi


 xvii

xviii

    1

    7

   11

   23

   35

   45



   48

   50

   52

   55
                               vii

-------
                                                               Page




              Whitefishes and Ciscoes                           58




              Smelt and Mudminnow                               59




              Pikes                                             61



              Carp and Goldfish                                 63




              Chubs and Dace                                    68




              Minnows and Shiners                               74



              Carpsuckers, Redhorses and Suckers                86




              Catfishes                                         91



              Trout-perch                                       "'




              Burbot                                            97



              Stickleback and Silverside                        98




              White Bass                                       10°



              Crappies,  Sunfishes and Blackbasses              100



              Walleye,  Blue  Pike, Sauger and Yellow Perch      112




              Darters                                          116



              Drum                                            122




              Sculpins                                        124



       Nursery and Spawning  Areas                              127



       Studies on Yellow Perch in Lake  Erie                    i3i




       Commercial and Sport  Fisheries                          I35


                                                                I OQ
       Population Fluctuations                                  J-~>:7



                                                                14"}
       Species Diversity



       Summary of the General Decline of the Fishery            145




VII  Bibliography                                               169
                                  viii

-------
                                FIGURES

Number

 1.    Stream Obstruction at Willoughby, Ohio                     14

 2.    Litter Present on Beaches near Cleveland, Ohio             19

 3.    Undisturbed Wild Area Similar to that Described by Early   22
            Surveyors Along the Lower Cuyahoga and the Lake Erie
            Shoreline

 4.    Effluent into a Stream Tributary of Lake Erie              34

 5.    Gill Net Sample being Collected in the Cleveland Harbor
            During January                                        37

 6.    Fyke Net Sample Being Taken in a Tributary Stream          39

 7.    Seining in the Cleveland Harbor Shallows                   41

 8.    Gill Netting in Streams                                    44

 9.    Distribution of Lampreys, Gar and Bowfin                   51

10.    Distribution of Alewife and Eastern Gizzard Shad           54

11.    Distribution of Salmon and Trout                           57

12.    Distribution of Smelt and Mudminnow                        60

13.    Distribution of Pikes                                      62

14.    Distribution of Carp                                       64

15.    Distribution of Goldfish                                   66

16.    Distribution of Golden Shiner                              67

17.    Distribution of River Chub, Bigeye Chub and
            Blacknose Dace                                        70

18.    Distribution of Longnose Dace and Creek Chub               72

19.    Distribution of Redbelly and Redside Dace, Pugnose
            Minnow and Common Emerald Shiner                      75
                                   IX

-------
Number                                                            Page

20.    Distribution of Rosyface, Redfin, Striped and Common
            Shiners                                                 78

21.    Distribution of Spottail and Spotfin Shiners                 80

22.    Distribution of Sand, Mimic and Bigmouth Shiners             82

23.    Distribution of Minnows                                      85

24.    Distribution of Quillbacks, Golden and Black Redhorse        88

25.    Distribution of Shorthead Redhorse and White, Spotted
            and Hog Suckers                                         92

26.    Distribution of Catfish, Bullheads and Madtoms               96

27.    Distribution of Trout-perch, Burbot, Stickleback
            and Silverside                                          99

28.    Distribution of White Bass                                  101

29.    Distribution of Crappies                                    103

30.    Discribution of Roc.kbass, Blackbasses and Wannouth          106

31.    Distribution of Bluegill, Green and Orangespotted
            Sunfisiies                                              109
32.    Distribution of Pumpkinseed  Sunfish

33.    Distribution of Walleye                                      113

34.    A Large Walleye Collected  in the  Cleveland Harbor
             in 1971                                                 11*

35.    Distribution of Yellow Perch and  Logperch Darters            118

36.    Distribution of Darters                                      123

37.    Distribution of Freshwater Drum and  Sculpins                 126

38.    Length Frequency  Distribution of  539 Aged Yellow Perch      133

39.    Length Frequency  Distribution of  1,671 Yellow Perch         134

40.    Length to Weight  Relationship for Yellow Perch Population   136

-------
Number                                                            Page

41.    Fluctuations in the Population Size of Four Lake Erie
            Species in the Vicinity of Cleveland, Ohio             140

42.    Fish Population Data on Ten Intensive Stations in
            Lake Erie                                              144

43.    Headwater Habitat for Many of the Less Common Species
            of Cleveland Area Fishes                               149

-------
                                TABLES


Number                                                            Page

 1.    Chloride Levels in Lake Erie Tributaries in 1904             31

 2.    Chemical Input to Lake Erie in the Cleveland Area
           from Harbor and River Dredgings                          32

 3.    Fish Fry Collected in the Cleveland Harbor, 1971
           to 1974                                                 128

 4.    Fish Fry Collected in the Rocky River, 1971-1972            129

 5.    Fish Fry Collected in the Chagrin River, 1971-1972          130

 6.    Estimated Economic Losses Due to the Decline of the
            Cleveland Area Commercial Fisheries                    138

 7.    Fluctuations in Fish Species Composition and
            Abundance in the Lower Rocky River                     142

 8.    List of Fish Species Which Are Considered Rare, Probably
            Extirpated or Extirpated Within the Study Area         147

 9.    Distribution of Fish Species in Various Sections of
            Study Area Rivers                                      150

10.    Relative Abundance of all Species Collected in the
            Entire Study Area                                      156

11.    Relative Abundance of Fishes Collected in the Lower
            Rivers and Along the Lake Erie Shoreline               161

12.    Relative Abundance of Fishes Collected in the Cleveland
            Harbor and Adjacent Marinas During the Period
            1971 - 1974                                            165
                                    xn

-------
                            ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS


 JUNIOR AUTHORS  ON PROJECT G005107,  VOLUME II,  THE FISHERIES STUDY.

 Dr.  Milton B. Trautman,  Professor Emeritus,  Museum of Zoology,
     The Ohio State University,  Columbus,  Ohio.

 Mr.  Eric J.  Foell,  John  Carroll University.

 Mr.  Michael P.  Kelty,  John Carroll  University.

 Dr.  Ronald Gaby,  Biology Department,  John Carroll University.

 AUTHOR'S ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

 This volume represents the combined effort of  five individuals.   The
 project director  wishes  to acknowledge  the fine work  and  excellent
 cooperation of  each of these  individuals.

 The  work of  Dr. Milton B.  Trautman  was  invaluable in  the  compilation
 of much of the  historical information which  is presented  throughout
 this volume.  He  contributed  much to  the  collection of  literature
 sources,  thus enabling myself and the others to concentrate on
 the  field and laboratory investigations.   His years of  experience
 with the Ohio ichthyofauna proved to  be of great  significance,
 especially in our search for  rare species  and in  the  identification
 of hybrid fishes.   We  collaborated  fully  in  the final preparation
 of this volume.

 I should  also like  to  thank Dr.  Ronald  Gaby, who  worked on  the initial
 phases  of the field collections,  leaving  the University in  order  to
 accept  employment elsewhere.

 Throughout the  entire  project, Messers. Michael P.  Kelty  and Eric J.
 Foell assisted  in a major  portion of  the field collections, often in
 extremely hazardous weather conditions.  They sorted  these  collections
 after which  they  were  checked by  either myself or Dr. Trautman.   They
were also extremely helpful in maintaining data files and in the
preparation  of  the  final  draft of the report.

 I should  also like  to  thank the following persons for their assistance
during  the project.  Mrs.  Virginia R.  Howley, of  the Western Reserve
Historical Society  aided  in the research into the early history of
Cleveland.  Mrs.  Janet Friedlander,  of  the Sears Library, Case-Western
Reserve University, obtained many of  the literature references which
we required and the staff  of  the Cleveland Museum of Natural History
who supplied Jared P. Kirtland's original letter books.
                                  Xlll

-------
Several commercial fishermen allowed us to examine their catches and
supplied information concerning the distribution and abundance of
commercial species in the Cleveland area.   We are especially indebted
to Captains Fred Wittal and Robert Jaycox who gave us information
concerning the changes in fish populations and environmental
conditions during the past fourty years.

The other investigators working on the various portions of this
baseline assessment were also extremely helpful, often making us
aware of specific conditions or the occurance of situations concerning
the local fish fauna.  For this help we are grateful; as the final
report is far more complete than it would have been without their
aid.

I would also like to thank the residents of the local river drainages,
especially those of  the Chagrin River and the East Branch, who
graciously allowed us access to the stream through their private
property.

This project could not have been undertaken without the support of
Messers. Denis Case, James P. Schafer  (formerly of the City of
Cleveland), and the  present project coordinator Mr. Al B. Garlauskas.
Without federal support through the U.  S. Environmental Protection
Agency, Region V., this project would not have been implemented.
A special recognition is due Dr. Norbert Jaworski, Director, Pacific
Northwest Laboratory, for assistance in the original planning
phases of this project; to Mr. Curtis Ross, Director of the Indiana
District Office for  technical assistance and  support;  to Mr. Max
Hanok and Mr. Ralph  Christensen who provided  coordination and
guidance throughout  the project and completion  of  this document.
                                xiv

-------
Sportsmen "snagging"  Coho  Salmon in the Chagrin River,  Willoughby,  Ohio,  November,  1972.

-------
Young-of-the-year Eastern Gizzard Shad which winter-killed in the
Cleveland Harbor. This photo is a portion of a kill in 1975 which
was estimated to have contained over 150,000 individuals.  Such
winter-kills are not associated with toxins or organic pollutants
but are the result of the inability of small shad to survive the
cold winter temperatures of Lake Erie.

                              vi

-------
                            CONTENTS
Abstract

Sportsmen "snagging" Coho Salmon in the Chagrin River,
    Willoughby, Ohio, November, 1972

Young-of-the-year E. Gizzard Shad which winter-killed in the
    Cleveland Harbor.

List of Figures

List of Tables

Acknowledgements

Fish collecting Stations in Lake Erie and the Lower Rivers

Three Rivers Watershed and Vicinity Map

A 24 Hour Collection made with a 125 ft. Experimental Gill
    Net in a Cleveland Harbor Marina

A Sample of Fish Specimens Prepared for Permanent Storage

Section I      Conclusions

Section II     Recommendations

               Introduction

               Historical Review

               Methods

               Study Results and Discussion

                   Species Accounts

                      Lampreys and Sturgeons

                      Gars and Bowfin

                      Eel, Herrings and Shad

                      Salmon and Trout
                                                               Page

                                                                iii
Section III

Section IV

Section V

Section VI
   vx

   ix

  xii

 xiii

   XV

  xvi


 xvii

xviii

    1

    7

   11

   23

   35

   45



   48

   50

   52

   55
                               VII

-------
                                                               Page



              Whitefishes  and  Ciscoes                            58


              Smelt and Mudminnow                               59


              Pikes                                             61


              Carp and Goldfish                                 63


              Chubs and Dace                                    68


              Minnows and Shiners                               74


              Carpsuckers, Redhorses and Suckers                86


              Catfishes                                         9^


              Trout-perch                                       9'


              Burbot                                            97


              Stickleback and Silverside                        98


              White Bass                                       10°


              Crappies, Sunfishes and Blackbasses              100


              Walleye,  Blue Pike, Sauger and Yellow Perch      112


              Darters                                          116


              Drum                                            122


              Sculpins                                        124


       Nursery and Spawning Areas                              127


       Studies on Yellow Perch in Lake  Erie                    131


       Commercial and Sport  Fisheries                           135

                                                                •I OQ
       Population Fluctuations                                  J-J:7

                                                                ~\ I *3
       Species Diversity


       Summary of the General Decline of the Fishery            145


VII  Bibliography                                               169
                                  viii

-------
                                FIGURES

Numb er                                                           Page

 1.    Stream Obstruction at Willoughby, Ohio                     14

 2.    Litter Present on Beaches near Cleveland, Ohio             19

 3.    Undisturbed Wild Area Similar to that Described by Early   22
            Surveyors Along the Lower Cuyahoga and the Lake Erie
            Shoreline

 4.    Effluent into a Stream Tributary of Lake Erie              34

 5.    Gill Net Sample being Collected in the Cleveland Harbor
            During January                                        37

 6.    Fyke Net Sample Being Taken in a Tributary Stream          39

 7.    Seining in the Cleveland Harbor Shallows                   41

 8.    Gill Netting in Streams                                    44

 9.    Distribution of Lampreys, Gar and Bowfin                   51

10.    Distribution of Alewife and Eastern Gizzard Shad           54

11.    Distribution of Salmon and Trout                           57

12.    Distribution of Smelt and Mudminnow                        60

13.    Distribution of Pikes                                      62

14.    Distribution of Carp                                       64

15.    Distribution of Goldfish                                   66

16.    Distribution of Golden Shiner                              67

17.    Distribution of River Chub, Bigeye Chub and
            Blacknose Dace                                        70

18.    Distribution of Longnose Dace and Creek Chub               72

19.    Distribution of Redbelly and Redside Dace,  Pugnose
            Minnow and Common Emerald Shiner                      75
                                   IX

-------
Number                                                            Page

20.    Distribution of Rosyface, Redfin, Striped and Common
            Shiners                                                 78

21.    Distribution of Spottail and Spotfin Shiners                 80

22.    Distribution of Sand, Mimic and Bigmouth Shiners             82

23.    Distribution of Minnows                                      85

24.    Distribution of Quillbacks, Golden and Black Redhorse        88

25.    Distribution of Shorthead Redhorse and White, Spotted
            and Hog Suckers                                         92

26.    Distribution of Catfish, Bullheads and Madtoms               96

27.    Distribution of Trout-perch, Burbot, Stickleback
            and Silverside                                          99

28.    Distribution of White Bass                                  101

29.    Distribution of Crappies                                    103

30.    Distribution of Rockbass, Blackbasses and Warmouth          106

31.    Distribution of Bluegill, Green  and Orangespotted
            Sunfishes                                              109

32.    Distribution of Pumpkinseed Sunfish                         111

33.    Distribution of Walleye                                     113

34.    A Large Walleye Collected in the Cleveland Harbor
            in 1971                                                I14

35.    Distribution of Yellow Perch and Logperch Darters           118

36.    Distribution of Darters                                     123

37.    Distribution of Freshwater Drum  and  Sculpins                126

38.    Length Frequency  Distribution  of 539 Aged Yellow Perch     133

39.    Length Frequency  Distribution  of 1,671 Yellow Perch        134

40.    Length to  Weight  Relationship  for Yellow Perch Population  136
                                    x

-------
Number                                                            Page

41.    Fluctuations in the Population Size of Four Lake Erie
            Species in the Vicinity of Cleveland, Ohio             140

42.    Fish Population Data on Ten Intensive Stations in
            Lake Erie                                              144

43.    Headwater Habitat for Many of the Less Common Species
            of Cleveland Area Fishes                               149
                                 XI

-------
                                TABLES
Number                                                            Page

 1.    Chloride Levels in Lake Erie Tributaries in 1904             31

 2.    Chemical Input to Lake Erie in the Cleveland Area
           from Harbor and River Dredgings                          32

 3.    Fish Fry Collected in the Cleveland Harbor, 1971
           to 1974                                                 128

 4.    Fish Fry Collected in the Rocky River, 1971-1972            129

 5.    Fish Fry Collected in the Chagrin River, 1971-1972          130

 6.    Estimated Economic Losses Due to the Decline of the
            Cleveland Area Commercial Fisheries                    138

 7.    Fluctuations in Fish Species Composition and
            Abundance in the Lower Rocky River                     142

 8.    List of Fish Species Which Are Considered Rare, Probably
            Extirpated or Extirpated Within the Study Area         147

 9.    Distribution of Fish Species in Various Sections of
            Study Area Rivers                                      150

10.    Relative Abundance of all Species Collected in the
            Entire Study Area                                      156

11.    Relative Abundance of Fishes Collected in the Lower
            Rivers and Along the Lake Erie Shoreline               161

12.    Relative Abundance of Fishes Collected in the Cleveland
            Harbor and Adjacent Marinas During the Period
            1971 - 1974                                            165
                                    xix

-------
                           ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
 JUNIOR AUTHORS  ON PROJECT G005107, VOLUME  II, THE  FISHERIES  STUDY.

 Dr. Milton  B. Trautman, Professor Emeritus, Museum of  Zoology,
    The  Ohio  State University,  Columbus, Ohio.

 Mr. Eric J. Foell, John Carroll University.

 Mr. Michael P.  Kelty, John Carroll University.

 Dr. Ronald  Gaby, Biology Department, John  Carroll  University.

 AUTHOR'S ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

 This volume represents the combined effort of five individuals.  The
 project  director wishes to acknowledge  the fine work and excellent
 cooperation of  each of these individuals.

 The work of Dr. Milton B. Trautman was  invaluable  in the compilation
 of much  of  the  historical information which is presented throughout
 this volume.  He contributed much to the collection of literature
 sources, thus enabling myself and the others to concentrate  on
 the field and laboratory investigations.   His years of experience
 with the Ohio ichthyofauna proved to be of great significance,
 especially  in our search for rare species  and in the identification
 of hybrid fishes.  We collaborated fully in the final preparation
 of this  volume.

 I should also like to thank Dr. Ronald Gaby, who worked on the initial
 phases of the field collections, leaving the University in order to
 accept employment elsewhere.

 Throughout  the  entire project, Messers. Michael P. Kelty and Eric J.
 Foell assisted  in a major portion of the field collections, often in
 extremely hazardous weather conditions.  They sorted these collections
 after which they were checked by either myself or Dr. Trautman.  They
were also extremely helpful in maintaining data files and in the
preparation of  the final draft of the report.

 I should also like to thank the following  persons for their assistance
during the project.   Mrs.  Virginia R. Howley, of the Western Reserve
Historical  Society aided in the research into the early history of
Cleveland.   Mrs. Janet Friedlander,  of the Sears Library, Case-Western
Reserve University,  obtained many of the literature references which
we required and the staff of the Cleveland Museum of Natural History
who supplied Jared P.  Kirtland's original  letter books.
                                  xiii

-------
Several commercial fishermen allowed us to examine their catches and
supplied information concerning the distribution and abundance of
commercial species in the Cleveland area.   We are especially indebted
to Captains Fred Wittal and Robert Jaycox who gave us information
concerning the changes in fish populations and environmental
conditions during the past fourty years.

The other investigators working on the various portions of this
baseline assessment were also extremely helpful, often making us
aware of specific conditions or the occurance of situations concerning
the local fish fauna.  For this help we are grateful; as the final
report is far more complete than it would have been without their
aid.

I would also like to thank the residents of the local river drainages,
especially those of the Chagrin River and the East Branch, who
graciously allowed us access to the stream through their private
property.

This project could not have been undertaken without the support of
Messers. Denis Case, James P. Schafer  (formerly of the City of
Cleveland), and the present project coordinator Mr. Al B. Garlauskas.
Without federal support through the U.  S. Environmental Protection
Agency, Region V., this project would not have been implemented.
A special recognition is due Dr. Norbert Jaworski, Director, Pacific
Northwest Laboratory, for assistance in the original planning
phases of this project; to Mr. Curtis Ross, Director of the Indiana
District Office for  technical assistance and support; to Mr. Max
Hanok and Mr. Ralph  Christensen who provided coordination and
guidance throughout  the project and completion of  this document.
                                xiv

-------
                                                                           Chagrin^ River
LAKE ERIE
                                                            Lake Erie Intensive
                                                              Sample Stations

                                                            Supplemental Samples

                                                            Composite of All
                                                             Upstream Samples
                              Fish Collecting Stations  in Lake Erie and the Lower  Rivers

-------
VICINITY  MAP
   SCALE OF MILES
                CUYAHOGA RIVER BASIN
     Three Rivers  Watershed and Vicinity Map
                        xvi

-------
A 24 hour collection made with a 125 ft. experimental gill net placed in a protected portion
of a marina within the Cleveland Harbor, Cleveland, Ohio;  April, 1974.

(A) 7 Eastern Gizzard Shad; (B) 22 Golden Shiner;  (C) 2 Spottail Shiner; (D) 1 Rainbow Trout;
(E) 1 Coho Salmon; (F) 1 Northern Pike; (G) 2 Goldfish; (H) 2 Carp:  (1) 1 Black Bullhead;
(J) 2 Brown X Black Bullhead;  (K) 9 Crappies (Black,White and Hybrids).

-------
H-
H-
H-
           A  sample  of  fish specimens prepared for permanent storage  in  the John  Carroll  University Museum.
           Such  specimens will  be maintained for documentation and future research.

-------
                                SECTION I

                               CONCLUSIONS

After a complete review of all pertinent data concerning the past
and present fish populations in the Cleveland Metropolitan Area,
several conclusions can be made.  Other, more specific conclusions
are based primarily on the information collected during this phase
of the study and are of significance especially to the future
documentation of the restoration of the Cleveland rivers and shoreline.
Many of these, however, should be applicable to other areas both of
distressed and recovering ecosystems and as such these data and
conclusions become more important.  We should hope that the conclusions
of this report would be applied in other regions for research and
monitoring efforts in addition to those in Cleveland, Ohio.

     1.  It is concluded that the fish populations of the Cleveland
         Metropolitan Area are under stress from the degradation
         of the ecosystem and that the stress varies significantly
         within the study area.  The most highly distressed area
         is the lower 7 miles of the Cuyahoga River and the least
         distressed area is the middle and upper portions of the
         Chagrin River system.   Other areas display various
         degrees of degradation.

     2.  In the entire study area, including the lower Cuyahoga
         River,  there were no areas found where a fish fauna was
         completely absent.   While the fauna of the most distressed
         reaches of the Cuyahoga River is meager,  consisting of
         only occasional individuals of a few species, it is
         concluded that fishes  routinely enter the lower reaches
         of this stream from the  Cleveland Harbor.   The most
         commonly collected  species were the Goldfish, the Emerald
         Shiner  and the Eastern Gizzard Shad.

     3.   The fish fauna of the  Cleveland-Lake  Erie shoreline is,
         at present markedly different than in former times.   The
         species composition has  changed from  one  of  highly valuable
         food species  and  clean water  forms (ie. Muskellunge,  Walleye,
         Lake Trout,  Silver  Chub,  Burbot),  to  one  of  a predominance
         of rough fish and low  value food  species  such as  the  Goldfish,
         Carp, Gizzard Shad,  Yellow Perch  and  Drum.   The species  have
         changed from  large  piscivorous  species  to  primarily plankton
         and bottom feeding  fishes.

     4.   The decline and change in the  fishery  in Lake Erie and  in
         the rivers did not  primarily  occur in  the  past  few years.
         The first  major decline  in  the  fishery occurred prior  to
         1840  and included the  nearly  complete  collapse  of  the  local

-------
      populations of Muskellunge,  Northern Pike  and  other  stream
      spawning species.   These species  have not  recovered  since.
      This first decline  was  caused  by  the blockage  of  streams  by
      dams,  thus restricting  access  by  many species  to  their
      upstream spawning grounds.

  5.   The second major decline in  the fishery  occurred  during the
      period from 1860 -  1890 and  appears  to be  rather  well
      correlated with the deterioration of the Cuyahoga River
      during the rapid growth of the City  of Cleveland.  Although
      the decline is not  as well documented as the most recent
      one,  it appears that the Cuyahoga became grossly  polluted
      during this period,  perhaps  more  polluted  than at present.
      The principal  species affected during this period were the
      Walleye,  Smallmouth Blackbass  and shoreline species  such
      as  the darters and  shiners.  Several species became
      extirpated from the area during this  period.

  6.   A third period of major  decline occurred during the  1950-1960
      period.   The Blue Pike,  Walleye,  Burbot and many others
      suffered  a sudden and drastic  reduction  in numbers.  While
      the Walleye appears  to have  made  a partial recovery  in the
      Eastern and Western Basins of  Lake Erie, its numbers in the
      Cleveland  Area remain critically  low.  The Blue Pike is
      considered  by  many  to be  extinct  at  the  time of this writing,
      and the Burbot has been  placed on the  list of Ohio endangered
      species.

  7.   The primary cause of the decline  in  the  Cleveland Area fish
      populations is  the destruction of spawning grounds and the
      elimination of  access to such  localities by the activities
      of  man  in  the   study area.  We feel that the sport
      or  commercial  removal of fishes played a minimal part in the
      reduction of the fish fauna.

 8.   The species of  fishes which have most severely declined are
      those which spawned in the upper sections of the river
      drainages,  entering in spring from Lake Erie.   The former
      spawning grounds of these fishes have either been drained,
      silted or blocked by construction of dams.

 9.  Those species which formerly  spawned in the lower river
     mouths or on gravel bars and  beaches along  the shoreline
     have also declined sharply since 1850, because of siltation,
     dredging and industrial  or municipal pollution.

10.  Species which spawn in offshore,  deeper portions  of Lake Erie
     have shown the least reductions in numbers, and many  of

-------
      these  (Drum,  Smelt) have  increased greatly in number.

 11.   Literature, museum and present survey records indicate
      that a  total  of 101 species and 6 additional subspecies
      of fishes have at some time inhabited the study area.
      Presently, our survey indicates that 47  (45%) of these
      are either rare or probably  extirpated within the study
      area.   Of the 107 forms, we have documented the presence
      of 87 within  the area.  It is probable that several more
      exist in very small numbers.

 12.   Major fish concentrations are correlated with (1) a nearby
      municipal pollution source, or (2) a warm water effluent
      or (3)  protected waters such as marinas, harbors or river
      mouths.  These concentrations are to be expected and have
      been documented in other studies.

 13.   The principal concentrations of sport fishing activities
      are associated with the preceding localities.

 14.   The principal sport and commercial species along the Lake
      Erie Shoreline are Yellow Perch,  Drum (Sheepshead), Carp
      and White Bass.  The Yellow Perch contributes the greater
      portion of the catch.

 15.   Successful reproduction of 24 species of fishes has been
      documented within the Cleveland Harbor and adjacent marinas.
      Two species,  the Goldfish and Green Sunfish are reproducing
      in the lower  5 miles of the Cuyahoga River.

 16.   The major nurseries along the Lake Erie shoreline are (in
      order of decreasing production),  the Cleveland Breakwall
      and adjacent marinas, the lower Chagrin River, the lower
     Rocky River, the Lake Erie Shoreline and the lower Cuyahoga
     River.   The Chagrin has a greater variety of species.

 17.   In general,  the species diversity index (Shannon-Weaver)
     and the species composition along the Cleveland-Lake Erie
     shoreline is low at a depth of 20-30 feet.   Collections
     show that there is a trend toward a more diverse and
     abundant fish fauna to the east and west of  Cleveland.   The
     fauna near the mouth of the Chagrin River is most diverse.

18.  The species  diversity index increases as collections are
     taken nearer to shore, and excluding river mouths,  the  most
     diverse and  abundant fish fauna along the Lake Erie shoreline
     occurs  in the shoreline marinas,  especially  within the
     Cleveland Harbor System.

-------
19.  In  the entire study area, the most diverse fauna occurs
     in  the lower 5 miles of the Chagrin River.  In this area,
     the diversity index is often in excess of 3.0.  More  than
     sixty species have been collected.

20.  The species diversity and relative abundance of fishes
     changes seasonally along the Cleveland shoreline because
     of  the seasonal use of the area by various species (Drum,
     Gizzard Shad, Trout-perch, etc.).  The diversity is highest
     in  the early spring (March-April) and is lowest in the late
     summer (July-August).  Summer samples are not the most
     representative of the fish fauna along the Lake Erie
     shoreline.

21.  This diversity and abundance of fishes along the shoreline
     does not vary considerably during a season, indicating little
     or  no avoidance of selected areas by pelagic species.
     Further, the species composition of the fishes in the
     shoreline marinas (including within the Cleveland Harbor)
     does not vary significantly during the entire year.  This
     indicates that local, resident populations inhabit the
     marinas and that they are not transients.  Species such as
     Largemouth Blackbass, White Crappie and Northern Pike are
     collected in these areas during all seasons of the year.

22.  Species diversity and relative abundance of fishes changes
     on  a regular basis in the lower rivers and may change
     greatly from week to week, day to day, or day to night.
     Any evaluation of the fish fauna of a lower river should
     involve several collections and these collections should
     be  taken during spring and late fall,  and if possible should
     involve night collections.

23.  The formerly valuable commercial and sport fishery for Blue
     Pike and Walleye in the Cleveland area has at present
     diminished to zero.   Although the Walleye appears to  be
     recovering in certain areas of the Eastern and Western Basins
     of Lake Erie,  neither have recovered in the Cleveland area.
     According  to our collections and observations between 1971
     and 1974,  it appears that the populations of the Yellow
     Perch in the Cleveland Area are currently suffering a precipitous
     decline.   The population presently consists of very few
     adults (III+ or older)  and the numbers of 11+ individuals has
     seriously declined.   The commercial and sport fishery is
     supported by this species in the Cleveland Area,  and  both
     are meeting with poor success in 1974.

24.  It is estimated that the loss to the Cleveland Area because

-------
     of the collapse of the commercial fisheries is more than
     $8,000,000.00 annually.  This does not include the
     estimated loss resulting from the near collapse of the
     sport fishery and its revenues (tackle, boats, bait, gasoline,
     lodging, etc.).  Many investigators have calculated (for
     other areas), that sport fisheries revenues often exceed
     those derived from commercial fisheries.

25.  Forty-six species and subspecies of fishes have been
     documented as present within the Cleveland Harbor and
     adjacent marinas.  Many of these exist in limited areas,
     consist of small populations, and exhibit minimal reproductive
     success.

26.  The number of species and subspecies which were documented
     as present in other sections of the study area are summarized
     below. (Lists may include same species in two stream sections),

          78 species and subspecies in the Chagrin River system,
               67 in the lower section and
               56 in the middle and upper reaches.

          58 species and subspecies in the Rocky River system,
               40 in the lower section and
               46 in the middle and upper reaches.

          47 species and subspecies in the Cuyahoga River system,
                8 in the lower section
               14 in the middle section and
               39 in the upper reaches.

          50 species and subspecies along the Lake Erie shoreline
             from the Rocky to the Chagrin rivers.

27.  According to the composite list of Ohio endangered fish
     species, compiled from "Rare and Endangered Vertebrates
     of Ohio" (Smith, H. G., R. K. Burnard, E. E. Good, and
     Keener; Ohio Journal of Science 73 (5):257-271) and a more
     recent list prepared by the Ohio Division of Wildlife;
     (August 1974) endangered species exist within the study
     area.  These are as follows:

          1.  Silver Lamprey, Ichthyomyzon unicuspis
          2.  American Brook Lamprey, Lampetra lamottei
          3.  Lake Muskellunge, Esox m. masquinongy
          4.  River Chub, Nocomis micropogon
          5.  Bigmouth Shiner, Notropis dorsalis
          6.  Pugnose Minnow, Notropis (=0psopoeodus)  emiliae
          7.  Lake Chubsucker, Erimyzon sucetta
          8.  Burbot, Lota lota maculosa

-------
28.  The Cleveland Area can be restored to its former position
     as a viable fishery, although certain species will be
     difficult if not impossible to restore.  Should the
     conditions along the shoreline and in the rivers improve,
     most species would recover quickly.

29.  The reports of Simpson, et al., of Havens and Emerson Ltd.
     (135, 136) are misleading and unacceptable to us,  insofar
     as the fisheries are concerned.  These reports indicate a
     poorer quality of fish life than is actually present.
     They reported less than 20% of the present fish fauna of
     the Chagrin River drainage.  Their reports of Carp and
     bullheads and little else at their lower Chagrin River
     stations is inaccurate because we have routinely collected
     more than 25 species per hour at the same locations.   At
     some of the stations which they had sampled, we have
     collected over 45 species in a single day.

     The explanation that the environment has significantly
     improved since 1970 does not explain these dissimilarities
     in results.  Disjunct populations are present in the  Rocky
     River (Bigmouth Shiner, Notropis dorsalis) and in the Chagrin
     River (Pugnose Minnow, Notropis emiliae);these are considered
     to be endangered Ohio species.  These species are very
     unlikely to have repopulated these streams since 1970,
     for they are the only local sources for restoration.

     If we assume that these species were present, but  were not
     collected because of their low numbers; it is difficult to
     understand why so many associated species of shiners,
     minnows, chubs and suckers were not collected.  Our collections
     indicate that some of the most abundant species in the area
     are not represented in the findings of these authors.  We
     conclude that their collections are inadequate and misleading.
     To utilize their data for the determination of water  quality
     would yield incorrect conclusions.

-------
                             SECTION II
                          RECOMMENDATIONS
Concerning the protection of existing fish stocks, we feel that
certain areas should be discussed as important sources for the future,
natural repopulation of the Cleveland metropolitan area.  These
areas should be considered as potential sources for the population
of  distressed areas, and as such should be protected.  The most
important of these areas are as follows:

         (1)  The Entire Chagrin River Drainage

              The Chagrin River drainage is the most important
              reserve of fish species in the study area. Nearly
              80 of the original 107 species and subspecies of
              fishes probably still inhabit the drainage, and
              74 of these have been observed during this study.

              This stream is the only one within the study area
              capable of supporting the Rainbow, Brown and
              Brook Trouts and contains reproductive populations
              of Rainbow Trout in the headwaters of the East Branch.
              Portions of this stream system harbor several
              species which are considered rare or endangered
              within the State of Ohio : Brook Trout, Great Lakes
              Muskellunge, River Chub, Pugnose Minnow, Silver
              Lamprey and American Brook Lamprey.  The stream may
              also contain populations of the Sand Darter, Iowa
              Darter and Northern Shorthead Redhorse.

              The Chagrin River system seems to contain the only
              remaining spawning and nursery areas for several
              species within the study area (Northern Pike,
              Great Lakes Muskellunge etc,) and as such is extremely
              important to the restoration program in this region.

              Should the Chagrin River system, especially the lower
              and extreme headwater areas, become degraded within
              the next few years, the restoration of many species
              in the Cleveland area would become more difficult,
              if not impossible.

-------
          (2)   The  Rocky  River,  the Middle Portions

               The  middle portions of  the Rocky River is an
               important  source  of fish  stocks for repopulation
               of the  drainage.  The fauna is not as diverse as in
               the  Chagrin, but  stream species necessary for  the
               restoration of  the lower  sections are present  in this
               middle  portion.   It is  also important since it contains
               one  of  the remaining two  populations of the Central
               Bigmouth Shiner,  an Ohio  Endangered Species.

               This stream, as with the  Chagrin, is an important
               feeding ground  for some Lake Erie game species and
               is a stock source for Smallmouth and Largemouth
               Blackbasses.

          (3)   The  Cuyahoga River, the Upper Portions

               If the  Cuyahoga River is  to be restored, we must rely
               on the  fish stocks now  present in the upper third
               of the  drainage.  In these areas, nearly all of the
               former  Cuyahoga fish species persist, and populations
               of two  Ohio endangered  species, The Hornyhead Chub and
               Lake Chubsucker, are present.

Local, State and Federal agencies should begin to investigate the
possibilities  of fish meal production from the Central Basin of
Lake Erie.  Rough fish removal by commercial fisheries would tend
to improve a declining industry while at the same time removing
unwanted species and  large quantities of organic material from the
Lake.

Investigations should begin immediately by all agencies, concerning
the removal of all unnecessary stream obstructions or the creation
of alternative migration routes around  these structures for the
passage of Lake Erie and stream species of migratory fishes.
Obstruction removal should begin with those structures located
nearest to Lake Erie and proceed in an upstream direction.  The
first structure to be considered is the Willoughby Dam, on the
Chagrin River.  This would allow passage of Lake Erie and Lower
Chagrin species into the entire East Branch drainage and a large
portion of the middle Chagrin River.

