The Overfishing of Yellow Perch in Lake Erie: An Analysis
Simon Beck, Amanda Eddie, Andrew Kuntz, Sydney Martis
Northern Ohio Department of Natural Resources
Analysis Division
Executive Summary
Catch of yellow perch is declining in Lake Erie. This is happening because of “open access” which
occurs because yellow perch, the natural capital, is a public good and cannot be easily regulated.
Northern Ohio has the majority of the US Lake Erie coast, so it makes sense for it to have the strictest
regulations regarding yellow perch. We are suggesting the following regulations:
● Minimum weight of .6 lb and minimum length of 9”
● Maximum catch of 20­25 daily per angler
● A sustainable fishing season
● Limitation of boats to maximize rent, the revenue from catching the fish, without economic waste
● Limit on bulk of gear in proportion to depth of water
○ Nets to be regularly cleaned from slime
We are also suggesting an increase of walleye fishing tournaments because walleye are an undesirable
predator fish to the yellow perch. N. Ohio could also develop a smelt industry to increase food available
to perch. Finally, the state can implement trade­able quotas to keep watch on the equal rights of people
to the common good.
Overfishing is clearly a large problem with the decline of yellow perch in Lake Erie. However, there are
other factors which may be equally to blame:
● Phosphorous pollution
○ although it is an essential element found in DNA and essential to life­ it is found in large
quantities leading to the rapid growth of Micro­cystic blue­green algae
● Micro­cystic blue­green algae
○ harmful to large animals in the Lake Erie ecosystem
● Asian carp
○ non­discriminatory fish that eat everything and anything it can
I.
Introduction
The dwindling number of yellow perch in Lake Erie could easily be labeled as an “open access”
problem. Open access arises when natural capital, the perch in this case, is commonly owned and
poorly regulated. This problem is typically described as the “tragedy of the commons,” in which
individuals weigh only the personal costs and benefits of an action, rather than considering any possible
external public costs (in this case, degradation of fish populations). In this specific example, fishers,
both commercial and recreational, want to maximize their catch, so as to not let other parties catch more
and be more competitive. They continue to fish more and more, seemingly unaware of the true
population of fish below them. At times, it may be possible that the fish population is sustainable and
growing, but as more fishers are added, the populations begin to trend downward. Eventually, the
marginal returns of one more fishing entity are negative, measuring the inefficiency and overuse of the
public good. For a fish such as the perch, which is valued for its culinary usefulness, this problem can
easily become a reality. This summary will examine how different proposed and existing regulations can
be used to combat this fundamental problem and allow for the sustainability of the perch population in
Lake Erie, as well as the better health of the surrounding ecosystem.
II.
Review of Regulations
Northern Ohio which borders most of the US Lake Erie coast already has the most strict regulation on
yellow perch fishing. Current regulation in the state of Ohio is 40, but only 30 per angler on Lake Erie.
Should N. Ohio restrict more because of the problem it’s having? Right now, there is no restriction on
size of yellow perch in N. Ohio. Perch usually grow 5­12” but some can reach 16”. These lengths
usually mean the fish weigh .25­ 1 lb but some have been reported at 2 lb.
Should our state regulate on
1. No. of fish only?
a. If we restrict purely on number, more will be available to Canada with only a 50
perch per angler limit1
2. Weight/Length of fish only?
a. At an average of about 2/3 lb, perch are not large fish. They rarely grow over
12”.
3. Blend of weight/length and amount?
a. With a blend of regulation, we would hopefully be able to maximize perch profit
while keeping perch growing.
We propose a minimum weight on perch of .6 lb, minimum length of 9” and maximum catch of 20­25
per angler daily. With regulations in place on size and weight, more perch will stay in the water to
hopefully re­populate the lake. Our largest problem in numbers seems to be with Canada’s restriction.
Their regulation is looser than ours at 50 instead of 30 per angler. The problem may be unavoidable
without putting up some sort of underwater barrier to keep yellow perch in Northern Ohio waters.
A limit on fishing season.
http://ohiodnr.com/wildlife/dow/regulations/fishing.aspx
1
Now to see the effect of regulations on limiting the season for commercial fishing we must first set a goal
for the regulation to achieve. In this situation we would look at the sustainable amount of days fishing
and the value of the catch so that we are maintaining a safe number the fish population while taking into
account the profits for the total amount of fishermen. The restriction we need to put in place would have
to find where the distance between the total costs and the total revenue is the greatest, in other word
where marginal cost equals marginal revenue. This is the point D* is on the chart. To find this point we
would need to find the sustainable number of fishing days per year and compare that to the value of the
catch per year. However this model is based on a private fishery. While we can certainly put in
regulation to control the number of fishing days, Canada may not and in fact cause the regulation put in
place to be useless.
