Skip to content
A Virtual Museum on the State's Fish Biodiversity

TPWD 1962 F-4-R-9 #798: Fisheries Reconnaissance of Major Lakes in Region 2-A, Texas, 1961-1962

Open PDF
tpwd_1962_f-4-r-9_798_reconnaissance.txt completed 40 entities

Extracted Text

JOB COMPLETION REPORT As qequired gy FEDERAL.AID IN.FISHERIES RESTORATION ACT TEXAS Federal Aid Project No. F—4-R-9 FISHERIES INVESTIGATIONS AND SURVEYS OF THE WATERS 0F REGION Ri-R . Job No. 3-29 Fisheries Reconnaissance Project Leader: Leonard Lamb Ha D. Dodgen Executive Secretary Texas Game and Fish Commission Austin, Texas Marion Toole Eugene A. Walker DwJ Coordinator Director, Program Planning February 5, 1963 ABSTRACT " Six major Lakes of Region 2~A were rechecked during the period November 1, 1961 and October 319 1.9626 These impoundments were; Benbrook (Tarrant County)9 Bridgeport (Wise County)9 Weatherford (Parker County), Eagle Mountain (Tarrant County)a Carter (Montague County) and Worth (Tarrant County)“ The most significant change in the makeup of the fish population of these lakes appears to be in the gizzard shad in Lakes Benbrookfi Eagle Mountain and Werth, Lake Benbrook showed a rise in the net collection of 14916 per cent while Eagle Mountain and Lake Worth had a drop of 45955 and 329A7 per cent respectivelyo Lakes BridgeportD Weatherford and Worth provided an increase in the crappie percentage while Eagle Mountain showed an increase in the white bass catch to correm spend with the decrease in gizzard shada Lake Carter was quite murky and there were only two species taken. The channel catfish appeared to be average size and in good conditionflbut the white crappie were small and in poor conditiono JOB COMPLETION REPORT State of Texas Project No. F'4"RF9 Name: Fisheries Investigation and Surveys of the waters Job Noa B~29 Title: Fisheries Reconnaissance Period Covered: November 1 1961 = October 31 1962 MM Objectives: To conduct limited investigations to obtain current information concerning gross changes in fishing conditions and factors influencing fish populationsa Techniques Used: Certain major lakes in Region ZmAs that had been surveyed in previous segments, were revisited and net collections made. These data collected were recorded for comparison with the results of previous survey work to provide a basis for determin~ ing any change that may have occurreda Lakes Benbrook, Bridgeport3 Carter, Eagle Mountain3 Weatherford and Worth were revisitedo Findings: Lake Benbrook Lake Benbrook shows only slight changes in population with the gainnbeing in gizzard shada This Species provided 80.51 per cent of the l960«196l net catch but rose to 94067 per cent in the 1961-62 catch (Tables 1 and 2). There was little change in the average length of the Spec1es taken but the number and pounds per A comparison of the "K” factor averages show slight changeo Gizzard shad, channel catfish and bluegill sunfish appear to be in slightly better condition while largemouth bass and white crappie have a smaller condition factor than last yearn This difference is light and may be the result of an insufficient sampleo Lake Bridgeport The