TPWD 1957 F-2-R-4 #317: An Inventory and Creel Census of the Fishes of Lake Inks, Texas

SEGMENT COMPLETION REPORT Investigations Project sTATE OF TEXAS IIIHL‘? Project Hon F2Rh Name Fisheries Investigations and Surveys of the Waters of Region 6-B. Job Noe Bulk Title An Inventory and Creel Census of the Fishes of Lake Inks, Texas. Period Covered: February 1226 through January 1227. ABSTRACT The fish population of Lake Inks was sampled with nets and seines on a monthly‘ basis from February 1956 through January 1957 in an effort to determine the relative abundance of the species present. In addition a creel census was made to obtain the basis for an estimate of the total anglers' catch, by species, and the relative abundance of each species in the total anglers' catch, Compared with data obtained during the previous study of the fish population of’Lake Inks, it was learned that gizsard shad, Dorosoma cepedianum, were increasing in relativeabundancea For this reason a selective kill of this species was performed, in November 1956, under the Statewide Rough Fish Control Projecto At that time it was estimated that shad were reduced at the rate of 125 pounds per acre. Unfortunately sufficient data concerning the present status of the gizzard shad pepulation has not as yet been obtainedn Netting studies have, however, indicated a reduction in the relative 'abundance of this'species, The population study and creel census will be continued for another .full year to .Mdete Mus the full results of this type of population manipulation in regard to improvement of fishing quality and increasing the harvest of game fish y anglers During the study period an estimated 61,181 fish weighing 28, 50% pounds were harvested from.Lake Inks during an estimated 3h, 5&7’man days of fishing In terms of per acre yield this means 68 fish, weighing 32 pounds, were caught per acre The over— all rates of catch were 0 M6 fish per man hour for boat fishermen, 0 80 fish per man hour for shore fishermen and 0 32 fish per trotline hour for trotline fishermen As during the previous census period on this lake, live baits were more'succ~ “eseful :in catching fish, but artificial baits are still the most popular with black bass fishermen In the order of their relative abundance in the total angler a catch, the five most frequently taken species were sunfishes, principally bluegills, white bass, white crappie, largemouth bass and channel catfish QBJECTTVES ' To determine the relative abundance of the species present in Inks Lake; to estimate the total anglersE catch by species; and to obtain data regarding the relative abundance of each species in.the total anglers9 catch. TECHNIQDES Inventory of Species The work begun during the preceding segment period (June 1955 through January 1956}- was continued during the present segment periodo As usual';a monthly field trip 'was made to the lake during which specimens were collected with nets and seines, and data was recorded as outlined in the segment completion report for Job Bulk, Project Fm2-R-3. Net collections were made during each month with the exception of November 1956, at which time a "selective kill" of gizzard shed was attempted under Job 16a—1, Project F-lh-D, the Statewide Rough Fish ControlProJect. Seine collections were made at random.localities each month from February through August when seining efficiency fell off to the point where it was no longer profitable or possible to take fish in large enough numbers to be of significance. This impasse was brought about by the luxuriant growth of MErithyilum.§p. which almost completely took over the shoreline of the lake. During the previous year this con- dition did not arise because of a late spring drawdown which controlled the vegetation during most of that segment period. Creel Census The total catch by species was estimated by using the same methods used in the preceding segment period. As experienced during the latter part of the 1955 study period, the census stations proved to be of little value, except on occasion, and it was necessary to go to the fishermen wherever they were fishing and interview them.on the spot. The reasons for the marked decline in numbers of fishermen are not clear, but it is suspected that the economy of the region has been seriously affected by the drouth and that may of the pe0ple, who could afford to go fishing at Inks Lake during previous years, no longer can