A limit on number of boats:
In this chart we can see that at the point B* our rent is maximized. At BS there is more catch but it
would cause a decline in the fish population for the next fishing season. At BO total cost equals total
revenue and all profits have been used due to competition. The point we need to find is B*. To get to
this point, we need to introduce regulation that would have to limit the number of boat enough to
maximize rent without producing economic waste. However again we come across a problem that
Canada may not impose restrictions that would either complement those we would put in place or take
advantage of the fact that they would have less competition from the state of Northern Ohio. Any
regulation put in place needs to be in conjunction with Canada or at least the provinces that effect the
Great Lakes and the canals leading into the Great Lakes.
The problem with limiting the number of boats and/or the number of fishing days is that effort is
wasted by the fishermen to try to adapt to these regulations.
Waste Due to Regulations
Here we can see the effects that the regulations would have on the fishermen. Using policies that simply
make fishing more difficult can lead to a lower level of effort, but profits are spent up in wasteful
methods. From an environmental perspective this would be an improvement to the problem but it would
have a cost economically.
A limit on gear:
It is important to set a limit on gear and prevent the use of any fishing gear deemed unduly
destructive to the water environments. There have been several studies of the relative destructiveness of
gill nets and trap nets of various sizes and meshes. We should prohibit such gear as will reduce the
amount of fish caught to the amount which the species is able to replace. We have come up with the
conclusion that nets must stay clean especially gill nets as they are prone to collecting slime. There
should not be any abandonment of any fishing gear. Additionally, small hooks only be used in shallow
waters as well as lighter gear. This regulation upon gear may induce an additional cost for fishers that
need to purchase new gear. One possible side effect of this regulation is that fishers may increase their
number of vessels to make up for this additional cost or innovate and create new gear that may be as
destructive as the banned gear.
● Pro: It may increase the supply of fish and decrease the amount of damage that harmful gear
does to the environment.
● Con: Regulation of gear will anger some fishers and other vessels and gear may be used that are
possibly more harmful than those under regulation.
● The problem with implementing this is that there is a significant cost to have someone constantly
checking that illegal gear is not being used.
An Encouragement of Recreational Walleye Fishing:
Walleye are considered “rough” fish because they are undesirable predator fish. They prey on
fish important to the food industry such as trout and their meat is not as tender. A way to encourage
sport walleye fishing is by increasing the number of tournaments. These tournaments are provided with
media coverage. However, the media coverage is most often done by the tournaments themselves and
is often cluttered with advertisements by sponsors. A third party media source needs to be established
with the specific goal of catering more toward the general public and promoting sport walleye fishing.
Additionally, walleye organizations can get their name out by going out and helping with weed control on
lakes all over the State of Northern Ohio. This is similar to the coordinated grassroots programs of
bass fishers. An important thing to note is that walleye fishing is popular in November near Marblehead
Peninsula and in June on the Berlin lake, one of the states few lakes with natural walleye production.
● Pro: An increase the catch of rough fish such as walleye will leave water environments for more
desirable fish to prosper such as perch.
● Con: Lake Erie walleye is already on a nearly decade long trend of declining stock of walleye
fish.
● Problem that we see with implementing is that walleye fishing is not that interesting and the
season is short lived and snow is sometimes covering walleye waters.
Development of a smelt industry:
Contrarily, increasing the available food supply to perch could help increase perch populations.
Smelt (small, salmon­like fishes) are one of the staples of the perch diet. Using a simple production
model, more food (smelt) would result in larger numbers of perch. However, negative consequences
may exist. As an invasive species, smelt has been found to reduce both perch and walleye populations,
although the causes are uncertain2. The smelt would not only be a great increased food supply for perch,
but also for other larger fish, including the perch­eating walleye3. Using the same logic, increased food
supply could also increase walleye populations eventually reducing perch population. However, due to
the major size differences, the fish would most likely stay within a logical, size­based food system, and
the original argument concerning smelt as prey for perch would hold more truth than the latter.
