TPWD 1966 F-5-R-13 #1033: Region I-B Fisheries Studies: Job No. 8 Evaluation of Impoundment Renovation

Marion Toole D-J Coordinator JOB COMPLETION REPORT As required by FEDERAL AID IN FISHERIES RESTORATION ACT TEXAS Federal Aid Project No. F-5-R-13 REGION I-B FISHERIES STUDIES Job No..8 Evaluation of Impoundment Renovation Project Leader: James Wilcox J. Weldon Watson Executive Director _ Parks and Wildlife Department Austin, Texas Eugene A. Walker Director, Wildlife Services May 6, 1966 ABSTRACT Lakes Trammell and Moss Creek were selected flm:use in production and utili- zation studies aimed at determining cost-benefits ratios for evaluating impound- ment rotenone renovation. This first segment was a calibrating period to establish comparative data. Monthly netting and seining data were collected and creel census were taken on one weekday and one weekend day per week at each lake. Lake Trammell had a very desirable fish population and the harvest aver- aged over one fish per man-hour. Moss Creek Lake had many desirable fish but a large pOpulation of gizzard shad apparently contributed to a stunted Centrar— chid problem and poor fishing success. It was recommended that the data collected at Lake Trammell be saved until the fishery deteriorated. The lake could then be renovated and a post-treat- ment creel could be implemented. It was recommended that Moss Creek Lake receive a selective kill of gizzard shad when project personnel are permanently established. A post-treat- ment creel could then be used to evaluate results. JOB COMPLETION REPORT State of Texas Project No. F-S-R-l3 Name: Region I-B Fisheries Studies Job No. 8 Title: Evaluation of lmpoundment Renovation Period Covered: March 1, 1965 to February 28, 1966 Objectives: General: To determine cost-benefits ratios for evaluating impoundment rotenone renovation. Specific: 1. To determine production and relative abundance of fish species prior to renovation procedures. 2. To determine utilization and harvest of the fishery resources prior to renovation procedures. Procedures: General: Two similar bodies of water, Lakes Trammell and Moss Creek, were selected for evaluating the effects of rotenone renovation on fisheries production and harvest. During this first segment extensive creel census were run and monthly netting and seining samples were collected. This was a calibration period to establish comparative data. No renovation activities were scheduled. Specific: l. Desirable-undesirable fish ratios and relative abundances for indi- vidual species were estimated by the monthly use of standard unit, lSO-foot gill nets and various type seines. Standard nets.haVe six 25- by 8-foot sections. The first section has l'inch mesh. In each succeeding section the mesh is l/2-inch larger. The seines used are described in the tables denoting their catches. The term "seining collection” is used to designate one or two drags of a 20-, 30-, or 40~foot seine in an area no larger than 2 acres, or one drag of a 100-, 200% or 300-foot seine. 2. All available records of recreational permits sold for Lakes Trammell and Moss Creek were procured from the cities of Sweetwater and Big Spring. Automatic car counters were placed at the entrances to both lakes. The lake superintendents recorded the meter readings on Friday evenings and Monday mornings. Creel census were taken on alternating weekend days and rotating weekdays as stipulated in the job description schedule, except for minor deviations. Angler's catches were counted by species and recorded according to total length. The same creel cards used in Job 7 were utilized for this purpose (Appendix A). In order to convert total length to weight, samples of 10 specimens of each size range (using one—inch intervals) were actually weighed at each lake. The average weights