Areas of remaining marshlands should be protected, especially those
near the Lake Erie shoreline.  The shallows near the mouth of the
Chagrin and Rocky Rivers should be considered for State Wildlife
Areas, and should be managed as fish spawning grounds.   Such areas
could also be utilized for other non-consumptive recreation such
as birdwatching, nature photography,etc.

-------
Land use programs should be developed for areas in the headwaters
of stream drainages.  Erosion control measures should be developed
and strictly enforced.

Where possible, programs should be implimented to restore the
forest canopy over the smaller streams in the area.  This would
help to prevent bank erosion, thus reducing siltation, and would
provide cover for fishes in streams.  Such a canopy would tend
to shade the smaller tributaries and cool the waters in summer.

Municipal and industrial point sources of pollutant input should be
strictly controlled.  Effluents should be treated as effectively
as technology will provide and efforts should be made to improve
such treatment as time progresses.

Studies should be initiated to investigate the feasibility of
artificial habitat restoration in highly polluted areas*  Evidence
from this study indicates  that the fishery within the Cleveland
Harbor could be greatly improved by the addition of artificial
substrates in selected areas which would serve as spawning and
nursery areas.  Many species are already utilizing artificial
substrates in lieu of natural materials, indicating the feasibility
of such a program, (see Species Accounts; Yellow Perch, Largemouth
Blackbass).

Studies should be initiated concerning the food chain relationships
between fishes, benthos and plankton.  Such investigations would
reveal the value of certain food species to fish production and
would provide information documenting the value of specific habitats
in polluted ecosystems.

A more thorough documentation of the distribution of rare and
endangered Ohio fish species is imperative.  It is evident that two
of these may occur only in the Cleveland area, and as such should
be protected by the State of Ohio.  Documentation of their
distribution would enable the Ohio Division of Natural Resources
to protect certain selected portions of habitat from adverse factors
affecting these species.

Sport fishing for Largemouth Blackbass in the Cleveland Harbor
should be prohibited during the spawning season.   Our observations
indicate that production of this valuable game species is greatly
hampered by sportsmen removing Blackbasses from their nests in
marinas and along the Cleveland breakwall.

-------

-------
                               SECTION III

                              INTRODUCTION

GENERAL COMMENTS

Originally this research project was undertaken to establish a baseline
of information concerning the past and present species composition,
relative abundance and seasonal fluctuations of the fishes of the
Greater Cleveland Metropolitan Shoreline.  Preliminary investigations
were to be initiated concerning the age and growth structure, feeding
behavior and migrations of Lake Erie fish populations within the
study area.  In addition, heavy metal analysis of food fish species
were to be undertaken.

As a result of initial findings, we were instructed by officials of
the U. S. Environmental Protection Agency to concentrate on the
ecology of fish populations rather than pursue the heavy metal analysis.

It became apparent early in our investigations that it would be
difficult, if not impossible, to separate the near-shore areas of the
lake from the river drainages in regard to fishes.

Therefore, it was decided not only to investigate the shoreline area
in Cuyahoga County from Lakewood Park east to Moss Point, but to
include the Rocky, Cuyahoga and Chagrin river drainages.  It also became
necessary to conduct a literature survey for the period from 1790
to present because it was important to have information concerning the
chronological changes of the area in regard to the fish populations
and water quality.

Since the Yellow Perch (Perca flavescens) was the most important food
fish, a study of growth rate, coefficient of condition (K), age
composition and seasonal fluctuation was considered necessary.  Those
species of fishes which were collected as either fry or young-of-the-year
were considered to be either reproducing  in the study area or utilizing
the area as a nursery ground.

Fishes as Indices

The presence or absence of particular species of fishes has often
been used as an indicator of water quality.  Certain species have a
limited "home range" and therefore may serve well as indices of the
local effects of water quality degradation.  These species, especially
those that are intolerant of pollutants (Ammocrypta, Percina), may
also serve as excellent indices of short term pollutants that may
go undetected, especially by bi-weekly or monthly chemical monitoring
programs.  Conversely, since some fishes are highly mobile, they may
temporarily enter a grossly polluted zone (such as the Lower Cuyahoga
                                  11

-------
River).  It is important that their presence should not be improper-
ly evaluated or overstressed.  The fact that a species is occassionally
present or even commonly present at such a site indicates only that the
species is capable of surviving and not that the population is re-
producing, feeding, growing, etc.

In order to obtain an accurate evaluation of the impact of man on the
population of fishes, an evaluation of all factors must be considered.
Such an evaluation must include not only the presence of species,
but also their diversity, relative abundance, reproductive success,
growth rate as well as other factors.

This information must be correlated with the chemical environment,
benthos and planktonic community structure, physical characteristics
of the area and other biological parameters in order to achieve a
more complete picture of the cause and effect relationships which
have resulted in the present status of fishes in any given body of
water.

FACTORS AFFECTING FISH POPULATIONS

It is erroneously believed by some that all of a fish species' re-
quirements are met if there is sufficient oxygenated water present,
and many regulations have been passed which pertain to Q£ levels
for fishes.  In addition to sufficient oxygen levels, however, many
other factors constitute a fish's life cycle, such as adequate
spawning areas, access to the proper habitat, favorable conditions
for the growth and development of fry, available food for young and
adults, proper temperature , presence or absence  of aquatic vege-
tation (often of the proper plant species), presence of sheltered
waters and many other factors.  If one or  more of these factors
are absent, even for a short period of time,  the abundance of a
species may become greatly reduced, or the species may become extir-
pated; even though oxygen or temperature values may remain within
an acceptable limit  of tolerance.

Unless a species of fish has all of the requirements of its life
history, its future survival is in serious doubt.   If any of these
requirements is absent,  the species will be absent.  For example,
it is obvious that the tributary streams play a very important, if
not an essential role, as a nursery for some  Lake Erie species.  Even
though the water quality of such a stream might remain satisfactory
for a given species,  a decrease in abundance  could be caused by a
single factor, such as a dam, which would effectively block all up-
stream migrations to the spawning grounds.   It is conceivable, there-
fore, that a species may be brought to near extinction without the
addition of any industrial or municipal pollutants.  While we recognize
that such a physical blockage of streams might be a cause of the
decrease in a certain population,  we also recognize that additional
                                 12

-------
factors are at work at the present time.  To assume that the removal
of such structures, or any other single detrimental factor, may
bring about a recovery of the species is an invalid assumption,
since the effects of other factors play an equivalent or perhaps
greater role in the disruption of the life history of the fish.  A
full comprehension of the interrelationships between each of these
factors and the total life history requirements of each species
of fish is essential in understanding the current status or methods
of restoring Lake Erie fishes.

Some of the most important factors affecting the Cleveland area fish
populations are discussed as follows:

FACTORS AFFECTING LOCAL FISH POPULATIONS

Stream Obstructions

Arriving in Ohio, the early settlers needed power and the most readily
available source was water.  In response to this need, hundreds of
small dams were built and placed in use during the first quarter of
the 19th Century.  These structures were among the first causes of a
major decline in the populations of some Ohio fish species (147),(Fig. 1)

As  a general rule, most species of Ohio fishes are migratory, at
least when ready to spawn.  These migrations may take several forms.
The Burbot (Lota lota maculosa) migrates from the deeper portions of
Lake Erie toward the shoreline, where it spawns in the shallows or
in the mouths of rivers during February.  The Whitefishes and Ciscoes
remained in the deeper waters of the Central and Eastern basins
during the summer, migrating westward to the Western basins in fall,
where they spawned primarily among the reefs.  Other species, such as
the Sturgeon (Ancipenser fulvescens), suckers of the genus (Moxostoma,
Smallmouth Blackbass (Micropterus dolomieui) and Walleye (Stizostedion
v_. vitreum), migrated from the lake or lower portions of the rivers,
upstream to spawn in higher gradients.

The Lake Muskellunge (Esox m. masquinongy) and the Northern Pike
(Esox lucius) sometimes made extensive migrations from the Lake, going
upstream many miles where they spawned among the flooded terrestrial
and aquatic vegetation.  Even small species such as the darters
(Etheostomatidae) and shiners (Notropis) apparently migrated short
distances of a few miles and there is evidence that  the Longnose Dace
(Rhinichthys cataractae) migrated from Lake Erie to the upper portions
of river drainages to spawn.

It is obvious that any structure such as a dam which prevents or hinders
upstream migrations would be detrimental to the sustained productivity
of many species.  Without access  to their spawning ground, they may be
rendered nearly unreproductive except possibly during periods of high
                                  13

-------

Figure 1: Stream Obstruction at Willoughby,  Ohio.
          Dams such as these block the spawning runs and upstream migrations of many species
          of fishes.   The wire fencing placed on the top of this dam is to prevent salmon from
          jumping the structure during their migration.

-------
water when migrating adults  might bypass  the obstructions.  Even
the bypassing of these dams was probably inconsequential, because
although some spawners might succeed in bypassing the obstruction,
ditching, draining, and increased siltation may have destroyed their
former spawning grounds.  In more recent years stream obstruction
has taken the form of what we might term "chemical dams".  The lower
portions of many streams are now impassable for most species of
fishes because of industrial and municipal pollutants.  Such a
situation is surely as effective an obstruction as a physical structure.

Ditching and Draining

It was necessary for the early pioneers to ditch and drain the marshlands
and swamps near rivers so that they might be utilized for agriculture.
Ditching and draining adversly affected a great variety of fish
species.  Permanent residents of the swamplands such as the Mudminnow
(Umbra limi), Brook Stickleback (Culaea inconstans ) and Iowa  Darter
(Etheostoma exile) were reduced due to the destruction of habitat.
Such species are the  Lake Muskellunge and Northern Pike, which
utilized these undrained areas as spawning grounds, were denied the
necessary habitat for reproduction.

As a secondary effect, draining often lowered the water table, thereby
reducing the annual sustained flow of tributary streams.  These streams
became intermittent and no longer served as nurseries for other species
not normally associated with marshes (ie Smallmouth Blackbass).
Frequently, these streams trapped all fishes present in the drying
pools during late summer.

The loss of marshlands and the resultant increased speed of draining
caused a more rapid run-off of water during storms.  This resulted
in more frequent and more violent flooding.  Unfortunately, ditching,
draining and channelization continues.

Siltation

Another effect of ditching, draining and channelization was the
increased erosion of soils adjacent to the stream.  This resulted in
higher turbidities and the deposition of large quantities of silt on
the formerly clean stream bottoms.  The removal of the forest canopy
resulted in an increased erosion since raindrops directly striking
the light humus soil eroded rapidly and deposited additional loose
material in streams.  The plowing of the lighter soils further resulted
in greatly increased deposition of silt in streams.  In many cases,
it took only a very small deposition of silt over the formerly clean
gravel, boulders and sand to partially or entirely eliminate spawning.

Especially affected were the Bigeye Chub (Hybopsis amblops), the River
Chub (Nocomis micropogon) and the Hornyhead Chub (Nocomis bigutattus)»
all of which spawned on silt-free gravel riffles.  Such pool species as
                                 15

-------
the Mimic Shiner (Notropjs v_. volucellus) which spawned over silt-free
sands also declined in numbers.  The Sand Darter (Ammocrypta pellucida)
demonstrated a great decline in numbers in this area and throughout
Ohio during the early years.  It appears logical to assume that this
was the direct result of the siltation of clean sandy substrates in
the streams.  The recent decline of the Silver Chub (Hybopsis storeriana)
a lake species, may possibly be attributed to the siltation of the
gravel substrates in Lake Erie.

Siltation also affected a large segment of the invertebrate fauna, by
smothering the substrates and eliminating their habitat.  Molluscs
were especially affected, and in Ohio, many species were extirpated as
early as 1850.

The deposition of silts has long been a major factor in the decline of
fish populations both in tributary streams and in Lake Erie.  Spawning
and nursery grounds have been covered, the insect species utilized as
food have been greatly reduced or extirpated and aquatic vegetation has
been destroyed.  Siltation continues to be a major  problem in the
Cleveland area.

Organic  Pollutants

Organic material, as with silts, is a pollutant which has been an
adverse factor since the early 1800's.  As Cleveland grew, the demand
for lumber increased tremendously, resulting in  the rapid deforestation
of the area.  Sawdust from lumber mills was usually dumped into the
streams or along the banks.  During warm water periods oxygen was
depleted, sometimes resulting in massive fish kills.  Organic refuse
from slaughter  houses and breweries contributed to oxygen depletion.

As Ohio continued to grow,  domestic sewage became an ever increasing
problem.  Professor Orton (Howe 1900, 1:89) stated that prior to 1858
the amount of contamination was becoming both relatively and absolutely
larger and not a single town had met this urgent demand of sanitary
science,   and that many streams had become open sewers.

As the population of Cleveland has increased, the problems of organic
pollutants has shifted from sawdust and mash to domestic sewage.  The
effects of this organic material on oxygen depletion in the rivers
and lakes is well known today and continues to be a major problem in
the study area, as well as elsewhere.

Inorganic Pollutants

Throughout the early years, prior to 1825 there were only a few
inorganic wastes which contributed adversely to fish populations in
Ohio.  Tannic acid resulting from both the lumbering industry and from
tanning factories was probably the major contributor.
                                  16

-------
After 1825,  the development of  heavy industry resulted in increasing
number of inorganic pollutants.  This increase in types and amounts
of  inorganics continued until  some streams became uninhabitable by
fishes.  In  some areas, these deplorable conditions remain.  Inorganic
pollutants also eliminated essential factors in the life histories
of some fish species.  The loss or reduction of feeding and spawning
grounds have eliminated or greatly reduced many fish species.  The
Walleye and  White Bass (Morone chrysops) were particularly affected
because these species were regularly entering the lower portions of
streams to feed.

Aquatic Vegetation

Many species of fishes rely upon various types of submerged or emergent
aquatic vegetation for shelter, food, spawning and/or the development
of young.  In pursuing The Fishes of Ohio (147), it becomes obvious
that a goodly proportion of the species of fishes which have drastically
decreased in numerical abundance or appear to have been extirpated
from most or all of Ohio, are those requiring aquatic vegetation in
some phase of their life history.

Siltation and turbidity were the primary cause of the loss of aquatic
vegetation through lessening of light penetration and the covering of
plants with  a layer of silt.  The loss of aquatic vegetation beds
resulted in  an increased turbidity and  even greater rate of erosion,
as evidenced by present day Lake Erie Shoreline.

The loss of  aquatic vegetation resulted in the  reduction of many fish
species, through the loss of feeding and spawning areas and protection
for young and adults.  The Grass Pickerel (Esox americanus) Pugnose
Minnow (Notropis emiliae),Blackchin Shiner (Notropis heterodon), Golden
Shiner (Notropis crysoleucas), Pumpkinseed Sunfish (Lepomis gibbosus),
Black Crappie (Pomoxis nigromaculatus)  and Tadpole Madtom (Noturus gyrinus)
have declined proportionally to the reduction in the amount of aquatic
vegetation.

In many cases, rooted aquatic vegetation has been almost or entirely
eliminated through the adverse effects  of dredging,  siltation, organic
and inorganic pollutants and the results of higher turbidities.

Nutrient Enrichment

During the past 100 years,  the substrates and waters of Lake Erie and
its tributaries have become increasingly enriched (37) .   Originally,
the water contained less nutrient material,  was less turbid and
presumably was cooler.  Recently,  the higher  temperature of the waters
combined with an increased concentration of nutrients has resulted in
greater frequency and duration of algal blooms.
                                 17

-------
 At first the primary source of enrichment was organic matter entering
 streams from the forest,  fields and marshlands.   Later,  the refuse
 from lumber mills (sawdust),  breweries (mash),  graineries (chaff,  flour)
 and slaughter houses (carcasses,  offal)  added greatly to the nutrient
 input in the lower Cuyahoga River and Lake Erie.   More recently,
 enrichment has been greatly accelerated  by the  leaching  of  commercial
 fertilizers from agricultural and suburban lands,  detergents,  domestic
 sewage and other industrial and municipal sources.

 It is probable that this  over-enrichment has  led  to  an accumulation of
 organic material in all portions  of Lake Erie.  The  decay of this
 material has seriously  lowered the dissolved  oxygen  in many portions
 of the Lake,  and according  to Hartman (37);

           "...low oxygen  stress on the benthos and
           fish communities  is becoming of consequence."

 Litter

 Litter has  been a part  of Ohio  streams since  the days  of  the early
 pioneers.   Discarded  saw-logs, bark,  metal,  ceramics  and other materials
 were  piled  along stream banks.  This  practice was  convenient since
 flooding streams would  periodically  carry away all the refuse.  This
 practice has  continued, but more  recently the litter has  taken the form of
 slowly deteriorating aluminum cans,  glass, automobile  tires, and large
 quantities  of  household and industrial items of plastics  (Fig. 2).

 After  floods,  the  trees along  the banks  of streams are often festooned
 with  sheets  of  plastic.  Gill net samples  taken along  near-shore areas
 of  the  lake  often  contained few fish  and  large amounts of trash and
 junk.   Seining  often produced many cans  and bottles.   Besides being
 unsightly,  this  debris is hazardous  to recreational activities.  Many
 swimmers  and stream fisherman are injured each year and thousands  of
 dollars  in damages to recreational boats  occur each season.

Many  species of  fishes, such as the Bluntnose Minnow (Pimephales notatus).
 Fathead Minnow  (Pimephales  _p_. promelas)  and several species of catfishes
 use these objects  as substrates to deposit their  eggs.  At  times, the
 litter may be  the  only available spawning substrate or cover.  It  is
 possible  that  in certain areas the litter is responsible for the
productivity of  certain species.

During the floods, however,  much of this  debris is moved downstream,
carrying the spawn into the lake or lower river.   Often the  eggs are
destroyed or the larvae hatch into unfavorable environments.  We have
observed that the Yellow Perch deposits strings of eggs on mops,  rugs,
pieces of plastic, paper,  wire and discarded Christmas trees.  As
this debris moves  throughout the lake, the eggs become dislodged and
fall  to the silted bottom where they fail to hatch.   Often  the debris
                                  18

-------
Figure 2:  Litter Present  on Beaches  Near  Cleveland,  Ohio.

-------
 carrying the eggs drifts far from shore where the larvae,  upon hatching,
 may be unable to find suitable food and subsequently perish.

 Exploitation c)f_ Fish Populations

 It is patently obvious  that exploitation of fishery resources,
 through commercial and/or sport fishing,  must have an effect  on certain
 fish populations to a greater or lesser degree.   The literature is
 replete with instances of over-fishing, especially during  that period
 when a fish population is concentrated  in a  small area,  such  as on  its
 spawning ground.  It appears  to us that  over-fishing,  commercially or
 otherwise,  has been greatly over-rated  in many instances and  that most
 species can be over-fished only through maximum  and continued effort.
 It is our belief that had not a single  muskellunge or sturgeon been
 removed directly by man,  the present populations of these  species would
 not be noticeably greater in Lake Erie.  It  was  the destruction of  one
 or more factors in their  life history,  such  as of their  spawning areas,
 that resulted  in marked decreases in the  size of a given fish population
 or has actually endangered many species in Lake  Erie.   It  long has  been
 the custom  for the gill netter to blame the  trap netter  for the
 decrease of a  fish population,  or for the  sport  fisherman  to  blame  both.
 The destruction of one or  more environmental factors necessary  to  the
 completion  of  a fish's life history adversely affects the  production of
 young or adults and is the more significant  contributor  to its decline.

 An excellent example is the Smallmouth  Blackbass.   In 1830, the  species
 was  heavily fished around the  Bass  Islands of  Lake  Erie  by both  sport
 and  commercial fishermen.   The  normal catch  of several hundred bass per
 day  were reported  by sportsmen,  and  as  late  as   1877, several  tons  of
 Blackbass were taken daily in  the vicinity of  the  islands by hook and
 line.   During  this period,  Sterling  (142) bitterly  complained  that  the
 sport  fishermen were  rapidly depleting  the Blackbass population  and
 that  catches of  750  per day by  single individuals was not uncommon.

 The   population began  declining  rapidly after  1885.  In  1902,  the
 commercial  catch and  sale  of all  species of Blackbasses was prohibited.
 It was  public  opinion  that  removal of commercial exploitation would
 result  in the  immediate restoration of  the population to its former
 abundance.

 The population  continued  to decline, and several years later restrictions
were placed on  the sport  catching of Blackbasses.  Despite increased
 restrictions, Lake Erie populations of Blackbass  continues to  dwindle.
After more  than 70 years of protection from both commercial and sport
 exploitation the Smallmouth populations have continued to decline.
 Sport catching near the Bass Islands is presently limited to only a
 few specimens daily and the species has been extripated from much of
 the remainder of the South Shore of Lake Erie.
                                 20

-------
Introduction of Exotic Species

Exotic or non-native species of fishes may become established in a
body of   water by several methods.  Often efforts are made by man
to introduce fish species to augment the existing fishery.  Trautman
(147) states that more than 17 species of non-native fishes have
been introduced into Ohio waters for this purpose.  Normally, the
introduction of such species is unsuccessful.  Unfortunately, some
species which have become firmly established have in time also become
largely unwanted, as have the Carp and Goldfish.

Occasionally, species are inadvertently introduced by sportsmen
through their use of minnows as fishing bait.  Often these minnows
are imported, and their release into Ohio waters may establish a
reproductive population.  This may have been the case with the Fathead
Minnow in many Ohio streams.

Species have also invaded Ohio waters through man-made waterways, such
as the Welland Canal.  These species (e.g. Sea Lamprey, Petromyzon
marinus) have been largely undesirable.

Exotic species compete  in the ecosystem for space and food, and may
adversely affect native species ability to survive.  Often the exotics
are major predators, feeding heavily on the native fauna, while having
less sport  or commercial value than the native predators which they
displace.

The introduction of exotic species is often hailed as the ultimate
answer to a  problem of environmental degredation.  It is believed
that exotics will survive in an eroding environment where native fishes
have drastically declined.  Some species, (Coho Salmon, Oncorhynchus
kisutch) are of outstanding food value in their native habitat,  whereas,
when introduced into Lake Erie they become far less desirable than the
species they apparently were intended to replace (Blue Pike,
Stizostedion ;v. glaucum) .

Environmental restoration would be a  more reasonable, less costly
and a more permanent method of establishing high populations of  food
species.  It seems more logical to attempt to restore the former
abundance of Smallmouth  Blackbass, Walleye or Northern Pike  than to
continue the  expense of random introductions or "replacements"  for the
native fauna, hoping for success.
                                 21

-------
                                                                      f!     1
Figure 3:  Undisturbed Wild Area Similar to Ihat Described by Early  Surveyors Along the Lower
          Cuyahoga and the Lake Erie Shoreline.  This area is in  the Upper Cuyahoga.
                                                                    (Photo by Mark Caroots)

-------
                               SECTION IV

             HISTORICAL REVIEW OF THE CLEVELAND AREA FISHERY

 A survey of the literature concerning the study area indicated that
 a total of 107 species and subspecies of fishes had been reported
 by previous investigations to have at one time inhabited the Cleveland
 Metropolitan Area.   These comprised a total species list regarding
 the fishes of the Cleveland  shoreline and the three river drainages.
 (See p. 48-132).  The only available literature pertaining to the fish
 fauna of this area within the past twenty years are the reports of
 Orr (1968), Havers and Emerson (1969,  1971)  and the annual reports
 of the Ohio Division of Wildlife.   Orr's work is concerned only with
 the upper one-third of the Cuyahoga River drainage.  The Ohio
 Division of Wildlife gill net surveys  include only one Cleveland
 sampling station (comparable  to  our station 3);  and the reports of
 Havens and Emerson comprised  what  we deemed  to be an inadequate and
 inaccurate investigation of the  abundance and distribution of fishes
 of the three river  drainages.  These latter  investigators collected
 only thirteen species of fishes  from the Chagrin River while our
 cursory investigations yielded 78  species.   In addition,  it has been
 stated that the Lake Erie and especially the Cleveland area is
 virtually fishless.   For example,  a college  level biology laboratory
 manual (1971)  stated:

           "Nobody was paying  close enough attention to tell
           when it happened, but  a  few  years  ago  most  of Lake
           Erie died;  solid  wastes  along  with acid  and other
           poisons have left much of its  water void of life
           except  for sludge worms  and  a  few  mutant carp that
           have adjusted  to  conditions."

 Such inferences and  statements have been refuted  by the findings of
 this investigation.

 It  is  apparent  that  a detailed,  accurate baseline  of  data  for  the
 fishes of   the  shoreline  and  the three river  systems  in the  Cleveland
 area is unavailable.   Such  a baseline, when  achieved, would  be
 meaningless unless compared with distribution and  abundance  of  fishes
 in  the past.  An  exhaustive literature survey covering  the period
 from 1790  to 1972 was  undertaken,  to define  the chronological  changes
 of  the Cleveland Metropolitan Shoreline  and adjacent  tributaries
 regarding fish populations and water quality.

 Original Water Quality and Fishery

 The first surveyors and settlers who reached the Cleveland area
 did not leave verbose accounts of its fauna, although we have a
 rather complete account of the forests.  From the few existing reports
and scattered information from journals and diaries of the pioneers,
 it is possible to obtain some  concept of Cleveland during this early
                                 23

-------
  period.
  Published  references  indicate  that  the  Cuyahoga,  Chagrin  and  to  a
  lesser  extent,  the  Rocky  rivers, originally were  composed of  a
  continuing series of  riffles and deep pools.  The substrates  consisted
  primarily  of clean  sands  and gravels with areas of scoured bedrock
  and boulders.  All  streams were largely covered by a forest canopy;
  the waters  cool, clear and free of  turbidity.  The statements of many
  early writers testify to  the clarity and purity of the waters of the
  Cuyahoga.   Early surveyors drank directly from the river, and the City
  of Cleveland utilized it  as a source of drinking water until  the 1850's
  Kirtland stated that in 1844, the Brook Trout was present in area
  streams, this attesting to their clarity and coolness.

 The upper and lower sections of all three river drainages contained
 profuse quantities of aquatic vegetation,  in the streams and adjacent
 swamps.   Near the mouth of the Cuyahoga (presently the industrial "flats"
 of Cleveland),  there was an immense marsh.   The upper section  of the
 Cuyahoga was also largely wetland.   Concering this section,  Seth Pease,
 a member of Moses Cleaveland's survey party (1797) wrote in his journal
 tnat they were,   ...much troubled with ponds  and swamps."  (127), (Fig.  3),

 The shoreline of Lake Erie in the Cleveland area was  quite different
 than it  is  today.   Holley (48)  another member of Cleaveland's  survey
 party, wrote in  his  journal that:

           "East  of  the Cuyahoga River a  rock  shore begins
           and continues  nearly  a mile,  then a good beach
           commences  and  continues  to the Chagrin River."

 Apparently  this  beach  was  of  considerable size because a survey  party
 of  nearly 40 men maintained a base camp  on it.

 Originally,  the  Cleveland  area was densely forested and contained a
 sizable  population of  game animals.   Zarly surveyors and settlers
 routinely captured such mammals  as elk,  deer, bear and smaller animals
 as  passenger pigeons,  turkeys and squirrels.  According to Whittlesey
 (160), Hamilton  stated in  his 1797  journal that:

          "...we discovered a bear swimming across the
          river  [Chagrin].  Porter and myself jumped
          into a canoe and paddled after him,  while
          another man went with a gun up to the shore."

Rattlesnakes were apparently numerous, and were sometimes eaten as
a delicacy  (160).

The rivers and streams were heavily populated  with wildlife.   Although
no exact  records  exist concerning the abundance of  fishes in the
                                 24

-------
 Cleveland  area,  it  is  the opinion  of Mrs. Virginia Howley, of  the
 Western Reserve  Historical  Society, that the reason for  this was that
 fish were  so  commonplace and ubiquitous that they were largely deemed
 unworthy of mention in the  journals (51).  The occasional records  of
 soldiers and  woodsmen  elsewhere  in Ohio, indicate that there was
 an  immense population  of fishes  (147).  This condition can be  assumed
 to  be  representative of the Cleveland area also.

 Hildreth (39), for  example, stated that the Indians could travel long
 distances  by  canoe  because  the waters

           "...afforded them a constant magazine of food."

 because of the vast multitude  of  fishes.  Trautman (147, p. 17),
 in  discussing the great abundance  of fishes in Ohio before 1800 quoted
 that Bradly constructed a brush  fish trap across the Miami River near
 Hamilton,  Ohio.  This  trap, in one night, caught 2500 pounds of fish,
 and about  the same  number on the next night.  Also that Brown, in
 discussing fishes in the Maumee River near Toledo, Ohio, stated that
 their  numbers were  "almost  incredible".  He further stated that,

           "...[fish were] so numerous...at this place, that
           a spear may  be thrown into the water at random
           and will  rarely miss killing one!"

 Kirtland,  several times indicated  similar abundances of fishes in  the
 Cuyahoga River between 1840 and 1855.

 It should  be  noted  that in  these early days, the species composition
 differed markedly   from the present.  Carp and Goldfish had not yet
 been introduced  into Lake Erie and the Gizzard Shad was not abundant.
 It was the large, fine food species that were abundant.  These species,
 such as Lake  Sturgeon, Lake Muskellunge,  Northern Pike, Smallmouth
 Blackbass,  Walleye  and numerous species of redhorses (Moxostoma spp.)
 flourished in the clean unpolluted lake,  streams and marshlands.

 The Cleveland area  fauna of 1797 persisted until at least 1820
 although a slight decline was evident.  Charles Whittlesey (160)
wrote  that a  member of Cleaveland's survey party of 1797 had revisited
 the Cleveland area  in  1820,  and found that the Cuyahoga River was
virtually unchanged from what he had originally observed.

Changes Between 1820 and 1855

By 1820 nearly every stream and river in the Cleveland Metropolitan
Area was blocked by mill dams.   These dams affected many species
of fishes in various ways,  as indicated by the early decline of several
species.  The first result was  the drastic decline of  the Lake Muskellunge
and Northern Pike populations.   Unable to  reach the upstream marshlands
                                 25

-------
because of dams, they were unable to spawn.  Likewise, the stream
spawning populations of Lake Sturgeon also declined although
populations of adults persisted for years because this fish is particularly
long-lived (probably over 100 years), and because during this period, it
had little commercial value.

The Cleveland area was fortunate in having during the 1820-1850
period one of Ohio's outstanding naturalists, Jared Potter Kirtland.
This man left for posterity a highly accurate account of fish populations
in Ohio and especially in the Cleveland area, in his writings published
primarily in the Boston Society of Natural History and in the Family
Visitor (for bibliography of Kirtland, see Trautman (147), pp. 628-630).
Kirtland, in 1850, pointed out the drastic modifications in the fish
fauna during this period.  He stated,

          "still greater changes if possible have
          occurred with the finny tribes^.  The sturgeon
          has nearly forsaken this [south] shore of
          the Lake..."

He further stated:

          "all the migratory species have been excluded...
          by the construction of dams..."

While Kirtland (91) deplored the decrease of Muskellunge and Pikes,
he pointed out that in the same year one could capture near the
present Cleveland harbor as many as 100 bass and Walleye in a morning
by hook and line and that,

          "Between 1849-51 the waters of Lake Erie near
          the mouth of the Cuyahoga River was literally
          black with fishing boats."

Other species, such as the Smallmouth Blackbass and Walleye did not
undergo a drastic reduction during this period because of the spawning
and nursery areas available along the shoreline.  Unfortunately,
however, the Cleveland region does not contain the abundance of reefs
and shallow water spawning sites that occurred to the west in the
vicinity of the Bass Islands, and as shall be seen, these populations
of shoreline species were to be severely affected after 1850.

In addition to the early effect of mill dams, the water quality in
the Cleveland area also changed notably after 1820.  The deterioration
of water quality increased with the increase in human population and
industrialization.  In 1820, the population of Cleveland was approximately
150 persons, and as has been previously stated, the river was relatively
unpolluted.  Soon after the opening of the Ohio Canal, industrial
activity was accelerated and by 1855 the population of Cleveland was
                                 26

-------
 26,000 (145).   Municipal and industrial pollutant input was greatly
 accelerated,  leading to the total degradation of the Cuyahoga River.

 By 1840,  industrial pollutants,  such as coal dust,  iron ore,  sawdust
 and others had greatly deteriorated the quality of  the lower
 Cuyahoga.   In 1851,  a report on  the water  quality of the Cuyahoga was
 submitted to  the Ohio State Medical Convention.   It stated  that,

           "...contaminated drinking water  taken from
           the Cuyahoga is responsible for  the wide
           prevalence of Typhoid  Fever."

 Obviously,  this was  the result of increased  domestic sewage in the
 lower  river.

 Kirtland was  appointed to a commission to  relocate  the Cleveland
 water  intake.   He was insistent  that the intake  tunnel be located in
 the Lake,  at  a point where prevailing winds  would not carry sewage
 contaminants  to the  water intake.   In 1854 a new intake was constructed
 400 feet offshore in Lake Erie.   By the end  of  this period, it was
 apparent  that  the lakeshore was  relatively clean, with high populations
 of  many species of fishes;  while the lower Cuyahoga had become an
 open sewer, full of  industrial and  municipal wastes.

 Changes Between 1855 and  1900

 Industrial pollution increased so  that  by  1868,  the Cleveland  Daily
 Plain  Dealer reported that:

          "...from the  filthy looking conditions  of the
          river, we  imagine  that but  a  short  time will
          be required to  remove  all evidences of beauty
          and  cleanliness  from there.  We  should  think
          there might be  some way discovered by which
          the  filthy  refuse  of the  oil  refineries could
          be disposed of  in  some other way,  than by
          emptying it into  the river."
          (Vol. XXIV  #110, May 6, 1868, p. 3)

During the winter of  1869 petroleum wastes were reported to have
contaminated the waters of Lake Erie  from bottom to surface for a
distance of one mile  from shore.   This total deterioration of water
quality in the Cuyahoga River was now having an  adverse effect on the
near-shore waters of Lake Erie.   Numerous reports in newspapers of the
1860's told of "rescuing" fishes  from near the mouth of the Cuyahoga
River.   About this time, open Lake species began to avoid the polluted
near-shore areas of Cleveland.
                                 27

-------
In 1859, Garlick (35) had reported that:

          "Owing to the scarcity of fish on our coast
          last fall [Whitefish] eggs will be ready for
          planting in Lake Erie."

Apparently, the reason for the decline of Whitefish (Coregonus clupeaformis)
along the near-shore areas was their avoidance of Cleveland pollution,
since good catches of the species were still being made elsewhere in
Lake Erie.

Soon after 1870, local newspapers carried increasing numbers of
advertisements for Smallmouth Blackbass fishing excursions to the Lake
Erie Islands.  Since Kirtland had reported large populations of Blackbasses
in Cleveland during the 1850's, it is apparent that the populations
along the shoreline had declined drastically within 20 years.
Obviously, other shoreline species (eg shiners, minnows, darters) were
also adversely affected by the   industrial and municipal pollutants.

Further documentation of the increased effect of the river pollution
on Lake Erie is evidenced by the construction, in 1875, of a new water
intake for the City of Cleveland.  This time it was located 6,200 feet
offshore, where uncontaminated waters were still available.  This
new source of water was not to be uncontaminated for long, however,
for in 1882 the City experienced its first problem with algal blooms
which contaminated the water collected from the new source.  A report
on the problem stated that prior to this year (1882), the City had
been exempt from this problem.

In 1890, the construction of the Cleveland Sewer System effectively
collected municipal wastes from the City, and emptied them, untreated,
into the Cuyahoga River.  This final act of the 1800's must have had
an adverse effect on the already decimated Smallmouth  Blackbass and
Walleye populations along the near-shore areas of Cleveland.

