TPWD 1959 F-5-R-6 #446: Basic Survey and Inventory of Species, as Well as Their Distribution in the Clear Fork of the Brazos River in Region 3-B, Texas

Report of Fisheries Investigations Basic Survey and Inventory of Species, as Well as Their Distribution in the Clear Fork of the Brazos River in Region 3-B, Texas by James F. Wilcox Assistant Project Leader Dingell-Johnson Project FuBané, Jab B~16 April 16, 1958 ~ April 159 1959 Ha D. Dodgen w Executive Secretary Texas Game and Fish Commission Austin, Texas Marion Toole Kenneth Co Jnrgens & William E. Brown Coordinator Assistant Conrdinators Job Completion Report State of TEXAS Project No. F-5-R—6 Name: Fisheries Investigations and Surveys of the Waters of Region 3-B. Job No. B~16 Title: Basic Survey and Inventory of Species, as Well as Their Distribution in the Clear Fork of the Brazos River in Region 3—B, Texas. Period Covered: April 16, 1928 ' April 15; 1959 Abstract: Altogether 28 seining stations and 15 netting stations were employed to collect 5,339 specimens of fish life representing 10 families, 18 genera, and 29 species. Redhorse shiners (Notro is lutrensis) dominated the seining sample while gizzard shad (Dorosoma cepedianum_ dominated the netting. Channel catfish (Ictalurus punctatus) were found to be the most prevalent of the larger game species. It was concluded that the survey should be extended for another year in an effort to obtain more complete fishery data from the lower areas of the Brazos watershed and more information concerning pollution and water quality. Objectives: To gather fundamental data on the above waters in regard to their physical, chemical and biological aspects and to determine the distribution of the species present, their relative abundance and the ecological factors influencing their distribution. Procedure: A total of 9S gill nets were set and 28 seine collections were made in an effort to sample the fish population of the Clear Fork of the Brazos River and its watershed. The use of netting as a sampling technique was limited in use in the river and impossible in the riveris tributaries due to the shallowness of the water in most places and the narrowness of the river and creek beds. For that reason only 10 netting collections were made at five localities in the river. A total of 85 nets were set in 10 lakes on the river's watershed. Some of the netting collections from lakes were obtained in conjunction with other Dingell-Johnson Projects. All nets employed were experimental type gill nets measuring 125 feet in length by 8 feet in depth. All seines used were either 20 feet long by 6 feet deep commonw sense seines, or 30 feet long by 6 feet deep bag seines. Specimens collected by seining were taken to the laboratory for identification and study. Samples of each species were preserved in a 10 percent formalin solution. Since water quality records were available on the Clear Fork of the Brazos River through the Texas Board of water Engineers, and since time that could be devoted to this job was at a premium, no special chemical analyses were made. Air and water temperatures, pH and turbidity recordings, and physical and botanical observations were made at various netting and seining localities during the course of the survey. Findings: Physical Characteristics The Clear Fork of the Brazos River arises in the south-eastern part of Scurry County from a series of small springs. As the stream progresses through Fisher and Jones Counties a multitude of creeks are added to the watershed. Permian red soils prevail in this area and much of the land is in cultivation. The river in this region usually flows only in periods of heavy rain. For these reasons the water flowing in these areas usually contains much red and brown collodal suspension. However, the water becomes clearer and the stream becomes more deserving of its name as it continues further east. In times of drouth much of the standing water of the upper watershed dries up completely. This upper area is best characterized as a sporadic, intermittent stream (Figures 1 and 2). On down the river, at the Nugent station, average annual runoff figures for a period of 30.6 years equaled 91,770 acre feet. The minimum flow recorded during this period was 7,830 acre feet and the maximum flow recorded was 518,000 acre feet. (Figures 3 and h). The eastern part of the Clear Fork watershed is chiefly composed of Shackelford, Throckmorton and Stephens Counties. The undulating surface of the land in these counties is used principally for