Quotas and taxes:
Another approach for reducing overfishing is more market­based; trade­able quotas are a
method of monitoring and regulating catches of fish that allocate equal rights to all individuals and
corporate entities for consumption of the common good. In this case, there would be established a limit
(most likely by weight) to the size of any day or period’s catch. All licensed individuals have the right to
catch up to that amount, but any amount exceeding that limit would be subject to a higher tax rate or
http://lter.limnology.wisc.edu/education/exotic_species
2
http://www.gov.mb.ca/conservation/sustain/bioacc.pdf
3
fine. This is a good way to incentivize individuals to fish less or in smaller amounts, but would possibly
be difficult to enforce; the task of weighing every catch made in Lake Erie every day is entirely
infeasible, thus such a regulation could only be enforced by random inspection and heavy fines, or by
self­regulation. Similarly, a weighted tax (by catch size) on all catches could be implemented, but would
be even harder to enforce. Most likely, this regulation would focus mainly on commercial fishing, as
corporations are more likely than individuals to have access to the capital (large fishing boats) necessary
for catching vast quantities of fish, and these larger vessels would be easier to spot, thus easier to
monitor. Typically these quotas (very similar to “cap and trade” propositions in the energy sector) have
several taxable brackets to affect different strata of fishers; there is no tax up to a certain point, but after
the permitted quantity, there are several progressively higher tax rates. Canada and New Zealand have
enforced individual transferable quotas with a general belief that the benefits outweigh the costs and
difficulty of enforcement4.
III.
Other factors
Although much of the loss of yellow perch populations in Lake Erie can be attributed to overfishing,
there are many other potential factors. Among them are: phosphorous pollution, microcystis blue­green
algae, and the invasive Asian carp.
There is an increased level of phosphorous in Lake Erie’s water in the past several decades
due to several newer sources. First, phosphorous is a leading component in fertilizer; runoff from
agriculture and private consumers (lawn fertilizer) has released more of this element into the Lake.
Secondly, invasive Quagga and Zebra Mussels have entered the Great Lakes; these shellfish do filter
http://publications.gc.ca/Collection­R/LoPBdP/BP/bp344­e.htm
4
basic toxins from the water, but also release small quantities of various nutrients, including phosphorous
and ammonia. Phosphorous is a mineral commonly found in nature with dietary uses by all creatures as
an essential element of DNA, as well as in bone production among vertebrates.While phosphorous is
essential for all living beings including the perch, it encourages growth of more basic creatures:
microcystis blue­green algae. Typically, small organisms such as algae are a basic food source for
zoo­plankton, which continue the food chain on; however, the microcystis algae contain a toxin known
as microcystin, which can be harmful to the liver of larger animals who consume the algae. This in itself
affects the entire Lake Erie ecosystem. Mussels normally consume algae to keep levels at an
equilibrium, but research has shown that they do not consume this algae nor do other aquatic species, as
the algae cause liver damage and/or death; simultaneously, the mussels do eat other competitive species,
further encouraging the growth of the microcystis. Aside from the direct effects by consumption, the
microcystis algae also deplete oxygen levels in deeper parts of the Lake, effectively suffocating fish or
causing migratory shifts of species. Other fringe costs include, but are not limited to: reduction in scenic
beauty and thus tourism; poor­quality or bad­tasting water in municipal water supplies; beach property
degradation from decomposing algae blooms. This problem affects all citizens who use the Lake as a
primary source of water, as well as citizens who would like eat the fish found there. Currently, more
research is being done to discover possible solutions to this issue. Without doubt any solution would
come at a price, and when the discoveries are made, it will be necessary to analyze the costs and
benefits in such a development. Applying current knowledge, a possible partial remedy would be to
further regulate and reduce runoff waste from agricultural and lawn fertilizers. Currently there are no
regulations on lawn fertilizers in the State of Ohio; however, such a restriction was enacted in Minnesota
in 2002. The Minnesota Department of Agriculture5 found that the transition from low­phosphate to
zero­phosphate lawn fertilizers went rather smoothly, as 97% of suppliers already stocked the more
environmentally­friendly alternative and there was effectively no difference in the cost of the different
fertilizers. The benefits would be most notably the preservation of the current ecosystem and
maintenance of current levels of tourism and drinking water quality. The costs would be immediate to
the agricultural sector and private consumers; individuals would either need to find alternative fertilizers
or develop new methods of runoff disposal, however these costs are minimal as previously cited. The
costs of this regulation would increase production costs, and thus costs of food to all consumers. Other
potential trade­offs for unknown solutions are yet to be identified.
Asian Carp were first introduced to American waters from the rivers of Russia, China and
Vietnam in the 1960s and 1970s. They were used by fish farmers as a method of controlling aquatic
weeds and algae in commercial ponds. However, they turned into a menace when they escaped their
ponds due to flooding and moved into local waters such as the Mississippi as they headed north to
spawn. Eating everything in their path, Asian Carp have no natural predators or diseased to stop their
invasion of local waters. They feed by filtering plankton from the water. Due to their feeding habits,
they are difficult to capture by normal angling methods. Their high abundance has caused great concern
because of the potential for competition with species native to Lake Erie for food and living space. To
make matters worse, Lake Erie is thought to the the most friendly environment for the fish. At the same
time, Lake Erie is the most productive Great Lake with a $7 billion fishing industry. If Asian carp
invade the waters of Lake Erie, there could be detrimental effects to this very prosperous fishing
industry. Despite environmental effects, Asian Carp have been known to cause direct harm to people
http://www.mda.state.mn.us/phoslaw
5
and their property. They are very easily startled by the start of a motor boat and have been known to
jump up to ten feet out of the water landing on boats and injuring people. Currently, the only protection
is a chain link fence which prevents the carp from entering into Maumee River. Other possible
strategies to keep carp out of Lake Erie consists of poison, netting, electro­shocking and barriers. The
down side to all of these strategies is that they can cause harm also to desirable, native fish.