afford to make such a long trip, or they now fish at lakes closer to home. The formula used in estimating the total anglers' catch or total yield for the segment period, excluding trotline fishermen, is as follows: Total yield 2: (a.b.d) 6%) Where: a f the average number of fishermen counted on the lake during all cruise counts made during the census period. b a the average length of the fishing day, i.e. the length of time in hours from'when appreciable numbers of fishermen start fishing until virtually all have stOpped fishing for the day. d 3 the number of days in census period. f a the total number of fish caught by the fishermen interviewed. g = the total effort in hours by the fishermen interviewed. The derivation of this formula was given in detail in the report for Segment 3, JOb Bull} 0 FINDINGS Inventory of Species Table 1 contains a checklist of species of fish found to occur in Lake Inks. A total of 70 seine collections and 8% net collections provided a grand total of 5296 specimens representing 25 species of 11 fish families. These collections are broken down by species, type of gear, and month of collection in Tables 2 and 3. Table A is a record of gonadal development of the more regularly collected species taken in gill nets. This development was rated from 1 to 5 with No. 1. rep— resenting ripe; 2. representing nearly ripe; 3. representing sexes not easily distinw guishable; and 5. representing spent fish, gonads empty. Table 5 presents the results of analyses made on the food remains found in the stomachs of to specimens of channel catfish. These stomachs contained a total of 797.3 m1. of food. Of this, 80.hh percent was composed of fish in various stages of digestion. Over half of this food was identified as giszard shad remains, while sunfish, freshwater drum, white bass, minnows and unidentifiable fish remains made up the rest. Various types of vegetable matter made up another 16.68 percent of the toal volume, with algae and flyriophyllum.§p. comprising the bulk of this. Insect remains comprised only 2.3% percent of the total volume, with beetles (Coleoptera) accounting for the largest portion of this volume,fl Other items of food remains present in the catfish stomachs included pieces of cut liver, pecans, various'microscopic crustaceans, pieces of shrimp, etc. do the basis of frequency of occurrence in channel catfish stomachs, gizsard shad was found in nearly half of the stomachs containing food. Algae and Mgrioch llum pp; were next in order of frequency,,with chironomid.larvae.and beetles next. These ' insect remains were almost always found in the stomachs in.association with vegetation. Only five largemouth bass stomachs were found hocontain food. This food amounted to a total of 39 ml., 3h m1. of which were gissard shad remains and 5 ml. were shiner minnows. The three spotted bass stomachs found to contain food held the remains of gissard shad only. Four white bass stomachs contained a total of 77 m1. of partially digested food. 72 ml. of this food were the remains of gisnard shad, h.0 ml. were unidentifiable fish and 1.0 ml. was the remains of damselflys. A minimise wamnnth homo. 412+anth nnn+m¢§wma n O m"! was mmu.n\-L-na———- _____-_°___ (2.961): is: t s v r is w v w H9961) /\ ion I new to Table 3 contains info action similar to that in Tables 6 and T but is concerned only with trotline fishing. Table 9 compares the relative success of the various methods of fishing employed on Inks Lake during the study period. It gives the total number of fish taken by each method, gee time reqnired to catch the fish and the rate of catch for each method. Similarly, Table 19 presents information concerning the relative success of Lake Inks anglers in fishing for the various species of.fish caught during the study period. These data are based only on pure catches, where only a single species was involved. i 5 In Table ll is a breakdown of the total catch of boat and shore anglers and trotline fishermen showing the number of fish caught on the various type of baits used by fishermen duri.s the study period. The estimated total yield to anglers, excluding trotline fishermen, during the eleven months covered by the census is presented in Table I3. Bus to other work within Region 6-3 and to assistance given to the Project Leader of Region 7-3, the regularly scheduled work on Lake Inks was not done during November 1956. Table 13 is a breakdown of