The Lake Sturgeon population continued to decline after 1855, because
of a lack of reproduction.  This decliae was then accelerated by
commercial exploitation.  By 1917, the Sturgeon  had declined to such
a low level that only 128 Ibs. (probably one or two fish) were landed
by the combined effort of 63 commercial vessels fishing from Cuyahoga
County (40).

From the above discussion, it is apparent that the deterioration of
fish populations and water quality were occurring simultaneously.
By 1900, the combined effects of physical obstructions, draining,
siltation, and the municipal and industrial wastes had nearly
extirpated most fish species along the near-shore areas of Lake Erie in
the vicinity of the Cuyahoga River.  Apparently, the lower Cuyahoga
itself was devoid of fish life.

The popular opinion of the general public is that the decline of fish
                                  28

-------
 populations  in  the  Cleveland  area  of Lake  Erie  is  of  recent  origin.
 This  is  simply  not  so.   The actual decline in population  size  of
 some  species  of fishes began  before 1820.   By 1850 many local  populations
 had become drastically reduced.  By 1900 the populations  of  many
 species  were  on the verge  of  extirpation.   Certain species such as
 the Muskellunge, Channel Darter  (Percina copelandi),  Sand Darter,
 Pugnose  Minnow  and  Smallmouth Blackbass had almost disappeared from
 the area near Cleveland.

 The production  of fishes from the  river drainages  and the near-shore
 areas of Lake Erie  had become critically low.

 By 1900, two  species of  fishes had been extirpated from all  of Lake
 Erie, the Popeye Shiner  (Notropis  ariommus) and  the Gilt  Darter
 Percina  evides).  In the Cleveland area, many species were already
 extirpated, such as the  Spotted Gar (Lepisosteus oculatus),  Bigmouth
 Buffalofish  (Ictobius cyprinellus), Flathead Catfish  (Pylodictus olivaris),
 Tadpole  Madtom  (Noturus  gyrinus) and Longear Sunfish  (Lepomis  megalotis
 peltastes).

 Changes  Between 1900 and 1970

 Between  1900  and 1970, there  was a continued decline  in abundance of
 several  of the  remaining species.   Others,  such  as Carp (Cyprinus carpio)
 and Goldfish  (Carassius  auratus) had been  introduced  and  were  becoming
 increasingly  abundant.   Rainbow Smelt  (Osmerus mordax) had gained access
 to Lake  Erie  by 1936 and was  increasing in abundance.  The Eastern
 Gizzard  Shad  (Dorosoma cepedianum)  was rapidly replacing  the waning
 populations of  the  Mooneye (Hiodon tergisus).

 Hartman  (37)  adequately  describes  the  trends of valuable  food  species
 during this period.  He  states:

          "...since 1925,  the fisheries for lake herring,
          lake  whitefish,  sauger and blue  pike have also
          disappeared.   Today the  important walleye
          population is  exhibiting  highly  variable year-
          class success  from  year  to year.

                In place  of those lost resources, other
          species have thrived or  even had explosive
          abundance.  Sizable population of medium-value
          yellow perch, white bass, and channel catfish
          still exist in the  lake.  But the fish business
          is becoming more strongly dominated by such
          lower-valued species as  carp, smelt,  and fresh-
          water drum."

A similar decline of non-food species  has also occurred,   and in many
                                 29

-------
instances the number of species involved is much greater.

At present, the Cleveland area may be seen to exhibit almost
every possible situation which would adversely affect fish populations.
Dams are present in every river drainage, often near the river mouth;
chemical pollution is at such a critical level that the Cuyahoga
River occasionally catches fire.  Municipal pollutants have caused
most area beaches to be closed (except for those which are enclosed
and chlorinated), and in some areas the organic material makes low
dissolved oxygen levels commonplace.  Siltation is a major problem,
and dredging is essential  for the passage of ships, yet land use
practices enhance erosion  and channelization proposals continue to
be considered.  Forest canopy, which formerly shaded the streams
is almost non-existent and most streams are warm and turbid.  The
formerly abundant  aquatic vegetation has nearly disappeared and swamps
have been replaced by homes and factories.  Shoreline marshes are
either being drained, filled or contaminated with industrial wastes
(eg salt, oil, etc.).  Chemical and thermal discharges of the Cuyahoga
River and lakeshore at times results in fish kills.  (Tables 1,2).

Spawning grounds for nearly all species of fishes have either been
covered by silts, been made inaccessible by both physical or "chemical
obstructions,  or been drained.  At this point in time, nearly 50%
of the former fish fauna of the Cleveland Metropolitan Area are
extirpated, endangered or rare.

It is important to note that the destruction of the Greater Cleveland
fisheries was a gradual process, beginning after 1830.  We have already
indicated that many of our native species were nearly extirpated by
1850  (Muskellunge), others by 1900  (Sturgeon) and still others (Blue
Pike, Burbot) by 1960.

It is more important to realize that almost all of  the species of
fishes, formerly inhabiting the Cleveland Metropolitan Area, are still
present, even though in limited numbers.  The generally accepted
attitude that only Carp, Drum  (Sheepshead, Aplodinotus grunniens)  and
Yellow Perch are present in the Cleveland Lake Erie  area  is erroneous.
It is our opinion  that should  the water  quality and  the environmental
requirements of fishes be restored, the  populations  and diversity  of
fishes would recover in a few years.  We believe that many  species
are  in a very precarious position at this  time, and  that  it is
essential  that  the Cleveland   area  water quality and habitat be restored
quickly.  Otherwise, we predict that the several additional species
will become  extirpated from the area within  the next few  years.

Since the  results  of this report  indicate   that the fish  fauna of
the  Cleveland Metropolitan area can be  restored, it is  imperative
that attempts to accomplish this  task be undertaken.   In  an area  such
as  the Cuyahoga River  or Cleveland  Harbor, where current  attitude  is
                                  30
                                  ,,1—	,.,„.

-------
      Table 1 :   Chloride Levels of some Lake Erie Tributaries in 1904
                               ( mg/1)
                          (from Volume I )
Location
    Date
Chloride
Detroit River, South of
      Grosse lie

Maumee River, near the mouth

Portage River, Woodville, Ohio

Sandusky River, near Tiffin,
      Ohio
July 12, 1904


August 27, 1904

September 11, 1904

September 11, 1904
       3.00


      24.60

  23,240.00

     410.00
                                31

-------
Table  2:  Loadings to Lake Erie via the Cleveland Harbor and
           Cuyahoga River Dredgings from July 1, 1966 to
           July 1, 1967.

                                         (from Volume I)

                  (Quantities expressed in tons)
Constituent
COD
BOD
5
Chlorine Demand
(15 minutes)
Volatile Solids
Oils and Greases
Phosphorus
Nitrogen
Iron
Silica
Total Dry Solids
From
River
110,000
7,100
14,000
58,000
16,000
1,860
2,300
51,000
270,000
460,000
From
Harbor
19,000
1,000
2,400
13,000
1,600
300
320
9,000
140,000
200,000
Total
Amounts
129,000
8,100
16,400
71,400
17,600
2,160
2.620
60,000
410,000
660,000
                           32

-------
that no fishes are present, the restoration of fish populations
would be  a striking example of pollution abatement and restoration
within the City.  Such an accomplishment would be of significance
to the area, the State and the Nation.
                                33

-------
OJ
        Figure 4:  Effluent into a Stream Tributary of Lake Erie


                 Hot water  effluents  in upper sections of Lake Erie  tributary  streams  often contain
                 chemical pollutants  in addition  to heat.  Tributary waters  are warmed and many species
                 are killed during winter and spring in  large numbers.

-------
                              SECTION  V

                     METHODOLOGY OF DATA ACQUISITION
LITERATURE SEARCH

To determine the historical changes in both the distribution and
abundance of each species of fish inhabiting the Cleveland Metropolitan
area, an intensive literature search was undertaken. The past conditions
of the Cleveland fish fauna was documented in several ways.  Many
historical documents were utilized, these from the collections of the
Western Reserve Historical Society, the Cleveland Museum of Natural
History Library and others.  These included the field notes of several
members of the Moses Cleaveland Survey Party(1797-1798), local
newspapers of the 1800's, publications of scientists of the early era
such as Rafinesque and J. P. Kirtland, and the field notes of 20th
Century scientists such as Milton B. Trautman.

Certain of the information concerning the early fauna of the area was
interpolated from the writings of the early pioneers, surveyors and
naturalists of the early 1800's who wrote of the conditions elsewhere
in Ohio.  This information, often concerning streams and areas of Lake
Erie adjacent to the study area, was utilized in the historical
discussion contained in Section VI of this publication.

More recent information was gathered from publications, the records
of commercial fishermen, unpublished manuscripts and theses, and the
collections of local museums and Universities. Discussions  with local
fishermen and residents were also  helpful in determining the recent
changes which had occurred with the distribution and abundance of the
fish fauna.

More than 500 documents pertaining to the region or individual members
of the fauna were utilized during the literature search.  Several
hundred of these are presently filed at the John Carroll University,
Department of Biology and/or The Sears Library, Case-Western Reserve
University. Approximately 160 of these are cited in this publication.

FIELD COLLECTIONS

The field collections were conducted in the nearshore areas of Lake Erie,
and in the drainages of the Rocky, Chagrin and Cuyahoga rivers.  During
the period from June 1, 1971 through December 31, 1972, more than 200
collections were made at various sites,  some of which were sampled
repeatedly. A variety of techniques were used, often several at a
site during a single collection.  Over 77,000 specimens of fishes were
                                 35

-------
collected and examined.  All except approximately 7,000 were
subsequently released.

Specimens of each species collected were preserved and placed in the
John Carroll University Museum, Vertebrate Collections or in The Ohio
State University, Museum of Zoology.  These specimens will serve to be
a permanent record of the species present during the study and shall be
maintained for reference or study by other investigators.  The John
Carroll Collections are maintained by Dr. Andrew M. White, Biology
Department, and the Ohio State collections are under the direction of
Dr. Ted Cavender, Zoology Department.
Sampling Techniques

Samples were taken in the deeper waters employing an 18-1/2 foot
outboard motorboat, the "Noturus". In deeper areas of the lower river
drainages, rowboats were often utilized.  During periods of heavy seas,
especially during the winter, a chartered commercial fishing vessel
was used.  In order to insure that the greatest variety of fishes were
collected, several sampling techniques were utilized, depending upon
the conditions at the sample site.  Often, more than one technique
was employed during a collection. These various techniques are described
as follows:

     1.  Gill Nets

         Experimental gill nets were used in the open Lake, the deeper
         portions near the shoreline, and in the lower sections of the
         river drainages.  These nets were 125 feet in length, 6 feet
         in depth, and consisted of five panels of varied stretch mesh
         sizes ( 1 in., 1-1/2 in., 2 in., 3 in., 4 in. ).

         Stations were sampled with experimental gill nets for periods
         of 24 to 48 hours.  In some cases, additional gill nets were
         utilized, these having stretch mesh sizes of 2, 2-3/4, 3-1/2,
         4-1/2, 5, 6, 8, 10 or 12 inch stretch.  As these larger sizes
         were not used routinely in the sampling procedure, the fishes
         collected by these nets were included only in the distribution
         data and have been disregarded in the evaluation of relative
         abundance and species diversity.

         It was difficult to sample in the shallow waters of the Lake
         and lower rivers due to the interference on the part of
         recreational boaters and sport fishermen.  The gill nets
         therefore, were always set between 0-7 feet from the bottom,
         and at least 10 feet below the surface. Occasional samples
                                 36

-------
Figure 5 :   Gill net samples being collected in the Cleveland
            Harbor during January.
                            37

-------
    were taken in these areas by setting nets for short periods in
    the early morning hours or at night.  Crews would then remain
   . with the nets insuring that fishermen or boaters did not
    become entangled.

    A considerable number of samples in the upper and middle
    portions of the rivers were taken with the aid of short (125')
    gill nets.  Often large pools were sampled by placing one of
    these nets across the pool, and then swimming in the pool in
    order to frighten the fishes into the net.  In this manner,
    several species were collected that were extremely difficult
    to capture by other methods.

    Many samples were not included in the data concerning the
    relative abundance and some were completely disregarded as
    representative since high  winds and storms frequently filled
    the nets with trash and debris.  This often caused the nets to
    roll and collapse; or tore large holes in the gill net, thereby
    reducing its efficiency.

2.  Trawling

    Trawling samples were taken in order to collect species that
    were either too small to capture with the gill nets or were
    not readily collected by that technique.   Trawling was difficult
    to accomplish in the study area, especially in lower rivers and
    the Cleveland Harbor,  because of the great quantity of rocks,
    trash and debris on the bottom.  A limited amount of trawling
    was accomplished and this information is  included in the
    distribution data only, since most attempts at these collections
    were considered to be unrepresentative.

    The trawl utilized in the collection of this data was a 16 foot
    semiballoon otter trawl equipped with mud rollers.

3.  Fyke Nets

    Fyke nets were utilized on a limited basis due to the heavy
    use of the study area by recreational boaters and sport
    fishermen.  Tampering,  theft and boating  accidents due to the
    obstruction of waterways  invalidated most of the samples.  The
    possibility of boating accidents would have created a public
    relations problem in many areas.  Fishes  collected by the
    Fyke nets are included in the distribution data only.

    Fyke nets were successfully used in certain areas of the upper
    and middle portions of rivers,  and in these cases the nets were
    set for periods of 24 hours.  The nets consisted of 4 foot hoops
    and twenty foot wings.   The mesh was of 1/2 inch stretch mesh.
                            38

-------
u>
             Figure 6:   Fyke Net Sample  Being Collected  in a  Pool  in  a Tributary  Stream.

-------
4.  Seining

    The shallow beaches along the Lake Erie shoreline and shallow
    areas within the marinas and harbors were sampled with seines
    and a crew of four men.

    In the river drainages,  seining was the most effective method
    of collection, and was utilized extensively. Seining in the
    streams was accomplished using three man crews.   All available
    habitats were sampled within  1/2 mile areas both upstream and
    downstream of the station.  Depending upon the characteristics
    of the area, a variety of seines were utilized.  These included
    the following:
            A.   A 50.foot, 1/2 inch mesh seine with a 4 X 4 foot
                 bag. The seine is 4 feet high.

            B.   A 26 foot, 1/4 inch mesh seine with a 4 X 4 foot
                 bag. The seine is 4 feet high.

            C.   A 16 foot, 1/4 inch mesh seine with a 4 X 4 foot
                 bag. The seine is 4 feet high.

            D.   An 8 foot Common Sense seine, 4 feet high with
                 1/4 inch mesh.

            E.   A 4 X 4 foot fry net with 1/16  inch mesh. This
                 seine constructed of "Ace" netting.

    Of the fishes collected by seining, approximately 95% were
    identified at the collection site and then returned to the
    stream. The remainder were placed into a solution of 6%
    formalin and returned to the laboratory for confirmation and
    to be used as representative specimens.

5.  Sport and Commercial Catches

    No attempt was made to actively survey the catch of either
    sport or  commercial fishermen. In some localities however,
    certain species were observed only in these catches. These
    data have been included in the distribution of species and
    are not incorporated into the relative abundance data. At
    times, only persons engaged in these activities observed some
    species. These reports were considered valid only when supported
    by a clear, dated photograph or the specimen itself (or portions
    of the specimen which could identify it to species).

    The records of the Cleveland area commercial catch  and the
    Ohio Division of Wildlife gill net surveys have been considered
                            40

-------
Vy^tjifii, %fS"K;-3^
      Figure  7:   Seining in  the Cleveland Harbor  Shallows.

-------
          valid and have been utilized  as a source of recent data.

      6. Direct Observations

          •Observations of fishes without supporting collections were,
          in almost every case, considered to be invalid.  Only the
          observation of a species having unique characteristics was
          accepted, and then only if reported by a reliable observer.
          Such species as the Longnose Gar were accepted while species
          such as the Common Emerald Shiner, Bluegill Sunfish or White
          Sucker were not  accepted unless substantiated by a specimen.


LABORATORY TECHNIQUES AND METHODOLOGY

Coefficient of Condition

Fishes utilized in the calculation of the Coefficient of Condition (K)
were collected and then returned  to the laboratory on ice.  The
specimens were  weighed as soon as they reached the laboratory. Weights
were taken with  a Mettler Balance, and were recorded to the nearest
gram.

Lengths were also taken in the laboratory, as soon as  the specimen was
weighed. Lengths were recorded in millimeters, using a standard  fish
measuring board, obtained from Wildco of Michigan.

Data was entered into the Burroughs 5700 computer located at John Carroll
University where the calculations were made.  The standard foumula for
the calculation of K was utilized. The formula is given below:


                       K =  W( 105) / L3
              where    W = Weight in grams
                       L = Length in millimeters, and the standard
                            length is used.
The age of certain species was  determined by standard techniques of the
reading of scale annuli.  Specimens of scales were taken from fishes to
be aged and stored in envelopes upon which the pertinent data was
recorded.  Scale impressions were made of several scales from each sample
by the techniques described by  Smith (140). Annuli were read using a
Fish scale projector and magnification equipment ( Eberbach, Inc).
                                   42

-------
 Species Diversity  Index

 The  species diversity  index(calculated)was based  on  either  gill  net
 or seining samples. The  two  techniques were not compatable  relative  to  catch
 per  unit of effort and therefore,  samples were treated as distinct data.

 Gill net samples were  all  converted  to a catch of 24 hours  duration  and
 with 1000 feet of  experimental net.  Often this necessitated the  multiplic-
 ation of a collection, but more often, samples were  taken with nets  of
 1400 feet.  The data was relatively  uniform throughout   the collecting
 period as pertains to  the  size of  meshes and length  of the  net.

 Seining samples were converted to  a  standard of one  hour of effort.  Since
 the  crews utilized only one  seine  at a time this  resulted in a rather
 uniform conversion of  data.

 The  species diversity  index  calculated is that of Shannon-Weaver. The
 formula utilized is presented below, and is compatable with that used
 by the other investigators involved  in the Phase  one project.
                      D = -dii/n) Iog2 (n±/n)


               where    n.^ = the number of individuals in the i species
                        n  = the total number of individuals in all species

In addition, the maximum diversity was calculated, in order to provide an
assessment   of species richness.  This was calculated according to the
formula:

                      d"    = Iog0 S
                       max      2
               where  S = the number of species present.


Equitability was calculated between the diversity and maximum diversity
and is presented  as the value of E.  this was calculated according to
the formula:

                      E =   D  / Iog2 S
                                 43

-------
                                                      >?.'^-;^, •.;'
                                                            ,        .
                                                         • *• -;',- ,;>'-.'   V;>'
                                                             • v/.v™ •,-,„,; .1 ^.j
Figure 8:   Gill Netting in Streams.
            Gill net collections  were made in areas  of streams where
            seining or fyke net  collections were  impractical due  to
            depth or substrate.
                                44

-------
                           SECTION  VI

                  STUDY RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
Utilizing all of the methods described, more than  77,000 specimens
of fishes were captured and examined. All except approximately 7,000
of these were subsequently released. These latter specimens are
currently preserved in the museums of the John Carroll University,
University Heights, Ohio or The Ohio State University Museum of
Zoology, Columbus, Ohio. They will be maintained by these museums
for future documentation and/or research.

The results of this study were primarily intended to provide a firm
baseline of both past and present distribution and abundance of fishes
in the Cleveland Metropolitan area. A total of 107 species and
subspecies are included in the following discussion, representing
60 per cent of all species of fishes known to have occurred in the
state of Ohio.
Individual Species Accounts, Past and Present

In discussing these 107 species and subspecies, we recognize that
fish populations fluctuate, sometimes radically, from year to year.
Realizing this we feel that a few years data are insufficient to
discuss abundance except in relative terms. Therefore, the terminology
such as "abundant" or "common" are necessarily vague, and are
intended only to provide gross quantitative measures. For those who
wish to examine the actual numbers of each species collected, these
figures are presented in tabular form at the end of the discussion.
In general, our definition of the terms utilized in the discussion
is as follows:

       (1)   Extremely Abundant

             present in huge concentrations; utilizing the proper
             technique, they are normally extremely easy to collect
             and comprise a major percentage of most collections.

       (2)   Abundant

             present in fairly large concentrations; occurring in
             most collections, sometimes in considerable numbers.

       (3)   Common

             sufficiently numerous to be present, at least in some
             numbers, in almost every collection.
                                45

-------
        (4)   Uncommon

             usually present in small numbers, at least a few
             individuals occurring in some collections ,

        (5)   Rare or Commercially Extirpated

             either present in only a very few collections and
             then represented by only one or a few individuals; or
             when the numbers captured commercially are so few
             as to be economically unprofitable.

        (6)   Scientifically Extirpated

             a species is considered to be scientifically extirpated
             if it was not taken by any type of scientific or
             commercial collection technique, regardless of the
             effort to do so.

        (7)   Probably Extirpated

             a species is considered to be probably extirpated
             when no specimens have been captured for several years
             despite a determined effort. It should be understood
             that in such a large body of water as Lake Erie, it
             is possible for a species to survive for years in a
             small, isolated area of favorable habitat. As such, it
             might be undetected by ichthyologists but increase
             again in the future if favorable conditions should
             once again become available. Therefore, it is difficult
             to state unequivocably that any species is extinct in
             Lake Erie.

Many species of fishes are highly migratory and may enter an area
only occasionally, sometimes in an annual cycle.  In order to
indicate these conditions, the terminology described above is further
qualified at times by the adjective Seasonally. Where applicable,
such a designation is given immediately following the evaluation
of abundance.

The adjective Locally is used to qualify a species which has a very
specific habitat requirement. Such a species may be restricted in its
range throughout the study area, but may be abundant in limited areas.
This qualification immediately follows the evaluation of abundance.

The primary habitation (Lake, Stream, Ubiquitous) is also given for
each species. This is essential to an adequate understanding of the
distributions as presented in the following discussion. It should be
                                46

-------
noted however, that the preferred habitat for each species refers
to the habitat of the species within the study area. In other
parts of Ohio or elsewhere, the species may be found in different
areas. In this discussion the following general definitions are
utilized:

       (1)   Lake

             Refers to the preference of the adult members of a
             species for lentic or lower river waters.

       (2)   Stream

             Refers to the preference of the adult members of a
             species for lotic waters.

       (3)   Ubiquitous

             Used when the adult members of a species occur in both
             lentic and lotic habitats as residents  (not as strays only)


In reading the following discussion it should be remembered that the
data contained in Volume I of this report was printed prior to the
completion of Volume II. The authors of Volume I were unaware of
the data that was to be collected in the summer of 1974. Therefore,
the numbers of specimens, and the total number of species in areas
such as the Cleveland Harbor are increased in Volume II. This is
due to additional data, and not to error on the part of the authors
of Volume I.

-------
INDIVIDUAL SPECIES ACCOUNTS OF THE STUDY AREA FISH FAUNA


1.  SILVER LAMPREY, Ichthyomyzon unicuspis !

    RARE 2
LAKE
Before the breeding streams were dammed and polluted immense numbers of
this parasitic lake species of lamprey ascended streams for the purpose
of spawning.

A decrease in abundance was observable by 1900 and this decline has
continued until the present.

An individual was collected during June of this survey. This specimen was
taken  in the Chagrin River, presumably ascending in an attempt to spawn.
Additional specimens were collected in areas adjacent to the study area
by Lake Erie commercial fishermen.  In discussions with these fishermen
we were informed that the species is rarely observed,  and that during
most years they collected fewer than twenty-five individuals.  This
species and the Sea Lamprey are often confused; therefore, the total
observations of these fishermen most probably represent a composite of
both species.
                                        4
  (References;  66, 101, 119, 147, 150)
2.   SEA LAMPREY, Petromyzon marinus
    RARE
LAKE
Apparently this parasitic species invaded Lake Erie after 1930 (147)
but according to available records it has never become abundant.  Its
confusion with the Silver Lamprey has led to the belief that it was more
   Scientific and common names from Bailey, et. al., 1970;  for
   subspecific status see Trautman, 1957.

   Relative abundance in the study area during this survey.

   Preferred habitation within the study area.

   These references are all of the available literature sources concerning
   the species in the Cleveland area of which we are aware. For historical
   information concerning the species in Ohio see reference number 147;
   for recent information concerning Lake Erie status see 150; all other
   references cited are specific.  Reference numbers within the text are
   cited for the readers benefit and may be utilized for fuller and
   more comprehensive documentation of the specific subject or incident.
                                 48

-------
common than is actually the case.  Preserved specimens indicate that
it has always been rare in Lake Erie.

Two specimens were collected during this survey, both in the Chagrin
River, apparently ascending the stream in an attempt to spawn.  Two
specimens were collected in Lake Erie, adjacent to the study area,
near Avon Lake, Ohio.  One was attached to a Carp, the other to a
Freshwater Drum.  The same factors of siltation, damming and pollution
which have contributed to the decline of the Silver Lamprey have limited
the success of the Sea Lamprey.

  (References;  37, 147, 150)

3.  AMERICAN BROOK LAMPREY, Lampetra lamottei

    LOCALLY COMMON                                             STREAM

This stream inhabiting, non-parasitic lamprey may be readily collected
during its limited spawning season.  At other times of the year, (as
ammocoetes, the larval form) it may be obtained by digging in the stream
bottoms.  No attempt was made to collect this species, although a
single adult was seined in the Chagrin River during 1972.  The species
is recorded from numerous localities in the upper portions of the
Chagrin River drainage (147) and in these areas it probably occurs
commonly.

  (References;  147, 150)

4.  LAKE STURGEON, Acipenser fulvescens

    SCIENTIFICALLY EXTIRPATED                                  LAKE

This large species, sometimes attaining a weight of 200 pounds, was
an important food source before 1900.  It spawned in large numbers
in streams such as the Cuyahoga River prior to 1830.  According to
Kirtland (95), spawning runs had ceased in the Cuyahoga on or before
1850 and the numbers of individuals in the open lake had drastically
declined.  This decrease in numerical abundance is obviously the result
of stream obstructions which prevented sturgeons from reaching the
upstream spawning grounds.  The deterioration of the Cleveland shore-
line accounts for its early avoidance of the areas near the shore.

After 1900, sturgeon populations which remained continued to decline.
In the early 1900's only a few specimens were taken per year by
commercial fishermen and by 1930 the species was considered extremely
rare, only occasional  specimens being observed per year.

No documented specimens have been recorded in the Cleveland area for
several years.  A concerted effort to collect one was made during this
study but none was taken.  The species is currently a member of the
                                 49

-------
Ohio Endangered Species List.

  (References;  70, 74, 95, 119, 147, 150)

5.  SPOTTED GAR, Lepisosteus oculatus^

    PROBABLY EXTIRPATED                                        LAKE

Kirtland (95) stated that "a specimen was taken near Cleveland..."
about 1850 or 1851.

None  has been collected in the Cleveland area since.  This species
is also considered to be an Ohio Endangered Species.

  (References;  96, 119, 147, 150)

6.  LONGNOSE GAR, Lepisosteus osseus

    UNCOMMON                                   LAKE AND LOWER RIVERS

This gar was formerly numerous  in areas where aquatic vegetation was
abundant.  Lesser populations were present in other areas along the
shoreline and middle sections of the river drainages wherever deep
pools were present.

After 1900, disappearance  of the aquatic vegetation and increased
siltation resulted in  the  drastic decline of this species.

At present, small  populations occur  in and near  the mouths of the
Rocky and Chagrin  rivers,  especially where the water is quiet and
vegetated.  The majority of the specimens of Longnose Gar were taken
in the marina  channels  of  the Chagrin.  This gar occasionally enters
the  open lake  and  individuals were recorded in some Lake Erie shore-
line marinas.   Two specimens were collected within  the Cleveland
Harbor.

   (References;   68, 97,  115, 119, 147, 150)

7.   BOWFIN, Amia  calva

     UNCOMMON                                   LAKE AND LOWER RIVERS

Originally  the Bowfin  was  present in areas of  low  gradient streams  and
embayments which were  heavily vegetated.  Kirtland  reported  that  the
species  was  abundant  in Lake Erie prior  to 1851  (98).   Since then it
has  declined in abundance  greatly.

During this  survey two specimens  were collected  in the  lower Chagrin
River.   A few individuals  were  reported  by anglers  who  caught  them
 in the lower Rocky River.   Its  present scarcity  is  probably  the  result
                                  50

-------
Figure 9:  Distribution of Lampreys,  Gar and Bowfin
                    LAKE ERIE
                           Cuyahoga  \f River
COLLECTIONS AND OBSERVATIONS




 O Silver Lamprey




 Q Sea Lamprey




 ^ Longnose Gar




 • Bowfin

-------
of the decrease in aquatic vegetation and the filling of the shoreline
marshes.

  (References;  64, 67, 98, 115, 119, 147, 150)

8.  AMERICAN EEL, Anguilla rostrata

    PROBABLY EXTIRPATED                                        LAKE

Kirtland (69) heard rumors of eels in Lake Erie waters after the
completion of the Welland Canal in 1829.  It was not until sometime
later (date unrecorded) that he examined an eel caught in the Cuyahoga
River in Cleveland (147).  This may have been the same one that Garlick
mentioned, that was taken "...last year (1856)..." in the Cuyahoga
River (35).  In 1882, the Ohio Fish Commission began planting elvers
in Ohio waters and by 1887 they mentioned the capture of eels throughout
Ohio, especially in the Lake Erie drainages.

The species was fairly numerous following their introduction but we
have few records and little information realtive to eels after 1900.

Recently, no records of eels in the study area have been cited in the
literature and none was taken during the survey.  It is assumed that
the stockings of eels did not produce a self-sustaining population in
this area.

  (References;  35, 69, 119, 147, 150)

9.  ALEWIFE, Alosa pseudoharengus

    COMMON                                                     LAKE

This herring was first reported from Lake Erie in 1931, having probably
invaded through the Welland Canal.  The species has not become as
numerous in Lake Erie as it has in others of the Great Lakes.

It continues to be uncommon as an adult in the immediate Cleveland
area but during the survey large numbers of fry were collected in the
shallow areas along the shoreline.  Adults were most frequently
encountered during the colder months of the year and the largest numbers
of fry were taken near the mouth of the Chagrin River.

  (References;  32, 147, 150)

10.  EASTERN GIZZARD SHAD, Dorosoma cepedianum

     EXTREMELY ABUNDANT                                     UBIQUITOUS

Kirtland  (75) considered this species as a recent invader  (circa 1851)
                                 52

-------
into Lake Erie from the Ohio River drainage via the recently constructed
canals.  However, it is now generally believed by ichthyologists to
have been present in Lake Erie throughout historic times.  It is
generally assumed that then the population was low and largely unconcen-
trated, and was therefore, unnoticed.

With the advent of power plants producing thermal discharges, shad
have become increasingly observable because of their tendency to
concentrate at such outflows during the winter.  Their inability to
survive rapid temperature changes has resulted in massive kills.  The
presumed increase in plankton, their principal source of food, has
probably resulted in a great increase in numbers.

At present this species is extremely abundant in the Cleveland area,
congregating in immense numbers at warm water discharges and near the
mouth of the Cuyahoga River during winter.  In summer, it retires to
the deeper portions of the lake and is frequently absent from the
Cleveland Shoreline.  During the survey, this species was represented
in approximately half of the collections from Lake Erie and the lower
portions of the three river drainages.

  (References;  64, 75, 119, 147, 150, 163)

11.  MOONEYE, Hiodon tergisus

     SCIENTIFICALLY EXTIRPATED                                 LAKE

Kirtland stated in 1847 (73), and again in 1851  (103), that "...this
fish abounds both in Lake Erie and the Ohio River.  It was not very
highly valued for food."  Commercially, it was then and is now considered
among the "trash" species and no accurate commercial records of its
abundance exist.

Apparently, the species remained abundant until  after 1935, after which
it decreased sharply.  During the depression of  the early 1930fs many
Cleveland area residents utilized these as a food source, spearing them
in great numbers near hot water outflows.

Although a careful search was made for this species during this survey,
both in Cleveland and adjacent areas, not a single specimen was
collected.  Apparently, the increase in siltation, turbidity and the
decline in suitable prey have contributed to the sudden disappearance of
this species.

  (References;  55, 73, 103, 119, 147, 150)
                                 53

-------
Figure 10:  Distribution of Alewife and Eastern Gizzard Shad
                                                                                              agrin  l^River
                         LAKE ERIE
                          Cuyahoga \*  River
                                                                     OLLECTIONS AND OBSERVATIONS




                                                                        Alewife




                                                                        Eastern Gizzard Shad

-------
12.  CHINOOK SALMON, Oncorhynchus tshawytscha

     SEASONALLY COMMON                                         LAKE

This species was first introduced unsuccessfully into Lake Erie waters
in 1875.

After 1890, it was occasionally reintroduced into the lake waters
(150).  The first successful introductions occurred in the 1970's
when large numbers were introduced into the East Branch of the
Chagrin River.

Commercial fishermen reported fair catches of salmons during the survey
from areas adjacent to Cleveland, presumably of both Chinook and Coho.
Fourteen adult Chinook were collected during this survey from five
localities, including Cleveland Harbor, and recently, sport fishermen
at Gorden Park (near station five) caught many salmon which we assume
to be chinooks.  Collections indicate that the stocked fingerlings
remain in the Chagrin River until the March following their release.
Downstream migration occurs after this and by May none was collected
in the streams.  It is doubtful that any reproduction is occurring in
the study area.

   (References;  9, 55, 150)

13.  COHO SALMON, Oncorhynchus kisutch

     SEASONALLY COMMON                                         LAKE

As with the Chinook, this species was stocked irregularly without success
between 1876 and 1930 (150).

It was first successfully introduced into Lake Erie by planting
thousands of fingerlings in the Chagrin River during the years 1968
to 1970.

In 1972 this species was captured in Lake Erie by commercial fishermen,
sometimes in fair numbers.  Specimens also were taken in the Chagrin
River, Rocky River, Cleveland Harbor and Edgewater Park.  Apparently,
the species does not spawn in the Cleveland area, and the maintenance
of the Lake Erie population is entirely the result of restocking.

   (References;  9, 55, 136, 150)

14.  BROWN TROUT, Salmo trutta

     RARE                                                      STREAM

This species is not native to North America.
                                 55

-------
Brown trout have been sporadically stocked in Ohio tributaries since
1934 and possibly before, with little success (147).

During the survey, approximately 50 adults escaped into the Chagrin
River drainage from a trout club in Geauga County.  Occasional specimens
are captured by sportsmen fishing in the Chagrin; and it is assumed
that such specimens are the results of similar escapes from stocked
ponds. One specimen was collected in the East Branch, Chagrin River.

  (References;  147, 150)

15.   RAINBOW TROUT, Salmo gairdneri

     UNCOMMON                                                  STREAM

This trout was apparently introduced about 1886 with little success
(147).  Its original range was western North America.

The species was successfully introduced recently in the Chagrin
River where thousands of fingerlings were released.  In this river,
collections of many recently stocked fingerlings were made and in
addition, several yearlings were collected.  Successful reproduction
has occurred in at least one of the tributaries of the East Branch,
Chagrin River.  Both adults and very small young were collected at
one site.

Adults of this species are occasionally taken by sportsmen in the lower
Chagrin River and in 1974 we collected two specimens of Rainbow Trout
in the Cleveland Harbor.  As with the Brown Trout, numerous escapes of
large adults occur from the trout clubs in the upper portions of the
Chagrin River.

  (References;  9, 121, 147, 150)

16.   BROOK TROUT, Salvelinus fontinalis

     RARE                                                      STREAM

Kirtland stated that originally "speckled trout" occurred in "...a
branch of the Chagrin River, in Geauga County."