The current problems we have with the blue­green algae and the invasive mussels species can
get severely worse should the Asian carp make it to Lake Erie. Currently the Zebra and Quagga
mussels filter the water which causes the water to be much clearer and therefore promotes the growth of
algae at lower levels. However the mussels also feed on the competitors of the algae, making the
environment much more friendlier to that type of algae since the mussels do not feed on them. Should
the Asian carp make their way into Lake Erie, they will compete somewhat with the mussels for food
but they have a large chance of enhancing the growth of the algae because when the algae is consumed
by the carp it is undigested and will actually pick up nutrients from the gut of the fish and grow healthier.
6
Should the Asian carp make it into Lake Erie, they will face some predators and competition for
food. The young or just smaller adults of Asian carp are susceptible to being prey to several local
predators such as walleye, catfish, bass, and eagles. Once, however, they reach adulthood and grow to
their projected size and population, they will be too large for many predators to feed on. Another factor
that makes them hard for predators to feed on, is the fact that when young, they largely stay in shallow
waters preventing large predators from being able to reach them. Should the Asian carp make it into the
Great Lakes, predators will not be in at the same water levels that the Asian carp tend to habitat. The
6
http://www.in.gov/dnr/lakemich/files/Tue_Stardust2_115_Morrison_Asian_Carp_final_27Sept11­edited.pdf
best way to deal with this issue is to make sure they do not get into the Great Lakes, prevention of their
invasion is the only practical solution.
IV.
Conclusions
With the decline of the population of yellow perch in Lake Erie at its current state, actions may be
necessary to preserve the current ecosystem. While it may be argued to be more efficient to simply let
the market decide on fishing, the open access problem suggests otherwise; government is needed to
step in and prevent overuse or depletion of this natural resource. Policies regarding limiting the number
of boats and reducing the number of fishing days in a season would not be efficient given the nature of
Lake Erie. In private fisheries we are able to put in restrictions that would help safeguard the resources
while being efficient but in a large ecosystem such as Lake Erie in which there are regulations put in
place by both Canada and the United States, such regulations would have to be coordinated by both
nations. While these regulations can stop overfishing, they would cause too much economic waste due
to fishermen trying to overcome these barriers to entry. Such examples would be fishermen trying to
maximize revenue by hiring larger crew to man the boats to improve the number of their catch or
focusing their total effort into the limited fishing days to maximize profits. Limits can be placed on gear
as to minimize any negative impact to Lake Erie and increase the perch population. There must be an
increase in the fishing of walleye which is a predator of perch. Furthermore, there are many problems in
Lake Erie that are outside of the fishing industry, yet directly or indirectly affect it. Yellow perch only
grow to a certain and potential limitations on weight, length, and amount collected must be examined.
Microcystis algae blooms must be studied more intensively, the costs and benefits of further reduction of
fertilizer runoff should be analyzed. The pending threat of the invading Asian carp should be stopped
before it damages the Lake Erie ecosystem as it has elsewhere. Further, more precise cost­benefit
analysis should be done in order to find whether the costs of preventing the depletion of this natural
capital today would be less than the costs of attempting to reverse the process later.
V.
References and Links
Anderson, John J. B. (1996). "Calcium, Phosphorus and Human Bone Development". Journal of
Nutrition 126 (4 Suppl.): 1153S–1158S. PMID 8642449
Report to the Minnesota Legislature:
Effectiveness of the Minnesota Phosphorus Lawn Fertilizer Law, Minnesota Department of
Agriculture, Pesticide and Fertilizer Management Division, March 15, 2007
http://www.glfc.org/lakecom/lec/YPTG.htm
http://www.epa.gov/med/grosseile_site/indicators/algae­blooms.html
http://ohiodnr.com/wildlife/dow/regulations/fishing.aspx
http://www.walleyecentral.com/forums/archive/index.php/t­156040.html
http://blog.cleveland.com/metro/2011/01/asian_carp_crisis_lands_of_sho.html
http://www.asiancarp.us/