ranching. The vegetative cover on these black and grey soils and the presence of several small ponds and lakes are probably the main reasons for the less turbid waters in the lower Clear Fork watershed. The stream bed in this area is generally packed sand with limestone projections and the banks of the river are lined with large trees. For the Fort Griffin station, in this lower area, the average annual runoff figures for a period of 30.8 years equaled 173,300 acre feet. The minimum flow recorded during this period was 6,370 acre feet and the maximum flow recorded was 711,000 acre feet. ' Aquatic Vegetation Streambed vegetation varies from the headwaters to the lower reaches of the Clear Fork as the topography and water characteristics. 'Vegetation in the upper reaches of the watershed is relatively scattered and is composed mainly of mesquite, button willows, and a few hackberry trees with various weeds and grasses intermingled. Small patches of bulrushes (ScirEus) and various forms of algae were the only aquatics noted in the upper area. (Figure 5). The lower drainage of the Clear Fork supports more profuse vegetation with larger mesquites, pecans, hackberries, post oaks, blackjack oaks, and willows being the principal trees along the river banks. Various grasses, vines, and brambles are likewise abundant. The bulk of the aquatic vegetation appears to be muskgrass {Chara} and coontail (Ceratophyllum). Pollution Small scattered patches of oilewell, saltwwater, pollution seem to be common in several localities along the Clear Fork of the Brazos River. The areas of most heavy concentrations apparently lie on California Creek, in Jones County (see Table 53); on the Clear Fork itself, in northmeastern Stephens County; and in the 01d Hamlin City Lake. Three nets set in the 01d Hamlin City Lake produced no fish and seining yielded only very salt tolerant species (see Tables 26 and 39). A small refinery at Lueders, Texas, is emptying a bymproduct into the river. Detailed examinations and investigations of these pollutions or possible pollutions has been impossible during the survey thus far due to the lack of available time. It is hoped that more time may be expended on this phase of the survey during the following segment. Fish Populations The results of the netting and seining collections can best be given in the follow- ing annotated species list and the fishery charts included in this report. For a complete summation of fishery results consult Tables 31 and 51. A total of 5,339 specimens of 29 species were collected. These 29 species represented 10 families and 18 genera. Annotated Species List Lepisosteidae (Cars) Lepisosteus osseue (longnose gar). This species is prdbably the dominant one in the lower part of the Clear Fork of the Brazos River. In the lower regions there are some sections of stream that have apparently been stripped of practically all small fish by this species. It was also observed that gar in those sections were rather poor and on the average, weighed only one pound. It is possible that they were having a hard time finding enough to eat. In one particular hole of water the gar were so active and perhaps so ravenous that there were approximately 20 of them in the gill net before the survey crew had it completely set out. There were no gar taken in the upper reaches of the watershed. Thus, considering the whole river and all its tributaries, gar com- posed only h.h2% by number of the total fish netted. Clupeidae (Earrings) 1 collections in some localities and equaled 2A.966of the total number of fish taken by netting. This was the highest percentage, by number, of any species taken by netting. However, it must be mentioned that some lakes and netting localities produced no shed at all. The shad taken from the river were generally very large, 97 of them averaging slightly over 10 ounces. Shad of this size are considered to be highly undesirable. (See Table M7). Dorosoma cepedianum (giasard shad). This species was very prevalent in the netting Catostomidae (Suckers and buffalofishes) IctiObus bubalus (smallmouth buffalo). Most netting stations in the river yielded this species but none were taken from any of the lakes sampled even though they are known to exist in some of the lakes (i.e. Lake Fort Phantom Hill). as buffalo were Obtained in any of the seining collections. Although this species has a high commercial value, the difficulty of access and netting in the holes in the river, where the majority of this species exist, probably tends to