Summerfelt, R. C. 1996. Introduction. Pages 1-1 0 in R. C. Summerfelt, editor. Walleye culture 

manual. NCRAC Culture Series 101. North Central Regional Aquaculture Center Publications 

Office, lowa State University, Ames. 

I n t rod u ct i on 

Robert C. Summetfelt, Department of Animal Ecologx lowa State Universitx Ames, lowa 5001 1-3221 

Walleye: what’s in the name? 

walleye are also called: pickerel, walleye pike, 

walleyed pike, yellow walleye, yellow pikeperch, 

pikeperch, and other names (Scott and Crossman 1973). 

The pike in the names walleye pike or pikeperch is 

obscure. There is no scientific basis for this because 

phylogenetically, northern pike and walleye are not 

close relatives. Walleye, sauger, and yellow perch are 

called “percids” because they are in the perch family 

(Percidae), whereas northern pike and muskellunge are 

called “esocids” because they are in the pike family 

(Esocidae). Pickerel is a common name for walleye in 

the prairie provinces of Canada, but in French-speaking 

Canada, the vernacular dore‘ (golden), or dore‘jaune 

(golden-yellow) is used. Dore‘ and dore‘jaune are 

descriptive, because the background color of the 

walleye’s body is a golden hue with brassy yellow 

(’jaune) mottlings. The sauger is called “dor& noir“ 

(black) in French-speaking Canada. 

Because of the plethora of common and colloquial 

names, the Committee on Names of Fishes of the 

American Fisheries Society has endeavored to standardize the names of fish by publishng Common and 

Scientific Names of Fishes from the United States and 

Canada (Robins 1991). The book was first published in 

1948 and subsequent editions have been published in 10 

year intervals. The scientific name for the walleye is 

Stizostedion vitreum, which literally means “the 

pungent-throated fish with glass eyes” (Carmichael et 

al. 1992). Stizostedion means pungent-throated fish in 

reference to the large sharp (i.e., pungent), pharyngeal 

teeth, and vitreum means glassy, in reference to the 

nature of the large, silvery eyes (Scott and Crossman 

1973). Hereafter, in the Walleye Culture Manual, all 

fishes are referred by their accepted common name, but 

Appendix A contains a list of common and scientific 

names following the nomenclature published by Robins 

(1991). 

The name walleye is clearly a reference to the smoky, 

white opacity of the cornea which gives the species a 

distinct appearance. At night, especially in the spawning season when walleye in shallow water can be 

spotted with a light, the eye reflects light back and gives 

the fish a stunning appearance. The eyeshine of walleye 

comes from a unique reflective layer (tapetum Zucidum) 

in the retina of the eye. The tapetum Zucidum enhances 

the stimulation of more rod cells in the retina by 

reflecting incoming light many times. The ichthyologist, George A. Moore, who first described the histology of the walleye eye, said that fishes with an eye like 

the walleye are “pre-adapted to life in weak illumination” (Moore 1944). Field studies have demonstrated 

that adult walleye are crepuscular, or nocturnal, and 

shun bright light. Because of their visual acuity, light 

intensity is more important than temperature in determining feedmg and depth distribution of walleye in 

lakes (Ryder 1977; Kelso 1978). 

The age-specific phototactic response of walleye plays 

an important role in the design of the cultural environment for larvae, juveniles, and food-size fish. The 

behavioral response of walleye to light changes with 

development. Larval walleye are strongly attracted to 

bright light; this behavior can be used to concentrate 

walleye fry in the catch tank that receives newly 

hatched fry from a battery of incubation jars or to 

concentrate them under a feeder (Howey et al. 1980). 

Larval are so strongly attracted to light that light 

reflected from tank surfaces will attract larvae and they 

will cling to the side walls of culture tanks, even in 

tanks that have been painted black (Bristow and 

Summerfelt 1994). Larvae will also be attracted to the 

aquablue-colored bottom of tanks that have black walls. 

Between 4 and 8 weeks posthatch, juvenile walleye 

become negatively phototactic and seek out areas with 

2- to 13-lux (Bulkowski and Meade 1983). Lux is a unit 

of illumination equal to one lumen per square meter. 

Pond-raised fingerlings, 1.5 to 3.0 in (38 to 76 rnm) that 

NCRAC Culture Series 1 101 - Walleye Culture Manual 
are to be habituated (i.e., the process of converting fish 

accustomed to live food to accepting formulated feed) 

to formulated feed, must be cultured at low light 

intensity (4.2- to 15.8-lux) (Kuipers and Summerfelt 

1994), or dim, in-tank lighting must be used (Siegwarth 

and Summerfelt 1992). Walleye are easily disturbed by 

shadows that often result from overhead light; and 

internal tank light can minimize such disturbances 

(Nagel 1985). 

Walleye are also called a "coolwater fish", a generalization suggesting that their temperature preference falls 

between that of salmonids (coldwater) fishes and 

warmwater species such as catfishes and sunfishes. 

Walleye, sauger, and yellow perch and the esocids, 

northern pike, and muskellunge, are the five most 

important coolwater fishes in North America because of 

their recreational and commercial importance (Kendal 

1978). Walleye tolerate northern climates where the 

water temperature is ~39°F (4°C) for more than 8 

months of the year, and they can tolerate temperatures 

up to 32°C (90°F) for short periods in the southernmost 

portion of their range (Collette et al. 1977). 