The species was sporadically introduced, unsuccessfully, both inten-
tionally and accidentally between 1900 and 1970.

No specimens were collected during the survey but in 1974 we observed
a single specimen in a tributary of the East Branch, Chagrin River in
Geauga County.  As numerous escapes of this species are also reported
from local trout clubs in the area, it is probable that the species
exists in very snail numbers in the East Branch.  It is doubtful
                                 56

-------
        Figure  11:  Distribution of Salmon and Trout
                                 LAKE  ERIE
Ul
                                                                         COLLECTIONS. AND, OBSERVATIONS




                                                                         A  Coho Salmon




                                                                         ^  Chinook Salmon




                                                                         O  Rainbow Trout




                                                                         ty.  Brown Trout




                                                                         O Brook Trout

-------
that successful reproduction of this species occurs in the study
area.

  (References;  35, 64, 147, 150)

17.   LAKE TROUT, Salvelinus namaycush

     PROBABLY EXTIRPATED                                       LAKE

This trout was formerly considered common (147).  Kirtland (100),
noted its capture before 1850 from Lake Erie near the mouths of the
Cuyahoga and Rocky Rivers.

Apparently the species began to avoid the Cleveland shoreline as
early as 1860, and simultaneously began to decline in Lake Erie.  Its
decline in Lake Erie was steady and by 1950 it had become nearly
extirpated.

Although the decline of this species in other Great Lakes was attributed
to the effects of the Sea Lamprey, it is doubtful that lampreys caused
the Lake Erie decline.  Rather we agree with the suggestion of Hartman
and feel that low dissolved oxygen levels in the deeper portions of
the lake are the significant contributing factor to its decline  (37).
No recent specimens have been reported and none was collected during
the current survey.

  (References;  37, 68, 100, 147, 150)

18.  CISCO or LAKE HERRING, Coregonus artedii

     COMMERCIALLY EXTIRPATED                                   LAKE

According to Garlick  (35),  the species was immensely abundant along
the Cleveland Shoreline prior to  1850.

In 1917 the commercial catch from Cuyahoga County was 3,536,647 pounds
and had a value of $297,030.00 (40).  A drastic decrease  occurred
after 1946 and by  1967 the  total  Ohio catch was reported  to be  5 pounds
(133).  This  species has not recovered from this decline  and local
commercial fishermen currently report only occasional specimens.  No
specimens were  collected during  the  current survey.  The  reasons for
its  decline are speculative.  The principal causes are believed  to be
the  combined  effects of  the deterioration of its spawning habitat due
to siltation  and  the overfishing  during the spawning season.

   (References;  35, 37,  40, 68,  147,  150)
                                 58

-------
 19.   LAKE WHITEFISH,  Coregonus clupeaformis

      COMMERCIALLY EXTIRPATED                                   LAKE

 The  whitefish,  a favorite food species,  was formerly abundant in the
 Cleveland area  especially during the spring and fall.   More than a
 million pounds  annually were brought into Ohio ports prior to 1900.

 This species decreased in abundance during the next two decades but
 remained common.   In  1917,  98,046 pounds were taken in Cuyahoga County.

 This decline continued,  and by 1963 the  total catch for all Ohio ports
 was  only 699 pounds  (40).   No specimens  were collected during the current
 survey  although occasional  whitefishes were reported by local commercial
 fishermen,  captured four  to seven miles  offshore.   Commercial fishermen
 believe that this species avoids turbid  waters.  This  may account for
 the  fact that it  is occasionally taken offshore but not near the shore-
 line in the Cleveland area.

   (References;   37, 40,  64,  67,  147,  150)

 20.   RAINBOW SMELT, Osmerus  m. mordax

      SEASONALLY ABUNDANT                                        LAKE

 This recent invader was first recorded for  Lake  Erie in 1936 and rapidly
 increased  (147).

 Spawning success  in Cleveland is  limited because of the lack of
 suitable spawning grounds.   The  Cleveland population is probably
 supported by production from neighboring streams and adjacent beaches
 (147) .   It  is abundant during early  spring  and  late fall in  all areas
 of the  Cleveland  Shoreline.   The  species is  present in nearly half  of
 our  Lake Erie samples, and  846 individuals  represent nearly  6%  of the
 total fishes  collected in Lake Erie.  Adults  occasionally ascend the
 lower portions  of  all  three  river  drainages  but  do  not contribute
 significantly to  the  total fish  fauna of the  streams.   In late  summer
 and  early fall, young of the  year  are often very numerous in mouths of
 streams  along the  shoreline  and in the Cleveland Harbor.

  (References;  147, 150, 151)

 21.  CENTRAL MUDMLNNOW, Umbra limi

     LOCALLY COMMON                                             STREAM

Although this species was undoubtedly present throughout historic
 times, no specimens were reported in the Cleveland  area before  1890
 (147).
                                 59

-------
Figure 12:  Distribution of Smelt and Mudminnow
                                                                                              Chagrin \River
                              LAKE ERIE
                            Cuyahoga \» River
                                                                 COLLECTIONS AND OBSERVATIONS




                                                                 0  Rainbow Smelt




                                                                 A  Central Mudminnow

-------
A few specimens were recorded after 1900, these  in isolated localities
in the upper portions of  the Cuyahoga and Chagrin River systems.

At present, the populations of Mudminnows are confined to only a  few
limited areas, presumably because of the lack of suitable habitat
elsewhere.  During the survey, Mudminnows were collected in the Chagrin
and Rocky River drainages.  Populations in the swampy portions of  the
Rocky River Reservation  (Metropolitan Park) are  large; those elsewhere
are much smaller.  The species is confined to marshy, heavily vegetated
portions of the river systems, entering Lake Erie only as a stray.
It is severely affected by draining and filling  of swamps.

  (References;  65, 119,  124, 147, 150, 163)

22.  CENTRAL GRASS PICKEREL, Esox americanus vermiculatus

     COMMON                                                    STREAM

Kirtland, in 1845 (107),  (as Esox umbrosus) considered the species
to be present in Lake Erie and some of its tributaries.  Prior to
this time, it was obviously present in such localities as the marshes
of the lower Cuyahoga River, as described by Pease in 1797 (127).

It decreased in abundance after 1900 presumably because of extensive
draining and filling of marshes.

During this survey, it was collected only in the Chagrin River drainage
and the upper reaches of the Cuyahoga River.  It is probably no longer
present along the Lake Erie shoreline.

  (References;  107, 119, 124, 127, 135, 136, 147, 150, 163)

23.  NORTHERN PIKE, Esox lucius

     RARE                                                      LAKE

Little is known concerning the early abundance of the pike in this area
because of the confusion existing between pike and muskellunge.
Obviously it was numerous before the drainage of the extensive marshes
along the shoreline and in the tributaries;  and the damming of tributary
streams.

Apparently,  the pike remained relatively numerous after 1900.   In
1922,  54,425 pounds were brought into Cuyahoga ports.  However, the
muskellunge was included in some of the above poundage as indicated
by the lack of a reported poundage of muskellunge in 1922.

Presently,  extremely small populations persist in and near the mouth of
the Chagrin River,  and in various marinas along the shoreline.   Probably
                                 61

-------
Figure 13:  Distribution of Pikes
                          LAKE ERIE
                                                                  COLLECTIONS AND OBSERVATIONS




                                                                  A  Grass Pickerel




                                                                  0  Northern Pike




                                                                      Great Lakes Muskellunge

-------
limited reproduction occurs in these areas since post-spawn females
were collected in two marinas within the Cleveland Harbor.  The popu-
lations of pike are present in the river and marinas during the entire
year, and during 1973, more than 10 specimens were collected within
the Cleveland Harbor.  While this number may seem extremely low
(and is) we include it here since only three Walleye were collected
during the same period.

   (References;  74, 69, 74, 91, 107, 111, 119, 144, 147, 150)

24.  GREAT LAKES MUSKELLUNGE, Esox m. masquinongy

     COMMERCIALLY EXTIRPATED                                   LAKE

Klippart recorded this species as abundant in Lake Erie in 1830
(111).  Kirtland in 1850 (74), stated that prior to that time
".. .muskellunge often run up the Cuyahoga several miles...".  He
also reported that "...forty years since (1811) this fish was far more
abundant than at present (1850).", and that by 1850 "Muskellunge has
become scarce, and no longer seeks the mouth of the rivers to deposit
its spawn."  The cause of this early decline was obviously the obstruc-
tions (dams) which prevented the reproduction of the species in upstream
marshes.

Ditching, draining and removal of aquatic vegetation also caused a
great decline in the abundance of this species after 1850.

According to the Ohio Division of Wildlife it occurs in very limited
numbers near the mouth of the Chagrin River in spring.  No specimens
were collected by us during the survey, but a single specimen was
taken by an angler in the Chagrin River in 1972.  This was substantiated
by a clear photograph which we have accepted.  Also, one was collected
in 1970 west of Cleveland Harbor by Mr. James Shaefer, of the City
of Cleveland.

   (References;  62, 72, 74, 90, 91, 111, 119, 144, 147, 150)

25.  CARP, Cyprinus carpio

     ABUNDANT                                               UBIQUITOUS

In 1880, applicants in the Cleveland area received shipments of carp
fry from the federal government for stocking purposes.  These were
primarily stocked in private ponds, where many escaped into nearby
streams.

By 1900, probably due to the increased availability of suitable habitat
resulting from enrichment of the water, it became firmly established
                                 63

-------
Figure 14:  Distribution of Carp.
                                                                                                Chagrirl River
                          LAKE ERIE
                                                                 COLLECTIONS AND OBSERVATIONS




                                                                 •  Carp

-------
in Lake Erie and its Cleveland-area  tributaries.  In 1922,  the  Cuyahoga
County catch was 47,021 pounds.

Presently, this species is well established and can be captured in
any waters except those of highest gradients.  It was present in over
a fourth of the total collections made in the survey.  It is most
readily captured when large numbers  of individuals are congregated  in
the lower portions of the rivers, when spawning in spring.  This species
hybridizes with the Goldfish.

  (References;  115, 119, 124, 136,  137, 144, 147, 150, 163)

26.  GOLDFISH, Carassius auratus

     ABUNDANT                                                   LAKE

In 1850, Kirtland suggested that "if a little pains would be taken  to
introduce it into streams and ponds  in this vicinity (Cleveland), it
would soon become as numerous as our common minnows." (76).  In 1885-86,
some Ohio applicants received Goldfish from the federal government
for stocking (147).  The stockings were successful, and the species
has increased in numbers.

After 1900, it continued to increase in abundance.

At present the Goldfish is very abundant in the lower rivers, harbors
and shoreline marinas.  It has been  observed depositing eggs on the
Cleveland Harbor breakwall, on pilings in nearby marinas and in the arm
of the lower Cuyahoga River.  Fry were collected in many locations
including the lower Cuyahoga.  The species interbreeds with the  Carp.

  (References;  76, 115, 120, 135, 136, 147, 150, 163)

27.  GOLDEN SHINER, Notemigonus crysoleucas

     LOCALLY COMMON                                         UBIQUITOUS

Kirtland (70) considered the Golden  Shiner as occurring in most  of  the
ponds and lakes of Ohio and believed it to be a "valuable kind  of
bait for pickerel."  It was abundant in the weedy, sheltered bays and
vegetated marshes adjacent to Lake Erie, and in the vegetated sections
of many of its tributaries (150).

This species gradually decreased in abundance after 1900 as the  swamps
and marshes were drained and aquatic vegetation decreased in amount.

At present, the Golden Shiner is restricted to isolated populations in
heavily vegetated portions of headwater streams,  existing in limited
                                 65

-------
      Figure 15:  Distribution of Goldfish.
Rocky 4 River
                               LAKE ERIE
                                                                                                     Chagrin\River
                                                                       COLLECTIONS AND  OBSERVATIONS
                                                                          Goldfish

-------
      Figure 16:   Distribution of  Golden  Shiner
Rocky l|River
                                                                                                     ChagriWRiver
                            iAKE ERIE
                                                                       COLLECTIONS AND OBSERVATIONS
                                                                           Golden Shiner

-------
populations elsewhere including the lower portions of the tributaries,
and along the shores of Lake Erie.  It is numerous only in the shore-
line marinas.  Especially high populations occur in the Cleveland
Harbor marinas, where the Golden Shiner is one of the most abundant
forage species.

  (References;  70, 119, 124, 147, 150, 163)

28.  HORNYHEAD CHUB, Nocomis biguttatus

     RARE                                                      STREAM

Because of the early confusion between this species and the River Chub,
little is known of its early abundance.  Preserved specimens are
extant that were collected before 1901 (147).

After 1900, it declined greatly in abundance as its preferred habitat
was destroyed by increased siltation in the medium gradient portions
of streams which formerly provided a clean substrate and rooted aquatics.

During this survey, the Hornyhead was recorded from the upper reaches
of the Cuyahoga River, where among profuse aquatic vegetation 15
specimens were taken in a short period.  The species is limited to
streams and was never reported from Lake Erie.

  (References;  66, 119, 147, 150, 163)

29.  RIVER CHUB, Nocomis micropogon

     UNCOMMON                                                  STREAM

Little is known of the abundance of Hornyhead and River Chubs before
1900 because of the inability to satisfactorily distinguish the two
species (147).  However, early collections of specimens from the Rocky
and Chagrin Rivers indicate that the River Chub may have been the most
numerous of the two.

After 1900, there appears to have been a definite decrease in abundance,
as occurred throughout the remainder of Ohio.   As evidenced by museum
specimens, it remained present in all three tributaries, probably
declining with the increase in siltation.

During this survey, it was collected frequently in the clear waters
throughout the Chagrin River system.  One specimen was taken in the
Rocky River and none in the lower Cuyahoga.

  (References;  119, 147, 150)
                                 68

-------
30.  SILVER CHUB, Hybopsis storeriana

     SCIENTIFICALLY EXTIRPATED                                 LAKE

Kirtland, in describing this species, gave its type locality as Lake
Erie, (presumably in the vicinity of  Cleveland), where it was taken
from the deeper waters of the lake.  Some were taken in shore seines
as well.  After midsummer, the young occasionally congregated in
considerable numbers about the mouths of rivers and bays.

Lake Erie populations remained high until after 1955.  Recently, there
has been a drastic decline in this species in all of Lake Erie (150) .

Intensive trawling in the deeper portions of the Cleveland shoreline,
the river mouths and the harbors produced no specimens.  It is assumed
that this once abundant species is now near extirpation in the vicinity
of Cleveland.

   (References;  71, 85, 119, 147, 150)

31.  BIGEYE CHUB, Hybopsis a. amblops

     UNCOMMON                                                  STREAM

Kirtland did not recognize this species and there are few preserved
specimens before 1900.  However, there is no reason to doubt that it
was at least as numerous in this area as in adjacent sections of Ohio.

Since 1900, the species has continued to decrease in abundance throughout
Ohio and apparently in this area also.

Although  intensive seining was done in the Chagrin and Rocky Rivers
it was collected only in the middle portion of the Chagrin.  This species
may be present in limited numbers in the Rocky River and the upper
portions of the Cuyahoga River.  Its decline in numbers is apparently
continuing.

   (References;  119, 147, 150)

32.  WESTERN BLACKNOSE DACE, Rhinichthys atratulus meleagris

     LOCALLY ABUNDANT                                          STREAM

It is believed by most ichthyologists that this dace was originally
abundant only in the higher gradient streams east of the Allegheny
Front Escarpment.

It was locally abundant after 1900 in smaller tributaries east of the
Escarpment.  Their numbers have recently decreased, as they did else-
                                 69

-------
        Figure 17:   Distribution of River Chub,  Bigeye  Chub  and  Blacknose  Dace
                                   LAKE ERIE
Rocky
                                                                         COLLECTIONS AND OBSERVATIONS




                                                                         A  River Chub




                                                                          O Bigeye Chub




                                                                         A Western Blacknose Dace

-------
where in Ohio, because of intensive ditching and draining.

During the current survey, the species was locally abundant in such
tributaries of the Chagrin River as the East Branch, Griswold Creek
and Aurora Branch.  Also, it was abundant in the tiny tributaries of
the Cuyahoga River, such as Boston Run near Peninsula, Ohio.

  (References;  119, 147, 150, 163)

33.  LONGNOSE DACE, Rhinichthys cataractae

     RARE                                                   UBIQUITOUS

There is no reason to doubt that the species was present on the shores
of Lake Erie and in its tributaries, although no records are extant
for the period before 1900.

It was recorded from the Grand River as early as 1900, but it was
not until 1929 that the species was found to be fairly numerous in the
Chagrin River drainage and along the Lake Erie shore during winter (147).

A small population apparently exists in Lake Erie that returns to the
onshore areas and migrates up certain tributaries during the colder
months.  Intensive seining in suitable habitats along the Lake Erie
shoreline and lower portions of the rivers produced only a few specimens.
These individuals were collected on a riffle in the lower Rocky River
and in isolated areas of the Cleveland Harbor.  It is assumed that the
Lake Erie population utilizing the Cleveland Metropolitan shoreline
has been nearly extirpated.  However, local populations exist in a
limited section of the East Branch of the Chagrin River where they
remain throughout the year.  These populations appear to have been
isolated by the establishment of the Willoughby Dam.

Throughout the year, another isolated population exists along a gravel
bar at the mouth of the Chagrin where both adults and fry were frequently
collected.

  (References;  136, 147, 150)

34.  CREEK CHUB, Semotilus a_. atromaculatus

     ABUNDANT                                                  STREAM

In 1850, (77), Kirtland reported the species to be "abundant in every
brook and river in Ohio."  It was formerly caught by ice fishermen
and considered to be an excellent panfish.

The many records in the local tributaries after 1900 indicate that it
                                71

-------
      Figure 18:  Distribution of Longnose Dace and Creek Chub.
                                 LAKE ERIE
                                                                       COLLECTIONS AND OBSERVATIONS




                                                                       A  Longnose Dace




                                                                       0  Creek Chub
Rocky *River

-------
was still abundant.

This excellent forage and bait chub is presently abundant in all of
the tributary streams of the study area, except the lower Cuyahoga
River which is grossly polluted.  None was taken in Lake Erie during
the survey although it may occur there as an occasional stray.

  (References;  77, 115, 119, 124, 136, 147, 150, 163)

35.  SOUTHERN REDBELLY DACE, Phoxinus erythrogaster

     LOCALLY COMMON                                            STREAM

In 1844, Kirtland stated that during April and May, every stream
swarmed with this species (68).

After 1900, the Redbelly was numerous only in the small tributaries of
the three river systems in the study area where it was an associate of
the Blacknose Dace.  The species continued to decline in numbers and
its populations in many areas were extirpated because of ditching,
dredging and general deterioration of its habitat.

Currently it is taken in some very small, high gradient tributaries of
the Chagrin River.  It was also collected from similar habitats in
the Rocky River drainage, and is probably present in similar tributaries
of the upper Cuyahoga.  This species does not normally inhabit Lake
Erie or the lower portions of the rivers.

  (References;  68, 77, 119, 147, 150, 163)

36.  REDSIDE DACE, Clinostomus elongatus

     LOCALLY COMMON                                            STREAM

In 1841, Kirtland, in the initial description of the Redside Dace
gave the Cuyahoga River as one of the type localities (66).  Even though
few specimens were saved, the species was probably widely distributed.

After 1900, it was recorded in the clear tributaries of the Cuyahoga
and Chagrin Rivers east of the Allegheny Front Escarpment.  Although
preserved specimens are lacking, it probably was more widely distributed
at this time than at present.

During this survey, the Redside Dace, as with the Redbelly Dace, was
collected only in the tiny headwater tributaries.  The species appears
to be declining in numbers and is becoming more limited in distribution.

  (References;  63, 66, 68, 119, 147, 150, 163)
                                  73

-------
37.  PUGNOSE MINNOW, Notropis emiliae

     RARE                                                      STREAM

As represented by specimens taken near the mouth of the Chagrin River,
the Pugnose Minnow was present prior to 1900 (147).

Since then, no records of its presence have been documented anywhere
in Northeastern Ohio, and it was considered by many to have been
extirpated.

During the current study two specimens were collected, one each on
June 6 and 16, 1972, in dense vegetation near the mouth of the Chagrin
River.  This relict population is currently endangered, and no other
population is presently known in northeastern Ohio.  Elsewhere in
Ohio, only a few relict populations exist and the species is considered
to be one of the state's endangered species.

  (References;  62, 147, 150)

38.  COMMON EMERALD SHINER, Notropis a. atheriniodes

     ABUNDANT                                               UBIQUITOUS

There is no reason to question the early abundance of the Emerald
Shiner in Lake Erie prior to 1900.  Kirtland (108) recorded an immense
concentration (schools several miles long) which occurred on October
9-12, 1853 in the shallows in and near the mouth of the Rocky River.

Between 1900 and 1950 there was no indication of a decline or increase
in the numerical abundance of this species.

Currently, this shiner is undoubtedly one of the most important food
sources for piscivorous fishes in the study area, not only in Lake
Erie, but also in its tributaries.  It remains abundant and contributes
more than 18 per cent of the specimens collected from the Lake and lower
sections of rivers in the Cleveland area during this survey.  This
shiner is commercially important since it is the primary live bait
species utilized by sportsmen when fishing for Yellow Perch.  Discussions
with bait dealers indicate that there has been a recent decline in
abundance of this species.  This is supported by Van Meter and Trautman
(150) who state that it is "...possibly decreasing in abundance through-
out Lake Erie." It would be difficult at this time to determine whether
the decline will continue or represents only a temporary population
fluctuation.  Should this indicate the initiation of a continuing trend,
we believe that there would be serious consequences to the loss of
such an important forage species in the Cleveland area.

   (References;   108, 119, 147, 150, 163)
                                 74

-------
       Figure 19:   Distribution of  Redbelly  and  Redside Dace,  Pugnose Minnow
                    and Emerald Shiner.
                                  LAKE  ERIE
-vj
Ul
                                                                                                     Chagrin^River
 RocKy
COLLECTIONS AND OBSERVATIONS

 A Southern Redbelly Dace

 •^ Redside Dace

 O Pugnose Minnow

 A Common Emerald Shiner

-------
39.  ROSYFACE SHINER, Notropis rubellus

     COMMON                                                    STREAM

There are preserved specimens from the area taken before 1900, and
it is assumed that the species was more numerous in the tributaries at
that time.

Although some large collections were taken in the tributaries east
of the Allegheny Front Escarpment since 1900, the species has obviously
become less numerous on the whole and some populations appear to have
been extirpated.

The Rosyface was taken, sometimes in considerable numbers, from the
middle and upper portions of the Chagrin and Rocky rivers.  None was
taken in Lake Erie, although it may occur there as a stray.  Occasion-
ally this species may serve as a food source for some Lake Erie fishes
entering the rivers to feed (such as yearling White  Bass).

   (References;  147, 150, 163)

40.  NORTHERN REDFIN SHINER, Notropis umbratilis

     RARE                                                      STREAM

Although large-sized populations occurred before 1900 in the Lake Erie
tributaries immediately to the east and west, only a few individuals
have been recorded from the study area.

Since then and  prior to 1955, Redfins have been taken at the mouth of
the Chagrin and from the middle section of the Cuyahoga River.

Despite intensive seining, only two specimens were collected during
the current survey;  one in the lower Rocky River, and the  other in
the lower Chagrin.  Apparently, this species has greatly declined in
numbers and appears  to be near extirpation.

   (References;  119, 147, 150, 163)

41.  STRIPED  SHINER, Notropis chrysocephalus

     ABUNDANT                                                  STREAM

In 1847,  Kirtland considered  the  Striped  and Common  Shiners  to be
conspecific  (71).  As  a result, no  evidence  exists indicating which
species was  the most numerous.
                                  76

-------
Since 1900, the species was widely distributed throughout the area,
but presumably was most numerous in the lower sections of the lake
tributaries.  During the 1900 to 1970 period, the habitat of the
Striped Shiner was apparently increasing, whereas that of the Common
Shiner seems to have been decreasing.

Evidence for this change in habitats was observed during this survey.
Since 1950, the Striped Shiner has invaded from lower portions of the
three rivers, into the middle sections of both the Chagrin and Rocky
rivers.  Furthermore, specimens collected in the former range of
the Common Shiner are predominately hybrids or intergrades between
these two species.  This would indicate the continuing invasion of the
higher gradient tributaries by the Striped Shiner.  It is probable
that this extension of the range is due to increased siltation,
which is favoring the Striped Shiner, the more silt-tolerant of the
two.  Striped Shiners and their hybrids are most abundant in the lower
portions of the Chagrin and Rocky rivers.  The species occurs occasion-
ally in Lake Erie as a stray.

   (References;  71, 115, 136, 147, 150, 163)

42.  COMMON SHINER, Notropis cornutus

     LOCALLY COMMON                                            STREAM

There is no reason to doubt that this species was as numerous, and most
probably more numerous in the study area before 1900 than it has been
since.

Since 1900, the habitat of this high gradient species has been eliminated
in some areas, and it appears to have become less abundant than formerly
(See Striped Shiner).

The Common Shiner was collected in limited areas in the upper tributaries
of the study area especially in those of the Chagrin River.  Confusion
exists as to the conspecific identity of this species and the Striped
Shiner because of the large numbers of supposed intergrades occurring
in some areas, especially in the middle sections of the tributaries.
Hybrids between the Common and Striped Shiners with other species
such as the Rosyface Shiner and River Chub are frequently encountered
in some sections of area streams.  Because of the morphological similarity
between the Common and Striped Shiners; or their intergrades, it is
often impossible to identify the parentage of a natural hybrid; that is
whether its one parent was a Striped, Common or intergrade between the
two.

   (References;  115, 121, 124, 136, 147, 150, 163)
                                 77

-------
       Figure 20:   Distribution of Rosyface, Redfin,  Striped  and  Common Shiners
                               LAKE ERIE
00
                                                                                                     Chagrin^lRiver
                                                                       COLLECTIONS AND OBSERVATIONS




                                                                       A  Rosyface Shiner




                                                                       O  Northern Redfin Shiner




                                                                       0 Striped Shiner




                                                                        ^f Common Shiner

-------
43.  SPOTTAIL SHINER, Notropis hudsonius^

     UNCOMMON                                                  LAKE

In 1845, Kirtland (71) considered this species to be confined to
Lake Erie where it was "not uncommon".

There is no reason to believe that there was any change in its abundance
before 1900.

The species was quite numerous in Lake Erie until 1925, when it began
to demonstrate a definite decline in numbers.

A recent survey of this species in the western basin of Lake Erie has
shown a significant decrease in numbers.  In the Cleveland area, this
shiner has apparently also declined.  It was occasionally taken in
fair numbers, especially where it was concentrated in the lower rivers
but in general, only a few were taken in a sample.

   (References;  71, 119, 147, 150, 163)

44.  SPOTFIN SHINER, Notropis spilopterus

     COMMON                                                    STREAM

Unquestionably, this species was present throughout historic times;
its early abundance is unknown.

After 1900 it was noted throughout the streams of the area and in
protected portions of the lake shore.  The number  of this rather
pollution-tolerant species was observed to be increasing in abundance
in many localities, especially in the lower portions of the streams
north of the Allegheny Front Escarpment (147).

Indications during the present study were that the increased pollution
caused a recent reduction in numbers.  It was abundant only in the
lower and middle sections of the Chagrin River and occurred in limited
numbers in the Rocky River.  It appears to have become greatly reduced
along the shoreline of Lake Erie and in the lower Cuyahoga River.
While 3000 of these were collected in the Chagrin and Rocky rivers,
only a very few were  taken from Lake Erie, this in spite of intensive
efforts to collect them.

   (References;  119, 147, 150, 163)
                                 79

-------
       Figure 21:   Distribution of Spottail and Spotfin Shiners
                                                                                                      Chagrin Stiver
                              LAKE ERIE
00
o
                                                                         COLLECTIONS AND OBSERVATIONS


                                                                         A  Spottail Shiner


                                                                         A Spotfin Shiner

-------
45.  CENTRAL BIGMOUTH SHINER, Notropis d. dorsalis

     RARE                                                      STREAM

This species was not recorded in Ohio prior to 1900, but it is assumed
that a population was present in the Rocky River throughout much of
Columbian time.

It was not until 1922 that it was taken from the East Branch of the
Rocky River.  This relict Ohio population was never extensive and the
largest number taken was a total of 23 individuals in two collections,
June 2, 1929 (147).

During this survey, none was found in the East Branch of the Rocky
River.  One was taken on July 20, 1971, and another, August 16, 1971,
in the middle portions of the Rocky River itself; presumably these
were strays from a relict population somewhere in the upper Rocky
River drainage.  Currently the Bigmouth Shiner is known only from the
Black and Rocky rivers.   These two Ohio populations have been declining
rapidly.  The species is considered to be an Ohio endangered species
and should be protected.

   (References;  147, 150, 163)

46.  NORTHEASTERN SAND SHINER, Notropis stramineus  deliciosus

     UNCOMMON                                               UBIQUITOUS

Until 1928, the Sand Shiner was hopelessly confused with other species
of shiners.  Preserved specimens exist which were taken in Cuyahoga
County, and there is reason to believe that the species was numerous
before 1900.

After 1900, it was present in fair numbers throughout the Chagrin and
Rocky rivers, in a few areas of the upper Cuyahoga drainage, and on the
exposed sand and gravel beaches of Lake Erie.

The present study indicates that the largest populations are in the
Chagrin River over clean sand-and-gravel substrates.  The populations
inhabiting the local Lake Erie beaches appear to have been drastically
reduced and Sand Shiners are present there only in limited numbers.

   (References;  136, 147, 150, 163)

47.  NORTHERN MIMIC SHINER,  Notropis v. volucellus

     RARE                                                   UBIQUITOUS

Literature references prior to 1928 are absent because the Mimic Shiner
                                 81

-------
       Figure  22:   Distribution of Sand,  Mimic  and  Bigmouth Shiners.
                               LAKE ERIE
oo
N3
                                                                                                      Chagrin Vjliver
                                                                    ''  COLLECTIONS AND OBSERVATIONS


                                                                        A  Central Bigmouth Shiner


                                                                           Northeastern Sand Shiner


                                                                           Northern Mimic Shiner

-------
 was  hopelessly  confused  with  other 6hiner  species.   However,  preserved
 specimens  from  Cuyahoga  County  indicate  its  presence before  1900.

 After  1900,  large  populations were found along  the  shores  and islands
 of western Lake Erie,  and  presumably  it  was  present along  the shores
 of the lake  in  the Cleveland  area.  It was present  in all  three  tribu-
 taries and was  most numerous  in the Rocky  River.

 Recently,  a  great  decline  has occurred in  the Cleveland  area  and an
 effort of  more  than several hundred man-hours of  seining streams in
 its  former habitat produced only two  specimens, one each from the  Rocky
 and  Chagrin  rivers.  Collections taken on beaches indicate that  it has
 been nearly  extirpated;  of more than  10,000  cyprinids examined only
 12   were Mimic  Shiners.

   (References;   147, 150)

 48.  SILVERJAW  MINNOW, Ericymba buccata

     COMMON                                                    STREAM

 Since  this species was not described  until 1865,  little  is known of
 its  early  presence  in  the  area.  McCormick (1892),  recording  it  from
 the  streams  of  Lorain  County, considered it  rare  in the  Black River
 (119),  and presumably  populations were similar elsewhere in northeastern
 Ohio.

 After  1900,  and  especially since 1920, the evidence suggests  that  the
 Silverjaw has been rapidly increasing in northeastern Ohio.

 The  Silverjaw Minnow is  relatively  tolerant  to some types  of  pollutants
 provided that the  sandy  substrates  remain unsilted.   During the  survey
 it was  found to be common  to  abundant in most areas  of the Chagrin,
 Rocky  and upper Cuyahoga rivers.  In some localities  it  was the most
 abundant minnow.

  (References;  119, 147,  150,  163)

 49.  NORTHERN FATHEAD MINNOW,  Pimephales p. promelas

     UNCOMMON                                                  STREAM

A few specimens have been  preserved which were collected before 1900,
and there is little reason to believe that the species was not present,
at least in isolated populations, throughout historic time.

There appears to have been a definite population increase after 1900.
Since 1960 it has been increasingly utilized as  a bait and forage minnow,
                                 83

-------
and it is assumed that many are inadvertently introduced into streams
by anglers.

It was taken, although never in large numbers, from the middle and lower
sections of the Chagrin and Rocky rivers, and from the middle section
of the Cuyahoga River, notably at Peninsula, Ohio.  One was collected
along the shoreline of Lake Erie, within the Cleveland Harbor.

  (References;  67, 124, 147, 150, 163)

50.  BLUNTNOSE MINNOW, Pimephales notatus

     ABUNDANT                                               UBIQUITOUS

From the many preserved specimens before 1900 throughout all of Ohio,
it is believed that this ubiquitous species was most numerous throughout
the area and present along the shoreline of the Lake.

Collections after 1900, demonstrate its almost universal presence in
the tributaries of the area and in the Lake.  After 1925, it was
propagated by the Ohio Conservation Department.   Some were released in
the study area.

Presently, it is an extremely abundant minnow in  tributary streams, but
populations along the Lake Erie shoreline have noticably declined.
During the survey,it was routinely collected in the streams of  the area,
and small numbers were taken along the Lake Erie  shoreline, mainly in
marinas.

   (References;  115,  119, 124, 135, 136, 147, 150, 163)

51.  STONEROLLER MINNOW, Campostoma anomalum

     COMMON                                                     STREAM

Reviewing  the literature, Osburn  (125) stated that this stream  species
was very abundant and widely distributed in Ohio  prior to 1900.  There
is no reason  to believe that it was not equally abundant in the tribu-
taries of  the study area.

Since 1900, it has been taken commonly throughout the streams of the
area.

This high-gradient species was taken  from the upper portions  of the
Rocky and  Cuyahoga rivers; and throughout the Chagrin, sometimes in
large numbers.

   (References;  119,  124, 125, 136, 147, 150, 163)
                                  84

-------
       Figure 23:   Distribution of Minnows.
                                     LAKE ERIE
00
Ui
                                                                        COLLECTIONS AND OBSERVATIONS


                                                                        •^  Silverjaw Minnow


                                                                        O  Fathead Minnow


                                                                        ^P  Bluntnose Minnow


                                                                        A  Stoneroller Minnow

-------
52.  BIGMOUTH BUFFALOFISH, Ictiobus cyprinellus

     PROBABLY EXTIRPATED                        •               LAKE

There is a single specimen in the Harvard Museum of Comparative Zoology
collected by Kirtland at Rock Port, Cuyahoga County, in November of
1845 (147).

None have been taken since and the species may be considered to be
extirpated in the study area.

  (References;  54, 147, 150)

53A. EASTERN QUILLBACK CARPSUCKER, Carpiodes cyprinus cyprinus

     RARE                                                      LAKE

Kirtland stated that he had "...met with it in a few instances in
Lake Erie.", referring to it as the shad (102).  Evidence before 1900
indicates its presence in Lake Erie and its tributaries.

There appears to have been slight increase in numbers of this subspecies
between 1900 and 1960, after which an apparent decrease occurred in
the Central Basin.

Although many young-of-the-year Carpsuckers were collected in the lower
portions of the rivers during the survey, it is impossible to determine
to which subspecies they belong.   Two adult Carpiodes c. cyprinus were
collected in Lake Erie during this survey,  and it is assumed that they
are rare.   Since the population of Carpiodes £. hinei is larger, the
young-of-the-year collected in the rivers were probably of the hinei
subspecies.  A small number of young-of-the-year Carpsuckers were col-
lected in the Cleveland Harbor during 1974, and during the same year,
3 yearlings were taken near the mouth of the Cuyahoga River.  It is
possible that the young-of-the-year from the harbor are of the cyprinus
subspecies.