make the commercial fishing for this fish unprofitable. Carpiodes carpio (river carpsucker). These fish were taken both by net and seine. The presence of this species constitutes a serious fishery problem in some lakes on the watershed, since no utilization of this species by either man or fish has been Observed. Cyprinidae (Shiners and minnows) Cyprinus carpio (carp). This species is sub-dominant to the river carpsucker but does constitute a fishery problem in all lakes. Carp are becoming more and more fished for in many West Texas lakes because of their tremendous strength and willingness to fight when caught. Notemigonus crysoleucas (golden shiner). Although this species was taken by net and seine, it was taken only from lakes. This fish is not believed to be native in the Clear Fork of the Brazos River, or its watershed, but is known to have been intro— duced as a forage fish by the state fish hatcheries. Notropis lutrensis (redhorse shiner). This is the dominant shiner in the Clear Fork of the Brazos River. Practically all of the l,h68 individuals collected were taken from the river and its tributaries. Even so they constituted over 33% of the fish taken by seining for the whole watershed. These minnows thrive particularly in the sporadic, intermittent streams of the upper part of the Clear Fork. Notropis volucellus (mimic shiner). Only one individual of this species was col- lected. It was taken from the upper part of the river. (See Table 12). Notropis buchanani (ghost shiner). Only one specimen of this species was collected. This fish was taken from a tributary of the Clear Fork during a muddy run off of rain waters. (See Table 22). Pimephales vigilax (parrot minnow). All of the small sample of this species were obtained from the bigger waters of the middle and lower reaches of the river. Pimephales promelas (fathead minnow). This species is fairly abundant but seems to be more prevalent in the upper reaches of the river. Ameiuridae (Freshwater catfishes) Ictalurus_punctatus (channel catfish). Only occasional specimens of this fish were obtained by seining and netting in the river and its tributaries. The species was very abundant in netting collections taken from the lakes and composed over 21% of the number and over h7% of the weight of the total netting sample. This is one of the most sought after species by West Texas Anglers and is frequently stocked from the state fish hatcheries. Ictalurus melas (black bullhead). This species was taken by not and seine from both the river and the lakes. It appears to be more abundant in some of the smaller lakes, which apparently have no flathead catfish, than in any other waters. Ictalurus natalis {yellow bullhead). This species was obtained only by seining. It is fairly common in the river but was not collected from the lakes. Pylodictus olivaris (flathead catfish). This very desirable food fish is much sought after by anglers and apparently serves as an effective bullhead control in lakes where it occurs. One specimen, taken from the river, was the only individual of this species collected. The species is known, however, to be fairly common in some of the lakes on the watershed. Possibly these fish lie on the bottom in a lethargic state for long periods of time which might account for their scarcity in netting collections. Cyprinodontidae (Killifishes and topminnows) Fundulus notatus (blackstripe topminnow). The only locality in which this top- minnow was coined was a tributary of the lower part of the river (See Table 2%). Fundulus kansae (plains killifish). This species was collected from a lake con- taining large amounts of chlorides which are believed to be the results of nearby oil wells. The killifish was not taken from any other locality. (See Table 26). Cyprinodon rubrofluviatilis (Red River pupfish). This species appears to be the dominant fish in the lake mentioned above where the water is too salty for many other species. Poeciliidae (Mosquitofishes) Gambusia affinis (mosquitofish). The mosquitofish is common in backwater sloughs and quiet pools throughout the watershed. They were the second most common fish in the seining collections, and are considered to be very desirable to man because of their practice of eating mosquitos. Serranidae (Basses) Roccus chrysops (white bass) w This species is not indigenous to the Clear Fork but has been introduced in some of the lakes on the watershed. Although not many of these fish were collected, Fort Phantom Hill Lake is known to have a large population. Centrarchidae {Black basses and sunfishes) Micropterus salmoides (largemouth bass). The evasive nature of these fish makes them difficult to capture in nets and seines. It is therefore difficult to arrive at an accurate estimate of their occurence. The data collected would indicate, however, that they are much more common in some of the lakes than they are in the river. .. Lepomis cyanellus (green sunfish). This sunfish is common throughout the waters shed and is a desirable species to the angler when it attains a reasonable size. However, very few of these sunfish collected were large enough to be fished for and some indi» viduals, only 2 inches long, were fully grown, sexually ripe, fish. Lepomis microlophus (redear sunfish). This is one sunfish that generally attains a desirable aims in West Texas waters. Only a few individuals of this species were collected. (See Tables 12 and at). These were present probably because of hatchery stocking and very likely are not native to the stream. Lepomis macrochirus (bluegill). This species is very common in the lakes and the river. None of these fish were of a desirable site due to overpopulation of this species. Some individuals were sexually mature at a length of 2 inches. Lepomis humilis (orangespotted sunfish). Under ideal conditions, these sunfish do not attain a very desirable size. All of the individuals collected from the Clear Fork were extremely small. This species is apparently sub-dominant to the other native sunfish. Lepomis megalotis (longear sunfish). These fish, along with bluegills, are the dominant sunfish. They appear to prefer running stream areas but were very abundant in the upper reaches of the river whether the water was running or was standing in pools. These fish, like the other species of sunfish, were nearly all stunted. Pomoxis annularis (white crappie). Practically all the bigger waters of the Clear Fork and its watershed contained this species. They were particularly abundant in the lakes. Not many were collected, however, that were a desirable size and many indi- viduals were stunted. PomoXis nigromaculatus (black crappie). Two specimens of this species were taken from Lake Sweetwater in a previous segment. (See Table #5). They were very large crappie and in very good condition. It is nearly certain, however, that these fish were stocked in that reservoir and are not indigenous to the watershed. Percidae (Perches and darters) Percina caprodes (logperch) - This apparently unimportant species was collected from only one lake on the watershed. (See Table 28). Conclusions: Because very limited fish sampling was performed on the lower reaches of the river and since none of the sampling stations were worked but one time, it is concluded that this survey should be continued for another year. There is also a vast amount of investigation that needs to be conducted in regards to water quality and pollution. As much time as can possibly be used for this facet of the project, in conjunction with the pollutions investigations projects, needs to be used. Prepared by James F. Wilcox Approved by Assistant Project Leader Date September 2h, 1959 __m________l_______________________ Table 1. Clear Fork of Brazos River Type of Collection: Seining Location: Springs on A. R. Willingham Ranch in Southeast Scurry County Date: July 18, 1958 Weather: Hot Percent Species No. by No. Redhorse shiner 6 11.11 Fathead minnow 18 33.33 Green sunfish 2O 37.0h Bluegills 10 18.52 Totals 5h 100.00 *it-K- Table 2. Clear Fork of Brazos River Type of Collection: Seining Location: Clear Fork on Sterling Willingham Ranch in Southwest Fisher County Date: July 18, 1958 Weather: Hot Percent Species No. by No. River carpsucker # .90 Redhorse shiner #00 90.50 Yellow bullheads 26 5.88 Green sunfish 10 2.26 Longear sunfish 2 .h6 Totals hh2 100.00 Table 3. Clear Fork of Brazos River Type of Collection: Seining Location: Netlleton Ranch in Western Fisher County Date: July 18, 1958 Weather: Hot Percent Species No. by No. Redhorse shiner 200 72.h6 Fathead minnow 18 6.52 River carpsucker l5 5.hh Yellow bullhead l2 h.3h Green sunfish 20 7.25 Bluegill 3 1.09 Orangespotted sunfish 5 1.81 Longear sunfish 3 1.09 Totals 276 100.00 a * a Table h. ’Clear Fork of Brazos River Type of Collection: Seining Location: Holes Ranch in North West Fisher County Date: July 19, 1958 Weather: Hot Percent Species No. by No. Redhorse shiner 30 36.58 Fathead minnow #0 88.78 Black bullhead 2 2.hh YellOW'bullhead 2 2.hh Green sunfish h 4.88 Bluegill h h.88 Totals 82 100.00