Fish are ectothermal, which means that their body 

temperature is similar to that of the water. The optimal 

temperature for fish growth is called the standard 

environmental temperature (SET). The SET for 

coldwater fish is 50°F (19°C) for salmon and 59°F 

(15°C) for rainbow trout. The SET for channel catfish, a 

warmwater fish, is 85°F (29°C) (Piper et al. 1982). A 

SET has not been established for walleye, but the 

optimum temperature for walleye growth changes with 

life stage (fry, fingerling, or near food-size). For 

fingerlings, the suggested optimum range is from 

71.6"F (22°C) (Smith and Koenst 1975) to 78.8"F 

(26"C), depending on light intensity (Hokanson and 

Koenst 1986). Hokansen and Koenst (1986) reported 

that 88.8"F (26°C) was optimal at 5 lux. Cai and 

Summerfelt (1 992) developed an equation for estimating the optimal temperature for metabolism of juvenile 

walleye based on light, at 45 lux the estimated optimal 

temperature was 77°F (25.3"C). A ground water supply 

at 75 to 77°F (23.9 to 25.3"C) would be ideal; otherwise, access to heated water or use of a recycle aquaculture system is needed to maintain the optimal temperature year-around. Heating large volumes of water to a 

constant 77°F (25°C) would not be practical for a single 

pass or serial reuse system. 

The coolwater habitat adaptation of walleye makes it a 

preferred aquaculture species for culture in climates too 

cool for channel catfish. Economically significant 

ground water sources that have ideal temperatures (75 

to 77°F; 23.8 to 25°C) for walleye culture are rare, but 

indoor facilities with controlled environmental temperature and a recycle aquaculture system provide opportunities for walleye culture anywhere in North America 

(Summerfelt 1996). 

Geographic range 

The original range of walleye in the U.S. extended 

west from New Hampshire through the Great Lakes 

basin; southward on the Atlantic slope to North 

Carolina; and west of the Appalachians, from the 

Alabama River system of Georgia to the Tennessee 

River drainage of Alabama, and from the lower Mississippi River valley to North Dakota (Hubbs and Lagler 

1949; Trautman 1957; Becker 1983). In Canada, the 

original range extended from the mouth of the St. 

Lawrence River west to include the Hudson Bay and 

Great Lakes drainage, the Saskatchewan River system, 

the Great Slave Lake and Mackenzie River (Hubbs and 

Lagler 1949; Trautman 1957; Scott and Crossman 

1973; Becker 1983). Colby et al. (1979) report that the 

northern limit to the distribution of walleye in Canada 

can be approximated by the 55.4'F (1 3°C) mean July 

isotherm. 

In the United States, the popularity of walleye as a 

game species has resulted in their introduction to 

artificial lakes within and far beyond its original range, 

including reservoirs throughout the Southeast, the Great 

Plains (eastern Colorado, Nebraska, Kansas, Oklahoma 

and Texas), the Colorado River, and northwest to the 

Columbia River. 

Importance in the sport fishery of the U.S. 

and Canada 

The abundance of walleye illustrations on the cover of 

sport and fishing magazines provides conspicuous 

evidence about the popularity of walleye to anglers. 

There are fishing lures and apparatus, fishing clinics, 

angling tournaments, and books on fishing for walleye 

(Sternberg 1986). Ellison and Franzin (1992) accurately 

described the demand for walleye angling: 

"A fishmg boom for walleye ... developed during 

the 1980s, is reminiscent of the explosion in 

2 NCRAC Culture Series 101- Walleye Culture Manual 
angling demand for largemouth bass ... during 

the late 1960s through the 1970s. Advances in 

biological knowledge of the species, improved 

fishing gear and techniques, angling seminars, 

magazine articles, and television coverage first 

generated and then fed an accelerating interest in 

walleye fishng. The growth of angling clubs and 

fishng tournaments and concurrent increased in 

the numbers of anglers who fish only for 

walleyes have placed great pressure on walleye 

resources .” 

Walleye are targeted as a sport fish in 34 states, seven 

provinces, and one territory (Fenton et al. 1996). 

Sport fishing is an economically important recreational 

activity in the US. In 1991, the expenditures for sport 

fishng by 3 1 million US anglers 2 16 years old (1 9% of 

the US population in that age group) was $24 billion; 

$15.1 billion was spent on freshwater fishmg (USDI 

1993). In 1991 , in freshwaters other than the Great 

Lakes, 9% of the 431 million angler days of fishing was 

for walleye and sauger, which amounted to expenditures of $1.36 billion dollars. In the Great Lakes, 40% 

of 2.55 million anglers fished for walleye and sauger, a 

greater percentage than for any other species or species 

group; 39% of the anglers 

fished for perch, 28% for 

salmon, 21 % for black 

bass, and 19% for lake 

trout. Angler expendtures 

for walleye and sauger 

fishing in the Great Lakes 

was $480 million, thus the 

total angling value for 

walleye and sauger in the 

US in 1991 was about 

$2.16 billion. 

Travel by US citizens for 

sport fishing in the 

Canadian provinces of 

Ontario, Manitoba, and 

Saskatchewan is nearly 

synonymous with fishing 

for walleye. Scott and 

Crossman (1973), authors 

of the respected “Freshwater Fishes of Canada,” 

state, “The walleye is 

probably the most economically valuable species in 

Canada’s inland waters.” In 1990, walleye represented 

16.3% of the total freshwater fishes captured by anglers 

in Canada (Fenton et al. 1996). 