  (References;  72, 102, 119, 147, 150)

53B. CENTRAL QUILLBACK CARPSUCKER, Carpiodes cyprinus hinei

     UNCOMMON                                                  STREAM

Little is known of the abundance of this subspecies prior to 1900
since it was not recognized until 1956.  The relatively few records of
Quillbacks before 1900 suggests that both subspecies were not numerous.

Since 1900, the subspecies Carpiodes cyprinus hinei has been increasing
in abundance.
                                 86


-------
During  the present survey, many adults  of  this subspecies were  collected
in  the  lower Chagrin, while  fewer were  collected  from  the Rocky River.
Apparently, this subspecies  continues to increase in abundance.

  (References;   72, 102,  119,  147, 150)

54.  SILVER REDHORSE, Moxostoma anisurum

     SCIENTIFICALLY EXTIRPATED                              UBIQUITOUS

Although 19th Century ichthyologists failed to satisfactorily separate
the various species of the genus Moxostoma, it is believed  that the
Silver  Redhorse was at least  as numerous,  or maybe more so, before 1900
than it has been since.  Conditions were then more favorable.

Since 1900, as well as before, specimens have been taken from the lower
portions of the Rocky River.

During  the present survey, intensive seining of all habitats produced
none and it is assumed to have been extirpated in the  area.

  (References;  105, 119, 147, 150)

55.  BLACK REDHORSE, Moxostoma duquesnei

     RARE                                                       STREAM

As stated previously, 19th Century ichthyologists  failed to separate
the suckers of the genus Moxostoma.  Therefore, nothing is known relative
to its  presence or abundance  in this area  prior to 1900.

It was  not until 1930 that the species was generally recognized and
although it was not definitely recorded for northeastern Ohio,  Trautman
believed this species to be present in high gradient streams such as
the Chagrin River prior to 1951 (147).

During  the survey, 34 specimens of adults  and yearlings, were taken in
the middle portions of the Chagrin River.  Intensive collecting in
other streams and in the lake produced no  additional specimens.  Obviously,
the presence of young indicates successful reproduction in the  Chagrin
River.

  (References;   105,  147, 150)

56.   GOLDEN REDHORSE, Moxostoma erythrurum

     COMMON                                                 UBIQUITOUS

As has  been previously stated, early workers failed to satisfactorily
                                 87

-------
      Figure 24:  Distribution of Quillbacks, Golden and Black Redhorse.
oo
oo
                                 LAKE ERIE
                                                                                                     Chagrin W River
                                                                        COLLECTIONS  AND  OBSERVATIONS



                                                                        ^  Eastern  Quillback



                                                                        £  Central  Quillback



                                                                        Q  Black Redhorse



                                                                        J.  Golden Redhorse
                                                                                                            OA

-------
separate the various species of the genus Moxostoma.  It is assumed that
the Golden Redhorse was then the most numerous of the redhorses in
Ohio.

Since 1920, the species has been the most widely distributed and most
abundant of all the redhorses in the streams, whereas in Lake Erie it
was surpassed in abundance by the Northern Redhorse.

Results of the current survey indicate that this sucker remains the
most abundant redhorse in the streams and may have become the most
abundant redhorse species in Lake Erie near Cleveland due to the recent
decline of the Northern Shorthead Redhorse.

  (References;  105, 147, 150, 163)

57.  NORTHERN SHORTHEAD REDHORSE, Moxostoma m. macrolepidotum

     RARE                                                      LAKE

Despite confusion existing before 1925 relative to the genus Moxostoma,
all evidence indicates that this was by far the most numerous redhorse
in Lake Erie.

Since 1900 and until recently, it was abundant throughout Lake Erie
and was numerous in the Cleveland area.  We have observed large catches
in the Cleveland fish houses prior to 1955.

Since 1955, the species has declined in numbers and at present it is
rare.  Only eight specimens were collected during the period of study,
all in the open lake.  Examination of local commercial catches during
1972 indicate that the species has greatly declined in abundance, and
the average daily catch has been only a few specimens.

  (References;  94, 119, 147, 150)

58.  NORTHERN HOG SUCKER, Hypentilium nigricans

     ABUNDANT                                                  STREAM

It is evident that the Hog Sucker originally was as numerous in all of
the tributaries, including the lower Cuyahoga, as it was throughout Ohio.
Since the species prefers the higher gradients, it was most numerous in
the upper sections of the streams.

Since 1900, the species has continued to be numerous in these tributaries,
except for those areas subjected to pollutants.  Occasionally it is taken
in the shallow waters of Lake Erie near river mouths where it occurred
as a stray.
                                 89

-------
The Hog Sucker may be readily collected throughout most of the upper
Cuyahoga and Rocky river drainages and is abundant in the upper two-
thirds of the Chagrin system.  A specimen was also collected in the
shallows of Lake Erie near the mouth of the Chagrin River.

  (References;  92, 104, 115, 119, 124, 136, 147, 150,163)

59.   COMMON WHITE SUCKER, Catostomus c. commersoni

     ABUNDANT                                               UBIQUITOUS

Kirtland (92), stated that "This species abounds in every permanant
stream, lake and pond."  Other ichthyologists testify to its universal
distribution and great abundance in the tributaries of Lake Erie.

This rather pollution-tolerant species appears to have shown only a
slight decrease in numerical abundance since 1900, but it appears that
the decline was accelerated after 1950.

At present, the species may be collected in fair numbers in nearly all
of the waters within the study area, with the exception of the lower
Cuyahoga River.  It is reproducing with considerable success in the
Chagrin and Rocky rivers.  In the early summer, thousands of fry may be
collected in a short period of time with little effort.

  (References;  92, 104, 119, 124, 135, 136, 147, 150, 163)

60.   EASTERN LONGNOSE SUCKER, Catostomus c. catostomus

     PROBABLY EXTIRPATED                                       LAKE

In 1878, Klippart  (111) recorded this species as occurring in the Ohio
waters of Lake Erie.

Although no specimens have been preserved from the Cleveland area,
Trautman observed an occasional specimen in the fish houses prior to
1955.

No specimens have been reported from any locality in the Ohio waters
of Lake Erie since 1960 and we have not been able to obtain a specimen
despite an intensive effort.  This species is probably extirpated from
the Cleveland area.

  (References;  57, 111, 147, 150)
                                 90

-------
61.  SPOTTED SUCKER, Minytrema melanops

     RARE                                                      STREAM

Kirtland in 1851 (93), stated that the Spotted Sucker "...is abundant in
Lake Erie."  This was not true after 1900.  It is possible that in
the early 1800's it was present in numbers in the shallows of Lake
Erie in the vicinity of Cleveland when there were clean sand bottoms
and aquatic vegetation.  There are preserved specimens for the period
before 1900.

Since 1900 the species has been taken occasionally in the Rocky and
Cuyahoga rivers.

Recently, Orr (124) reported collecting it in the upper Cuyahoga and we
have collected specimens there.  In 1973 one individual was taken in
the lower Chagrin River among dense vegetation.  As this species is
difficult to capture, it is possible that relict populations may
exist elsewhere.  None was collected in Lake Erie.

   (References;  92, 124, 147, 150)

62.  WESTERN LAKE CHUBSUCKER, Erimyzon sucetta kennerlyi

     RARE                                                      LAKE

Although there are  specimens extant from  the mouth of the Chagrin
River, little else  is known concerning this species before 1900.

Since I960, it has  been recorded in the upper Cuyahoga River by Orr
(124).

None was collected  during this survey.  It is possible that it may be
present  in low numbers in the Chagrin and Rocky rivers.

   (References;  119,  124, 147, 150)

63.  CHANNEL CATFISH,  Ictalurus punctatus

     UNCOMMON                                               UBIQUITOUS

As  early as 1850, Kirtland observed its presence  in  the Cuyahoga River
indicating  that it  was rather numerous and that the  species was
"...extensively diffused  through  the waters of Lake  Erie...".  He
likewise commented  on the possible effects of dams upon this highly
migratory  catfish,  stating that it was "...decreasing in  numbers in
many tributary  streams as they are becoming obstructed with mill dams."
(79),
                                 91

-------
Figure 25:  Distribution of Shorthead Redhorse and White,  Spotted and
              Hog Suckers.
                         LAKE ERIE
                                                                  COLLECTIONS AND OBSERVATIONS

                                                                  A  Northern Shorthead Redhorse

                                                                  ft  Hog Sucker

                                                                  A  Common White Sucker

                                                                      Spotted Sucker

-------
The species was common to abundant in the area and contributed substan-
tially both to the commercial and sport fisheries between 1900 and 1955.

While Channel Catfish are taken in limited numbers throughout the study
area, it is no longer an abundant species.  Commercial catches in
the open lake have declined.  At present, the highest populations occur
in and near the lower Chagrin where many young were observed.
Significantly lower populations are present along the shoreline and near
the Rocky River.

  (References;  40, 79, 119, 136, 144, 147, 150)

64.  YELLOW BULLHEAD, Ictalurus natalis

     COMMON                                                 UBIQUITOUS

Records before 1880 were unreliable because of the inability of writers
to separate the Yellow from the Brown and Black Bullheads, consequently,
its numerical status is unknown.  It is assumed, however, that the
species was at least as abundant as later, because habitat conditions
were more favorable.  Preserved specimens from the tributaries taken
between 1880 and 1900 are extant.

Between 1900 and 1960 the species was recorded only in the rivers,
and until this survey, it had not been collected from the Rocky River.
There appears to have been a general decline in numbers.

Throughout the investigation fair populations of this bullhead were
found in the lower portions of the Rocky and Chagrin rivers.  Individuals
were taken in many other localities attesting to its general distribution.
The species does not normally inhabit the open lake and only a few
specimens were collected from Lake Erie, these from shoreline marinas.

  (References;  119, 124, 147, 150, 163)

65.  BROWN BULLHEAD, Ictalurus nebulosus

     COMMON                                                 UBIQUITOUS

As was stated above, little is known concerning the early presence and
abundance of the individual bullhead species before 1900.  Although the
Brown Bullhead's early numerical status is unknown, it is believed to
have been at least as numerous before 1900 as it has been since.

Between 1900 and 1965,  the Brown Bullhead was the most numerous of the
three species of bullheads in the lake.   Increased turbidity along the
shoreline and in the lower portions of the tributaries,  coupled with
                                 93

-------
 the  disappearance  of  aquatic vegetation,  appears  to  have  reduced  its
 numbers  and  possibly  increased  hybridization with the Black  Bullhead,
 as the latter  increased.

 The  largest  populations of  this bullhead  are presently  confined to  the
 lower portions  of  the Chagrin and Rocky rivers  although many of these
 are  Brown X  Black  bullhead  hybrids.   Most  of the specimens  from  other
 areas, and many from  the  lower  rivers as  well,  show  massive  hybridi-
 zation with  the Black Bullhead.  It appears at  this  time  that Brown
 Bullheads are declining in  numbers, at least as a pure  species.

  (References;   73, 119,  124, 147, 150, 163)

 66.  BLACK BULLHEAD,  Ictalurus  melas

     COMMON                                                  UBIQUITOUS

 Although there  was considerable confusion in the  identification of  the
 three species of bullheads  before 1900, preserved specimens  testify to
 the  presence of  the Black Bullhead in the tributaries and shallow
 waters of Lake  Erie in this area.

 The  species was  recorded, sometimes in considerable  numbers, in the
 tributaries since  1900.   It is  believed that, as  elsewhere,  the species
 has  been increasing in abundance with the increase in the amount of its
 habitat, (perhaps  since 1850 according to Kirtland), (78).   It is the
 most tolerant of the  three bullhead species to turbidity and pollutants.

 Most of the specimens collected during this survey were taken from  the
 middle and lower portions of the rivers,  including the  Cuyahoga River
 near Peninsula.  Populations also occur in the Lake  Erie marinas and in
 Cleveland Harbor.  As has been  previously pointed out,  the Black
 Bullhead freely hybridizes with the Brown.

  (References;   78, 115, 119, 124,  136, 147, 150, 163)

 67.   FLATHEAD CATFISH, Pylodictis olivaris

     PROBABLY EXTIRPATED                                       LAKE

 By 1850 Kirtland had not found  this species in the waters of Lake Erie.
McCormick recorded relict populations from the Ohio waters of the Central
 Basin of Lake Erie in 1892  (119).

 Between 1900 and 1950, there was apparently no change in the numerical
 status of this species, and it  remained rare in the area; however,a
 small population has been recorded  from the Huron River where a few
 individuals are captured annually (147).
                                 94

-------
None was collected during this survey and no recent captures have
been reported by commercial fishermen in the area.  The Flathead is
probably absent from the Cleveland area.

  (References;  86, 119, 147, 150, 161)

68.  STONECAT MADTOM, Noturus flavus

     COMMON                                                 UBIQUITOUS

Many specimens preserved before 1900 indicate that the Stonecat was
present in the area and throughout the remainder of Lake Erie.  Because
it was not commercially valued, little is known of its numerical
abundance.  It is believed to have been numerous in Lake Erie near
Cleveland.

Throughout the 1900-1950 period, the species was present in the tribu-
taries and Lake Erie and quite numerous in the latter.

The many specimens collected during our survey indicate that it was
numerous along the Cleveland shoreline.  It was present in smaller
numbers in the middle portions of the Chagrin and Rocky rivers, where
it inhabited moderately swift riffles with a substrate of gravel,
boulders and bedrock.

  (References;  73, 119, 147, 150)

69.  BRINDLED MADTOM, Noturus miurus

     PROBABLY EXTIRPATED                                       STREAM

Although preserved specimens are lacking, it is assumed that this
species was present in Lake Erie and its tributaries in this area
before 1900.

Between 1900-1950, the Brindled Madtom was recorded in the upper
Cuyahoga River.  Although no specimens are extant from this area of
Lake Erie, the species was common in the shallows about the Bass
Islands and therefore, was assumed to have been present, at least in
low numbers, in the Cleveland area.

None was collected during the survey despite many hours of seining.
It is assumed that the species is scientifically extirpated, although
possibly,  a very low population might exist in the Chagrin River in
isolated localities.

  (References;  62, 119,  147, 150)
                                 95

-------
Figure 26:  Distribution of Catfish, Bullheads and Madtoms.
                        LAKE ERIE
                                                                  COLLECTIONS AND OBSERVATIONS




                                                                  A  Channel Catfish




                                                                  O Yellow Bullhead




                                                                  (J) Brown Bullhead




                                                                  if  Black Bullhead




                                                                  A  Stonecat Madtom

-------
 70.   TADPOLE MADTOM,  Noturus gyrinus

      PROBABLY EXTIRPATED                                       STREAM

 Although literature references and preserved specimens of this small-
 sized and relatively  secretive species are lacking,  it is assumed that
 the  Tadpole Madtom was present in the area and was numerous.   The
 extensive dredging, ditching and draining of the shoreline marshes,  and
 depletion of aquatic  vegetation destroyed its habitat early in the 1900's.

 Since 1900,  a few have been taken from the lower portions of  the Chagrin
 River in cattail   marsh near its mouth.

 As with  the previous  species,  this madtom was not found during the
 survey.   It is  possible that it  is  extirpated,  since its preferred
 habitat  has been  almost completely eliminated within the Cleveland
 area.

   (References;  119,  147,  150)

 71.   TROUT-PERCH,  Percopsis  omiscomaycus

      SEASONALLY ABUNDANT                                       LAKE

 Jordan and  Evermann in 1896  (59)  considered  the  Trout-perch to be
 abundant  in Lake  Erie.   There  is  no  reason to question their  statement.

 After 1900  and  until  recently,  in the  colder  periods  of  the year,  the
 Trout-perch  was numerous in  the  shallows  of Lake Erie in this  area,
 ascending a  short  distance into  the  tributaries.

 During 1972  and 1973,  the Trout-perch was  collected between February
 and May.  It was present in  all areas  along the  shore but was  not  taken
 in the lower rivers.   It was especially numerous  in Cleveland  Harbor
 and in marinas where  it  spawned.  A  few young-of-the-year were  collected
 during the summer months in  the Cleveland  Harbor.  Adults were  not taken
 in the study area during summer,  fall or  early winter.   Apparently they
 retreat to the deeper  portions of Lake Erie.

  (References;  59, 119, 147, 150, 163)

 72.  EASTERN BURBOT, Lota lota lacustris

     RARE                                                       LAKE

Kirtland stated (99) that this species was "...abundant  in  the waters
of Lake Erie" prior to 1900.
                                 97

-------
After 1900 and until at least 1955, the Burbot remained an abundant
species.  In 1917, 171,929 Ibs. were brought into Cuyahoga County ports,
even though it was not considered to be a valuable commercial species
(40).  Later it became increasingly sought after by sport fishermen,
especially during the colder weather months.  Its initial decrease
in abundance was evident soon after 1960.

During the study, only occasional specimens were reported by commercial
fishermen in the area.  We collected three individuals during the winter
months, all in the vicinity of Cleveland Harbor.  The species probably
occurs in very limited numbers along the shoreline from January to
March, spawning near the river mouths.  The Burbot is currently an
Ohio endangered species.

  (References;  59, 119, 147, 150, 163)

73.  BROOK STICKLEBACK, Culaea inconstans

     LOCALLY COMMON                                            STREAM

Kirtland in 1850  (89), stated that the Stickleback has been found in
tributaries of Lake Erie.  We assume that some of these streams were
in  the Cleveland area.  In 1882, Jordan  (57) stated that it was "...very
abundant in many streams in the Northern part of Ohio."

The species was repeatedly recorded after 1950 in the tributaries of
the Cuyahoga and Chagrin rivers.   It appears to have decreased in
abundance because of  destruction of habitat by ditching, draining,  and
channelization.

The destruction of its habitat is  continuing and at present the species
is  primarily limited  to a relatively few swamps and ponds within the
drainages of all  three rivers.  Within these areas, Sticklebacks are
abundant, and many hundreds may be collected in a single day with a
small  seine.

   (References;   57,  65, 89, 115,  119,  147,  150, 163)

74.   BROOK  SILVERSIDE, Labidesthes sicculus

      RARE                                                   UBIQUITOUS

The abundance  of  preserved  specimens  from  the Rocky,  Cuyahoga  and
Chagrin rivers  indicate  the  general distribution  of  the  Silverside  in
 this  area before  1900.  McCormick (119)  also  stated  that  it was  common
"...in the  Lake.",  during his  study  in 1892.

 Shortly after  1900 it became  apparent  that  the  Silverside was  decreasing
                                  98

-------
      Figure 27:   Distribution of  Trout-Perch,Burbot,Stickleback and Silverside
Rocky ARiver
                                                                                                     Chagrir^ River
                               LAKE ERIE
COLLECTIONS AND OBSERVATIONS




^  Trout-perch




    Eastern Burbot




    Brook Stickleback




    Brook Silverside

-------
 in numbers  in  the  tributaries and  in Lake Erie.  This was probably
 due  to  the  destruction  of  its preferred habitat; clear waters and
 vegetated shallows.

 This decrease  in abundance continues.  During the survey it was  taken
 in only 10  collections.  It was present in limited numbers in the
 lower Chagrin  and  Rocky rivers, and along the shoreline in the Cleveland
 Harbor.  It is assumed  that the decline in numbers began before  1900
 and will continue.

  (References;  62, 119, 124, 147, 150)

 75.  WHITE BASS, Morone chrysops

     ABUNDANT                                               UBIQUITOUS

 Klippart (111) reported that in 1830, this species was captured with
 shore seines and with hook and line and "...were then most numerous."

 Since 1900, the species has been abundant.  In 1922, 37,286 Ibs. were
 brought into Cuyahoga County ports.   Between 1939-49, the commercial
 catch from Ohio waters  of  Lake Erie averaged 549,510 Ibs. per annum.

 Currently, the. species  is  abundant in Lake Erie and occasionally in
 the lower portions of the  Chagrin and Rocky rivers.  Great concentra-
 tions of White Bass may be observed during certain times of the year
 near warm water outfalls,  such as the one near Gordon Park.  Together
with the Yellow Perch it comprises the major portion of the sport and
 commercial fishing catch in the Cleveland area.   The species is
 reproducing successfully in this area as evidenced by the presence of
 fry and yearlings at nearly all Lake and lower river sampling sites.

  (References;  71, 81, 111,  119, 132, 144,  147, 150, 163)

 76.   WHITE CRAPPIE, Pomoxis annularis

     COMMON                                                 UBIQUITOUS

 In 1850, Kirtland  (82), did not separate the two species of Grapples,
 referring to them collectively as Centrarchus hexacanthus.   His drawing
 is that of the present  species.   He stated that "Lake Erie seems to
be its most prominent resort..." and that considerable numbers are often
 taken "...in the vicinity of  Cleveland."  There is no reason to believe
 that it was not present in large numbers in the tributaries and the
Lake adjacent to Cleveland.  After 1875, the White and Black Grapples
were usually separated  in literature,  and the White Grapple was considered
 to be less abundant in Northern Ohio than the Black Grapple.
                                 100

-------
      Figure 28:  Distribution of White Bass
                               LAKE ERIE
                                                                                                      ChagrirJl River
                                                                        COLLECTIONS  AND OBSERVATIONS
                                                                           White  Bass
Rocky 4 River

-------
Since 1900 , the species has been numerous in the streams of the area
and many thousands have been captured in Lake Rockwell and liberated
elsewhere in Ohio.

Currently this species may be commonly collected throughout the Chagrin,
Rocky and upper Cuyahoga rivers, but at present it occurs in fewer
numbers in Lake Erie, principally in marinas.

  (References;  82, 115, 119, 124, 136, 147, 150, 163)

77.  BLACK CRAPPIE, Pomoxis nigromaculatus

     UNCOMMON                                               UBIQUITOUS

Little is known concerning the abundance of the Black Crappie in the
area prior to 1900 because of confusion with the White Crappie.  It
is the general opinion of ichthyologists, commercial fishermen and
others that the Black Crappie was more numerous than the White, and
this may well have been true when there was an abundance of aquatic
vegetation and less turbidity.

After 1900, the species was locally abundant in the tributaries and
the Ohio Department of Natural Resources liberated many thousands of
adults throughout Ohio waters.  These had been taken from such lakes
as Meander and Rockwell, in the upper Cuyahoga.

Results of our survey indicate that the species had drastically declined
and in most areas the White Crappie was now more abundant than the
Black.  This is especially true of the lower rivers and harbors along
the Lake Erie shoreline.  Large populations existed only in artificial
reservoirs and in heavily vegetated sections of the streams.

   (References;  82, 119, 124, 147, 150, 159)

78.  NORTHERN ROCKBASS, Ambloplites r. rupestris

     COMMON                                                 UBIQUITOUS

Many preserved specimens collected between  1853-1900 and many  litera-
ture references leave us no doubt as  to the  great abundance of Rockbass
in inland Ohio and in Lake Erie.

Between  1900 and  1965 it was  common to abundant  in  the  streams of the
area but little is known of  the Lake  Erie population  during this period.

During  this study, the  species was found  to  be uniformly distributed
but not  immensely abundant.   Very small populations occurred about  the
                                 102

-------
       Figure 29:   Distribution of Crappies
                               •LAKE ERIE
Rock
                                                                                                               River
                                                                         COLLECTIONS AND OBSERVATIONS




                                                                         A  White Crappie




                                                                         ^  Black Crappie

-------
breakwalls of the Lake Erie shoreline, including the Cleveland Harbor.
The largest populations were found in the upper two-thirds of the river
drainages.  It is believed that the species is declining in numerical
abundance.

  (References;  67, 69, 87, 115, 119, 124, 147, 150, 163)

79.   NORTHERN SMALLMOUTH BLACKBASS, Micropterus d. dolomieui

     UNCOMMON                                               UBIQUITOUS

The many preserved specimens and innumerable literature references
attest to the great abundance of this species in Lake Erie and inland
Ohio streams.  Kirtland stated that it was "...a valued source of food
and was captured with hooks and lines, seines, nets, spears and guns."
(71).  They were particularly vulnerable to capture because of the
clarity of the water, especially by spearing.  After 1810, when hundreds
of dams blocked the upstream migrations, they were taken in huge numbers
with seines in the pools below dams,  and later, while migrating
downstream, were caught in cribs and weirs placed on the openings of
dams.  Kirtland mentioned that between 1849-1851, the waters were
"...literally black with fishing boats.", these boats containing hook
and line fishermen.  Frequent catches of one hundred walleyes and
smallmouths were taken in a morning by a single person.  During the
latter part of this period, a considerable decrease in abundance in
Lake Erie was noted  (see history section).

In 1902, commercial fishing of this species was prohibited in Lake
Erie, but the decline in abundance continued  (147).

At present, the once immense populations near the mouth of the Cuyahoga
River and along the lake shore, have disappeared.  To the best of our
knowledge, not a specimen of Smallmouth was taken from the Cleveland-
Lake Erie shoreline during our 18 month survey by our crews, sport or
commercial fishermen.  Populations do exist, however, in the upper
Cuyahoga River, the upper and middle portions of the Rocky River and
in all of the Chagrin River drainage, the largest populations remaining
in the middle portion of the Chagrin River.  The Smallmouth has been
very adversely  affected   by mill dams, drainage, municipal and
industrial pollutants, etc., and has demonstrated a drastic decline
in numbers.  It is probable that, unless corrective measures are taken
to abate  these pollutants, the decline will continue.

  (References;  35,  71, 91, 119, 136, 147, 150, 161, 163)
                                 104

-------
 80.  NORTHERN  LARGEMOUTH  BLACKBASS, Micropterus  s.  salmoides

     COMMON                                                 UBIQUITOUS

 Preserved  specimens  and reliable  literature  references  testify  to  the
 presence before  1900 of the Largemouth Blackbass  in weedy bays,  harbors,
 marshes and  shallows of Lake Erie and the base-  and low-gradient portions
 of its tributaries.

 Preserved  specimens  after  1900  indicate  that  the  species was numerous
 in the tributaries of Lake Erie and shallow waters  in this area.   Many
 were captured  in Lake Rockwell  and liberated  elsewhere  in Ohio.
 During this  period the overall  numerical abundance  continued to  decrease
 in the shallows  of Lake Erie.   Between 1930  and  the present, many
 thousands  of farm ponds were constructed in  inland  Ohio and those
 in this area usually contained  this species.  Escapes from farm  ponds
 continually  replenished the tributaries.

 Presently  the  greatest concentration of  this  species continues to  be
 in the heavily vegetated reservoirs of the upper  Cuyahoga River.   In
 other areas, such as  the lower  portions  of the streams  and lake  shore,
 the population has greatly declined in numbers even though the species
 is more silt-tolerant than is the  Smallmouth  Blackbass.  In areas  such
 as Cleveland Harbor  and Edgewater  Marina, where  the Smallmouth has
 apparently been  extirpated, small  populations were  observed, especially
 in the marinas,  to be nesting and  young-of-the-year were collected
 from areas in  the Cleveland Harbor.  The limited  reproductive success
 of this species  was  apparently  further hampered by  sports fishermen who
 removed the adults while they were tending their  eggs in shallow
water, a time when they were most  conspicuous and vulnerable to  capture.
On June 29, 1972 we  observed more  than 30 nests that were tended by
adults in  the Edgewater Marinas; within  three days, all of these had
been removed by  anglers.  Considering the precarious state of the  species
in this area, such a  removal of spawning adults may have serious
deleterious effects.

  (References;   111,   115, 119,  124, 135, 136, 147,  150, 163)

81.  WARMOUTH SUNFISH, Lepomis gulosus

    UNCOMMON                                                   STREAM

Although this species must have been present in the tributaries and
shallows of Lake Erie before 1900, no specimens had been reported or
preserved from this area.

Since 1900, Warmouth  has  been repeatedly taken in  the Chagrin and
Cuyahoga rivers and was not uncommon in Lake Rockwell (147).
                                 105

-------
       Figure 30:  Distribution of Rock Bass, Blackbasses and Warmouth.
RockijBb River
                                  LAKE ERIE
COLLECTIONS AND OBSERVATIONS




If.  Northern Rock Bass




Q  Northern Smallmouth Blackbass




0  Northern Largemouth Blackbass




A  Warmouth Sunfish

-------
Small populations persisted in the upper and middle portions of the
Chagrin River drainage and in the upper Cuyahoga River as well.  This
species was not abundant in the rivers.  Rarely are more than a few
taken at a time even then only in an occasional collection.  One
individual was collected in Lake Erie; taken in the Edgewater marina.
Presumably this specimen was a stray, as the species does not inhabit
Lake Erie.

  (References;  124, 147, 150)

82.  GREEN SUNFISH, Lepomis cyanellus

     COMMON                                                    STREAM

Preserved specimens and reliable literature references indicate that
previous to 1900, the Green Sunfish was present in this area, was
generally distributed and usually numerous from Cleveland westward.

Since 1920, the species was present in all of the tributaries in the
area, and apparently its numbers were increasing.

This Centrarchid is apparently one of the most pollutant-tolerant of
Ohio Sunfish species and was taken in large numbers in locations
where other species were few or absent.  In areas of cleaner waters,
less silted substrate, and/or with aquatic vegetation, other sunfish
species usually far outnumbered the Green in abundance.  It is our
opinion that the relative populations of sunfish species may be used
as general indices of water quality.  Current survey indicates that
populations of Green Sunfish were low in the Chagrin River moderate in
the Rocky River; and in the middle Cuyahoga River it was the predominant
sunfish.

  (References;  119, 124, 136, 147, 150, 163)

83.  BLUEGILL SUNFISH, Lepomis m. macrochirus

     COMMON                                                    STREAM

Specimens, captured before 1970, have been preserved from every Ohio
county bordering Lake Erie, and they, together with reliable litera-
ture records, indicate its presence in Lake Erie and tributary streams.
It was abundant and of importance as a sport fish after 1900 and was
found generally throughout the area.  After 1920, thousands were removed
from Lake Rockwell and liberated elsewhere.  The building of hundreds
of farm ponds in the area, almost all containing Bluegills, some of
which escaped, helped to maintain stream populations.
                                107

-------
While the Bluegill population in the area streams remained relatively
high, we found that in general, stream populations were considered by
many persons to be much higher than they actually are.  This is
probably due to the difficulty encountered by the public in discrimin-
ating between the various species of sunfishes  especially when dealing
with immature or hybrid specimens.  Often, the classification of
"bluegill" is indiscriminately applied to an immature specimen of
Pumpkinseed or Green Sunfish.  If, as we have previously stated,
sunfishes are to be used as indicators of water quality, then it is
essential that these species be correctly identified.

It was noted that Bluegill populations were high in the Rocky and
upper Cuyahoga drainages and moderate in the Chagrin River.  A few
were collected in Lake Erie at Edgewater Park and in the Cleveland
Harbor,where it occurred in low numbers.  In such areas, the Pumpkinseed
is far more numerous.

   (References;  115, 119, 124, 135, 136, 147, 150, 163)

84.  ORANGESPOTTED SUNFISH, Lepomis humilis

     RARE                                                      STREAM

This species has been invading Ohio from  the west since 1920  (147) .
None was found in  the study area  previous to  this survey.

This sunfish is the most  silt-tolerant of the Ohio sunfishes.  Its
invasion eastward  was apparently  due  to the extensive  siltation  of
the waters which is probably  creating less favorable habitat  for other
Centrarchids.  The few  individuals  collected  during  this  study are  the
first  records of the  species  in  this  area.  Together with  other  recent
unpublished  records from  southeastern Ohio, the  Cleveland  area  specimens
represent a  significant extension of  this species' range  eastward in
Ohio.   Previously, this species was recorded  only  from western Ohio
streams;  the easternmost  Lake Erie tributary  was near  Sandusky.   It
is our opinion  that  the populations of this sunfish  in the Chagrin
River  will  increase  in  the  future.

   (References;   58,  147,  150)

 85.  NORTHERN  LONGEAR SUNFISH,  Lepomis megalotis peltastes

     PROBABLY  EXTIRPATED                                  STREAM, LAKE

 Preserved specimens  of  this subspecies of Longear  Sunfish along the
 south  shore and tributaries of Lake Erie indicate that it was present
 in the Cleveland area.   Probably it was numerous so  long as aquatic
 vegetation was profuse.
                                  108

-------
       Figure  31:   Distribution of Bluegill, Green and Orangespotted Sunfishes.
                              LAKE ERIE
                                                                       COLLECTIONS AND OBSERVATIONS




                                                                        W Northern Bluegill Sunfish




                                                                        A Green Sunfish




                                                                        Q Orange-spotted Sunfish
Rocky 4River

-------
The few records since 1900 suggest that it decreased in abundance in
the area relatively early.  There are three collections from the
Cuyahoga River prior to 1926 but none from the study area since.

Apparently the Longear Sunfish has been extirpated from the Cleveland
Metropolitan area as no specimens were collected during the survey.

  (References;  119, 147, 150, 163)

86.  REDEAR SUNFISH, Lepomis microlophus

     LOCALLY COMMON                                       ARTIFICIAL LAKES

This recently introduced species has been recorded from a tributary
in the upper Rocky River where it had been introduced into a pond,
from which some subsequently escaped.  In 1939, 142 adult Redears were
liberated in Pippen Lake in the Cuyahoga drainage.  Since 1944, their
young have been trapped and shipped throughout Ohio for stocking purposes.

No Redear Sunfish were collected in the streams or Lake Erie during this
survey.  Stocked populations exist in impoundments of the river drain-
ages, especially in the upper Cuyahoga area.  This species has never
been reported from Lake Erie.

  (References;  147, 150)

87.  PUMPKINSEED SUNFISH, Lepomis gibbosus

     ABUNDANT                                               UBIQUITOUS

Preserved specimens, taken along the south shore of Lake Erie from
Lucas to Ashtabula counties and numerous literature references, indicate
that it was well distributed and abundant throughout this area prior
to 1900.  It occurred in both the straams and Lake Erie and was of some
commercial importance (147).

This Sunfish has continued to be present in the tributaries and shore-
waters of the Lake in the Cleveland area.  There is evidence that it
has continued to decrease in abundance with the continued increase
in turbidity and decrease in the amount of aquatic vegetation.

The Pumpkinseed continues to be the most abundant and widely distributed
sunfish species in the Cleveland area.  Contrary to the reports of
Havens and Emerson (135, 136) , we find that it was far more numerous than
the Bluegill, especially in the Chagrin River drainage.  It was the
sunfish species most frequently collected in Lake Erie, and was common
in the Cleveland Harbor where it reproduces with some success.  The
Pumpkinseed Sunfish is abundant in the upper Cuyahoga and Chagrin
rivers, common in the Rocky River and present in limited numbers in
                                 110

-------
      Figure 32:   Distribution of Pumpkinseed Sunfish
RockyV River
                                   LAKE  ERIE
                                                                        COLLECTIONS AND OBSERVATIONS




                                                                        0  Pumpkinseed Sunfish

-------
the middle and lower portions of the Cuyahoga where the Green Sunfish
surpasses it in abundance.

  (References;  88, 115, 119, 124,  136, 147, 150, 163)

88.   SAUCER, Stizostedion canadense

     PROBABLY EXTIRPATED                                       LAKE

Despite the confusion of the Sauger with the Walleye, there is no
doubt that before 1900 it was a valuable food species of considerable
commercial importance.

Between 1900 and 1945 the population throughout Lake Erie continued
to be large, and in 1917, 102,410  pounds were brought into Cuyahoga
County ports.  Thereafter, remarkably constant decreases in abundance
occurred and by 1970, the species was considered to be nearly extirpated
throughout Lake Erie.