netting of Lake Bridgeport in 1960»l961 was made with experimental gill nets that had mesh sizes from one inch to three inches while the 196lm1962 netting used only nets with 1% inch mesh. The most significant change is to be noted in the number and pounds of fish taken per 100 feet of net and this is believed to be due to the greater efficiency of the 1% inch mesh net over the graduated mesh size used in the experimental netse -2- Lake Carter The results of the 1961—1962 netting in Lake Carter were far from satisfactory. Weather conditions were not conducive to obtaining a proper sample as winds were Only channel catfish and white crappie were taken which made a extremely high. ompared to the seven Species taken in the 1960ml96l (Tables rather poor sample when c 5 and 6).. Lake Carter has been very murky for about two years and the wave action caused rather high winds tends to keep the colloidal clay suSpension at a high level by e more favorable to crappie and catfish which results in a condition that should b production than for bass and other sunfish. Eagle Mountain Lake The most significant changes in the net catch in Eagle Mountain Lake concerned the drop in gizzard Shad from 55.55 per cent in 1960-1961 to 10 per cent in 196lm 1962 and the rise of white bass from 6.35 per cent to 26.25 per cent (Tables 7 and 8). This is not an accurate reflection as the Shad population has not been depleated to this extent but there is usually a drop in the number of Shad taken when the white The only other significant change in the net catch was the reappearance of smallmouth buffalo, river carpsuckers and carp. These Species appear in cycles and periods of scarcity seem to be followed by periods of abundance. Small" mouth buffalo made Up 31.88 per cent of the net catch during the 1961-1962 netting after failing to appear during the previous year. bass catch increases. Lake Weatherford The netting results from Lake Weatherford indicate that gizzard shed and carp are increasing in relative abundance while channel catfish and white crappi a decrease (Tables9 and 10). The 1960n196l netting produced 2.15 per cent gizzard shad and 3.76 per cent crappie but the 1961~1962 netting Showed percentages of 29.16 and 13.33 for these Species respectively. In the case of the channel catfish and white crappie the percentages were 17.21 and 58.60 for the l960~1961 netting and 6.67 and 26.67 for the 196lwl962 collections. Other Species Showed Slight changes. The "K” factor comparison shows that lengthwweight relationships indicate that all Species have enjoyed better growth in 1961ml962 than was observed in 1960- 1961. The "K" factor average was considerably higher in each Species than in the previous year. Lake Worth Net collections from Lake Worth during l961wl962 were dominated by white crappie with 48.28 per cent of the total (Tables 11 and 12). This represents an increase of 17 per cent over the previous year. Gizzard shad was the most numerous Species in 1960wl96l collections with 41.67 per cent but drOpped to 9.2 per cent in the 1961: 1962 collections. The average length of all Species taken in the 1961—1962 