Commercial fisheries for walleye in the US. 

and Canada 

walleye were once a substantial part of the commercial fisheries of the Great Lakes, but especially Lake 

Erie (Hubbs and Lagler 1949). However, data on 

commercial harvest of walleye is difficult to obtain. The 

last year of record for commercial harvest data from the 

Great Lakes and the Mississippi River was in the 1977 

issue of Fishery Statistics of the US (NOAA 1984), 

which was the last year of issue for that government 

publication. The annual report of the Fisheries of the 

United States, a dfferent statistical report on US 

fisheries, does not provide data on commercial harvest 

from the Great Lakes or the Mississippi River. 

Available data indicate a sharp decline in commercial 

harvest of walleye, Walleye harvest by Canadian and 

US commercial fishers from Lake Erie declined from 

24 million lbs (10.8 million kg) in 1956 to 1.03 million 

lbs (0.47 million kg), in 1977; 89% of the total was by 

Pounds 1985: 139,331 Ibs 

Value (US$) ,E; and US$148,000 ! 

- 160,000 

140,000 

63 

g 120,000 

i 2 

Y 

.L 40,000 j rn 4 __ U 

5 20,000 

! 

I1 

1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 

Year 

j ,,,,, I,,,, I,,,, I,, 0 

a 

Figure 1. Commercial harvest of walleye from the Great Lakes and Mississippi 

River from 1976-1 991 (data from O’Rourke and Edon 1995). 

NCRAC Culture Series 101 - Walleye Culture Manual 3 
Canadians (NOAA 1984) In 1977, catch in Lake of the 

Woods was slightly more than the Great Lakes-1.1 

million lbs (0.50 million kg); 79.5% of the harvest was 

by Canadians. In 1977, landings of walleye on the 

Mississippi River was 580,000 lbs (263,088 kg) by 

Minnesota and Wisconsin fishers (both states reported 

the same harvest), which was greater than the 334,000 

lbs (151,502 kg) harvest on the US side of the Great 

Lakes in the same year. 

At one time, exploitation of walleye from Lakes Erie 

and Ontario was so intense that the blue pike, a subspecies of the walleye, was harvested to extinction 

(Zarbock 1977); but environmental changes to the deep 

water habitat of the blue pike was also a contributing 

factor. In the 1970s, walleye were considered the most 

exploited percid species in North American commercial 

and recreational fisheries (Kendall 1978). In Canada, 

the number of walleye caught declined from 25 million 

in 1986 to 20 million in 1990 (Fenton et al. 1996). 

Although a commercial fishery for walleye still exists 

on the Canadian side of the Great Lakes, especially on 

the north shore of Lake Erie, except for tribal fisheries, 

there is no licensed commercial harvest of walleye from 

the US portion of lakes Erie, Huron, Superior, and 

Michigan. Commercial harvest of walleye in the US has 

been eliminated in favor of the economically more 

valuable use of walleye stocks as resources for sport 

fishing , 

In 1994, the Michigan Department of Natural Resources Fisheries Division reported harvest of walleye 

from the Great Lakes by the Inter-Tribal Fisheries and 

Assessment Program was regulated by COTFMA (Bay 

Mills, So0 Tribe, and Grand Travers) and the Great 

Lakes Indian Fish and Wildlife Commission (Bad River, 

Keweenan Bay, and Red Cliff Bands of Lake Superior 

Chppewa Indians) (CFN 1995). In 1994, the tribal 

harvest of walleye from Michigan waters of the Great 

Lakes was 9,216 lbs (4,180 kg) valued at $12,626 

($1.37/lb, $3.00/kg). Data of tribal harvest elsewhere 

(Minnesota, Wisconsin, New York) were not found, but 

even collectively, tribal harvest in the Great Lakes and 

other freshwaters of the US is trivial compared with 

Canada. 

Commercial harvest of walleye in North America is 

largely from Canada, but even there, the total harvest of 

walleye has been declining; between 1973 and 1978, 

commercial harvest of walleye in the Province of 

Manitoba was only 65% of the average annual harvest 

between 1945 and 1954 (Sifa and Ayles 1981). Commercially harvested walleye pass through several 

marketing channels, but the larger portion are exported 

to the US under the aegis of the Freshwater Fish 

Marketing Corporation (FFMC), a “schedule I11 crown 

corporation” established in 1969 by the Freshwater Fish 

Marketing Act (documents supplied Dan Topolinsh, 

FFMC, personal communication): 

“The corporation has the exclusive right to 

market and trade in fish in interprovincial and 

export trade and shall exercise that right, either 

by itself or by its agents with the objective of: 

marketing fish in an orderly manner; increasing 

returns to fishers; and promoting international 

markets for and increasing interprovincial and 

export trade in fish.” 

The mandate of the FFMC is to achieve the greatest 

possible economic returns to the commercial fishers. It 

accomplishes this mandate by marketing fish in an 

orderly manner, and by serving as a single-desk agent 

for promoting markets and export of fish, which happen 

to be mainly to the US because that is where they 

obtain the best price. The income of the FFMC has 

averaged between CN$40-50 million (US$29.5-36.8 

million) for 1990- 1994. The FFMC affects the livelihoods of about 3,000 commercial fishers, of whom 70% 

are Aboriginal. They fish on about 400 lakes in western 

Ontario, the three prairie provinces of Alberta, 

Saskatchewan, Manitoba, and the Northwest Territories. 

