The amur pike (Esox reicherti Dybowski) in Fishes of the Amur Basin (results of the Ichthylogical Expedition to the Amur Region, 1945-1949 by G. V. Nikolsky, 1956) (Fisheries research report: 1787)

-16 -

of pike on the small flooded areas, covered with vegetation convenient
for spawning, are very vulnerable for catching; and in such fishing
operations considerable part of laid eggs also are destroyed.
I think that intensive harvest at the spawning grounds (instead
of harvest while pike migrate for spawning, and which is more rational)
was the main cause of decrease in numbers of pike and thus affected
total harvest. Another important point is that pike release all their eggs
at one time, which results in complete loss of eggs when spawning
conditions are unfavorable.
Pike can stand oxygen deficiencies better than most other fish;
also, in the winter pike often migrate from the lakes to the mouths of
lake tributaries, rather than to the faster flowing Amur beds. Hence,
setting traps in such places had strong influence on pike abundance.
Pike were affected more by such harvests than were other fish species.
Regulations which prohibited fishing on spawning grounds and setting
traps at river mouths doubtlessly resulted in increased numbers of pike
in recent years. Presently, catches certainly are on the increase,
although average size of fish caught is still small. The small size is
caused by high participation of strong year class 1947-1948.
The question is what should be done for pike in the Amur Basin?
Do we have to maintain restoration of the pike population, or inasmuch as
pike appear as predators which affect some other commercially important
species, should it be destroyed or its population reduced?