the estimated total yield, showing the total anchor of each species std t; - -;tt of each species in the sample obtained; the percentage of the total number1cid total weight of the sampled catch for each species; the estimated yield in number and weight for each species; and the estimated yield per surface acre in number and.wei§ht for each species. Fish taken by trotline are not included in these data. Table ls shows the eve ago length in inches for each 3.,cies in tee sample both on a monthly and study period basis. Table 15 presents an estimate of the total number of fishermen using Inks Lake during the 336 days covered by the creel census. Table 16 shows the origin, or saint of residence, of the fishermen interviewed by creel census persottel during the study period. DISCUSSIQH The nettable fish population of Lake Inks chewed some change during the present segment over :he l955w56 segment. In particular, gissard shad, which accounted ferimore' than 51 percent of the fish taken in enterimental type gill nets, duriua the seven month period from.July 1955 th: wugh Jasuary I956, increased to approximately 66 percent of the total fish taken during the period-from February through october 1956. Graphically these percentages of the total monthly net catches during the 1956 netting study were as follows: 75% 70% 65% . \ 60% I \ “x 55% 1/ ' 50% , / In November, in an effort to reduce the relative abundance of gizzard shad, a "selective kill" of gizzard shad was attempted under Job l6a—l, Project F-lh-Do JO netting was done during November 1956, but in December, 68 fish were taken in nets and 53 percent of these were gizzard shade A.month later, in January 1957, nets were again set, taking 153 fish. Gizzard shad accounted for 62 percent of this totalu From the data, as illustrated in the graph, it appears as if the "selective hill“ of gizzard shad was only partially successful. It remains to be seen whether or not the reduced relative abundance of gizzard shad will remain below the 66 percent level indicated by the total catch of fish taken in experimental type gill nets during the period from February through October 1956a This will be closely watched during the next segment of work on Lake Inkso The river carpsucker also seems to be increasing in relative abundanceo This species, during theeshort segment of 1955-56 accounted for 6°37 percent of the total netted Specimens while in the longer segment of 1956—57 its abundance rose to 7061 percent of the totalo Smallmouth buffalo, on the other hand, drOpped from.3020 percent to 2008 percent, while garfish increased in relative abundance from 0985 percent to 1°98 percent, The decrease in smallmouth buffalo might be attributed to the fact that commercial The combined rough and obnoxious species taken in nets accounted for 77°61 percent of the year's total catch in netso This was an increase of 1&093 percentage points over the short segment of 1955-56, In percentage of the total weight of the netted catch, rough fish comprised {3075 percent; aedecrease of only 0003 percentage pointso gee game fish group, including catfish, white bass, black bass and white crappie, but excluding the sunfishes, increased fram 12°h2 percent of the total netted catch to lhelT percent during the present segment periodo Like the rough fishes, the game fish group remained relatively constant in percent of the total weight of the netted catch, increasing Ou62 of a percentage point, from. 2.2995 percent of the weight of the netted catch in 1955-56 to 2357 percent of the total weight of the netted catch in 1956—57, At present some doubt exists as to the ability of white bass to find optimum conditions for spawning in Inks Lakeo Regardless of the fact that, other than sunfish, this species accounted for the largest number of fish in the creole of anglers, only 38 specimens were taken in the 8% gill net collections during the study periodo These specimens accounted for only l02 percent of the fish caught in gill netso None were taken in seine collectionso 1 The only indication of spawning success for white bass at all is found in the fact that 51 white base that averaged 890 inches in total length were taken by anglers interviewed in August 1956o Relatively speaking, fishing pressure on the white bass population is great and the species is highly prized by anglerso Unless something can be done to aid the *hite bass in its reproduction, however, this