Commercial fishers in eastern Ontario operate independent of the FFMC through a greater diversity of smaller 

marketing channels. FFMC consolidates the processing 

and marketing of fish by collecting fish at about 90 

landing points from which fish are transported fresh to a 

centralized processing facility located in Winnipeg, 

Manitoba. Packing stations are located in Hay River, in 

the North West Territory, and La Ronge, Saskatchewan. 

FFMC maximizes returns to fishers located in small, 

isolated communities. 

The harvest of walleye by the FFMC between 1990 and 

1994 ranged from 6.7-10.9 million lbs (3.0-4.9 million 

kg), but the annual landings shows a somewhat downward trend (Table 1). In 1992, the year for which 

landings and values data were available by province and 

territories, 47.0% of the walleye and 96.4% of the 

sauger were harvested in Manitoba, and 44.5% were 

harvested in Ontario; 44.9% of monetary value of 

4 NCRAC Culture Series 101- Walleye Culture Manual 
Table 1. Landings (round weight, in millions 

of pounds) of walleye and sauger 

processed by the Freshwater Fish 

Marketing Corporation of Canada’. 

Landings, weight in millions of pounds (Ib) 

or kilograms (kg) 

1990 10.9 (4.9) 5.9 (2.7) 16.8 (7.6) 

1991 8.7 (4.0) 4.8 (2.2) 13.5 (6.1) 

1992 9.6 (4.4) 5.5 (2.4) 15.1 (6.8) 

1993 8.5 (3.8) 4.1 (1.9) 12.6 (5.7) 

1994 6.7 (3.0) 3.2 (1.4) 9.9 (4.5) 

Data are from FFMC, Winnipeg, Canada. 

walleye was from Manitoba and 47.1 % from Ontario. 

In 1992, the only year from which I obtained data on 

walleye, the average price per pound in the round was 

CN$1.63 (US$l.20, $2.60/kg). 

Stocking for sport fishery enhancement 

Because of inadequate recruitment, annual stockings 

are frequently used to maintain walleye populations; 

such programs have been underway for more than 90 

years. In 1906, the US Bureau of Fisheries, the forerunner of the US Fish and Wildlife Service, stocked 368.2 

million “pike perch” (formerly, a common colloquial 

name for walleye), which was 19.1 % of the total 

number of eggs, fry, fingerlings, and adult fishes that 

were stocked in that year (Bureau of Fisheries 1906). 

The national fish hatchery system grew substantially 

after 1906 to a peak in the late 1950s. Although the 

number of federal hatcheries has declined since the 

1960~~ in 1991, 65. 8 million walleye, 3.8 million 

sauger, and 0.4 million saugeye (walleye x sauger 

hybrids) were distributed by federal hatcheries, and 

walleye fry stocking, was 3 1.6% of the 221.19 million 

fish dstributed that year (FWS 1992). 

In 1983 and 1984, state, federal and provincial fisheries 

management agencies in North America stocked more 

than one billion walleye fry and fingerlings (Conover 

1986). Between 1986 and 1991, thirty-two state, 

federal, and provincial agencies reported stocking 

walleye and 29 agencies operated fingerling stoclung 

programs; each agency produced an average of 32.5 

million fingerlings at a total cost of US$19 million 

(Fenton et al. 1996), which seems to be a very minor 

cost relative to the economic value of walleye in the 

recreational fisheries of the US and Canada. For 

example, $19 million was only 0.9% of the $2.16 

billion of the economic value of walleye fishmg in the 

US in 1991. 

Walleye raised by Indian tribes and private producers 

arc also used for stocking inland lakes although few 

statistics on production by the private sector are 

available. In a survey of the North Central Region 

conducted in 1991, forty-seven of 286 contacts (1 6.4%) 

responding to the survey indicated that they were 

raising walleye (Hushak 1993). The value of walleye 

was 8.0% (US$1.1 million) of US$13.9 million in total 

gross sales for respondents to the survey. In Minnesota, 

however, commercial (fish farmers) producers are the 

major sources of walleye that are purchased by lake 

associations and angler clubs for private lakes, and sales 

are also made to county and municipal governments. In 

1992, over 600,000 walleye fingerlings valued at 

$328,000 ($0.54 per fish) were sold by private growers 

in Minnesota (MDA 1993). 

Numerically, fry made up 98% of walleye stockings in 

the US and Canada (Conover 1986). However, the 

relative survival of stocked fingerlings is 16 to 60 times 

greater than that of fry (Heidmger et al. 1987). Large 

numbers of fingerlings can be raised to 1.5-2.5 inches 

(35-50 mm) by tradtional pond-culture methods 

(Beyerle 1979; Fox 1989; Summerfelt et al. 1993). The 

focus of research by government agencies is increasingly directed to training pond-raised fingerlings to 

formulated feeds in intensive culture to meet the 

demand from recreational fisheries management for a 

larger (1 00- 150 mm) fingerling (Cheshire and Steele 

1972; Nagel 1974, 1976; Beyerle 1975; Nickum 1986). 

Ellison and Franzin (1 992) reviewed ten studies of 

maintenance stochng evaluations that were reported in 

a 1990 symposium. The overall finding was that success 

of various stochng practice remains largely unpredctable. In these studies, 32% of 34 fry stockings, 32% of 

the 22 small fingerling stockings, and 50% of the 40 

reports on stocking large fingerlings were considered 

successful to some degree. 