were then calculated (Appendixes B and C). Results of actual creel interviews were tabulated on a daily basis. These data were then compiled into monthly findings. The independent weekday and weekend totals were reduced to daily averages in order to project the data into estimates of monthly fishing utilization and success. These estimates were derived by multiplying daily averages by the actual number of weekdays and weekend days occurring in the particular month under consideration. A list of common and scientific names is presented in Appendix D so that ,common names may_be used in the context of this report. Findings: General: Lake Abilene, in Taylor County, and Moss Creek Lake, in Howard County, were originally selected as the investigation areas. Written approval for the use of these lakes was promised by the cities of Abilene and Big Spring before the job was incorporated into the F-5-R-l3 project. This documentary sanction was soon forthcoming from Big Spring, but negotiations with Abilene over a three month period failed to produce written results. Lake Trammell, in Nolan County, was substituted for the Lake Abilene site. The city of Sweetwater quickly produced written clearance. However, delay resulting from the lengthy negotiations with Abilene prevented initiation of field activities until June 1, 1965. Fishing usage at the two lakes dwindled as the weather became cold. Because of this Sparse utilization, and because of a shortage of project person~ nel, harvest data collection was terminated at the end of November 1965. Corresponding production investigations were completed December 15, 1965. Specific: 1. Production and Abundance Car counter readings were severely influenced by intermittent sight- seeing traffic. Sporadic traffic by oilfield workers also contributed to inaccuracy. The fishing utilization factor, as reflected by car counters, was so encumbered with variables that it was unreliable. For that reason, utili— zation projections were derived by multiplying daily averages by monthly ' weekday and weekend day totals. Lake Trammell This is an auxiliary water supply for the city of Sweetwater. When full, as it became during June 1965, it contains 3,183 acre feet of water and covers 230 surface acres. Prior to June the lake had contained less than half of its capacity. The report for Job B-24, Project F-5~R~6 contains background information, fisheries statistics and other pertinent information. Table l is a compilation of monthly seining results. Shallow shoreline areas were heavily infested by water star grass, Heteranthera dubia, smartweed, Polygonum sp. and muskgrass, Chara sp. during the summer months so that uni— form seining collections were impossible to obtain. Soon after the lake caught a significant runoff from spring rains, 40,000 largemouth bass fry were stocked from the state hatchery‘s surplus production. Later, 8,350 channel catfish fingerlings were stocked because of an apparent biological need. Soon after the hatchery bass were released, several late but successful natural Spawns occurred. As indicated by the seining results, some of the bass progeny_grew very well. Other progeny, possibly the late spawns, remained about three inches long throughout the year. Netting results are presented in Tables 2, 3 and 4. Since the June sample Was composed mainly of game fish species, it was decided that a monthly collection of two netting units would yield sufficient netting statistics. _ Centrarchids were extremely abundant in these samples. White crappie, redear sunfish and largemouth bass were of adequate average size to be desirable. Golden shiners appear to be the most numerous undesirable species present. Only one gizzard shad and three river carpsuckers were captured. Fortunately and unexplainably these Species have