species can be expected, at best, to provide only mediocre fishing in Inks Lake, Some thought, it appears, should be given to artificially increasing the numbers of white bass in this lake and the possibility of replenishing stocks of white base through restocking with fry obtained by stripping techniques merits future attention, Creel Census . Excepting November 1956, a total of 1297 fishermen were interviewed by creel census personnel during the period from February 1956 through January 1957, Of these, #95 were boat fishermen and 8&2 were shore fishermen, In addition, the catch from 32 trotlines was also examined, Together, these fishermen including the trotliners caught a total of EMS; fish of 17 Species (Tables 6, 7, 8 and 9), The average rates of catch fOr fishermen using the lake varied only slightly during the eleven.months of this study period from the average rates of catch of the preceding shorter study periodo Boat fishermen during the l955~56 segment had an average rate of catch of 00h5 fish per man hour, During the last segment this increased only slightly to Oeh6 fish per'man hour (Table 6), Lakewise, shore fishermen had only a slight increase in rate of catch from 0,79 fish per man hour to 0080 fish per*man houro'(Table 7), Trotu line fishing had a decrease from 0028 to 0023 fish per trotline hour (Table 8), From these slight variations in average rate of catch it appears as if fishing success remains at about the same level of quality over long periods of time, This stability may be upset during the coming year by the reduction in the numbers of gizzard shad as accomplished in November 1956, Generally speaking, more than half of the anglers, fishing on Lake Inks, are successful (Tables 6, 7, and 8) and the most successful method of fishing remains, as it was during the preceding study period, still fishing, This is true regardless of whether a person is fishing from.a boat or from.the shore (Table 9)o Based on the sample obtained during the creel census, live baits are the most effective types of bait used in catching fish (Table ll) and the most successful of these are minnows and worms, 'Fly fishing, however, during the months of June and July, the peak months of the sunfish bedding season, was verysuccessful° Unfortunately, few anglers use this method and as a result the sunfish harvest from the lake is much smaller than it could be, As for success in taking the various types of fish, sunfish continue to be the most easily caught, Boat fishermen caught them at an average rate of 1,79 fish per man hour and shore fishermen caught them.at lot? fish per man hour (Table 10), All sunfish species combined made up #8095 percent of the total sampled catch (Table 13) but the bulk of these were small bluegills of approximately 5,7 inches in average total length (Table 1h), During the eleven months of the census it is estimated that 29,9h8 sunfish were caught, for a per acre yield of 33 sunfish weighing approximately 5 pounds (Table 13), As in the preceding short segment period, white base were the second most frequently caught type of fisho Qverall, these white bass had an average length of 10,9 inches and it is estimated that 9,630 of these were caughto This is a per acre yield of 1007 fish weighing 8051 pounds for the eleven month period (Table 13), From.netting samples it would appear that white crappie are not overly abundant in Lake Inks (Table 33, and judging from specimens contained in the fishermens’ creels, are not very large, The average total length of the crappie taken by fishermen was only 7,0 inches (Table 1h), appie harvested during the study period is estimated at 9,575 fish weighing 7,656 pounds for a per acre yield of 10,6 fish and 2,7 pounds (Table 13), Largemouth bass, though most actively sought after by boat fishermen on Lake Inks, were the fourth most abundantly caught fish, They comprised a little over 10 per- cent of the fish in the oracle of fishermen interviewed by census personnel, were caught at the rate of 0,90 fish per man hour (Table 10), The average total length of these bass was 12,3 inches (Table 1%), Per acre, 7,15 bass weighing 9,71 pounds were taken from.Lake Inks by fishermen during the study period (Table 13), ter census period. They drOpped sampled catch to 6 percent of the total catch during the 1956—57 census period, In all it is estimated that 3,861 channel catfish'weigh~ ing 2,916 pounds were taken