Presently, this species should be considered extirpated in the Cleve-
land area and, as suggested by Rieger  (131), this decline was probably
due to the environmental deterioration of the rivers and near shore
waters.  Evidence indicates that very probably, in the Cleveland area,
the Sauger was dependent on the nearshore (1-3 miles) for spawning.
After 1940, the deterioration of this area probably contributed to their
extirpation.

  (References;  40, 69, 119, 131, 147, 150)

89A. WALLEYE, Stizostedion v. vitreum

     RARE                                                      LAKE

Kirtland  (84) mentioned that "Lake Erie seems to be its favorite
residence."  Unfortunately, at  this  time, the Walleye and Blue Pike
were not  considered to be distinct.  It is  impossible to definitely
state the relative abundance of each.  Even  though official records  are
sparce,  there is little doubt that the Walleye was immensely  abundant
in  the waters of Lake Erie prior to  1900.   Records indicate that over
14  million  pounds  of  Walleye were taken commercially  in 1889, and  over
12  million  pounds  in  1893  (118).

A drastic decline  in  numbers occurred  in  the late  1800's.  By 1900 less
than 2 million pounds were taken.  Since  the commercial catch in 1955
was 6 million pounds, it  is  apparent that the population never recovered
to  half  of  its original size.   The major  cause of  this early  decline was
obviously construction  of  dams, which  effectively  blocked  the upstream
spawning runs of this highly migratory species.
                                 112

-------
      Figure 33:  Distribution of Walleye.
                                                                                                     ChagrinlRiver
                                    LAKE ERIE
                                                                       COLLECTIONS AND OBSERVATIONS




                                                                       V  Walleye
Rocky ( River

-------
Figure 34:  A Large Walleye Collected in the Cleveland Harbor in 1971.
            Walleye such as this one were once extremely abundant.  In
            1850 a person could  catch more  than 50 per day but  in 1973
            only occasional specimens were  reported  per year.

                               114

-------
Since 1900, spawning was primarily in the Lake Erie island region and,
to a lesser extent, in the lower rivers and shorelines of Lake Erie.
The population apparently recovered slowly between 1900-1955 and then
suffered another serious and sudden decline.  In 1970, the total Lake
Erie commercial catch was less than one million pounds.  The species
has not recovered from this recent decline in the Central Basin, although
some recent increase, (possibly a temporary one), has been noted in
the Western Basin. (Fig. 34.)

At present, the combined effects of stream obstruction, both chemical
and physical, and deterioration of the rivers and near-shore areas
have nearly eliminated the successful reproduction of this species in
the study area.  Only occasional specimens of adults are taken and the
collections of a few yearlings in the lower Chagrin River suggest
that a small population might be spawning in or near the stream.  On
the whole, this species should be considered rare in this area, having
little or no reproductive success.

   (References;  37, 55, 62, 64, 69, 74, 84, 111, 118, 119, 147, 150, 161)

89B. BLUE PIKE, Stizostedion vitreum glaucum

     PROBABLY EXTIRPATED                                       LAKE

The relative abundance of the Walleye compared with its subspecies, the
Blue Pike was unknown prior to 1900.  It is assumed that the Blue Pike
was very abundant in the area because of proximity to the center of
Blue Pike abundance in the deeper waters of Lake Erie.

After 1900, with the loss of Sturgeon, Muskellunge, Pike and Blackbass,
it became increasingly important to the fisheries and was highly prized
as a food fish.  In 1922, for example, 1,126,158 pounds were brought into
Cuyahoga County ports.  After 1955, the population in Lake Erie col-
lapsed and by 1967, the species had become  commercially extirpated
(37, 147, 150).

This once abundant and economically important species is presently
considered by many to be extinct.  It was restricted primarily  to Lake
Erie, the only other known populations of Blue Pike occurring in
limited areas of Lakes Ontario, Huron and Winnepeg.  Apparently,
these other populations have undergone similar declines and the entire
subspecies may well be  extinct.  No specimens were reported or  collected
during this survey.

   (References;  37, 144, 147, 150)
                                 115

-------
90.  YELLOW PERCH, Perca flavescens

     ABUNDANT                                               UBIQUITOUS

Before 1900, the Yellow Perch was widely distributed and abundant
throughout Lake Erie, and was considered a "trash" species, because
at that time the more desirable Whitefish, Ciscoes and other prized
food fishes were abundant.  At this time, Klippart (111) stated that,
its "...flesh is soft, rather coarse, and insipid; at best, it is
nothing more than a third-rate panfish.", and "The writers opinion is
that perch make better glue than food."  During this period, Sterling
wrote that

             "...perch were a most worthless animal...you
             can have all you want [from fish dealers] for
             the trouble of carrying them away.  I once saw
             three tons sold for manure...for as many dollars."

After 1900, and until 1950, the species was considered largely of
secondary importance.  In 1917, only 33,701 pounds were brought into
Cuyahoga County ports even though they were obviously abundant.  With
the decrease of other food fishes after 1955, especially the Blue
Pike and Walleye, the Perch became of major importance to the commercial
and sport fisheries.

Recently, the species appears to be declining in numbers although it
 is the most important sport and commercial species in Lake Erie.
In the Cleveland area it was the most abundant food species.  It was
currently reproducing in the Cleveland area, as evidenced by the col-
lections of eggs and all age classes during the survey.  Schools of
Perch occasionally enter the lower rivers as adults, and young-of-the-
year were commonly collected in the lower Chagrin River and elsewhere.
Yellow Perch are currently abundant in all areas of the Cleveland
Shoreline including the Cleveland Harbor, and reports of specimens taken
from industrial water intakes indicate that they occasionally ascend
the lower Cuyahoga River from Lake Erie.   Additional specimens have
been taken  in the upper Chagrin and Cuyahoga rivers and may be the
result of stocking in reservoirs.

   (References;  37, 40, 64, 73, 83, 111, 119, 124, 147, 150, 163)

91.  BLACKSIDE DARTER, Percina maculata

     RARE                                                      STREAM

Although little is known of the abundance of this darter prior to 1900,
there is no reason to doubt that it was present and perhaps locally
numerous in the area.
                                  116

-------
 Since  1900,  the  species has been  found  throughout  the  Rocky  River
 drainage  and was  present  in lesser  numbers  in  the  Cuyahoga and Chagrin
 rivers.

 During the current  survey, we were  unable to obtain  specimens  from
 the Rocky River.  A few individuals were collected from several locali-
 ties in the  middle  portions of  the  Chagrin  River.  In  addition,  Orr
 and Rhodes (124)  reported having  collected  two  specimens  in  the upper
 Cuyahoga  River.   The species must now be considered  locally  uncommon
 and rare  in  overall abundance.  This darter occasionally  strays  into
 the waters of Lake  Erie (150).

   (References;   119,  124, 147,  150, 163)

 92.  CHANNEL DARTER,  Percina copelandi

     PROBABLY EXTIRPATED                                       LAKE

 No specimens of  this  primarily  lake species appear to  have been  preserved,
 but there is reason to believe  that it was  formerly  numerous on  the
 clean, sandy shores of the Cleveland area.

 Between 1924 and  1950, specimens were taken at  the mouth  of  the  Rocky
 and Chagrin  rivers.   It decreased markedly  in abundance after  1950
 and no specimens  have been reported from the study area since.

 None was  collected  during our survey, and the species was assumed  to
 be extirpated in  the  study area, probably because  of the  destruction
 of its habitat along  the Lake Erie  shoreline.

   (References;  147,  150)

 93A. OHIO LOGPERCH  DARTER, Percina  caprodes caprodes

     RARE                                                      STREAM

After reviewing the literature,  Osburn (125) concluded that this
 species was widely  distributed in Lake Erie and its tributaries before
 1900.   At that time, two subspecies of P^.  caprodes were not recognized,
and it is assumed that both were included in his discussion.

Prior to  this survey, the  Ohio Logperch was recorded only in the
Cuyahoga River drainage.   It is  intolerant of pollution and siltation and
apparently has declined greatly  in abundance.

In Ohio, this subspecies  is primarily restricted to streams,  although
small populations occasionally persist in impoundments.  During this
study,  one specimen was taken  in the upper Cuyahoga River.  An additional
                                117

-------
       Figure 35:  Distribution of Yellow Perch and Logperch Darters.
00
                                 LAKE ERIE
 Rocky
                                                                         COLLECTIONS AND OBSERVATIONS




                                                                          •  Yellow Perch




                                                                          Q  Northern Logperch Darter




                                                                          •^  Ohio Logperch Darter

-------
Logperch specimen was collected in the lower Chagrin River and was
identified as an intergrade between the Ohio and Northern Logperch.
This would indicate the presence of a limited !P. c^. caprodes population
somewhere in the Chagrin.

  (References;  119, 124, 125, 147, 150, 163)

93B. NORTHERN LOGPERCH DARTER, Percina caprodes semifasciata

     RARE                                                      LAKE

As has been previously stated, confusion between the two subspecies of
Logperch Darters makes it difficult to determine their exact abundance
before 1900.  Apparently, the Northern Logperch was common along the
clean beaches of the study area.

Between 1900 and 1950, several specimens were taken on beaches near
Cleveland, but the population was declining along the shoreline (147).

A severe decline in numbers has occurred since 1950.  Only three adults
were taken in Lake Erie during this survey.  In the Cleveland Harbor,
the species is reproducing and small numbers of fry were collected
during 1973-1974.

  (References;  119, 125, 147, 150, 163)

94.   EASTERN SAND DARTER, Ammocrypta pellucida

     PROBABLY EXTIRPATED                                       STREAM

From literature references and many preserved specimens we conclude
that this sand-inhabiting species was present in the area prior to
1900 and probably was very numerous.

After 1900 it began to show a marked decrease throughout inland Ohio
and Lake Erie.  After 1960, none have been recorded from Lake Erie.

In spite of an intensive effort to collect this species, none was
taken in the study area during this survey, although five specimens
were collected in the adjacent Grand River.

  (References;  119, 134, 147, 150)

95A. CENTRAL JOHNNY DARTER, Etheostoma nigrum nigrum

     ABUNDANT                                                  STREAM

Prior to 1900, failure to differentiate between the Central Johnny and
Scaly Johnny Darters made it impossible to ascertain the relative
                                 119

-------
 abundance  of  each.  Members  of  the  Johnny Darter  complex  could  be  found
 throughout all  the  tributaries  and  along the  shores  of Lake Erie in
 this vicinity.   Typical  examples of  the Central Johnny Darter and
 intergrades with the   Scaly   Johnny have been preserved.  They are
 known  to have inhabited  all  of  the  streams  and the lake shore in the
 study  area.   Central Johnny  Darters  were probably numerous in all
 streams and tributaries.

 Since  1900, innumerable  specimens have been taken from streams  throughout
 the study  area.

 During the survey,  this  subspecies was numerous in all of the area
 streams, partly  because  of its  tolerance to siltation and many  types of
 pollutants.   However,  it was not collected  in the lower Cuyahoga River
 where  the  pollution level was apparently intolerable.  This darter
 is abundant throughout the Chagrin and upper Cuyahoga and Rocky drainages,
 whereas it was only moderately  numerous in  the other streams.

   (References;   115, 119, 124,  125,  136, 147, 150, 163)

 95B.   SCALY JOHNNY DARTER, Etheostoma nigrum eulepis

       RARE                                                    LAKE

 The Scaly  Johnny Darter, essentially a Lake Erie species in Ohio,  was
 not recognized until 1935 (147).  As was previously stated, there  are
 no accurate records documenting its  early abundance.

After  1935, and probably long before, this  subspecies was rapidly
 declining  in numbers.

 This decline has resulted in the near extirpation of the Scaly Johnny
Darters from the study area.   Only a single individual was collected
 during the study, this from the mouth of the Chagrin River.  There is
 an intergrading population in the lower Chagrin,  and six intergrades
were collected in the lowermost mile of the Chagrin.

   (References;  119, 125, 147, 150)

96A.  "ALLEGHENY" GREENSIDE DARTER, Etheostoma b_.  blennioides

      UNCOMMON                                                 STREAM

There is reason to believe that the Greenside Darter, as a species, was
present and perhaps numerous  in the tributaries of this area and adjacent
 sections of Lake Erie before  1900.
                                 120

-------
Since 1900, it has been particularly numerous in the upper sections
of the Rocky River and the upper half of the Cuyahoga River.  Increased
siltation of the streams and the elimination of suitable habitat has
resulted in a gradual decrease in abundance in the study area.

Specimens were taken during this survey only from the Rocky and Chagrin
Rivers, but it should occur in the upper Cuyahoga River as well.

  (References;  121, 130, 147, 150, 163)

96B. "OZARK" GREENSIDE DARTER, Etheostoma. b.. pholidotum

     RARE                                                      LAKE

In 1968, Miller (121) described this subspecies from the Ozarks.
In Ohio it inhabits Lake Erie, in more or less typical form, and in
tributary streams especially in the lower poritons.  In the study
area, we assume, that as elsewhere in Lake Erie (150), it was formerly
common in the shallows along the shore line, intergrading in the lower
sections of the tributaries with the "Allegheny" Greenside.  At present
this form is nearing extirpation from Lake Erie.  None was  taken from
the beaches of the  study area.  A single specimen ,  captured in the
Chagrin River near  its mouth, was an intergrade with the "Allegheny".

  (References;  121)

97.  IOWA DARTER, Etheostoma exile

     SCIENTIFICALLY EXTIRPATED                                  STREAM

No  specimens of the Iowa Darter were reported prior  to 1900.  There
is  no  reason, however,  to doubt their presence in the area, especially
in  pothole lakes and streams having much aquatic vegetation and a
rich organic bottom.

Between 1900 and 1950,  the  species was  taken in several localities  in
the upper  Cuyahoga  and  Chagrin  rivers,  after which  it appears to have
been extirpated from most of  these  localities.

Despite intensive seining,  none was  taken during this survey  and  it may
be  considered  to be scientifically  extirpated  in the area.

   (References;  147, 150)
                                 121

-------
98.  RAINBOW DARTER, Etheostoma caeruleum

     ABUNDANT                                                  STREAM

Literature records before 1900 are unreliable in most sections of Ohio
because of confusion with the superficially similar species, the
Orangethroat Darter.  Because the Orangethroat does not occur in this
area and since sufficient material is preserved from Cuyahoga, Lake,
Geauga, Portage, Summit and Medina Counties, we have been provided
with sufficient evidence of its former, widespread distribution (147).

Since 1900, it has been numerous throughout the tributaries, especially
east of the Allegheny Front Escarpment.

Presently in the study area the Rainbow Darter appears to be most
common in the upper Chagrin River, although smaller populations exist
in the upper Cuyahoga and Rocky river drainages.

   (References;  115, 119, 124, 136, 147, 150, 163)

99.  BARRED FANTAIL DARTER, Etheostoma f. flabellare

     COMMON                                                    STREAM

Published records and preserved specimens indicate that before 1900 this
species was abundant and of general distribution in the Lake Erie
drainage, including this area.

Since 1900, it was numerous  in all tributaries, especially in those
portions containing sluggish riffles and in pools having a swift
current.

At present a decline in universal abundance is evident and the species
is primarily restricted to small headwater tributaries of the rivers
in the study area which have not yet been subjected to the effects of
pollutants.

   (References;  124, 125, 136, 147, 150, 163)

100.  FRESHWATER DRUM, Aplodinotus grunniens

      ABUNDANT                                                 LAKE

Kirtland  (80) stated that Lake Erie "...abounds with  this species."

Since  1900 the  Drum has been an abundant inhabitant of Lake Erie;
95,019 Ibs. were brought into Cuyahoga  County ports in 1922.  If  there
has been a change in numerical abundance, it is towards  greater numbers.
Hartman  (37)  in giving possible causes  for  this increase states,
                                 122

-------
       Figure 36:   Distribution of  Darters.
                             LAKE  ERIE
U)
 Rocky L  River
COLLECTIONS AND OBSERVATIONS




 %  Central Johnny Darter




 © Scaly Johnny Darter




 A "Ozark" Greenside Darter




 "& Rainbow Darter




 TO Barred Fantail Darter

-------
          "The eggs are semi-buoyant and float at or near the
          water surface, and thus avoid potentially deleterious
          conditions on the lake bottom.  Newly hatched larvae
          also tend to remain near the surface."

This possible increase in the population is not to be considered
favorable.  Hartmen continues,

          "...this warm water species has virtually no commercial
          market value and little appeal to sports fishermen in
          Lake Erie."

Although this species occurs in great numbers in the Cleveland area of
Lake Erie, it is not as numerous as the Yellow Perch or Gizzard Shad.
Furthermore, during the cooler months of the year, it retreats to the
deeper portion of the Lake and becomes strikingly less abundant in
the near-shore waters of the study area.  The Drum occasionally migrates
upstream and was taken as far upstream in the Chagrin River as the
Willoughby Dam.  Collections of many year classes, including fry,
indicate  that it successfully reproduces in the area.

   (References;  37, 66, 80, 109, 119, 144, 147, 150)

101A.  CENTRAL MOTTLED SCULPIN, Cottus b. bairdi

       RARE                                                    STREAM

Although no locality records exist prior to 1900  (147), this subspecies
undoubtedly occurred in the small tributaries of the area.  Early
conditions were more favorable than at present.

After 1900, sculpins were taken in several localities in the upper
half of the Cuyahoga and Chagrin rivers.

No  collections of this species were made during this study.  Although
it  was not  collected, it cannot be assumed to be extirpated from the
area, since many  tiny tributaries were not sampled.  We believe that
limited populations exist in  the headwaters of  the Chagrin and Cuyahoga
rivers.  Obviously, Central Mottled Sculpins have become restricted
in their range and greatly reduced in numerical abundance.

   (References;  119, 147, 150, 163)

101B.  NORTHERN MOTTLED SCULPIN, Cottus bairdi  kumlieni

       RARE                                                   LAKE

Another sculpin subspecies had been  taken  east  of  the  study area near
the Ohio-Pennsylvania border.    This  subspecies  inhabits Lake  Erie,
                                 124

-------
and was not reported from the Eastern or Central Basins.

In 1974, a specimen of a Northern Mottled Sculpin was given to us by
Mr. David  Kananen, of the City of Cleveland.  The specimen had been
taken from the water intake screens.  Apparently it was pulled into the
intake a few miles offshore.  This specimen represents the first
record of the subspecies in the Central Basin.

In other areas, the Northern Mottled Sculpin was captured only in
shallow waters during the colder portions of the year, usually at the
time of ice formation (147).  It is probable that a small population
inhabits the Cleveland area beaches during the winter months,  retreating
to deeper waters at other times of the year.

  (References;  147, 150)
                                125

-------
      Figure 37:  Distribution of Freshwater Drum and Sculpins
                                  LAKE ERIE
                                                                                                              River
Rocky
                                                                       COLLECTIONS AND OBSERVATIONS




                                                                       ^  Freshwater Drum (Sheepshead)




                                                                       Q  Northern Mottled Sculpin




                                                                       A  Central Mottled Sculpin

-------
 Nursery Zones Within the Study Area


 No attempt was made to intensively survey the study area for nursery
 zones but certain observations should be included in this report. It
 should be understood that more work in this area is necessary and
 should be conducted in the future .

 Fish fry and young-of-the-year were routinely collected during seining
 operations throughout the survey and occasionally were taken in trawls
 or gill nets. Three principal nursery areas occur along the Lake Erie
 shoreline in the study area.  In order of increasing importance (in
 terms of numbers of individuals)  they are;the mouth,  lower one mile and
 adjacent shoreline of the Rocky River;  the  mouth and  adjacent shoreline
 of the Chagrin River; and the Cleveland Harbor and adjacent marinas.
 The area which produces the most  diverse fauna is the Chagrin River
 nursery;  a slightly less diverse  fauna  is in the Rocky River nursery
 area;  and in the Cleveland Harbor, most of  the nursery is dominated
 by a few species.

 The following tables (  3-5 )  indicate those species which are collected
 as fry or young-of-the-year in the  three principal nursery areas.  As
 it is  not unusual  to collect  a large number of young  fishes when
 seining due  to the collection of  an  entire  school,  the number of
 individuals  becomes somewhat  irrelevent.  The abundance of each species
 has been  depicted  as a  relative term, Abundant,  Common or Rare.  It
 was often the occurrence that we  collected  several thousand fry  or
 young-of-the-year  during a single seining sample,  all  but a few  specimens
 were invariably  released.
Spawning Areas

It is obvious that most smaller, non-migratory species of fishes are
reproducing within the study area.  The success of these species is
individually expressed in their distributions and abundances which have
already been discussed.  Certain species have been observed spawning
within the Cleveland Harbor and its adjacent marinas. Some have been
documented as spawning in the lower Cuyahoga River.  As it is generally
assumed that these two areas do not support the reproduction of fishes,
we feel that these observations should be discussed even though a study
of spawning areas was not actively pursued.  It is probable that the
list of fry and young-of-the-year are similar to a list that could be
constructed of the spawning areas, should such a study have been done.

During 1972-74,  the Goldfish,  Pumpkinseed Sunfish,Largemouth Blackbass
and Yellow Perch were documented as spawning within the Cleveland
                                   127

-------
     Table  3 :   Species of Fishes Collected as Fry or Young-of-the-
                 Year in the Cleveland Harbor,  1972-1974.
Species
Alewife

Eastern Gizzard Shad

Rainbow Smelt

Eastern Quillback

Common White Sucker

Carp

Goldfish

Golden Shiner

Longnose Dace

Common Emerald Shiner

Spottail Shiner

Fathead Minnow

Bluntnose Minnow

Trout-perch

Brook Silverside

White Bass

Rockbass

Largemouth Blackbass

Green Sunfish

Bluegill Sunfish

Pumpkinseed  Sunfish

Yellow Perch

Northern Logperch  Darter

White Crappie
Abundance
Abundant

Abundant

Abundant

Rare

Uncommon

Common

Common

Abundant

Rare

Abundant

Uncommon

Rare

Common

Rare

Rare

Uncommon

Uncommon

Rare

Uncommon

Common

Abundant

Common

Rare

Uncommon
                                   128

-------
   , Table   4  :  Species of Fishes Collected as Fry or Young-of-the-
                Year in the Rocky River Near Lake Erie, 1972-1974
Species
Species
Alewife

Central Quillback

Common White Sucker

Goldfish

Common Emerald Shiner

Spotfin Shiner

Silverjaw Minnow

Brown Bullhead

White Bass

Rockbass

Smallmouth Blackbass

Bluegill Sunfish

Yellow Perch
Eastern Gizzard Shad

Golden Redhorse

Carp

Goldenshiner

Spottail Shiner

Northeastern Sand Shiner

Bluntnose Minnow

Brook Stickleback

White Crappie

Largemouth Blackbass

Green Sunfish

Pumpkinseed Sunfish

Freshwater Drum (Sheepshead)
                                   129

-------
     Table  5 :   Species of Fishes Collected as Fry or Young-of-the-
                 Year in the Lower Chagrin River and Adjacent Areas
                 of Shoreline, 1972-1974.
Species
Longnose Gar

Eastern Gizzard Shad

Grass Pickerel

Goldfish

Longnose Dace

Common Emerald Shiner

Spotfin Shiner

Silverjaw Minnow

Channel Catfish

Black Bullhead

White Bass

Black Crappie

Smallmouth Blackbass

Green Sunfish

Bluegill Sunfish

Eastern Quillback

Golden Redhorse

Common White Sucker

Scaly Johnny Darter
Species
Alewife

Rainbow Smelt

Carp

Golden Shiner

Creek Chub

Spottail Shiner

Northeastern Sand Shiner

Bluntnose Minnow

Brown Bullhead

Brook Silverside

White Crappie

Rockbass

Largemouth Blackbass

Pumpkinseed Sunfish

Orangespotted Sunfish

Central Quillback

Black Redhorse

Yellow Perch

Freshwater Drum  (Sheepshead)
                                    130

-------
Harbor.  Goldfish were observed to be depositing eggs on the undersides
of boats in the marinas and on the pilings within the harbor. Yellow
Perch spawned within the harbor utilizing debris to attach the eggs.
Such items as newspapers, wire, tree branches etc.  were commonly used.
At one point, the Yellow Perch deposited large quantities of eggs on
the anchor lines and mesh of our gill nets.  Pumpkinseed Sunfish and
Largemouth Blackbass were frequently observed tending nests which
contained eggs. Green Sunfish were observed nesting in the old river
channel of the Cuyahoga by Mr. Larry McGeehan and Mr. Dave  Kananen of'
the City of Cleveland.  The Centrarchid nests were usually located on
flat surfaces of objects such as the breakwall rock, boards or sub-
merged marina steps. The success of these species was documented by
the collection of fry, but the success is limited in most cases.  As
has been indicated  in Table Five,  many other species of fry were
collected within the Cleveland Harbor, and it is probably that all of
these are reproducing with limited success.

Other areas also serve as spawning and nursery areas, but these were
not actively examined. Of interest in this discussion is the lower
ten miles of the Cuyahoga River. We have previously stated that in
this area the Goldfish and Green Sunfish were observed spawning in
1974.  We have observed that above the Southerly Sewage Treatment Plant,
large quantities of young fishes may be collected.  One such collection
(at Granger Road) produced the following fry and young-of-the-year,
(estimated numbers):

                          Creek Chub                 50
                          Goldfish                   25
                          Brook Stickleback           5
                          Common White Sucker        10
                          Stoneroller Minnow         15
                          Green Sunfish               1

Below the Sewage Plant, and especially as one approaches the Lake, the
condition of the river worsens. Within the lower five miles only the
Goldfish, Emerald Shiner and Green Sunfish were collected as Young-of-
the-Year or fry.  Even though these species are present in the lower
few miles of river, one can hardly consider the lower Cuyahoga as a
spawning or nursery zone.
The Yellow Perch in the Cleveland Area

The Yellow Perch is the most abundant commercial and sport fish species
in the Cleveland Area.  Its population remains rather high, although
not as high as in past years.  In spring, the species is abundant
enough to collect several hundred specimens from a 1000 ft. experimental
gill net in 24 hours.  It is the most sought after sport species and
contributes greatly to the remaining commercial fishery in the Central
Basin of Lake Erie.  Because of its economic importance, a study was made
                                  131

-------
of its growth rate and population structure, to determine the
possible effects of the Cleveland water quality on the species.  The
study was conducted on specimens collected in the nearshore waters
near the Cleveland Harbor.

In examining the possible effects of the Cleveland shoreline on the
Yellow Perch, two methods were utilized (1) the length to age
relationship and (2) the length to weight relationship.

Specimens were collected in the summer of 1972.  In order to standardize
the age to length data, only the June and July specimens were used,
whereas the length to weight relationship utilized all specimens that
were collected during the year.

During the period of study, 539 Yellow Perch were aged and the length
to age relationship was plotted (Fig. 38).  Considering that gill
nets are extremely selective (56) it is not surprising that the year
classes 0+ and 1+ are poorly represented in the catch.  Gill net of
the 1 inch size or smaller was not used in the survey.  If, however, we
examine the year classes 11+ through V+, a pattern emerges that is
very similar to that of other Lake Erie studies.  The overlap in length
of several age classes is considered to be normal for the Yellow Perch
in the Lake.  The decreasing percentage of individuals in succeeding
years is also normal.  In all respects, the length-age relationships
seem to be compatable to that found elsewhere in Lake Erie (133).

The relationship of length to weight, known as the coefficient of
condition or "relative fatness", may be utilized to determine the
condition of an individual fish specimen or population of a given
species.  A starved, stunted or diseased individual or population will
be relatively lighter per mm. of length, and therefore, will have a
lower coefficient of condition  (K).

The K for any given species will also be dissimilar at different
localities and in different years.  For example, in the Western Basin
of Lake Erie in 1952, the K for the Yellow Perch was 1.78-2.19 (56),
while in the colder northern waters of Wisconsin the K for the same
species was 1.72-1.92.

During our study, a total of 1,654 specimens of Yellow Perch were
examined and the K factor calculated.  As explained by Jobes (56),
the K factor is influenced slightly by seasonal changes, (especially
due to the increase in gonad size) and also is influenced by gill net
techniques since "fatter" specimens tend to be collected more frequently.
In spite of these fluctuations, the K factor of specimens from the
Cleveland area consistantly shows  high value, indicating that they
are in good condition and  are not heavily stressed due to the poor
quality of the waters.  The average value for all Yellow Perch examined
was 2.2 (range 2.06-2.45).  When the length of the Cleveland area
                                132

-------
                 Figure 38:  Length Frequency Distribution of 539 Aged Yellow Perch.  (From Lake
                                 Erie near Cleveland,  Ohio,  1971 - 1972).


                                             GILL NET SURVEY
LO
OJ



40-
35 -
4J
0)
53
H 3°-
•r)
O
^
4J ^-J
cd
u
o
w 20-
0)
o
* 15r-
10-
5-






































































1




i+-

















!*X*X*X




^^^^•••IM















•gjsii
x*x*x
'X*X*X'



II
1
Sjig

X\vX-
III

X:X:X:
•X*X*X
:•:•:•:•:•:•
::::::::::::
•:•:•:•:•:•:
ijilJi?:::
:w:;:;

*x*x*x
iijijijiS
SixSi
''vX'X
•!•!•!•:$!



f





?!§•:!:
::i:x:x
ll^i
:•:•:•:¥:•
::•:•:•:•::

S§i?l
•:•:•;•:•:•
x*x*x
:•:•:•:!:;:
I
:::•:•:§

wS

| 	 VT — — — j
TIT ' '
TTT-I- ...


Age Average Percent
Class Length (mm) of Catch


1+ 112.4 mm. 5.0 %
11+ 158 5 mm 76 3 %
III+ 178.6 mm. 16.7 %
IV+ 208.0 mm. 1.1 %
V+ 215.0 mm. 0.9 %







:|$8x:

XvX'X •"•'•*•'•*•'
liiwte*^

                                 100    130    160     190     210     250

                                                                  Standard Length  (mm.)

-------
•g
UH
O

                      Figure 39: Length Frequency Distribution of 1,671
                                Yellow Perch.(From Lake Erie near
                                Cleveland, Ohio  1971 - 1972. ).
32 -
30 -
28 -
26 -
22 -
20 -
18 -
16 -
14 -
12 -
10
8-
6-
4-

2
















™

40 70 10















V.' .'.*•*
()













88$:
£•;:•:•:'::'

1.











•il-8
:•;•&•••••
•'••••??:
!§i$s

0



1
IvX'X
:%%:;•
||:%i;
s$s
:-$S§

?:'•:'$:
i|%i:;
•SSv
ill
8

1





ssss
si§>i§
si§is
•'••K?.-:-:
/XvXv
||:§:
wSS
Siws
•S:i'*:$
x"£$

DO







ivSsi
si§s
Ss>s
III
:§%:•:•:
S:S§:
SJJjS
ssji-i

19











SxS-i;
;X'.'xjX
SS-w HSsS
Sl^^xTI^-

0 220 2'50 28b 310
                                                        Standard Length  (mm)
                                       134

-------
    Figure 40:  Length to Weight Relationship for Yellow Perch Population.
0)
   500
   450-
   400 J
   350 i
   300
   250J
   200
   150
   100
    50-
               40      80      120      160      200     240




                        Standard Length (mm.)
280
                                  136

-------
Perch is plotted against the weight, the resultant curve (Fig. 40)is very
similar to that indicated by Jobes (56).  It is evident that adult
Yellow Perch are not severely harmed by the water quality in Cleve-
land, and in fact, seem to be growing well and are slightly heavier
than those  from the Western Basin of Lake Erie.

Even though the above discussion seems to indicate that perch are
doing well in Cleveland area waters, it must be remembered that the
population is considerably lower in numbers than in past years.
Commercial fishermen (   161) report that catches of Yellow Perch
continue to decline in terms of catch per unit of effort.  This decline
cannot be attributed to the killing of fishes by pollutants, for major
fish kills (perch) are uncommon in the area and certainly do not
contribute significantly to reductions in population size.  Similarly,
the commercial fishing cannot be blamed, for only one vessel was
engaged in fishing the area during 1972, and this vessel has recently
left Cleveland to fish elsewhere in Lake Erie.  Probably sports fishing
presently removes more and smaller individuals than does commercial
fishing, but we doubt that the combined effort of both fisheries has
had much effect on the Yellow Perch population.

Considering that relatively few individuals are removed and that the
fishes are growing well and show little apparent stress from pollutants
as adults, the probability exists that a lack of reproductive success
would explain the continued decline of this species.  This might be
attributed to the individual or combined effects of a number of
factors among which several appear particularly obvious (See p. 18).
It is our opinion that the poor quality of the nearshore waters in the
area of Cleveland have an influence on the population of young Yellow
Perch.  The decline of forage species  (shiners, minnows, etc.) has
probably led to a lack of available food not only for the adult Perch
but also for the Freshwater Drum, Aplodinotus grunniens.  It is
possible that Drum, Smelt, adult Perch and other species have begun
to feed more heavily on young  Perch in lieu of shiners.  This
possibility  is the direct result of the degradation of the water
quality along the shoreline.

The feeding behavior of Yellow Perch, Freshwater Drum and Rainbow Smelt
should be thoroughly investigated in the near future.
The Commercial and Sports Fishery, Past and Present

Originally, the commercial fishery in Lake Erie near Cleveland was a
viable and thriving operation.  In 1922, a total of eleven vessels
and 19 small craft were engaged in fishing or transporting commercial
fishes and 171 persons were employed by the industry (144).  Beach
seining, gill netting, trap netting, trotlines and handlines were all
                                135

-------
employed by the fishermen.  During that year, 5,076,591 pounds of
fish were landed in the port of Cleveland.

The commercial fishery has declined steadily.  By 1955 the industry
had dwindled to a few individual fishermen.  By 1972, only a single
vessel was engaged in the fishery and this was crewed by a single
man.  The catch during that year was valued at a few thousand dollars.
In 1973 this last vessel was sold, and now there is no commercial fishing
activity from the port of Cleveland.

The economic loss to the Cleveland area is considerable.  Because of
its steady decline the loss of this fishery has gone virtually unnoticed.
At present, nearly all of the fresh fish sold in the city are imported,
and most of these are from Canadian sources.  In table 6  we have
utilized information regarding the 1922 catch in Cleveland waters,
and have projected this to 1973 prices, to obtain a better appraisal
of the economic loss to the area.  We realize that this is a rough
estimate.  It should be noted that 1922 was already a depressed
fishery, (see history of the Fishery), and is not at all representative
of the fishery possible under the 1850 ecosystem.

We have converted the value of each species to a present day value
(per pound, live, wholesale),and in those cases where a species is
no longer marketed because of legislation or unavailability we have
converted the 1922 dollar value to 1973 value as per the US Bureau of
Statistics figures.

The total dollar value of $2,739,475.00 is considered to be an
approximate annual loss to the area.  This figure  is only the value
of round fish (uncleaned) and does not include the revenue lost to
associated industries such as packing, marketing or transportation.
To more fully realize the loss, one should multiply this figure by
approximately 2.7, the 1973 Cleveland conversion from wholesale round
fish to retail fillet.  The resultant dollar loss figure then becomes
approximately $7,396,482, obviously a considerable loss to the Cleveland
economy.