not reproduced. When the original survey of this lake was made, bullhead catfish were very abundant. The introduction of 300 small flathead catfish during 1960 has evidently affected a control. Table 1. Results of 31 Seining Collections Obtained from Lake Trammell During 1965. (4 collections with a 10-foot straight seine, 6 feet deep with 1/8-inch mesh) (26 collections with a 20~foot straight seine, 6 feet deep with 1/4-inch mesh) (1 collection with a 100-foot straight seine, 8 feet deep with 1-inch mesh) Species June July Aug. Sept. Oct. Nov. Dec. Totals ___ 17 30 30 27 __igl.__._n_ 30 n_fl_fl£i_______ Numbers Golden shiner 8 184 2 82 0 2 0 278 Mosquitofish l 2 13 0 2 4 0 22 Warmouth 0 0 7 0 0 0 0 7 Green sunfish 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 Bluegill 18 4 20 50 13 12 11 128 Redear sunfish 0 16 25 0 l 4 2 48 Largemouth bass 550 62 62 48 29 21 14 786 White crappie 0 12 0 0 0 0 0 12 Logperch 0 3 0 12 0 O 0 15 Totals 580 283 129 192 45 43 27 1299 _Size Range in Inches Golden shiner 2 1-2.50 6H7 1.50m3.50 -1 2~3 -_ 1-7 Mosquitofish 2.25 2 .50-1 -- 1.50-2 2r2.50 mu .50w2.50 Warmouth -- -- 2—6 mm -' -' __ 2-6 Green sunfish 4 -- ”r m“ r” “r r“ 4 Bluegill 2-3.50 l-3.50 .50-4 2-6 2-4 2-5 3‘4 .50~6 Redear sunfish -- 1.50-2 2-7 -~ 3.50 3‘4 3 1.50-7 Largemouth bass 1—3.25 2~6 3-7.50 3-8.?5 2.50-4.50 3~5 3~4 1-8.75 White crappie _- 1.50-2.50 1- -~ r- -- -_ l.50w2.50 Logperch ~- 2-3 ~— 2~3 50 -- -_ -1 2~3.50 u m: ".mu—‘um “__m HmUHm N. wmuomsnmmm oonommnHoD cw zcaumu mwmowmm OHNNmua mrmm monmD mUHSmH Ww<mu omuwmcowmu meow vcHHrmma armssmw ommmwm: wwmnrmma omnmwmr Emuaocnr muons mcsmwm: wecmmHHH Wmammu mcsmwm: HmfimmBOCnr Ummm 234nm numpnwm Honmwm zo. bu Hmo ucnm Hm .... A... 8:3 III...- fi .Nu H.mm H.mm .oo m.bm .uw .oo H.mm hm.oo b.0m N.wm ww.wb Hoo.oo 20. Mb um acHw mo mmamswnmv N .00 .oo .oo ..oo D.Ho .oo bm.mm o.mo b.HH wN.mm Hoo.oo 20. No Hm Hw mu mam. ww AN CDmew: .oo .oo .oo .oo .oo .oo u.mo H.um bm.oH MN.mH w.mH mm.m~ Hoo.oo fi mmwn. Nu Emu 0 HH No Hm mm N in .00 Ho.mw .oo N.ob m.mm .oo .oo u.wo H0.HN b.bH N©.bw Nw.mw Hoo.oo Zo. ”finial-1|”! o m N. Dom. No Am nfiwnmv-r AN fifimmmv s. .8 8.8 .8 .8 .8 .8 PS .. o o 5.8 8.8 5.8 Hm.ow mm Hoo.oo 20¢. we 20. mm Hm Hm mm n, ......E N H. .oo wu.mH .oo N.©m .oo .oo H.mo .oo mm.wu No.mm N.©© N.o© Hoo.oo bmo. AN :DHmmv _zo. Hm Db om ZmHanW mmbHmm ovnmwmmm mung Hme HumBEmHH bcnwmm Hoom. Hm .8 8.8 N8 3.8 .8 .8 .8 ..8 Hm.Hm Hw.ow .oo o.Ho Hoo.oo HH Hp Hob ow wk How Duo HOHmHm aHo CDHHEV $ .NH HN.V® .ob N.wb N.©m .0» .mm H.uo ab.©o Hm.om u.mm mm.uw Hoo.oo 00.00H Nw.omH 00.00H oa.mfi 00.00H 00.0H 00.00H mw.0H 00.00H mm.mm 00.00H w¢.oH 00.00H h0.0¢ 00.00H H¢.Nm mammOH 0N.OH mm.mm oo.m 0H.H mw.N mm. 0m.ma N0.H NN.©H hm.m m©.mm om.¢ NH.wH ©N.m mm.oH mm.o @Hammmo wuHSB m0.0a mm.om 00. 0 0m.m «N.H wm.mm ow.m wm.~m 00.0 .N0.¢H Hm.N GN.0H Hm.m mo.m m¢.N mmmfi Sunoammmmd 00.HH 00.0H 0¢.NH ww.H QN.Hm Hm.m mm.¢m HN.N mm.m Om. om.mN mw.m ow.¢ mm.H Hw.¢ om.H :mflmasm Hmowom N0.wH 0N.0N mm.0 m0.H mm.©H wo.m mm.o mm. mN.o m¢.H MH.mm 0¢.m mm.0H m¢.m mm.mm 00.0 waflmosfim mo. m0.H 00. 00. 0 00.. 0 Gm.N 0m. H0. 0H. 00. 0 m0.H 8m. Lmfiwfinm coonw mm. am. 00. mn. mo. NH.N mm. 00. 0 HN.H 0m. 00. 0 00. 0 SHUOEMQB Ho.0 0m.ma 00. 00. 0 00. 0 00. 0 00. 0 0m.wN 0m.HH NH.0 00.N Smfl%uwo GmQSQQHh 8N.0H 00.0H 00. .00. 0 00. 0 mN.Hm qm.d 00. 0 Nm.HH No.8 00.0N 0m.o fimflwuwo Hoccmflo mm.o 00.0H 0m.0¢ ma.o ¢¢.mfi 0m.N 00. 0 a0.m Mona 00. 0 00. 0 00. 0 twosflann xomflm flw.N Nq.¢ 0N.0H om.a 00. 0 00. 0 00. 0 00. 0 00. 0 Nw.m ow-N umxonmmnmo H0>Hm mH.m .0N.HH m0.NN dm.m NH.0N 00.8 00 me 08.4 Om.m 0N.H 00. 0 00. 0 mm. mm. Hmmflfim nowaow fie. mm. 00. 00. 0 00. 0 00. 0 00. 0 00. 0 mm.N mm. vmzm wuwmmflw liAq wiAA nil... . sjnilmlijllfl. ...... .N. . .... ...... mfimuon mn .uam om .