netting Showed an increase over that of the previous year except longnose gar and largemouth bass. The average "K” factor for channel catfish and white crappie was slightly less m3... for the 1961w1962 netting but was higher for the other Species taken. Smallmouth buffalo3 river carpsucker and carp were taken in the 1961-1962 collection but were absent from the previous collection. w—H // Mada-Vl/J/ I’i-“f’LC/ 'oordinator Prepared by Leonard D. Lamb Approved by Project Leader Date: February 52 1963 __ Regional SUpervisor mmfloomm flmflw swson woumoHUcH % oH.N oo.Nnoo.o oq. mN.H man mo.n Ha.n mN.N m madaanu mung: ma.m OH.¢-ow.m mo. om. omn mm. mm. mm. N amuccam Hanmmaam OO.N OO.N-OO.N O¢.c mm. Odm mO.H HO.H an. H mama Sunoaomncq oo.n os.n-om.a am. om. ooN mm.n mm.n mm. N smuncao Mascara oo.N omoNaoo.N aH.H mN. omq om.¢ ¢S.a aq. H warao Om.N Om.muow.m NH.H mm. OHq mm.¢ m¢.q dc. H rumxonmmnno no>fim N©.H mw.n-m¢.n ow.ON mN.mm SHN wq.mw .qom.mw so.¢a mHN wanna snaNNuo and mo non mo HEEO u: Hoz HmnHO nocfisz ownno>¢ owcwm comm OOH comm OOH fluwcoq mo uflwfimz mo noflanz mmfluomm :M: :M: nod mccnom and noflanz owwno>4 ucoo Mom ucwo nom [Illillllilliilllliilillllllil N©®H-H©an .munsmmc manuumc noonasmm mama .N manna moHoomm Sme Lwnon mounoHUcH r - - Am.HH om.mN - oo.ooH oo.m¢ oo.ooH mHH mnanon NH.N ow.N-ms.H am.o om.n won am.q oH.N mo.m o anaaaco manna mm.m oo.a-0s.N ao.o oo.m wmn wm.m om.N SH.oH NH amHHGSm annmmsam mo.N oN.N-mw.H am.o om.o mNN so.m sq.H mo.n N swan anaoswwcaq mm.H mo.H-m¢.H No.0 om.o 0mm mN.m mq.N mo.H N Lmumnmu Hmccaro oo.N oo.N on.o mN.o oaN om.H No.0 mw.o H anmausm umunoam H©.H Om.nioq.n mm.m ms.MN SHN wq.om Hm.wm Hm.om ma wanna anammuo non mo non mo HEEO us Hoz AmflHO ucoo omnno>¢ owcnm comm OOH comm OOH fiuwcoq mo ustoB nmm nocanz mcfloomm :M: :M: nod mccnom nod noflanz owcno>¢ ucoo Mom 111% HOmHaoomH .muHomon wcfluuoc xoonccom oan .H oHacH 0oHooam cmflw fiwnon moucoHUnHr If}!!! - - ss.0n 00.0H I 00.000 0.0HN 00.00H 00N mHanon IIaI1II1aII1IIiIIIIII:III:IaiI:rIaIIiIIIiIIiIIaIIIIIIIIIi1tI1II1III:IIaIIIsIIIiIIaII::I|::I|::I::::Ii:[|:tn 00.N 0N.0-00.N 00. 00.0 00H 0n.0 0.H 00.0 NH Ssn0 00.N Ha.0-00.N 0s.0 00.0 00H an.0 0.0a 0H.0H Hm madamnu mauaz NN.N N0.N-0H.N s0.0 0H.0 N0N 0s.0 0.H SN.H 0 0000 ansoam0n00 00.N 00.N-00.N 0N.0 0a.0 00N N0.00 H.00 0M.H0 0s 0000 mafia: 00.H 00.H-00.H 0H.0 00.0 0N0 00.H 0.0 N0.0 H 0000na0 uamanana n0.a 00.H-0N.H 00.0 0s.0 00N N0.0 0.HH 00.0 0H” amnnnao 0000000 0s.N 00.N-00.N 00.0 00.0 000 00.s 0.0L 00.N 0 «anao as.N SH.0-HN.N 0s.0 00.0 NON 00.0 0.0L H0.0 0H rnmxusmanau n0>n0 00.0 00.0-0N.N 00.H 0¢.H SSN a0.0n 0.H0 0N.NH 0N «0Ha0000 Luzoaaamam 0N.N H0.N-00.N 00.0 00.N 00N no.0 N.0H 0N.0H 00 «0000 0000000 H0.0 00.0-00.0 s0.0 0N.0 000 0a.0 0.0 00.H 0 rn00 00000004 00.0 0s.0-n0.0 00.0 0N.0 000 0q.0 0.s 00.H 0 .n00 mwocunoam was no n00 00 “ago n0 0m: H00H0 M00.52 omcno>d omccm comm OOH comm OOH flowcoH mo pawHoB mo nocanz 0oHooom :M: :x: nod mcnnom mom nonasz owwno>¢ “coo Mom undo mom gill! HOOHaoomH .muHSmon mcfluum: unocowpflnm oxcq .m oHan moHUomm £000 fiwson mmuwo0UnHr 00.NN 00.00 00.000 00.000 00.000 00N 000000 00.0 00.0-00.0 00.0 00.NN N00 00.00 00.00 00.N0 000 0000000 00003 00.N 00.N-00.0 00.0 00.0 00N 00.0 00.0 0N.0 00 0000 0000000000 00.N 00.N-00.0 00.0 00.0 00N 00.00 00.0N N0.00 00 0000 00003 N0.0 00.N-0N.0 00. 