NCRAC Culture Series 101 - Walleye Culture Manual 5 
Aquacultural potential of walleye 

walleye has been recognized by the National Aquaculture Development Plan (Joint Subcommittee on 

Aquaculture 1983) as a species with substantial 

aquaculture potential. Potential, in this case, refers to its 

favorable attributes such as its high esteem as a sport 

and food fish throughout their natural distribution and 

the existence of past and present commercial markets 

for a full range of walleye life stages-from fertilized 

eggs to food-size fish. 

The types of animals used in aquaculture are related to 

biological traits that make the animal adaptable to the 

crowded environment of the pond, cage, tank, or 

raceways where they are to be raised. Biological 

characteristics of fish that are important for a decision 

on their suitability for aquaculture include: (1) desirable 

reproductive traits; (2) lack of cannibalism; (3) suitable 

growth rate; (4) acceptance of artificial food; (5) 

tolerance of crowding and other hatchery conditions; 

(6) disease resistance; and (7) palatability (Summerfelt 

1982). These issues are addressed throughout this 

culture manual. Although an itemized analysis at these 

points would not be justified, in summary, walleye are a 

highly fecund fish, i.e., it is easy to strip gametes and 

fertilize them; fry are easily incubated in conventional 

hatchery containers; the time needed to hatch eggs can 

be regulated within a range of 10 to 40 days; they can 

be spawned out of season; they do have cannibalistic 

tendencies, but this varies with stocks, and it seems to 

be reduced by domestication, and it is not a problem 

when fish are adequately fed; fingerlings can be raised 

at high densities in fertilized ponds to 2 in (50 mm); 

both fry and fingerlings can be habituated to formulated 

feed, and although fry feeds are special, walleye can be 

grown out to food size on a variety of fish feeds; 

walleye are tolerant of crowding and hatchery conditions, providmg the light intensity is correct; walleye 

are surprisingly tolerant of poor water quality; walleye 

are not more prone to diseases than other fish; and their 

flesh quality and palatability is excellent. Thus, the 

biological characteristics of walleye are desirable for 

aquaculture; however, cultural condtions must consider 

the importance of their light sensitive eye and phototactic response. Offspring of wild stocks are skittish, but 

they do well at low light or with in-tank lighting, and 

domesticated stocks and the interspecific hybrids are 

quite docile and they show hybrid vigor. 

An economic assessment of the aquaculture potential 

for walleye is more dfficult, but walleye has been a 

valuable commercial species for over 150 years. In 

1990 and 1991, two surveys of retail, wholesale, and 

other firms that comprise the traditional marketing 

channel for fish and seafood products within the North 

Central Region (Hushak et al. 1992; Hushak 1993) 

inhcated that fishes with the most marketing potential 

in the region were walleye, yellow perch, bluegill, and 

largemouth bass. The most significant species (or 

species groups) in the 1991 survey, measured by gross 

sales at the farm level, were salmonids ($6.18 million), 

catfish ($2.58 million), baitfish ($1.89 million), walleye 

($1.11 million) and largemouth bass ($0.65 million) 

(Hushak 1993). 

Walleye are already a cultured species, albeit a small 

industry geared to the production of eggs, fry, and 

pond-raised fingerlings for stochng. Priced per pound, 

however, sales for stoclung bring excellent returns if the 

markets can be found. For a time, the incentive of 

excellent market prices resulted in a rapid expansion of 

commercial production of fry and fingerlings. Newly 

hatched fry often sold for 1- to 1.5-cents, and 1.5- to 4- 

in (35- to 100 mm) fingerlings sold for $0.25-0.75 each. 

For example, one commercial source lists 2-in (50.8 

mm) walleye (available in July) at $0.45 each, or $0.35 

each per 1,000, and another source lists 5- to 8- in (1 27- 

203 mm) walleye (available September-November) at 

$0.90-1.35 each. Commercial pond production has been 

particularly marked in Minnesota and to a lesser extent 

elsewhere. Excellent prices for fry and fingerlings have 

bolstered commercial walleye production of small fish 

to the point where there is intense competition for 

regional markets. 

Walleye has favorable name recognition in restaurants. 

Although mainly sold in smaller, local, upscale, whitetable-cloth restaurants, it is on the menu of some 

national franchise chains such as Red Lobster@. Given 

the favorable name recognition for walleye by the 

public, and a limited commercial supply, skin-on 

walleye fillets sell for more than cultured catfish, 

salmon, or trout. Since February 1987, I have recorded 

retail prices of skin-on walleye fillets at local retail 

outlets, the prices ranged from a low of $4.98 (September 21, 1991) to $10.95 (October 15, 1995), with a 

mean of $6.97. In that interval, the price of walleye 

fillets were 118% of the price of cultured salmon fillets 

(mean was $6.46). Retail prices of this magnitude have 

6 NCRAC Culture Series 101- Walleye Culture Manual 
been a strong stimulus to the private sector for the 

production of food-size fish (1.25-1.5 lbs, 567-681 9). 

In 1994 walleye sold for US$l.37/lb ($3.00/kg) in tribal 

sales, and CN$l.63 (US$1.20) by FFMC. These prices 

are substantially greater than the $0.77-0.79/1b ($1.70- 

1.74kg) farm price for channel catfish in 1995 (ERS 

1996). 