>oz ON .uuo ”N .uuum Hm .w:< Om Anus NH mesa .moma wnflnna HHoEEmHH mxmd Eonm wmnflmuno mmamamm wnfluuoz mo mgmfloz hm nofluflmogaou mwmucmoumm .m maawH Hmwwm b. m<mwmmm Emmmrnm mum W wmnwoum om mHm: 2mnnmm mung bme HumBBmHH vcuwnm Foam. umnm Hm unww we mum. my mmwn. Nu can. No 20¢. we Umo. Hm mamummmm mwmowmm. Ab annm. «N anfimv IIWW!mmWWWMIHEWWimanm . . . ..Ho cmem uhmwrauw. n.2n..uw. uvmmvauw- mrmwrzuw. unmwrnw- n.2s. “w muss. 1w n.2s. “a mussmsu mums ..ou p.80 - a - - - a - a - s - - - - - - a - - - - a - - .su H.®o monums mssswa .Ho N.us - - - - - - - - .Hm N.NH .Hm N.Nu .Ho N.om .Ho N.Ho .Hs N.Hm Wwdmu nmuwmconu H.bm N.u© a u a a s.u a a a a w.: .3 a a a a a a : H.mmm:m.mb H.9u N.mH unmow scHHrmma -_- - - - - - - a - - 3 .mm N.Nu - - - - H.Nu N.u© .mm N.ma .os_yw.sn namsAmH omamsm: .ou H.mH H.us «H.uu _-.- - - H.Ns H.8u - - - I - - - - - - - - H.Hu H.ms mbmflrmma omamum: N.oo H.u© u.um H.8m - - -.- - - - g a - - - - - - - -.- - - s.uo H.wu gaseous: - - - - - - - - .Ho u.es - - - - .Nu s.~o .om u.Hu ..- - - .Hu u.wH mamas mcsmum: .Hu n.0s - - - - .Ho n.8m .HN n.0u - - - - - - - - - - - - .Hu s.uH upemmsyy .Hu b.mu .NH s.mo .NH s.mw .Hu b.8u .HN s.so .Hm s.us .Hu s.um .Hu b.0u wmamms magnum: .No s.uu .Nm s.so .uo u.mm .uo u.mm .us s.bs .um s.su .uu u.uu_ .ub s.ba smammaocfi: 8... .mm N.au N.ss N.uu H.Hu N.NH .su N.um .su N.um .mu N.um - - - - .uw N.uo Sana. canvas. .Hu N.mH .Nu N.©u .uu N.ua .Ns n.0u .um N.©u .Nu N.oa .mo N.os .Ns N.mu Moss Creek Lake This is an auxiliary water supply for the city of Big Spring. When full, as it was during June 1965, it contains 2,325 acre feet of water and covers 145 acres. A fisheries survey and a selective shad eradication were completed during 1958 and 1959. The reports for Job B~25, Project Fn5mR-6 and Job 16a-14, Project F-14-Dm3 contain background information. fish pOpulation data and other pertinent findings. Table 5 is a compilation of monthly seining samples. Wide discrepancies and variations in the monthly seining catches resulted partially from a lack of uniformity in the numbers and types of seining collections. Fluctuating water levels and obstructive aquatic vegetation made it impossible to stand— ardize seining techniques. Other factors creating discrepancies were the variations in water temperatures and turbidities occurring between June and December. Despite sampling errors it is significant that fingerling largemouth bass and other Centrarchids were common throughout the sampling period. Food compe— tition among small fishes appears critical. The carrying capacity of this lake is undoubtedly over—utilized. Project personnel authorized the stocking of 18,000 surplus bass fry prior to the initiation of production studies. The influence of stocked fish on established pOpulations is still somewhat conjectural. However, it appears that the supplementation of bass fry in this case was probably not needed and may have been detrimental. w Netting results are presented in Tables 6, 1 and 8. Six standard netting units captured 40 channel catfish during June. After June only two netting units were utilized monthly. It was decided that a smaller sample would pro“ vide sufficient pOpulation data without depleting the catchable pOpulation of catfish. The sample was increased to four netting units in NOvember. This larger sample was obtained to balance the data accumulated during the warmer months. Channel catfish accounted for 12.34 per cent of the netting sample and constituted 35.31 per cent of the t0ta1 weight. While the effects of trot~ lines on catfish pepulations is undocumented, it is interesting to note that the catfish pOpulation is much higher in this lake where no trotlines are allowed than in nonrestricting Region IrB lakes. Gizzard shad were very numerous in the netting sample. A percentage of 53.52 is large enough to warrant remedial action.