The sport  fishery has declined greatly.  The fishery, once attractive
to anglers seeking Walleye, Blue Pike, Smallmouth Blackbass etc.
(See pp. 104,  112), has now become a White Bass, Yellow Perch and
Carp fishery attractive primarily to local residents.  It is difficult
to estimate the loss in revenue because of the deterioration of the
sport fishery.   Several studies have shown that the normal sports
catches for some species usually exceed the commercial catch, (Ref. 25,
and others), thus placing a high value on the tonnage caught.  Further-
more,  the economic value of associated businesses such as bait sales,
fishing tackle shops, meals, lodging and gasoline are normal additional
revenues associated with a sports fishery which attracts non-residents.
The loss of revenue to Cleveland residents, both in real monies and in
                                137

-------
                               Table  6 :   Comparison of the Value of the Commercial Fishery in
                                           Cleveland based on the 1922 Catch and the 1973 Wholesale
                                           Prices for Round Fish.
u>
C3
Species
Burbot
Carp
Catfish
Cisco
Northern Pike
Blue Pike
Walleye
Sauger
Freshwater Drum
Suckers & Redhorse
White Bass
Whitef ishes
Yellow Perch
Landing
Value
(1922)
$ 803.00
1,732.00
1,544.00
73,286.00
2,721.00
140,625.00
8,494.00
16,115.00
2,111.00
1,975.00
1,719.00
846.00
14,480.00
Total
Pounds
(1922)
55,925
47,021
20,670
1,460,630
54,425
2,497,363
56,562
400,698
95,019
83,408
37,286
4,702
262,882
Price Per
Landing Pound
(July, 1973)
$ Unknown
.05
.40
Unknown
Unknown
.90
.75
Unknown
.04
.03
.27
.55
.42
Landing
Value
(1973)
$ 2,674.00
2,351.00
8,268.00
244,042.00
9,061.00
2,247,627.00
42,422.00
53,663.00
3,801.00
2,503.00
10,067.00
2,586.00
110,410.00
     Totals
$ 266,451.00
5,076,591 Ibs.
$ 2,739,475.00

-------
the value of those fishes captured by anglers is obviously a
considerable loss. When this is added to the estimated loss by the
commercial industry, it would seem that the total is a large enough
figure to be of real economic concern to the City of Cleveland.

Population Fluctuations

It has long been recognized that seasonal fluctuations occur in fish
populations in given areas.  Failure to recognize this may lead to an
improper evaluation of the relative abundance of a given species. The
Cleveland area is no exception.  Many cold water species of Lake
Erie fishes frequent the nearshore waters only during the colder months.
Such species as the Burbot, Lake Trout and Cisco were rare or absent
during the summer months although they were formerly present, at
times abundant, in the winter.  Prior to their extirpation from the
Cleveland area, the Whitefish behaved in a similar manner.

Other species utilized the shallow waters primarily during spring.
These entered the area to spawn and quickly retreated to the cooler,
deeper portions of the Lake.  This has always been the case with the
present population of Trout-perches.  This species was collected in
large numbers during March and May, 1972, but not a specimen was
taken during the following eight month sampling period.  Recently,
we have ascertained the exact month in which the Trout-perch migrate
to the shoreline, arriving in the last week of January and first
week of February; leaving soon after spawning late in May. It is
obvious that unless samples are taken of the fish fauna during the
early part of the year, such a species would not be observed and
thus might be considered not present.

Other fluctuations in numerical abundance were noted along the
Cleveland area shoreline immediately following periods of stormy
weather.  These fluctuations are well-known to commercial fishermen.
During high winds the soft muck bottom in the vicinity of Cleveland
is stirred by wave action, apparently causing such high turbidities
(and perhaps low dissolved oxygen levels) that the fishes retreat
to the deeper, cleaner areas approximately three to ten miles from
shore.  They remain offshore (apparently scattered) for approximately
three days after the storm subsides.  Recognizing this phenomenon
early in our studies, gill nets were set only during prolonged
periods of calmer weather.  This tended to standardize the samples
even though it reduced the number of samples obtained.

Observations of the seasonal population fluctuations of four abundant
Lake Erie fish species made during the course of the study are presented
in Figure 41.   These data were obtained during 1972.  Collections
made during the month of March, April and May comprise the Spring
period; June, July and August are designated Summer; September,
                                139

-------
Individuals  per  1000 ft.  of  gill net
r-        IN;        v^j         -p*
r        r        T         r
   4.V
T
r
r
f
                    w
                         o
9
fD
M
rt







H-
N
N
03
H
a.

en
cr
OJ
a.
H
p
3








fD
I-1
M
0
<

ITI
n>
I-!
o

r1
M
0
w
a
o


cr
                                                                        H-
                                                                        CTO

                                                                        H
                                                                        fD
                                                                      CO hr|
                                                                     t3 M
                                                                      (D e
                                                                      O O
                                                                      H- rt
                                                                      ft) C
                                                                      CD CD
                                                                        rf
                                                                      H- H-

                                                                      ° §
                                                                      rt en

                                                                      fD H-
                                                                      O P*
                                                                      H- tB

                                                                      p. x)
                                                                      rt O
                                                                     ^ T3
                                                                        H-
                                                                        O
                                                                     ro en
                                                                     h-1 H-
                                                                     CU N
                                                                     0 fD
                                                                     O<
                                                                     -•  O
                                                                        Hi
                                                                     O
                                                                     S4 Hi
                                                                     H- O
                                                                     O C
                                                                        83
                                                                        ?T
                                                                        fD

                                                                        W

-------
October and November are presented as Fall; and December 1971 is
combined with January and February of 1972 to indicate the Winter
abundances.  Although the lengths of gill nets used (See Methods)
varied from time to time, the numerical abundance of the Yellow
Perch, Rainbow Smelt, Eastern Gizzard Shad and Freshwater Drum was
standardized by presenting the data in terms of numbers of individuals
captured per 1000 feet of experimental gill net. It can be seen that
although these species are present during each season, the abundance
of each changes considerably.  For example, the abundance of Gizzard
Shad in the Fall is 100-fold greater than in Summer; and the population
of Rainbow Smelt is 25 times greater in Winter than in Fall.  Drum
are most abundant in Summer when it is at least 5 times more numerous
than in other seasons.

Such fluctuations represent the movement of large quantities of fishes
both to and from the nearshore waters in the vicinity of Cleveland. It
follows that to ascertain water quality of a given area, samples must
be taken during each of the four seasons, in order to insure a proper
evaluation of the relative abundance of fish species.

We have observed a similar phenomenon of abundance fluctuations in the
lower portions of the river drainages.  This is not surprising, but it
is important to note that these changes often occurred on a regular
basis.  Migrations of both lake and stream species to and from the
lower sections of rivers often changed species composition significantly.
The utilization of limited samples of fishes to determine the water
quality of the lower river watersheds is at best risky, and at most,
probably inaccurate.  As an example of this fluctuation, Table 7
illustrates a series of six collections at a single site in the lower
Rocky River taken over a period of 10 months in 1972.  These collections
were made with similar techniques and effort, and were standardized
by converting the data to fishes captured per hour of seining.  As can
be seen, the species composition, relative abundance and species
diversity index changes significantly from collection to collection.

For example, a collection made on May 18, 1972, yielded 13 species of
fishes and contained both stream and lake species.  A subsequent
collection made on the 27th of July, 1972, contained only four species,
all considered to be permanent residents of the lower river. A further
examination of these data indicates that the Spottail Shiner,predominantly
a Lake Erie species, was no longer present, and, in fact, it was not
until October that this species was again collected at the site.  White
Bass likewise had retreated from the area and again returned during
the October sample period. These data may or may not indicate mass
migrations of certain species into the lower rivers, but since the
presence or absence of species and the number collected  are factors
in the calculation of the species diversity index, it can be seen that
a very low index might be normal during certain periods of the year. It
might be added that stream samples are normally taken during the summer,
thus increasing the chances of low indices.
                                141

-------
         Table  7:   Fluctuations  In Fish  Species  Composition  and
                   Abundance  in  the Lower Rocky  River.
Species 18/Jan
Alewife 	
Eastern Gizzard Shad 	
Coho Salmon 	
Chinook Salmon 	
Central Quillback 	
Common White Sucker 	
Carp 	
Goldfish 	
Golden Shiner 	
Longnose Dace 	
Common Emerald Shiner 3
Redfin Shiner 	
Striped Shiner 	
n • 1 O1_ • 1
SpottaiJ. bhiner X
Spotfin Shiner 64
Northeastern Sand Shiner 3
Northern Mimic Shiner 	
Fathead Minnow 	
Bluntnose Minnow 13
-t 1 HT • 1
Stoneroller Minnow l
Brown Bullhead 	
Brook Silverside 	
White Bass 	
Northern Rockbass 	
N. Smallmouth Blackbass 	
N. Largemouth Blackbass 	
Bluegill Sunfish 	
__ - , j r» .t • 1
Pumpkinseed bunrish 	
Yellow Perch 	
Co
2 7 /Mar

2
1
1
2
1
5
	
	
	
2000
	
4
onn
/UU
50
1
2
2
30



_ —
	
	
	
	
	


25
llection
18/May

300
	
	
	
	
	
	
10
	
2000
	
1
s,r\n
JUU
6
	
	
I
30



____
50
	
	
	
20
o
z
1
Date
27/Jul 6/Oct
	 50
	 150
	 -i
	 	
	 	
	 4
	 3
	 1
	 	
	 	 i
1 21
	 1
	 	


	 40
	 1
	 	
	 4
	 25




	 200
	 	
2 	
1 	
1 6



l$/0ct
5
20
	
	
8
	
1
	
	
	
5
	

c.
D
	
25
	
	
2


i
_L
100
1
	
	
10



Total Species                 6      14      13       4     15      12

Diversity Index           1.204   0.846   1.435   1.922  2.389   2.284
                                 142

-------
 The  species  diversity  index  of  this  single  site  fluctuated  between
 .846 and  2.38  over  the 10 month period,  depending  on which  month
 was  examined.  By most  standards this would  translate into both  a
 poor water quality  and a rather good water  quality in  the same  stream.

 Species diversity indices of stations  in the Lake  were also found
 to fluctuate,  although not as markedly as the  rivers.   Diversity
 fluctuations in the Lake collections were predominantly seasonal.  We
 feel that this great fluctuation  in  the  rivers indicates the frequent,
 although perhaps temporary,  utilization  of  the lower rivers by  both
 Lake Erie species and  individuals  from upstream  areas.  This tends
 to emphasize the importance  of  the lower river areas to both groups
 of fishes.  Unfortunately, it is  these areas  which become  polluted
 first.

 Species Diversity in the Study  Area

 The  species diversity  index  (Shannon-Weaver) was calculated for each
 of the ten intensive study stations in Lake Erie.   It  was found that
 the  diversity  was low,  ranging  from  .691 to 1.615.  While the index
 fluctuated slightly from sample to sample, it is possible to state
 that  the diversity  is  rather uniform along the Cleveland shoreline
 at points one-half  to  one mile  from shore. This  reflects the high
 mobility of the species inhabiting these depths  (  25-30 ft.) as well
 as the lack of avoidance of  the areas  nearer to  the mouth of the
 Cuyahoga River. The noticable differential between the  species
 diversity index and maximum  diversity  (Figure 42)  is reflective of
 the  great predominance  of the Yellow Perch and/or  the  Eastern Gizzard
 Shad  in nearly every sample.  These two  species usually comprised
 more  than 90% of  each  collection.

 Samples taken  nearer the shoreline, near the mouth of  the Cuyahoga
 River or in shoreline marinas usually  produced considerably   higher
 diversities,  and at the same time, more  equivalent maximum  diversities.
 This  is because of  the presence of a more diverse  habitat,   to the
 local attraction of shallower, more protected waters and in  some
 cases, to the presence of warm water outfalls or sewage  effluents.
 These latter factors have been  shown to  act as attractants  for many
 species of fishes.   In general,  we have  found that pollution sources
 are attractive to many Cleveland area  fish species until they become
 toxic.  This point  is reached in some  areas of the lower Cuyahoga
 River.  Although fishes are usually present in this area in  low
 numbers,  the diversity usually approaches zero.  Once the Cuyahoga
 flow mixes with the relatively  cleaner harbor waters,  the diversity
 becomes strikingly higher.  Within  200 yards of the river mouth,  (near
 the U.S.  Coast Guard Station),  the diversity index often reached a
value of 3.00.  This figure is higher than the usual value for the
 offshore stations in the vicinity  of Cleveland.
                                143

-------
      Figure 42:  Fish Population Data on Ten  Intensive Lake  Erie  Stations
                                                                                                     Chagrinl River
Rocky
                                                                                       LEGEND
Species Diversity Index

Maximum Diversity

Number of Species

Density / 1000 ft. of
   Gill Net

-------
 The highest  diversities  in  the  study  area occur at  the mouth  of  the
 Chagrin River, where  collections often produce diversities over  4.00.
 Slightly  lower diversities  occur elsewhere  in the Chagrin drainage,
 3.00  to 3.50. In  the  Rocky  River the  diversities are usually  2.00  to
 2.50,  indicating  a slightly depressed area.  The Cleveland harbor  and
 protected areas along the shoreline usually exhibit diversities  of
 2.50  to 3.00, while the  offshore areas range from 1.00 to 1.50.  The
 lower  Cuyahoga River  diversities range from 0.00 to 0.50, indicating
 an extremely distressed  area.   Figure 42 depicts the species  population
 analysis  for the  ten  Lake Erie  study  sites.  Information pertaining
 to the distribution of fishes in the  area rivers is contained in Table 9.
 The relative abundance of species  in  the study area is presented in Table  10;
 of the Lake  and Lower Rivers in Table 11; of the Harbor area  in  Table 12,
 Fourty-seven species  are included in the species composition of the
 Cleveland Harbor, of  which  many are probably reproducing (See page 128).
 Obviously the study area, Lake  Erie or the  Cleveland Harbor are  not
 "virtually fishless"  as  has been stated by  certain individuals in
 the past.
Summary of the General Decline of the Cleveland Area Fish Fauna

Literature reports and unpublished records indicate that the Cleveland
metropolitan area contained, at one time or another, a total of 107
species and subspecies of fishes.  The past literature indicated that
prior to 1800 immense numbers of fishes were present.

The degradation of the area began early and its effects of the reduction
of fish species and populations seemed to have occurred during three
distinct periods.  The first period of decline occurred between 1800
and 1830 and was primarily caused by the physical obstruction of streams
by mill dams.  These severely reduced the populations of those species
blocked from their upstream spawning grounds.  The second period
began with the rapid expansion of industrialization and the concurrent
growth of the City of Cleveland; resulting in the input of many
pollutants into the Cuyahoga River.  Between 1865 and 1890, the river
and nearshore areas became heavily polluted with materials ranging
from crude oil and raw sewage to sawdust and animal carcasses.  This
of course eliminated the lower river and shoreline spawning grounds
for those species of fishes requiring such habitats.

During the 1950's another serious decline in Lake Erie species occurred.
Such valued species as the Walleye, Blue Pike and Sauger declined
rapidly.  This decline has been unexplained but it is  postulated
that low dissolved oxygen levels in the deeper portions of Lake Erie
are at least partially responsible.

Our present survey indicates that approximately 50% of those species
                                145

-------
reported for the Cleveland area are at this time either rare,
endangered or probably extirpated within the study area (Table 8 ).
Among those species most seriously affected are:

         (1)  those that are highly migratory stream spawning species
              such as the Lake Sturgeon, Muskellunge, Northern Pike
              or suckers.  The initial cause of their decline is
              attributed to stream obstructions during the early
              1800's.  The more recent effects of draining and siltation
              have largely destroyed their former spawning grounds.
              This recent factor, combined with "chemical dams" of
              pollutants have rendered these species nearly
              non-reproductive in the Cleveland area.

         (2)  those species which were limited to the lower river
              habitats or to the nearshore areas of Lake Erie were
              seriously affected during the 1850 to 1900 period.
              Such species as the Longnose Dace, Largemouth Blackbass,
              Walleye, Northern Mimic Shiner and many others were
              adversly affected by the degradation of the nearshore
              waters and the pollution of the lower rivers. Most of
              these species depend upon habitats of clean sand or
              gravels, heavily vegetated bays or shoreline marshes.
              These species declined greatly prior to 1900, due
              to the destruction of their preferred habitat.  It
              is probable that some of these species became extirpated
              from the area during this period.

         (3)  stream species which were intolerant of chemical,
              municipal pollutants or siltation were adversly affected
              in the upper areas of the stream drainages by the recent
              increase in human expansion into the suburbs.  The
              Sand Darter, Bigmouth Shiner and Hornyhead Chub have
              continued to decline in areas where they were abundant
              in past years, due to siltation and pollution of the
              smaller streams and brooks.  Poor land use planning and
              improper erosion control measures are of primary cause
              in these areas.

         (4)  those species that required colder, deeper portions of
              Lake Erie during the summer months were abundant on
              the Cleveland shoreline only during the winter or spring.
              Such species as the Lake Trout, Cisco, Burbot and others
              were recently affected by low dissolved oxygen levels
              in the deeper portions of the Central and Eastern Basins
              of the Lake. This is apparently the result of the
              accumulation of organic materials in the form of dead
              algae, sewage etc.
                                 146

-------
        Table  8
List of Fish Species which are Considered Rare, Probably
Extirpated or Extirpated Within the Study Area.
  Common  Name
                             Scientific  Name
                                                         Current  Status
  Silver  Lamprey
  Sea Lamprey
  Lake Sturgeon
  Spotted Gar
  Mooneye
  Brown Trout
  Brook Trout
  Lake Trout
  Cisco
  Lake Whitefish
  Northern Pike
  Lake Muskellunge
  Bigmouth Buffalofish
  Eastern Quillback
  Silver Redhorse
 Black Redhorse
 Northern Redhorse
 Longnose Sucker
 Spotted Sucker
 Lake Chubsucker
 Hornyhead  Chub
 Silver  Chub
 Longnose Dace
 Pugnose Minnow
 Redfin  Shiner
 Bigmouth Shiner
 Mimic Shiner
 Flathead Catfish
 Brindled Madtom
 Tadpole  Madtom
 Eel
 Burbot
 Brook Silverside
 Orange-spotted Sunfish
 Longear  Sunfish
 Sauger
 Walleye
 Blue Pike
 Blackside Darter
 Channel  Darter
 Ohio Logperch Darter
 Northern Logperch Darter
 Sand Darter
 Scaly Johnny Darter
 Iowa Darter
 Central Mottled Sculpin
Northern Mottled Sculpin
          Ichthyomyzon unicuspis
          Petromyzon marinus
          Acipenser fulvescens
          Lepisosteus oculatus
          Hiodon tergisus
          Salmo trutta
          Salvelinus fontinalis
          Salvelinus namaycush
          Coregonus artedii
          Coregonus clupeaformis
          Esox  luscius
          Esox  m. tnasquinongy
          Ictobius  cyprinellus
          Carpiodes c.  cyprinus
          Moxostoma anisurum
          Moxostoma duquesnei
          Moxostoma macrolepidotum
          Catostomus  catostomus
          Minytrema melanops
          Erimyzon  sucetta
          Nocomis biguttata
          Hybopsis  storeriana
          Rhinichthys  cataractae
         Notropis  emiliae
         Notropis umbratilus
         Notropis dorsalis
         Notropis v. volucellus
         Pylodictus olivaris
         Noturus miuris
         Noturus gyrinus
         Anguilla rostrata
         Lota lota lacustris
         Labidesthes sicculus
         Lepomis humilus
         Lepomis megalotis
         Stizostedion canadense
         Stizostedion v. vitreum
         Stizostedion v. glaucum
         Percina maculata
         Percina copelandi
         Percina c. caprodes
         Percina c. semifasciata
         Ammocrypta pellucida
         Etheostoma nigrum eulepis
         Etheostoma exile
         Cottus  b.  bairdi
         Cottus  b.  kumleini
 Rare
 Rare
 Probably Extirpated
 Extirpated
 Extirpated
 Rare
 Rare
 Extirpated
 Extirpated
 Extirpated
 Rare
 Rare
 Extirpated
 Rare
 Extirpated
 Rare
 Rare
 Extirpated
 Rare
 Rare
 Rare
 Extirpated
 Rare
 Rare
 Rare
 Rare
 Rare
 Extirpated
 Extirpated
 Extirpated
 Extirpated
 Rare
 Rare
 Rare
 Extirpated
 Extirpated
 Rare
 Extirpated (Extinct?)
 Rare
 Extirpated
 Rare
 Rare
 Extirpated
Rare
Extirpated
Rare
Rare
                                  147-

-------
Those species common or abundant within the study area are (1) species
which spawn and live primarily in the open Lake (Drum, Emerald Shiner),
(2) those which are highly pollution tolerant (Carp, Goldfish), (3) those
which live in the extreme headwater tributaries which in most areas are
relatively unaffected by human activities (Redside Dace), and (4) those
species which nest, cleaning their eggs routinely thus freeing them
of fine silts. Among these are the Sunfishes and Blackbasses, both of
which are still common in the rivers.  Sunfishes are still common in
the Cleveland harbor and the Green Sunfish is one of the three
species reproducing in the lower one mile of the Cuyahoga River.

In spite of the present condition of the fish fauna in the Cleveland
metropolitan area almost all of the former species still may be found
within the study area.  Many of these are only found in isolated,
small populations but it is important to realize that if the ecosystem
were  restored repopulation would result, thus restoring many of the
species in the area.  If the fishery in the Cleveland area is to be
restored, two things must be done; (1) the  present fish stocks must
be protected so that potential repopulation sources are not lost
prior to the improvement of the water quality and habitat availability
and, (2), the immediate reversal of habitat destruction, water quality
degradation, stream obstruction and uncontrolled land use.  The
latter approach is the goal of the U.S. and Ohio Environmental
Protection Agencies. The protection of present fish stocks is further
discussed in the section concerning recommendations.
                                 148

-------
Figure 43:  Headwater Habitat for Many of  the More Uncommon Species  of  Cleveland Area Fishes.

-------
Table  9:  Distribution of Cleveland Area Fish Species  in the Three River Drainages
SPECIES
Silver Lamprey
Sea Lamprey
American Brook Lamprey
Longnose Gar
Bowf in
Alewife
Eastern Gizzard Shad
Chinook Salmon
Coho Salmon
Brown Trout
Rainbow Trout
Brook Trout
Rainbow Smelt
Central Mudminnow
Central Grass Pickerel
Northern Pike
CHAGRIN RIVER


X




X
X
X
X/
4

X
X
,


X







X



X
,
X
X

X
X
X
X
X
X



X

X
X
ROCKY RIVER













X








X






X
X




X
X
X
X
X
X



X



CUYAHOGA RIVER













X
X
V






















X





X




-------
             Table 9:  Stream Distribution of Fishes in Study Area (Continued )
SPECIES
Great Lakes Muskellunge
Carp
Goldfish
Golden Shiner
Hornyhead 'Chub
River Chub
Northern Bigeye Chub
Western Blacknose Dace
Longnose Dace
Creek Chub
Southern Redbelly Dace
Redside Dace
Pugnose Minnow
Common Emerald Shiner
Rosyface Shiner
Northern Red fin Shiner
CHAGRIN RIVER
W?e* UV^N^

X

X

X
X
X
X
X
X
X

X
X


X

X

X
X
X

X



X
X
1
X
X
X
X

X
X

X
X


X
X
X
X
ROCKY RIVER
^^ «&&* ^*







X

X
X
X


X


X
X
X

X

X

X



X
X


X
X
X




X
X



X
X
X
CUYAHOGA RIVER
<«*«* *^dVe v^6t

X

X
X


X

X









X



X

X

X

X



X
X
X









X


Ln

-------
            Table  9:   Stream Distribution of  Fishes  in Study Area  (Continued)
SPECIES
Striped Shiner
Common Shiner
Spottail Shiner
Spotfin Shiner
Central Bigmouth Shiner
Northeastern Sand Shiner
Northern Mimic Shiner
Silver jaw Minnow
Northern Fathead Minnow
Bluntnose Minnow
Stoneroller Minnow
Eastern Quillback
Central Quillback
Black Redhorse
Golden Redhorse
Northern Shorthead
CHAGRIN RIVER
«*** rit&*uf**
X
X



X

X
X
X
X



X

X
X

X

X

X
X
X
X

X
X
X

X

X
X

X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
ROCKY RIVER
«&* *v^6 v**

X

X

X
X
X
X
X
X





X
X

X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X

X

X

X

X
X

X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X

X

CUYAHOGA RIVER
«,** ,^ev>^
X
X


•



X
X
X












X
X

X





















Ln
S3
           Redhorse

-------
Table 9:  Stream Distributions of Fishes in Study Area (Continued)
SPECIES
Northern Hog Sucker
Common White Sucker
Spotted Sucker
Western Lake Chubsucker
Channel Catfish
Yellow Bullhead
Brown Bullhead
Black Bullhead
Stonecat Madtom
Brook Silverside
Brook Stickleback
White Bass
White Crappie
Black Crappie
Rock Bass
N. Smallmouth Blackbass
CHAGRIN RIVER
W?e* va^-%,0^
X
X



X
X
X


X

X
X
X
X
X
X


X
X
X
X
X


X
X
X
X
x ,
X
X
X

X
X
X
X
X
X

X
X
X
X
X
ROCKY RIVER
v^eX v&A^e ^o^6*

X












X

X
X


X
X
X
X
X
X
X

X
X
X
X

X




X


X
X
X


X
X
CUYAHOGA RIVER
\\&^ &t&* \^^
X
X

X

X
X
X

X


X
X
X
X

X





X


X
















X





-------
  Table 9:   Stream Distributions of  Fishes  in Study Area (Continued)
SPECIES
N. Largemouth Blackbass
Warmouth Sunfish
Green Sunfish
Bluegill Sunfish
Orangespotted Sunfish
Redear Sunfish
Pumpkinseed Sunfish
Walleye
Yellow Perch
Blackside Darter
Ohio Logperch Darter
Northern Logperch Darter
Central Johnny Darter
Scaly Johnny Darter
"Ozark" Greenside Darter
"Allegheny" Greenside
CHAGRIN RIVER
W^ vaA^c***

X
X
X


X

X
X


X


X
X
X
X
X


X
X
X
X
X

X


X ,
X
X
X
X
X

X
X
X

X
X
X
X
X
X
ROCKY RIVER
^^ ^\.^e V*>e-t


X
X








X


X
X

X
X


X





X


X
X

X
X


X

X







CUYAHCGA RIVER
™n* -^^ ^
X
X
X
X

X
X

X
X
X

X





X
X














X





X







Darter

-------
             Table 9:  Stream Distributions of Fishes  in  Study Area (Continued)
SPECIES
Rainbow Darter
Barred Fantail Darter
Freshwater Drum
(Sheepshead)
Central Mottled Sculpin

CHAGRIN RIVER
VM* m&*^*
X
X


I
X
X



X
X
X


ROCKY RIVER
«*>* ^* V**





X






X


CUYAHOGA RIVER
^ '^* Vf**
X
X

X


X





X


t_n
Ui

-------
  Table 10  :  The Relative Abundance of Fishes Collected in the  Cleveland
              Metropolitan Area Including Lake Erie, 1971-1974.
Species
Silver Lamprey
Sea Lamprey
American Brook Lamprey
Longnose Gar
Bowf in
Alewif e
Eastern Gizzard Shad
Rainbow Trout
Coho Salmon
Chinook Salmon
Rainbow Smelt
Central Mudminnow
Central Grass Pickerel
Northern Pike
Great Lakes Muskellunge
Eastern Quillback
Central Quillback
Black Redhorse
Golden Redhorse
Northern Shorthead Redhorse
Northern Hog Sucker
No. Collected
1
2
1
29
4
5250
6135
403 *
44
65
929
38
102
16
1
12
456
36
160
8
571
% of Total
0.001 %
0.002
0.001
0.029
0.004
5.230
6.112
0.402
0.044
0.065
0.926
0.038
0.102
0.016
0.001
0.012
0.454
0.036
0.159
0.008
0.569
*  Collections of Rainbow Trout consist primarily of stocked young.
                                156

-------
Table 10 :   Continued, Cleveland Metropolitan Area Collections
Species
Common White Sucker
Spotted Sucker
Carp
Goldfish
Golden Shiner
Hornyhead Chub
River Chub
Northern Bigeye Chub
Western Blacknose Dace
Longnose Dace
Northern Creek Chub
Southern Redbelly Dace
Redside Dace
Pugnose Minnow
Common Emerald Shiner
Rosyface Shiner
Northern Redfin Shiner
Striped Shiner
Common Shiner
Spottail Shiner
Spotfin Shiner
Central Bigmouth Shiner
Northeastern Sand Shiner
No. Collected
1570
2
477
166
886
15
193
565
1020
72
3296
33
77
2
10918
5775
2
766
2103
2091
3468
2
3109
% of Total
1.564 %
0.002
0.475
0.165
0.883
0.015
0.192
0.563
1.016
0.072
3.284
0.033
0.077
0.002
10.877
5.754
0.002
0.763
2.095
2.083
3.455
0.002
3.097
                            157

-------
Table 10 :   Continued,  Cleveland Metropolitan Area Collections
Species No.
Northern Mimic Shiner
Silver jaw Minnow
Northern Fathead Minnow
Bluntnose Minnow
Ohio Stoneroller Minnow
Channel Catfish
Yellow Bullhead
Brown Bullhead
Black Bullhead
Stonecat Madtom
Trout-perch
Brook Silverside
White Bass
White Crappie
Black Crappie
Northern Rockbass
Northern Smallmouth Blackbass
Northern Largemouth Blackbass
Green Sunfish
Bluegill Sunfish
Orangespotted Sunfish
Pumpkinseed Sunfish
Collected
15
5555
689
20035
2784
149
38
139
171
84
157
15
1949
262
180
186
321
255
278
963
5
1820
% of Total
0.015 %
5.534
0.686
19.961
2.774
0.148
0.038
0.138
0.170
0.084
0.156
0.015
1.942
0.261
0.179
0.185
0.320
0.254
0.277
0.959
0.005
1.813
                            158

-------
Table 10 :   Continued, Cleveland Metropolitan Area Collections
Species No.
Warmouth Sunfish
Walleye
Yellow Perch
Blackside Darter
Ohio Logperch Darter
Northern Logperch Darter
Central Johnny Darter
Scaly Johnny Darter
"Ozark" Greenside Darter
"Allegheny" Greenside Darter
Rainbow Darter
Barred Fantail Darter
Freshwater Drum (Sheepshead)
Brook Stickleback
Northern Mottled Sculpin
Eastern Burbot
Striped Shiner X
Rosyface Shiner
Carp X Goldfish
River Chub X
Northern Creek Chub
River Chub X
Longnose Dace
Collected
25
25
5592
44
2
7
1372
1
1
115
912
45
589
73
1
3
7
218

2

2
% of Total
0.025 %
0.025
5.570
0.044
0.002
0.007
1.367
0.001
0.001
0.115
0.909
0.045
0.588
0.073
0.001
0.003
0.007
0.217

0.002

0.002
                            159

-------
Table  10:   Continued,  Cleveland Metropolitan Area Collections
Species No.
Common Shiner X
Striped Shiner
Longnose Dace X
Western Blacknose Dace
White Crappie X
Black Crappie
Common Shiner X
Redside Dace
Ohio Logperch Darter X
Northern Logperch Darter
Central Johnny Darter X
Scaly Johnny Darter
River Chub X
Common Shiner
Green Sunfish X
Pumpkinseed Sunfish
Brown Bullhead X
Black Bullhead
Totals
Collected

4362
1
8

1
1
6

1

32

9
100,376
% of Total

4.346 %
0.001
0.008

0.001
0.001
0.006

0.001

0.032

0.009
100.005 %
                             160

-------
Table 11 :   The Relative Abundance of Fishes Collected in Lake Erie
            And the Lower Portions of the Three Rivers;  Chagrin,
            Rocky and Cuyahoga, 1971-1974.  Adult Specimens Only.
Species
Silver Lamprey
Sea Lamprey
Longnose Gar
Bowfin
Alewife
Eastern Gizzard Shad
Rainbow Trout
Coho Salmon
Chinook Salmon
Rainbow Smelt
Central Grass Pickerel
Northern Pike
Great Lakes Muskellunge
Eastern Quillback
Central Quillback
Black Redhorse
Golden Redhorse
Northern Shorthead Redhorse
Northern Hog Sucker
Common White Sucker
Spotted Sucker
Carp
No. Collected
1
2
29
4
5250
6135
2
44
21
929
45
16
1
12
446
10
71
8
27
724
1
360
% of Total
0.002 %
0.003
0.048
0.007
8.728
10.199
0.003
0.073
0.035
1.544
0.075
0.027
0.002
0.020
0.741
0.017
0.118
0.013
0.045
1.204
0.002
0.598
                           161

-------
Table 11 :   Continued, Lake Erie and Lower River Collections.
Species
Goldfish
Golden Shiner
River Chub
Northern Bigeye Chub
Western Blacknose Dace
Longnose Dace
Northern Creek Chub
Pugnose Minnow
Common Emerald Shiner
Rosyface Shiner
Northern Redfin Shiner
Striped Shiner
Spottail Shiner
Spotfin Shiner
Northeastern Sand Shiner
Northern Mimic Shiner
Silver jaw Minnow
Northern Fathead Minnow
Bluntnose Minnow
Ohio Stoneroller Minnow
Channel Catfish
Yellow Bullhead
Brown Bullhead
No. Collected
156
783
27
26
1
19
84
2
10870
3317
2
412
2091
3155
1367
12
348
22
7560
96
148
9
112
% of Total
0.259 %
1.302
0.045
0.045
0.002
0.032
0.140
0.003
18.071
5.143
0.003
0.685
3.476
5.245
2.273
0.020
0.579
0.037
12.568
0.160
0.246
0.015
0.186
                             162

-------
Table 11 :   Continued,  Lake Erie and Lower River Collections
Species No.
Black Bullhead
Stonecat Madtom
Trout-perch
Brook Silverside
White Bass
White Crappie
Black Crappie
Northern Rockbass
Northern Smallmouth Blackbass
Northern Largemouth Blackbass
Green Sunfish
Bluegill Sunfish
Orangespotted Sunfish
Pumpkinseed Sunfish
Warmouth Sunfish
Walleye
Yellow Perch
Blackside Darter
Northern Logperch Darter
Central Johnny Darter
Scaly Johnny Darter
"Ozark" Greenside Darter
"Allegheny" Greenside Darter
Collected
144
76
157
14
1949
233
171
65
173
215
87
749
5
1596
13
25
5528
14
6
231
1
1
5
% of Total
0.239 %
0.126
0.261
0.023
3.240
0.387
0.284
0.108
0.288
0.357
0.145
1.245
0.008
2.653
0.022
0.042
9.190
0.023
0.010
0.384
0.002
0.002
0.008
                            163

-------
Table  11:  Continued, Lake Erie and Lower River Collections
Species No
Rainbow Darter
Barred Fantail Darter
Freshwater Drum (Sheepshead)
Brook Stickleback
Northern Mottled Sculpin
Eastern Burbot
Carp X Goldfish
Common Shiner X
Striped Shiner
White Crappie X
Black Crappie
Ohio Logperch Darter X
Northern Logperch Darter
Central Johnny Darter X
Scaly Johnny Darter
Brown Bullhead X
Black Bullhead
Totals
. Collected
76
1
589
5
1
3
218

3022
8
1
6

9
60,153
% of Total
0.126 %
0.002
0.979
0.008
0.002
0.005
0.362

5.240
0.013
0.002
0.010

0.015
99.854 %
                            164

-------
Table 12 :   The Relative Abundance of Fishes Collected in the Cleveland
            Harbor and Adjacent Marinas (Revised July, 1974)
Species
No. Collected
% of Total

Longnose Gar
Alewife
Eastern Gizzard Shad
Chinook Salmon
Coho Salmon
Rainbow Trout
Rainbow Smelt
Northern Pike
Carp
Goldfish
Golden Shiner
Longnose Dace
Creek Chub
Western Blacknose Dace
Common Emerald Shiner
Striped Shiner
Spottail Shiner
Spotfin Shiner
Northeastern Sand Shiner
Northern Mimic Shiner
Northern Fathead Minnow
Bluntnose Minnow
1
92
2525
9
42
2
323
15
64
97
393
1
1
1
4092
1
903
6
33
6
1
74
0.01 %
0.85
23.43
0.08
0.39
0.02
3.00
0.14
0.59
0.90
3.65
0.01
0.01
0.01
37.97
0.01
8.38
0.06
0.31
0.06
0.01
0.69
                                   165

-------
Table 12 :  Continued, Cleveland Harbor and Marina Collections
Species
Stoneroller Minnow
Eastern Quillback
Black Redhorse
Golden Redhorse
Northern Shorthead Redhorse
Common White Sucker
Channel Catfish
Brown Bullhead
Black Bullhead
Stonecat Madtom
Trout-perch
Brook Silverside
White Bass
White Crappie
Black Crappie
Northern Rockbass
Northern Largemouth Blackbass
Warmouth Sunfish
Green Sunfish
Bluegill Sunfish
Pumpkinseed Sunfish
No. Collected
2
1
1
2
1
89
2
23
14
13
153
3
223
80
11
5
3
1
3
4
34
% of Total
0.02 %
0.01
0.01
0.02
0.01
0.83
0.02
0.21
0.13
0.12
1.42
0.03
2.07
0.74
0.10
0.05
0.03
0.01
0.03
0.04
0.32
                              166

-------
Table 12 :  Continued,  Cleveland Harbor and Marina Collections
Species
Yellow Walleye
Yellow Perch
Northern Logperch Darter
Freshwater Drum (Sheepshead)
TOTALS
47 Species
No. Collected
2
1254
1
170
10,777
% of Total
0.02
11.64
0.01
1.58
100.05 %
                             167

-------

-------
                               SECTION VII

                               BIBLIOGRAPHY

  1.   Anonymous.    "Substantial Number of Walleyes  Planted in Lake Erie".
          The Fisherman.  23(1):4,  1971.

  2.   Anonymous.    Commercial Fish Landings  in Lake Erie.  Publication
          Number  200,  Ohio Department  of Natural  Resources.  1970.