Hushak (1 993) stated that “While North Central 

growers want to raise high-valued species such as 

yellow perch, walleye, and hybrid striped bass, the 

technology is not fully developed.’’ Thus, Hushak 

suggests that cultural technology is the constraint. The 

purpose of the research program of the North Central 

Regional Aquaculture Center (NCRAC) has been to 

overcome critical constraints, but substantial research 

efforts have been underway by state and federal natural 

resource agencies as well. Is the information base for 

cultural technology of walleye sufficient to commence 

commercial production of food-size walleye? 

Experience with raising walleye to food-size has been 

largely limited to a few researchers who started by 

habituating pond-raised fingerlings to formulated feed. 

In 1989 a large scale effort to raise walleye to food size 

was started by Aquaculture Inc., Rolla, Missouri 

(NCRAC Journal 1990). Unfortunately, that project 

may have been ahead of the rapid rate of technological 

progress and it is no longer growing walleye. The goal 

of the Walleye Culture Manual is to help fill the 

technology gap so that culture of all stages of walleye 

will be more effective and so that walleye can be raised 

economically to food size in the future. 

Although NCRAC research program on walleye has 

been diverse-pond culture, reproductive biology, 

larviculture-the goal has always been to develop 

technology for the production of walleye as a food fish. 

Eventually, the end use of walleye by commercial 

aquaculture will change from the culture of fry and 

fingerlings for stocking progeny to the production of 

fish for the food fish market. 

Research needs 

The biology of walleye has been reviewed by Scott and 

Crossman (1973), Collette et al. (1 977), Kendall (1 978), 

Colby et al. (1979), Becker (1983), Craig (1987), and 

others. These references are invaluable resources for 

basic information on the biological attributes of walleye 

important to their culture. The status of walleye culture 

has been reviewed by Nickum (1978, 1986). A culture 

manual on walleye was available by the U.S. Bureau of 

Fisheries in 1900 (Comm. Fish. 1900). Richard and 

Hynes (1 986) prepared a pond culture manual based on 

their experiences at the White Lake Fish Culture 

Station. Most cultural practices for walleye have 

developed from trial-and-error rather than from 

experimental design. The potential for development of a 

substantial walleye food-fish culture seems to be 

realistic, but for commercial walleye aquaculture to be 

profitable, many aspects of the production process need 

further study in order to shorten the time required to 

take a fish from egg to harvest size and to improve 

economic efficiency of all aspects of their culture. More 

field trials are needed to generate reliable economic 

data on alternative production systems. The case studies 

and chapters in this manual demonstrate many tradtional technologies. Some need refinement, but critical 

constraints remain for raising a walleye from a pondcultured summer fingerling to a food-size fish in an 

economically efficient food-fish culture system. To 

obtain the level of economic efficiency required to be 

competitive in the food-fish market, commercial 

producers need access to domesticated broodstock, 

includmg both walleye and sauger lines that are needed 

to produce high performance interspecific hybrids, and 

research to extend out-of-season spawning to all 

months; feeding strategies and low-stress cultural 

systems that will improve feed efficiency and reduce 

disease; identification of important fish pathogens and 

stress factors that affect their occurrence; and development of vaccines and FDA-approved therapeutics to 

control disease problems. Although substantial, these 

research needs should be kept in perspective. Very few 

scientist-years have been given to walleye aquaculture, 

especially when compared with that devoted to poultry, 

swine and cattle production, or even that for trout and 

catfish culture. Great strides have been made by 

investigators in the North Central Region since inception of the USDA regional aquaculture center program: 

the problem with noninflation of the gas bladder has 

been resolved, walleye are spawned out of season, pond 

culture strategies have been evaluated, and technology 

transfer developed. Researchers have spoken to state 

and regional conferences on their research findings, 

workshops have been offered on special topics, and this 

manual developed to provide a comprehensive information source for walleye culture. 

NCRAC Culture Series 101 - Walleye Culture Manual 7 
Summary 

walleye is an important sport fish in the US, with a 

value based on angler expenditures of $2.2 billion in 

1991. Historically, walleye have been an important 

commercial species; now however, except for small 

tribal fisheries, commercial harvest in the US is 

prohibited. From 1990-95, Canadian harvest of walleye 

in Ontario, the prairie provinces, and NWT ranged from 

6.7 to 10.9 million lbs (3.0 to 4.9 million kg) annually, 

and a substantial part of that harvest was marketed in 

the US. In 1992, fishers in Canada received CN$1.64 

(US$1.20) per pound (US$2.6O/kg) netted from remote 

natural lakes. The larger part of US aquaculture is by 

public agencies who culture fry and fingerlings for 

stocking purposes. Nearly all commercial aquaculture is 

marketed for sport fish enhancement. However, high 

retail prices ($6.97) for walleye and an interest in 

development of new species for the market have spurred 

interest in production of food-size walleye. Technological constraints have been cited as reasons for walleye 

culture to lag. Thus, NCRAC sponsored research, 

production of the Walleye Culture Manual, and workshops are several steps being taken to help fill the 

technology gap so that culture of all stages of walleye 

will be more effective and so that walleye can be raised 

economically to food size in the near future. 

Ref e re n ces 

Becker, G. C. 1983. Fishes of Wisconsin. The University 

of Wisconsin Press, Madison. 