00.0 00N 00.0 00.0 00.0 00 0000000 0000000 00.N 00.N-0N.N 0N.N 00. 000 00.0 00.00 00.0 N 00000 00.N 00.N-00.0 00. 00. NON 00.N 00.0 N0.0 0 00000000000 00000 00.N 00.0-00.N 00. 00.0 00N 00.0 00.0 00.0 0 00000000 0000000000 00.0 00.0-00.0 00.0 00.0 00N 00 00 0N.0N 00.00 00 00000 0000000 0N.0 00.0-0N.0 00.0 00. 000 00.0 00.0 00.0 N 0000 00000000 000 00 000 00 0000 00 003 00000 000002 ownno>¢ owcmm comm OOH umom OOH fluwcma 00 u£w003 00 003852 mmflowmm :M: :M: nwa mcnnom nod Hanan: mmnno>¢ unoo Mom ucco Mom NomHaHomH 00005000 mc0uuon unomowc0nm wind .0 oHnnH 0000000 0000 Lw500 00000000H0 iIIliI|IIIlII|lit|IIl|IIIlii|IIlIIIIliI|iI||iEI|IiIIIiIIIIiIIiIIIIiilIliII|liiI|IiIIIIiilllitiiilllliililllilll on.O 00.3 O0.00H mmoo O0.00H om HQHOH ilI|lII|IIIII1IIIiIIIilIIiIIIIiIIiIIIII|Iii||IiI|1ii|lII|||iI||IIIIliIIIIIIIIIEI||iifIillillllllillllllllllllw 00.0 00.0-00.0 00.0 00.0 00 00.00 00.0 00.00 00 0000000 00003 mw.H Om.H-mw.H m0.0 mN.O 0mm mH.mo mm.m mm.m N 0000000 Hmccmfio 00: MO 000 mo 088v 00 003 000852 wmwhm>< wmcmm 000m OOH 000m OOH suwcmq mo 0£m003 wo H®0852 mmHUwam :2: :2: 000 ch50m 000 000852 mmmmm>4 0000 00m 0500 00m iiII|II|liIIlI|IiI|li|lli|IIIIIIliI|IIIIif|Ili|Ii||liIIIIIIiI||IIllIIE||Ii||iIl||IIlliillliilliilllllilllr 0000-0000 .0000000 0000000 000000 0000 .0 00000 0000000 0000 £m500 00000000H0 rIIIIltlllllilllllllllllilliiIIIIIiIIIIIIiIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIiIIIIIIIIiIIIiiIIIIfIIIlIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII Om.m m¢.m O0.00H m.mm O0.00H 00H HmuoH 5ft! mo.N mm.m-wN.N mm.O OO.m HdH Om.mH w.HH NH.m© OOH 0020000 000:3 00.0 00.0.00.0 00.0 00.0 000 00.0 0.0 00.0 00 0000000 00000000 0m.m mm.m-mm.H mm.O ON.O OON ON.OH 0.0 00.N 0 0000 £0508®w004 mo.H mm.m-o¢.H m0.0 O0.0 HmH mw.H H.H mm.m w 0U000HH50 xumHm HO.H NH.NuOm.H mO.H mO.H HON mm.om w.HN mO.¢H Hm Lm0mumo Hmccmso 00.0 00.0-00.0 00.0 00.0 000 00.00 0.00 00.0 0 00000 00.0 00.0-00.0 00.0 00.0 000 00.0 0.0 00.0 0 00000000000 00000 0mm mo 008 HO 0880 u: 003 AmQHv 000852 wwmuw>¢ mwmmm 000% OOH 000m OOH suwcmq mo 0£m003 00 000852 mmHGmam :M: :M: 000 0U55om 000 000852 mwmwm>£ 0500 00m 0500 00m if; HooHaoomH 00005000 0000000 000000 0000 .m mHan mwfiommm fimfim fimsou mmumuHOcH% an.w OO.NH O0.00H mm.m¢ OOOOOH mo HmuoH % ndam mood OOON OOON Om.H Hooa mm.a wwwhm>< :x: om.m:OHoN omo¢-omo¢ on.~-ooafl mN.N-mhoH omoagomoa ooofi,mmafi ooomsowfia wwcmm ..um.. ONDO nHoO mmoO Owom mH.N dwoa was ummm OOH ”mm mucsom OOoH ow.O owoO Oqu ONDO owoO OOoh OOOO OOaH “mm mo ummm OOH awn HmnEsz OHH ONH NON mqm mwN MON “EEO aumcmq wwwum>4 mm.m owaa mmom Hmom ON.H Hwfiw oaon m©a¢N HNOHN HO ucmo me a: Hm: dnoO dwom HO.¢H «BQOH Omam AmnHO pawflmz qmom mmoo mmoo maom mmoa mmoo mmomm ummo gmm Hmfiasz m mflmmmuu wuflflz q smflwcsm Hfiflwmsam q mmma mafia: N mmwn anmswmflma H smflmumo Ummsumfim q smHHuwu Hmscmso mm ¥nwnm wgmmmflo m *wa mmocwcoq m *Hmw wmuuomm mwfiommm illlliE OHOOHIOOOH mmuadmmu wsfiuuwd wxmq Campuses mammm on maan