  3.   Anonymous.    Commercial Fishing  Occurring in  Lake Erie Fronting
          on Cuyahoga  County during 1969. Ohio Department  of Natural
          Resources. 1970.

  4.   Anonymous.    "Our Fishing  Industry: Almost  as Dead as  Lake Erie."
          The Plain Dealer  Sunday  Magazine.  (Cleveland, Ohio). September
          3,  1972.

  5.   Abrams,  James P. and  Clarence E. Taft.    A  Bibliography  of Research
          Conducted at the  Franz Theodore Stone Laboratory and its
          Predecessor  of The Ohio  State University  from 1895  to 1968.
          The Ohio  Journal  of  Science.  71(2):  81-105.  1971.

  6.   Applegate, Vernon C.    The Sea Lamprey in the  Great Lakes. The
          Scientific Monthly,  pp.  275-282. May  1951.

  7.   Applegate, Vernon C.    The Natural History  of  the Sea Lamprey,
          Petromyzon marinus,  in Michigan. University Microfilms,
          University of Michigan.  1950.

  8.   Applegate, Vernon C.  and H. Van Meter.    A Brief History of
          Commercial Fishing in Lake Erie. Fishery Leaflet 630.
          U.S. Depearment   of  the Interior.  1970.

  9.  Armbruster,  Dan C.    Personal Communication. 1972.

10.  Bailey, Merryll M.    Age, Growth, Maturity and Sex Composition
          of the American Smelt, Osmerus mordax,  (Mitchill),  of
         Western Lake Superior. Transactions American Fisheries Society
          93(4): 382-395.  1964.

11.  Bailey, Reeve M.  et.  al.   A List of Common  and Scientific Names
         of Fishes from the United States and Canada (third  edition).
         American Fisheries Society Publication.  1970.

12.  Baker, Carl  T. Jr.    Survey of Offshore Fish Species  in the Ohio
         Portion  of Lake  Erie. Ohio Department of Natural  Resources. 1972.
                                 169

-------
13.  Baldwin, Norman S. and R. W.  Saalfeld.    Commercial Fish Production
         in the Great Lakes, 1867-1960.  Technical Report No.  3.
         Great Lakes Fishery Commission. 1962.

14.  Ball, Frederick L. and R. L.  Scholl.   Lake Erie Fisheries
         Investigations. Ohio Department of  Natural Resources,
         Dingell-Johnson Project F-35-R-9 (Job No. 4, Draft). December 1970.

15.  Bean, Tarleton H.   Report on the Propagation and Distribution of
         Food-Fishes. U.S.  Comm. Fish and Fish. Dept. Part 20, pp.20-80
         (Document No. 424). June 30, 1894.

16.  Beckel, Leslie.   The Role of Aquatic Plants in Natural  Waters.

17.  Beeton, Alfred M.   Environmental Changes in Lake Erie.  Trans. Amer.
         Fish. Soc. 90(2):153-159. 1961.

18.  Boesel, M.W.   Foods of Some Lake Erie  Fishes. Ohio Division of
         Wildlife, Publication No. W-326. 1965.

19.  Brown, Edward Jr.   Population Characteristics and Physical
         Condition of Alewives, Alosa pseudoharengus, in a Massive
         Dieoff in Lake Michigan.  Great  Lakes Fish. Comm., Technical
         Report No. 13. December 1968.

20.  Brown, Edward Jr. and Clarence Clark.   Length-Weight Relationships
         of Northern Pike,  Esox lucius,  from East Harbor,  Ohio.
         Trans. Amer. Fish. Soc. 94(4):404-405. October 1965.

21.  Cahn, Alvin.   Observations on the  Breeding  of the Lawyer,
         Lota maculosa. Copeia. 3:163-165. November 1936.

22.  Cairns, John Jr.   Effects of Heat  on Fish.  Industrial Wastes.
         1(5):180-183.

23.  Clark, Clarence.   Observations on  the  Spawning Habits of the
         Northern Pike. Esox lucius, in  Northwestern Ohio. Copeia.
         No. 4.  1950.

24.  Greaser, Charles W.   The Structure and Growth of the Scales of
         Fishes in Relation to the Interpretation of their Life  History,
         with Special Reference to the Sunfish, Eupomotis  gibbosus.
         Misc. Publications of the University of Michigan  Museum of
         Zoology. Number 17. December 1926.
                                 170

-------
 25.  Crowe, Walter R., Earnest Karvelis and Leonard S. Joeris.   The
    •      Movement, Heterogeneity and Rate of Exploitation of Walleyes
          in Northern Green Bay, Lake Michigan,  as Determined by Tagging.
          Special Publication of the International Commission on
          Northwest Atlantic Fish.  4:38-41.  1963.

 26.  Crowe, Walter R.   Numerical  Abundance and Use of a Spawning Run
          of Walleyes in the Muskegon River, Michigan.  Trans.  Amer.  Fish.
          Soc.   84:125-136.

 27.  Daiber,  Franklin C.    The Food and Feeding Relationships of the
          Freshwater Drum, Aplodinotus grunniens,  Rafinesque,  in
          Western Lake Erie.  Ohio Journal of Science.  52(1):  35-46.
          January 1952.

 28.  DeRoth,  Gerardus C.   Age and Growth Studies of Channel  Catfish in
          Western Lake Erie.  Journal of Wildlife Management.  29 (2) : 280-286,
 29.  Doan, Kenneth H.   Catch of Stizostedion vitreum in Relation  to
          Changes  in Lake Levels in Western Lake Erie During the Winter
          of  1943. American Midland Naturalist. 33(2): 455-459. 1945.

 30.  Doan, Kenneth H.   Some Meterological and Limnological Conditions
          as  Factors in the Abundance of Certain Fishes in Lake Erie.
          Doctoral Dissertation (Unpublished). The Ohio State University
          Abstract Number 36. 1942.

 31.  Duncan, Thomas and R. Stuckey.   Changes in the Vascular Flora
          of  Seven Small Islands in Western Lake Erie. The Michigan
          Botanist. 9:175-200. 1970.

 32.  Dymond, John R.   Records of Alewife and Steelhead (Rainbow)  Trout
          from Lake Erie.  Copeia.  1:32-33. 1932.

 33.  Fish, Marie Poland.    Contributions to the  Early Life Histories
         of 62 Species of Fishes  from Lake Erie.  U.S.  Bur.  Fish  Bull
         47:293-398.  1932.

34.  Fish, Marie Poland.     Contributions to  the  Life History  of  the
         Burbot. Bull, of the Buffalo Soc. of Natural History
         15(1): 5-21,  1930.

35.  Garlick, Theodadus .  A Treatise  on the Artificial Propagation  of
         Certain Kinds of Fish, with  a  Description  and Habits  of  Such
         Kinds  as are  most  Suitable for Pisciculture.  Theo. Brown Publ.
         Ohio Farmer Office,  Cleveland,  Ohio.  142pp.  1857.
                                 171

-------
36.   Harkness,  W.J.K.    The Rate of Growth of the Yellow Perch (Perca
         flavescens)  in Lake Erie.  University of Toronto Studies,
         Publications  of the Ontario Fish. Res.  Lab.   6:89-95. 1922

37.   Hartman,  W.L.   Lake Erie:  Effects of Exploitation, Environmental
         Changes and New Species on the Fishery  Resources.  Jour.  Fish.
         Res.  Bd. of Canada. 29:899-912. 1972.

38.   Hatcher,  Harlan.    The Story of New Connecticut  in Ohio.  The
         Western Reserve. 268-271.

39.   Hildreth,  S.P.    Pioneer History:  Being an  Account of  the First
         Examinations  of the Ohio Valley, and the Early Settlement
         of the Northwest Territory. Historical  Society of  Cincinnati.
         H.W.Derby and Co. (Cincinnati, Ohio).  1848.

40.   Hile, R.    Fishery Industries of the United States. U.S.  Department
         of Commerce.  1918.

41.   Hile, R.    A Nomograph for  the Computation  of the Growth  of  Fish
         from Scale Measurements .   Trans. Amer. Fish. Soc. 78:156-162.
         1950.

42.   Hile, R.    Mathematical Relationship Between the Length and  Age
         of the Rock Bass, Ambloplites  rupestris, (Rafinesque).
         Michigan Acad. of Science, Arts and Letters.  28:331-341.
         1943.

43.   Hile, R.    Age and Growth of the Rock Bass, Ambloplites rupestris,
         in Nebish Lake, Wisconsin. Trans. Amer. Fish. Soc. 33:189-337.
         1941.

44.   Hile, R.  and F.W. Jobes.   Age, Growth and  Production  of  the
         Yellow Perch, Perca flavescens, (Mitchill),  of Saginaw Bay.
         Trans. Amer.  Fish. Soc.  70:102-122. 1941.

45.   Hile, R.    Age Determination of Fish from Scales: Method  and
         Application  to Fish Cultural Problems.  The Progressive Fish
         Culturist. No. 23:1-5.   October 1936.

46.   Hile, R.    Fish  Scales and  Commercial Fisheries. The Fisherman.
         1(10):10.  1932.

47.   Hohn, Matthew  Analysis of Plankton Ingested by Stizostedion
         vitreum (Mitchill) fry  and Concurrent Vertical Plankton Tows from
         Southwestern  Lake Erie, May 1961 and May 1962.  Ohio  Journal of
         Science. 66(2): 193-197.  1966.
                                 172

-------
 48.   Holley,  John M.    Personal Journal of the Moses Cleaveland Survey
          Party in the Western Reserve.  Western Reserve Historical Soc.
          Cleveland,  Ohio.  1797.

 49.   Horak,  Donald L. and  Howard A.  Tanner.    The Use of Vertical
          Gill Nets in Studying Fish  Depth Distribution,  Horsetooth
          Reservoir,  Colorado.  Trans.  Amer.  Fish.  Soc. 93:137-145.

 50.   Howe, Henry.   Historical Collections o^ Ojiio.  C.J.  Krehbiel and Co.
          Cincinnati.  Vol.  1,  992 pp  and Vol.  2,  991 pp.  1900.

 51.   Howley,  Virginia R.    Personal  Communications:  Western  Reserve
          Historical  Society,  Cleveland,  Ohio.  1972.

 52.   Hoyt, Robert  D.    Age  and  Growth of the  Silverjaw Minnow,
          Ericymba  buccata  cope,  in Kentucky.  American Midland Naturalist,
          86(2):  257-275. 1971.

 53.   Hubbs, Carl L.    An Ecological  Study of  the  Life-History of the
          Freshwater Atherine  Fish Labidesthes  sicculus.   Ecology
          2(4):  262-276. 1921.

 54.   Hubbs, Carl L.    Further Additions  and Corrections  to the  List  of
          Fishes of the Great Lakes and  Tributary  Waters.  Michigan Acad.
          of Science,  Arts and Letters.  11:425-436.  1929  (1930).

 55.   Jaycox,  Robert.    Personal  Communication. 1972.

 56.   Jobes, Frank W.    Age, Growth and Production of  Yellow Perch  in
          Lake Erie. Fishery Bull.  70; Fish and Wildlife  Service
          No.   52(70):  204-266. 1952.

 57.   Jordon,  David Starr   Section IV, Report on  the  Fishes o;: Ohio.
          Geological Survey of Ohio.  4:738-1002.  1882.

 58.   Jordon,  David Starr.    Report of Explorations Made During the
          Summer and Autumn of 1888, in the Allegheny Region of Virginia,
         North Carolina and Tennessee, and in the Western Indiana, with
         an Account of  the Fishes found  in each of the River  Basins of
          those Regions. Bull. U. S.  Fish. Comm. 8(1888):  97-192  pi  15
         1890.

59.  Jordon,  David Starr and Evermann.   The Fishes of North  and Middle
         America.  Bull. U.S. National Museum.  47(1896): Pt.  1-1-1240
         Pt.  2(1898)=1241-2183,  Pt.  3(1898):2183-3136, Pt. 4(1900):
         3137-3313, pis. 392.
                                 173

-------
60.  Kason, John D.   "Salmon in Rocky River".  The Emerald Necklace.
         22(1):3.

61.  Katz, Max and Arden R. Gaufin.    The Effects of Sewage Pollution
         on the Fish Population of a Midwestern Stream.  Trans.  Amer.
         Fish. Soc.  82:156-165.

62.  Kirsch, Philip H.   A Report upon the Investigations in the Maumee
         River Basin During the Summer of 1893. Bull. U.S. Fish Comm.
         14(1894): 315-337. 1895.

63.  Kirtland, Jared P.   Personal Letter Files, 1830-1860. at: The
         Cleveland Museum of Natural History,  Cleveland, Ohio.

64.  Kirtland, Jared P.   Report on the Zoology of Ohio. Annual Report
         of the Geol. Survey, State of Ohio. 2:157-197.  1838.

65.  Kirtland, Jared P.   Descriptions of Four New Species of Fishes.
         Boston Journal of Natural History. 3(1840):273-277. 1841.

66.  Kirtland, Jared P.   Descriptions of the Fishes of the Ohio River
         and  its  Tributaries. Boston Jour. Nat. His. Article 10.
          3(1840): 338-352, pis.  4-6. 1841.

67.  Kirtland, Jared P.   Descriptions of the Fishes of  the Ohio River
          and  its  Tributaries. Boston Jour. Nat His.  3(1840):469-482,
          pis.  27-29.  1841.

68.  Kirtland, Jared  P.    Descriptions of the  Fishes of  the Ohio River
          and  its  Tributaries.  Boston Jour. Nat.  His., Article  2
          4(1842):16-26,  pis.  1-4. 1844.

69.  Kirtland,  Jared  P.    Descriptions of the  Fishes of  Lake Erie, the
          Ohio River and  their Tributaries. Boston Jour.  Nat. His.,
          Article 7.  4(1842):  231-240, pis. 9-11.  1844.

 70.  Kirtland, Jared P.    Descriptions of  the  Fishes of  the Ohio  River
          and  its Tributaries. Boston Jour. Nat.  His., Article  25.
          4(1843): 303-308,  pis. 14-15. 1844.

 71.   Kirtland, Jared P.    Descriptions of  the Fishes of  the Ohio  River
          and  its Tributaries. Boston Jour.  Nat.  His., Article  2.
          5(1845):21, pis. 7-9. 1847.

 72.   Kirtland, Jared P.    Descriptions  of the Fishes of Lake Erie,  the
          Ohio River and Their Tributaries.  Boston Jour.  Nat. His.,
          Article 16. 5(1845): 265-276,  pis.  19-22. 1847.
                                   174

-------
 73.  Kirtland, Jared P.   Descriptions of the Fishes of Lake Erie, the
          Ohio River and Their Tributaries. Boston Jour. Nat. His.,
          Article 24. 5(1846): 330-344, pis. 26-29. 1847.

 74.  Kirtland, Jared P.   Fragments of Natural History. The Family
          Visitor, Cleveland, Ohio.  1(1):1. January 3, 1850.

 75.  Kirtland, Jared P.   Chatoessus ellipticus;  or, Gizzard Shad. The
          Family Visitor,  Cleveland, Ohio.  l(l);l-2.  January 3,  1850.

 76.  Kirtland, Jared P.   Chinese Goldfish. The Family Visitor,  Cleveland,
          Ohio. 1(4):29. January 24, 1850.

 77.  Kirtland, Jared P.   Leuciscus Atromaculatus,(Mitchell)Chub-Dace.
          The Family Visitor. 1(27):213.  October 3, 1850.

 78.  Kirtland, Jared P.   Pimelodus Catus  (Rafinesque),  Bull-head -
          Bull-pout.  The Family Visitor.  1(1):  141. May 30,  1850.

 79.  Kirtland, Jared P.   Pimelodus Coerulescens  (Rafinesque), Blue
          Catfish, Black Catfish and Silvery Catfish.  The Family Visitor
          1(22):173.  July  25,  1850.

 80.   Kirtland,  Jared P.   Corvina oscula  (LeSueur),  Sheepshead of  Lake
          Erie,  White Perch of  the Ohio River.  The Family Visitor.
          1(7):133. May  16, 1850.

 81.   Kirtland,  Jared  P.    Labrax multilineatus. White Bass, Striped Bass,
          or White Perch of Lake Erie. The  Family  Visitor. 1(7):53
          February 14, 1850.

 82.   Kirtland,  Jared P.    Centrarchus hexacanthus  (Val.), Grass Bass,
          Bank  Lick Bass, Roach. The Family Visitor. 1(9):69.
          Februauy 28, 1850.

 83.  Kirtland,  Jared P.   Perca flavescens  (Mitchell), Yellow Perch. The
          Family Visitor. 1(2):13. January 10, 1850.

 84.  Kirtland, Jared P.   Lucia-perca americana (Cuvier), Pike and
         Pickerel of Lake Erie, Salmon of the Ohio River and Sandre of
          the Canadians. The Family Visitor. 1(8):61.  February 21,  1850.

85.  Kirtland, Jared P.   Leucisus storerianus (Kirtland), Storers
         Minnow. The Family Visitor. 1(52):256. December 12, 1850.

86.  Kirtland, Jared P.   Pimelodus  limosus (Rafinesque).  The Family
         Visitor.  1(21):165.  July 11, 1850.
                                175

-------
87.   Kirtland,  Jared P.    Centrarchus  aeneus,  Rock Bass,  Goggle-eyed
         Bass,  Black Sunfish.  The Family Visitor.  1(10):77. March  7,
         1850.

88.   Kirtland,  Jared P.    Pomotis vulgaris (Cuvier) Roach,  Sunfish.
         The Family Visitor. 1(14):  109. April 4,  1850.

89.   Kirtland,  Jared P.    Gasterosteus inconstans, Stickleback.  The
         Family Visitor.  1(16):125. May 2, 1850.

90.   Kirtland,  Jared P.    Esox estor (LeSueur), Muskallonge.  The Family
         Visitor. Whole Number 60, 2(8):61. July 1, 1851.

91.   Kirtland,  Jared P.    Piscatoriana.  The Family Visitor.  Whole
         Number 63, 2(11):87. July 22,  1851.

92.  Kirtland,  Jared P.   Catostomus communis ((LeSueur). The Family
         Visitor. 2(40):317. February 13,  1851.

93.  Kirtland, Jared P.   Catostomus melanops (Rafinesque), Spotted
         Sucker. The Family Visitor. 1(52):413. May 6, 1851.

94.  Kirtland, Jared P.   Catostomus aureolus  (LeSueur), Mullet of
         Lake  Erie.  The  Family  Visitor.  1(39):309. February 6, 1851.

95.  Kirtland, Jared P.   Ancipenser ribicundus (LeSueur), Common
         Sturgeon.  The  Family Visitor.  2(29):229.  November 25,  1851.

96.  Kirtland, Jared P.   Lepisosteus  platystomus  (Rafinesque),
         Duckbilled Garfish.  The Family Visitor.  2(20):157.
         September  23,  1851.

97.  Kirtland, Jared P.   Lepisosteus  osseus  (Linn.), Common Garfish.
         The Family Visitor.  2(18):141. September 9,  1851.

 98.  Kirtland, Jared P.  Amia  calva (Linn.), Dog-fish,  Lake Lawyer.
          The Family Visitor.   2(11):  109. August  12,  1851.

 99.   Kirtland, Jared P.  Lota  maculosa (LeSueur), Eel-pout.  The Family
          Visitor.  2(23):181.  October 14, 1851.

100.   Kirtland, Jared P.   Salmo amethystus (Mitchill),  Mackinaw Trout.
          The Family Visitor. 2(13): 101. August 5, 1851.

101.   Kirtland, Jared P.   Petromyzon argenteus  (Kirtland),  Small
          Lamprey. The Family Visitor.  2(26):205.  November 4,  1851.
                                  176

-------
  102.   Kirtland,  Jared  P.    Sclerognathus  cvprinus  (LeSueur),  Catostomus
            cyprinus  of  Les.,  Carp  of  the Ohio  River;  Shad  of Lake  Erie—
            The  Family Visitor.  1(47):373.  April  3,  1851.

  103.   Kirtland,  Jared  P.   Hyodon tergisus  (LeSueur),  Toothed Herrinp-
            Mooneyes.  The Family Visitor.  2(17):133.  September 2,  185l!

  104.   Kirtland,  Jared  P.   Catostomus nigricans  (LeSueur), Mud-sucker
            The  Family Visitor.  1(50):397. April  24, 1851.

  105.   Kirtland,  Jared  P.   Catostomus Duquesnei  , Red Horse, Pittsburg
            Sucker of Fishermen. The Family Visitor. 1(46)-365
           March  27, 1851.

 106.  Kirtland, Jared P.   Peculiarities of the Climate, Flora and
           Fauna of the South Shore of Lake Erie, in the Vicinity of
           Cleveland, Ohio.   American Jour, of Science.   13:215-219.
           1852.

 107.  Kirtland, Jared P.   Revision of the Species Belonging to  the
           Genus Esox,  Inhabiting  Lake Erie and the Ohio River. Annals
           of Science,  Cleveland,  Ohio.   2(3):78-79.   1854.

 108.  Kirtland, Jared P.   Alburnus nitidus.  Silver Minnow.  Annals
           of Science, Cleveland,  Ohio.  2(2):44-45.  1854.

 109.   Kirtland, Jared P.    Fish Culture; Small Lakes. The  Ohio Farmer,
           Cleveland, Ohio.  7(36):281.  September  4,  1858.

 110.   Kleinert,  Stanton J.  and  Donald Mraz.    Life History of  the  Grass
           Pickerel  (Esox americanus vermiculatus), in Southwestern
           Wisconsin.  Wisconsin Technical Bull.  37. Wisconsin Conservation
           Department, Madison.  1966.

 111.  Klippart, John H.   History  of Toledo and Sandusky Fisheries. First
          Annual Report, Ohio State Fish. Comm., Years 1875-1876. Nevins
           and Myers Publ., Columbus, Ohio.   pp.31-42.   1877.

112.  Klippart  John H.    Catalogue of Fishes of Ohio. First  Annual Report,
          Ohio State Fish. Comm.,  Years 1875-1876. Nevins and Myers Publ.,
          Columbus, Ohio.  pp. 43-88.  1877.

113.  Klippart,  John H.    Descriptions of Ohio Fishes, arranged from
          Manuscript Notes of Professor D.  S.  Jordon,  by His  Assistant,
          Earnest R.  Copeland. Second Annual Report, Ohio State Fish
          Comm.  (1877).  pp.  83-116.  1878.
                                 177

-------
114.   Kolbe,  Carl F.    Fishery Decline,  a Matter  Involving  Efficiency
          and Upset Food Conversion Processes.  Unpubl.  Manuscript,
          University of Toronto,  Fish.  Res.  Lab.   1948.

115.   Kole, Bruce P.    Personal Communication.   1972.

116.   Lewis,  Donald W.   Some Factors Associated  with the Decline of the
          Lake Erie Commercial Fishing Industry in Ohio. Proc.  12th
          Conf. Great Lakes Res.   pp. 834-842.   1969.

117.   Magnuson, John J. and Lloyd L. Smith, Jr.   Some Phases of the Life
          History of the Trout-perch. Ecology.   44(1): 83-95.  1963.

118.  Marks, William D.   Summary Review of the Lake Erie Commercial
          Fish Catch Since the Beginning of Records.  Michigan Water
          Resources Commission.  August 1962.

119.  McCormick, Lewis M.   Descriptive List of the Fishes of Lorain
          County, Ohio.  Lab. Bull., Oberlin College.  No.  2. pp. 1-33,
          pis. 1-14.   1892.

120.  McDonald, Marshall.   Report  on the Distribution  of Fish and  Fish
           Eggs by  the  U.S. Fish  Commission  for the  Season of 1885-1886.
           Bull.  U. S.  Fish Commission.   6(1880):  385-394.  1887.

121.  Miller,  Robert  Victor.   A Systematic Study of  the Greenside  Darter,
           Etheostoma  blennioides,  Rafinesque (Pisces:Percidae).   Copeia.
           1:1-40.  March,  1968.

 122.  Norden,  Carroll.   The  Identification of Larval Yellow Perch, Perca
           flavescens  and Walleye,  Stizostedion vitreum. Copeia.
           No.  4, pp.  282-288, Fig.  1,  Table 3.   1961.

 123.   Olson  Donald E and Warren J. Scidmore.    Homing  Behavior of
           Spawning Walleyes.   Trans. Amer.  Fish.  Soc.  91(4):  355-361.

 124.   Orr, Lowell P.  and Russell Rhodes.   The Algae and Fishes of  the
           Upper Cuyahoga River.   Unp. Manuscript. 58 pp.  1967.

 125.   Osborn, Raymond C.   The Fishes of Ohio. Ohio State  Acad. Sci.,
           Special Paper Number 4, pp. 1-105.  1901.

 126   Paulus, Robert D.   Walleye Fry Food Habits in Lake Erie. Ohio
           Fish Monographs, Ohio Division of Wildlife, No.  2. December 1969.

 127   Pease, Seth.   Personal Journal of the Moses Cleaveland Survey Party
           in the Western Reserve,   at: Western Reserve Historical  Society,
           Cleveland,  Ohio.   1797.
                                   178

-------
 128.  Price, John W.   A Study of the Food Habits of Some Lake Erie
            Fish.  Ohio State University, Columbus, Ohio.  1963.

 129.  Pycha, Richard L.   Recent Changes in the Walleye Fishery of
           Northern Breen Bay and History of the 1943 Year Class. Trans.
           Amer. Fish. Soc.   90(4):  475-488, figures 5,  tables 11.
           October 1961.

 130.  Rafinesque, C. S.   Ichthyologia Ohioensis,  or Natural History of
           Fishes Inhabiting the River and its Tributary Streams,
           Preceded  by a Physical Description of Ohio and its Branches.
           W.G.  Hunt Publ.,  Lexington.  175 pp.   1820.

 131.  Reiger, Henry A.  at.  al.    The Ecology and Management  of the Walleye
           in Western Lake Erie.   Technical Report  15.  Great Lakes Fish.
           Comm.  May,  1969.

 132.  Shafer, Paul V.    General  Catch Reports of Ohio Lake Erie Commercial
           Fisheries for 1949.  Dept.  of  Natural  Resources, Division of
           Wildlife,  State of Ohio. Bull.  No.  251.   1950.

 133.   Scholl, Russell L.   Ohio  Commercial  Landings  Lake  Erie  1967-1969.
           Ohio  Department of Natural  Resources,  Division  of  Wildlife
           1970.

 134.   Sikes, Stephen.   The Fishes of  the Grand  River, Ohio.  Annual
           Meetings,  Ohio  Academy of Science.  1972.

 135.   Simpson,  George D., L.W. Curtis  and Henry Merkle.  The Cuyahoga
           River; Lake Rockwell to Lake Erie.  Havens  and Emerson Ltd.
           1968.

 136.   Simpson,  George D., et. al.   Water Pollution Study; Chagrin River
          and Rocky River.  Havens and Emerson Ltd.  1970.

 137.   Smiley, Charles W.   Report on the Distribution of Carp to July 1,
          1881,  from Young Reared in 1879 and 1880.  Report U.S. Comm.
          Fish and Fisheries.  10(1882):  943-1008.   1884.

 138.  Smith, Charles G.    Egg Production of Walleyed Pike and Sauger.
          Progressive Fish Culturist.  54:32-34.   1941.

139.  Smith, H.G., R.K.  Burnard,  E.E.Good and J.M.  Keener.   Rare and
          Endangered Vertebrates  in  Ohio.  Ohio Journal  of Science
          73(5):257-271.  1973.
                                 179

-------
140.   Smith,  Stanford H.    Method of  Producing Plastic Impressions
          of  Fish Scales  without using Heat.   Progressive Fish Culturist.
          16(2):75-78.  1954.

141.   Sterling, E.   Notes on the Great Lakes Fisheries,  Depletion  of
          Blackbass.  Bull, of the U.S. Fish Comm.  4:218-219.   1884.

142.   Sterling E.   Comments in: Records of the Cleveland Acad. Nat.
          Science. May 21, 1877.

143.   Surrarrer, T.C.   Studies of the Rocky River Drainage.   Unpublished,
          Ohio Biological Survey Records.

144.   Taylor, Hardon F.   Fishery Industries of the U.S.:  Report of the
          Division of Fish. Industries for 1922. Bureau of Fish.,
          Document No. 954.  1923.

145.   Thayer, Mary Scott.   The Development of Cleveland, Ohio from
          1818 to 1850 as reflected in the Newspapers of the Period.
          Unpublished Ph.D. Dissertation. Columbia University,

146.   Tomkiewicz, Linda A.   Typical Fish Mortality Rates in Eastern Lake
          Erie.  Technical Report 4.   Lake Erie Environmental Studies,
          State University College, Fredonia, New York.  April, 1970.

147.  Trautman, Milton B.   The Fishes of Ohio.  The Ohio State University
          Press, Columbus, Ohio. pp.   683.  1957.

148.  Tucker,  Thomas R and Stephen Taub.   Age and Growth of the Walleye,
          Stizostedion vitreum vitreum,  in Hoover Reservoir, Ohio. Ohio
          Journal of  Science.   70(5):314.  1970.

149.  Van Meter, Harry D.   The Yellow Perch  of Lake Erie.  Ohio Conserva-
          tion Bull.   24(11):22-23.   1960.

150.  Van Meter, Harry D.  and M. B. Trautman.  An Annotated List of  the
          Fishes  of  Lake  Erie and its Tributary Waters Exclusive of  the
          Detroit River.   Ohio  Journal of  Science.   70(2): 65-78. 1970.

151.  Van Oosten, John.    The Dispersal  of Smelt, Osmerus mordax, in the
          Great Lakes Region.   Trans. Amer.  Fish. Soc.   66:160-171.  1937.

152.  Van Oosten, John.    Records, Ages  and  Growth of  the Mooneye,
          Hiodon tergisus,  of  the Great  Lakes.  Trans. Amer.  Fish.  Soc.
          90(2):  170-174.  1961.
                                   180

-------
  154-
  156
 157   van
 158-  van
'"'
                                          °f
 160.  Whittlese,, Charles.   fel, Hi,^ „, Cleve^a, Ohio.  cleveland
 161.  Wittal, Fred.    Personal Con»unications .   1972
 '"-
                                 181

-------
                                 TECHNICAL REPORT DATA
                          (Please read Instructions on the reverse before completing)
 REPORT NO.
 EPA 905/9-75-001
                            2.
                                                         3. RECIPIENT'S ACCESSION NO.
 TITLE ANDSUBTITLE
 WATER QUALITY BASELINE ASSESSMENT FOR CLEVELAND AREA-
 LAKE ERIE,  Volume  II -  The Fishes of the Cleveland
 Metropolitan Area Including the Lake Erie Shoreline
            5. REPORT DATE
             February  1975
            6. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION CODE
. AUTHOR(S)
 Dr. Andrew M. White
 John Carroll University,  Cleveland, OH
                                                         8. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION REPOR
 PERFORMING ORGANIZATION NAME AND ADDRESS
 City of Cleveland
 Department of Public  Works,  Water Quality Program
 3090 Broadway Avenue
 Cleveland, Ohio  44115
            10. PROGRAM ELEMENT NO.
             Section 108  a Program
             11. CONTRACT/GRANT NO.
             EPA  G005107
 2. SPONSORING AGENCY NAME AND ADDRESS
 Office of the Great Lakes  Coordinator, Region V
 U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
 230 South Dearborn Street
 Chicago,  Illinois  60604
             13. TYPE OF REPORT AND PERIOD COVERED
             Vol.  II of  3  Vol.  Final Report
             14. SPONSORING AGENCY CODE
 5. SUPPLEMENTARY NOTES
 Volume III of  the  final report, on the water quality of  the  Cleveland lake and
 watershed area,  is in preparation.	
16. ABSTRACT
   The fish fauna  in the near shore waters of Lake Erie  and  the  Three Rivers Watershed
were investigated  from July 1971 through December 1972,  and  in 1973,  1974.  This
investigation was  performed by the John Carroll University as  a  part  of a broader
City of Cleveland  study (Volume I) to establish a baseline for planning and measuring
the restorative  value of water pollution abatement programs.
   The study established a baseline of the existence  of  fish species; their relative
abundance and distribution; the habitat degradations  due to  pollution and their
effects on changes in fish population diversity, distribution and abundance.
   The 86 fish species presently inhabiting the study waters are markedly different
than the 107 species documented historically in former times.   Changes in fish species
are attributed to  stream obstruction, pollution, siltation,  loss of aquatic vegetation
and other causes.
   The report concludes that the recovery of most species of fish to  levels of
previous abundance is possible by the use of recommended pollution abatement and
habitat restoration measures.  The potential economic significance of these measures
to  the fishing  industry in the Cleveland area is assessed,  as a further planning
index.
17.
                               KEY WORDS AND DOCUMENT ANALYSIS
                 DESCRIPTORS
                                             b.IDENTIFIERS/OPEN ENDED TERMS
  Fishes
  Water Pollution
 Chagrin River
 Cleveland,  Ohio
 Cuyahoga River
 Lake Erie
 Rocky River
 Water Pollution Abatement
 Economic Benefits
sanitary District Planning
                                                                          COSATI F-ield/Group
06F
08H
13B
13. DISTRIBUTION STATEMENT
                                             19. SECURITY CLASS (This Report)
                                                                        !1. NO. OF PAGES
 Document is available to the  public  through
 the National Technical Information Service,
 Springfield, Virginia 22151
                                200
20. SECURITY CLASS (This page)
                           22. PRICE
EPA Form 2220-1 (9-73)

-------