Bristow, B. T., and R. C. Summerfelt. 1994. Performance 

of larval walleye cultured intensively in clear and 

turbid water. Journal of the World Aquaculture 

Society 25:454-464 

Bulkowski, L., and J. W. Meade. 1983. Changes in 

phototaxis during early development of walleye. 

Transactions of the American Fisheries Society 

1 121445447. 

Beyerle, G. B. 1975. Summary of attempts to raise 

walleye fry and fingerlings on artificial diets, with 

suggestions on needed research and procedures to 

be used in future tests. Progressive Fish-Culturist 

37: 103-1 05. 

Beyerle, G. B. 1979. Extensive culture of walleye fry in 

ponds at the Wolf Lake Hatchery, 1975-1 978. 

Michigan Department of Natural Resources Fisheries 

Research Report Number 1874, Lansing, Michigan. 

Cai, J., and R. C. Summerfelt. 1992. Effects of temperature and size on oxygen consumption and ammonia 

excretion in walleye. Aquaculture 104:127-I 38. 

Carmichael, G., M. Ring, and J. McCraren. 1992. Sea 

fare cookbook. Volume 1. American Fisheries 

Society, Bethesda, Maryland. 

Cheshire, W. F., and K. L. Steele. 1972. Hatchery 

rearing of walleye using artificial food. Progressive 

Fis h-Culturist 34:96-99. 

CFN (Commercial Fisheries Newsline). 1995. Michigan 

1994 commercial fish harvest. Commercial Fisheries 

Newsline 14(3):14-I 5. 

Colby, P. J., R. E. McNicol, and R. A. Ryder. 1979. 

Synopsis of biological data on the walleye 

Sfizostedion v. vifreurn (Mitchill 1818). FA0 Fisheries 

Synopsis No. 11 9 (FIWS119), Food and Agricultural 

Organization of the United Nations, Rome. 

Collette, B. B., M. A. Ali, K. E. F. Hokanson, M. Nagiec, 

S. A. Smirnov, J. E. Thorpe, A. H. Weatherley, and J. 

Willemsen. 1977. Biology of the percids. Journal of 

the Fisheries Research Board Canada 34:1891- 

1 897. 

Comm. Fish. (U.S. Commission of Fish and Fisheries). 

1900. A manual of fish-culture based on methods of 

the United States Commission of Fish and Fisheries, 

revised edition. U. S. Government Printing Office, 

Washington, DC. 

Conover, M. C. 1986. Stocking cool-water species to 

meet management needs. Pages 31-39 in R. H. 

Stroud, editor. Fish culture in fisheries management. 

Fish Culture Section and Fisheries Management 

Section of the American Fisheries Society, Bethesda, 

Maryland. 

Craig, J. 1987. The biology of perch and related fish. 

Timber Press, Portland, Oregon. 

Ellison, D. G., and W. G. Franzin. 1992. Overview of the 

symposium on walleye stocks and stocking. North 

American Journal of Fisheries Management 12:271- 

275. 

ERS (Economic Research Service). 1996. Aquaculture 

outlook. United States Department of Agriculture, 

Econom ic Research Service, Pu bl icat i o n L D P-AQS3, March 7, 1996. 

Fenton, R., J. A. Mathias, and G. E. E. Moodie. 1996. 

Recent and future demand for walleye in North 

America. Fisheries 21 (1):6-12. 

8 NCRAC Culture Series 101- Walleye Culture Manual 
Fox, M.G. 1989. Effect of prey density and prey size on 

growth and survival of juvenile walleye (Stizostedion 

vitreum vitreum). Canadian Journal of Fisheries and 

Aquatic Sciences 46:1323-1328. 

FWS (US Fish and Wildlife Service). 1992. Fish and fish 

egg distribution report of the national fish hatchery 

system, Fiscal Year 1991. Report No. 26, US. Fish 

and Wildlife Service, Washington, DC. 

Heidinger, R. C., J. H. Waddell, and 6. L. Tetzlaff. 1987. 

Relative survival of walleye fry versus fingerlings in 

two Illinois reservoirs. Proceedings of the Annual 

Conference Southeastern Association of Fish and 

Wildlife Agencies 39(1985):306-311. 

Hokanson, K. E. F., and W. M. Koenst. 1986. Revised 

estimates of growth requirements and lethal temperature limits of juvenile walleyes. Progressive FishCultu rist 48: 90-94. 

Howey, R. G., G. L. Theis, and P. B. Haines. 1980. 

Intensive culture of walleye (Stizostedion vitreum). 

Lamar Information Leaflet 80-05, US Fish and 

Wildlife Service, Lamar, Pennsylvania. 

Hubbs, C. L., and K. F. Lagler. 1949. Fishes of the Great 

Lakes region. Bulletin No. 26, Cranbrook Institute of 

Science, Bloomfield Hills, Michigan. 

Hushak, L. J., C. F. Cole, and D. P. Gleckler. 1992. 

Survey of wholesale and retail buyers in the six 

southern states of the North Central Region. Technical Bulletin Series 104, North Central Regional 

Aquaculture Center, Iowa State University, Ames, 

Iowa. 

ishak, L. J. 1993. North central regional aquaculture 

industry situation and outlook report, volume 1. 