by Lake Inks anglers, not including those taken by trotline fishermen, This is a per acre yield of h.28 fish and 3,25 pounds (Table 13). Based on data recorded by census personnel it is estimated that 61,181 fish were harvested during the eleven months covered by the census, (Table 12), The estimated On a per acre basis, it is estimated that Lake Inks o anglers during the period covered by the creel The estimated number of man digs spent by Lake Inks anglers during the last segment period of eleven months was 3t,h93 man days, Of this total, 10,9h6 were spentby boat fishermen and 23,5h7 by shore fishermen (Table 15), Persons contacted on Lake Inks forent townships in 63 counties The home counties, states and towns of 1,202 fiche ermen are listed in Table l6° t r Prepared by Kenneth Co Jurgens Approved by : grunt“ arion Tools Date May 23 1957 ——-—-——-—-———-—-__L_______________________ Table 1, Checklist of Species, Lake Inks. _________________________________._____————-—-————————-—-— Scientific Name Common Name Lepisosteus osseus x longnose gar Dorosoma copedianum, gizzard shad Ictiobus bubalus smallmouth buffalo beostoma congestum * grey redhorse Carpiodes carpio river carpsucker Carinus cagio carp Notemigonus crysoleucas * golden shiner Notropis venustus spottail shinerv ‘ Notropis lutrensis redhorse shiner Ictalurus punctatus southern Channel catfish Pilodictus olivaris yellow or_f1athead catfish Fundulus notatus * blackstripe topminnow Gambusia affinis common mosquitofish Roccus chrysops white bass _ Micropterus punctulatus 0 Kentucky spotted bass Micropterus treculi ’ - Texas spotted bass Micropterus salmoides _ largemouth bass " u ' - tu if _ warmouth Lepomis'cyanellus"' green sunfish Lepomis microlophus ' redear sunfish _ Lepomis macrochirus“ bluegill Lepgmis auritus yellowbelly sunfish Lepomis megalotis 'longear sunfish Pomoxis annularis white crappie Porcine caprodes logperch Etheostoma spectabile o orangethroated darter Aplodinotus grunniens . freshwater drum Note: a Erroneously reported as Lepisosteus platostomus in previous report° * Added to checklist during present segmenta 0 Not collected during present segment, adeo m, moeowsm woeoHemo Home Hesse modgmaq wam ewsosmw bums—me Hmmm. moooeom Woodsman Keene prHH Zeus mobs «~on hemmed HoamHm pounced ow HoeoH e. cowoeeooos mm s em Hem we mom e rem seams oowweooom 3%: o o o o o H o m Pow mrleoooeece mmm me am so so mm 0 mac mw.mm .m. possesses me me o m m we o as w.wm w... monument H H4 m w m o o wm HLL, .m, awesome 0 mm o e a m c we poem mw.eaoooHs. o o o o H o o H 000m .m, ooeeoeaoo am e m we we so m as: mass .m, mmwoooe w o o m m o o e o.wm .Hu. okmboHHso o o H w o m. HH Hm comm .HI: SHQHOHowwom mm Hm Hr Hm .N Hm H Hoe 9km W, Boosoowfidm mmo HH Hm H40 mm Hmw m mu} wam We ooceooo m m m we so H: H we same We somoeoaeo o H H o o o e m o.mm W, commence o o o H O H o m obw sesame mow Hmo Hem sew moo mmo mo memo Hoo.oo HO, HmoHo w, Hose homo modeHom womoHdmo modesoew mem doaosmo awesome me4, mwoowom masseuse Eases bmaHH saw more mus become momeoeooe 20. to, 20, to, 20- so, 20. me, as, Se, 20, so, 20, Se, zoo Se, Hoe, . Homo. ....._.Hdm,._... _ Hon, ....._ qum,.. .-. Ham, . ,Hdm- Hum, mu camera m Heom m Noam : Hear me How.m Hm mH-H m mm,H H e,H o --- mt ooeeoeascs Hoe Hwom HHm mo-H mam . ream ewe me-w me rmoH was :H.w Hmm Hmom mm Ho.m Ht eseeHco m mH-e H: mooH w HH,m m wm-m mo . 4m,H a moo: m com o -- me eooeoeeos o -- H cow H m-: o -- o -- o -- o -- o -- omcosoeee escape mm meow mm HmH.m we Hoe-e we 4:,m we meow m HmoH m Hw-m e Heat a scene ooceeo o --- o -- o -- H mew c -- o -- o -- o --- 2- z o -- m 0.: o -- o -- o -- o -- o --- o --- My He mw.m Hm mH.H He Hm-e m: mH.e we poem on me-m we mean _o HH.m as m m-H o -- H mom 0 -- o -- o -- H Ho: H was my m. woe m e.H w w.m m was m was m m.w H on» m m.H my . t o. -- H m, w new m :.e o -- o -- H m-m H H.: aw eoHaoeoee w moH e e.m H H.: m H.H H o-e H com o --- m H.w my ecHooce o -- e o.m o -- o -- o -- o --- o -- o -- NH mmmmmmmeeco w 0.: m can m o.H m o.w Hm HOH w 0.: H 0-H H 0-H mu aeoeooseese Ho H.o ms moH mH H.m Hm How we m.H mm mo: Ho H.H Hm m-m my mmwmmmmMMII. o -- o -- o -- w o.w - -- m com o -- o -- on mosaHecee m H-o Hm woo mm mow :H mam He :0: o m.m w cow 4 o.o mm wmmmmwmmm o -- H H-H H o.w m o.w w H,e m com o -- H 0.: moeoHo Hm: Hmo.e mm: mew-m woe mHm,w moo .wme-e mHm me-o Hes Hom.H Hem meow.Hom mo.m I. iii-iii II_I-__ _. AnooeHBSom on some mommy-