Detected Entities

Montague County 0.950 p.1 ...d (Parker County), Eagle Mountain (Tarrant County)a Carter (Montague County) and Worth (Tarrant County)“ The most si…
Parker County 0.950 p.1 ...ok (Tarrant County)9 Bridgeport (Wise County)9 Weatherford (Parker County), Eagle Mountain (Tarrant County)a Carter …
Tarrant County 0.950 p.1 ...1 and October 319 1.9626 These impoundments were; Benbrook (Tarrant County)9 Bridgeport (Wise County)9 Weatherford (…
Wise County 0.950 p.1 ...e impoundments were; Benbrook (Tarrant County)9 Bridgeport (Wise County)9 Weatherford (Parker County), Eagle Mountai…
Austin 0.900 p.1 Ha D. Dodgen Executive Secretary Texas Game and Fish Commission Austin, Texas
Benbrook Lake 0.900 p.2 Six major Lakes of Region 2~A were rechecked during the period November 1, 1961 and October 3 1961. These impoundments …
Bridgeport Lake 0.900 p.2 Bridgeport (Wise County)
Carter Lake 0.900 p.2 Carter (Montague County)
Eagle Mountain Lake 0.900 p.2 Eagle Mountain (Tarrant County)
Lake Worth 0.900 p.2 Worth (Tarrant County)“
Region 2-A 0.900 p.2 Six major Lakes of Region 2~A were rechecked
Texas 0.900 p.1 FEDERAL.AID IN.FISHERIES RESTORATION ACT TEXAS
Weatherford Lake 0.900 p.2 Weatherford (Parker County)
Lake Weatherford 0.850 p.1 ...to appear during the previous year. bass catch increases. Lake Weatherford The netting results from Lake Weatherford…

organization (1)

Texas Game and Fish Commission 0.900 p.1 Texas Game and Fish Commission Austin, Texas

person (4)

Eugene A. Walker 0.900 p.1 Eugene A. Walker Director, Program Planning
Ha D. Dodgen 0.900 p.1 Ha D. Dodgen Executive Secretary
Leonard Lamb 0.900 p.1 Project Leader: Leonard Lamb
Marion Toole 0.900 p.1 Marion Toole DwJ Coordinator
Bluegill sunfish 0.900 p.3 Gizzard shad, channel catfish and bluegill sunfish appear to be in slightly better condition
Carp 0.900 p.4 The reappearance of smallmouth buffalo, river carpsuckers and carp
Channel catfish 0.900 p.2 Lake Carter was quite murky and there were only two species taken. The channel catfish appeared to be average size and …
Gizzard shad 0.900 p.2 The most significant change in the makeup of the fish population of these lakes appears to be in the gizzard shad in La…
Largemouth bass 0.900 p.3 A comparison of the “K” factor averages show slight changeo Gizzard shad, channel catfish and bluegill sunfish appear t…
Longnose gar 0.900 p.5 The average length of all Species taken in the 1961—1962 netting Showed an increase over that of the previous year exce…
River carpsucker 0.900 p.4 The reappearance of smallmouth buffalo, river carpsuckers and carp
Smallmouth buffalo 0.900 p.4 The reappearance of smallmouth buffalo, river carpsuckers and carp. These Species appear in cycles and periods of scarc…
White bass 0.900 p.2 Eagle Mountain showed an increase in the white bass catch to correm spend with the decrease in gizzard shada
White crappie 0.900 p.2 Lakes BridgeportD Weatherford and Worth provided an increase in the crappie percentage while Eagle Mountain showed an i…
Carpiodes carpio 0.800 p.4 river carpsucker
Cyprinus carpio 0.800 p.4 carp
Dorosoma cepedianum 0.800 p.2 gizzard shad
Ictalurus punctatus 0.800 p.2 channel catfish
Ictiobus bubalus 0.800 p.4 smallmouth buffalo
Lepisosteus osseus 0.800 p.5 longnose gar
Lepomis macrochirus 0.800 p.3 bluegill sunfish
Micropterus salmoides 0.800 p.3 largemouth bass
Morone chrysops 0.800 p.2 white bass
Pomoxis annularis 0.800 p.2 white crappie
Cyprinidae 0.700 p.4 not a direct mention, but family name