Situation Outlook Report, Volume 1, Publications 

Office, North Central Regional Aquaculture Center, 

Iowa State University, Ames, Iowa. 

ko, J. R. M. 1978. Diet rhythm in activity of walleye, 

Stizostedion vitreum vitreum. Journal of Fish Biology 

121593-599. 

Kendal, R. L., editor. 1978. Selected coolwater fishes of 

North America. Special Publication No. 11 , American 

Fisheries Society, Bethesda, Maryland. 

Kuipers, K. L., and R. C. Summerfelt. 1994. Converting 

pond-reared walleye fingerlings to formulated feeds: 

Effects of diet, temperature, and stocking density. 

Journal of Applied Aquaculture 42(2):31-57. 

MDA (Minnesota Department of Agriculture). 1993. 

Minnesota Aquaculture report. Minnesota Department of Agriculture, St. Paul, Minnesota. 

Moore, G. A. 1944. The retinae of two North American 

teleosts with special reference to their tapeta lucida. 

Journal of Comparative Neurology 80:369-379. 

Nagel, T. 0. 1974. Rearing of walleye fingerlings in an 

intensive culture using Oregon moist pellets as an 

artificial diet. Progressive Fish-Culturist 3659. 

Nagel, T. 0. 1976. Intensive culture of fingerling walleyes on formulated feeds. Progressive Fish-Culturist 

38:90-91. 

Nagel, T. 0. 1985. Development of domestic walleye 

broodstock. Progressive Fish-Culturist 47:121-122. 

Nickum, J. 1978. Intensive culture of walleyes: The state 

of the art. American Fisheries Society Special 

Publication 1 1 :187-I 94. 

Nickum J. G. 1986. Walleye. Pages 115-1 26 in R. R. 

Stickney, editor. Culture of nonsalmonid freshwater 

fishes. CRC Press, Inc., Boca Raton, Florida. 

NOAA (National Ocean and Atmospheric Administration). 1984. Fishery statistics of the United States 

1977. U.S. Department of Commerce, National 

Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, National 

Fisheries Service, Washington, DC. 

O’Rourke, P. D., and A. M. T. Edon. 1995. Economic 

analysis of advanced walleye fingerling production in 

an intensive recirculating system. 9th Annual 

Minnesota Aquaculture Conference and Trade Show, 

Minneapolis, Minnesota. 

Piper, R. G., I. B. McElwain, L. E. Orme, J. P. McCraren, 

L. G. Fowler, and J. R. Leonard. 1982. Fish hatchery 

management. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 

Washington, DC. 

Richard, P.D., and J. Hynes. 1986. Walleye culture 

manual. Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources, Fish 

Culture Section, Toronto, Ontario. 

Robins, C. R., Chairman, R. M. Bailey, C. E. Bond, J. R. 

Brooker, E. A. Lachner, R. N. Lea, and W. B. Scott. 

1991. Common and scientific names of fishes from 

the United States and Canada, 5th edition. Special 

Publication 20, American Fisheries Society, 

Bethesda, Maryland. 

NCRAC Culture Series 101 - Walleye Culture Manual 9 
Ryder, R. A. 1977. Effects of ambient light variations on 

behavior of yearling, sub-adult, and adult walleyes 

(Stizostedion vitreum vitreum). Journal of the 

Fisheries Research Board of Canada 34: 1481 -1 491. 

Scott, W. B., and E. J. Crossman. 1973. Freshwater 

fishes of Canada. Bulletin 184, Fisheries Research 

Board of Canada, Ottawa, Ontario. 

Sifa, L.S., and G.V. Ayles 1981. An investigation of 

feeding habits of walleye (Stizostedion vitreum 

vitreum) fingerling in constructed earthen ponds in 

the Canadian prairies. Canadian Technical Report of 

Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences Number 1040. 

Siegwarth, G. L., and R. C. Summerfelt. 1992. Light and 

temperature effects on growth and performance of 

walleye and hybrid walleye fingerlings reared 

intensively. Progressive Fish-Culturist 54:49-53. 

Smith, L L., Jr., and W. M. Koenst. 1975. Temperature 

effects on eggs and fry of percoid fishes. U.S. 

Environmental Protection Agency Ecological Research Series EPA-660/3-75-017. 

Sternberg, D. 1986. Walleye. Prentice Hall Press, Simon 

8 Schuster, Inc., New York, New York. 

Summerfelt, R. C. 1982. Practice and prospects of fish 

farming for food production. Pages 81 -1 20 in D. C. 

Beitz, editor. Proceedings of the international 

symposium on animal products in human nutrition. 

Nutrition Foundation Monograph Series, Academic 

Press, New York, New York. 

Summerfelt, S. T. 1996. Engineering design of a water 

reuse system. Pages 277-309 in R. C. Summerfelt, 

editor. Walleye culture manual. NCRAC Culture 

Series 101 North Central Regional Aquaculture 

Center Publications Office, Iowa State University, 

Ames, Iowa. 

Trautman, M. B. 1957. Fishes of Ohio. Ohio State 

University Press, Columbus. 

USDl (U.S. Department of the Interior, Fish and Wildlife 

Service and U.S. Department of Commerce, Bureau 

of the Census). 1993. 1991 National survey of 

fishing, hunting, and wildlife-associated recreation. 

U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington, DC. 

Zarbock, W. M. 1977. Fish, fisheries, and water quality 

of the Great Lakes basin. Fisheries 2(2):2-4; 26-33. 

10 NCRAC Culture Series 101- Walleye Culture Manual