TPWD 1963 F-2-R-10 #870: Job Completion Report: Fisheries Investigations and Surveys of the Waters of Region II-B, Job No. E-6: Inks Lake Fish Population Control Experiment

JOB COMPLETION REPORT As required by FEDERAL AID IN FISHERIES RESTORATION ACT TEXAS . Federal Aid Project.No. F—E—R—lO FISHERIES INVESTIGATIONS AND SURVEYS OF THE WATERS OF REGION IIwB Job No. E—6: Inks Lake Fish Population Control Experiment Asst“ Project Leader: Richard L. White J“ woldon Watson Executive Director Parks and Wildlife Department Austin, Texas Narion Toolo Eugene A, walker D-J Coordinator Director, Program Planning August 30, 1963 ABSTRACT An attempt was made to remove rough fish from Inks Lake using various size gill nets, hoop nets, fyke nets and chemical fish toxicants. After two years of work the job was dr0pped because the amount of time spent could not be justi- fied with the limited harvest of undesirable fish. During this period 118,200 feet of gill nets and selected fyke and hOOp nets removed a total of 9,485069 pounds of rough fish from the lake. Chemical eradication removed large numbers of gizzard shad and fresh water drum but no close estimates of numbers or weight were possibleo No renewal of this job is anticipated. JOB COMPLETION REPORT State of Texas Project No. F—2-R—10 Name: Fisheries Investigations and Surveys of the Waters of Region II—B. Job No. E—6 Title: Inks Lake Fish Population Control Experiment. Period Covered: February 1, 1962 — January 31, 1963 Objectives: To intensively remove rough fish Species from Inks Lake as an experiment to determine the effect of such removal upon the specific composition of the total fish population and angling success. Techniques used: A total of 118,200 feet of gill net was set during the two years of this job to intensively remove smallmouth buffalo, Ictiobus bubalus, river carpsucker, Carpiodes carpio, and longnose gar, Lepisosteus osseus, from the lake. Of this total, 90,950 feet consisted of 2-inch square mesh; 1,500 feet of 2%—inch square mesh; 23,900 feet of 3—inch square mesh, and 1,850 feet of 4—inch square mesh. Cottonseed cake and sour corn were used occasionally in an attempt to con— centrate bottom feeders in a netting sector. Baited and unbaited fyke nets were used in specific areas of the lake to determine if they would prove more efficient in harvesting rough fish. One slough of the lake, Devil‘s Waterhole, was treated with rotenone on December 12, 1961, at a concentration of 0.12 ppm to selectively remove gizzard shad. Plans called for treating various sloughs with concentrations of liquid rote— none approaching 0.21 ppm to selectively remove gizzard shad. However, treatment of the entire lake for this purpose was accomplished in early March of 1962, under Job 16a35, Project F~14~D—6. In order that adequate evaluation of this job could be made, slough treatments were suspended. Approximately eight experimental gill nets were set each month under Job 8—24 (Resurvey). These collections were made at designated stations in an attempt to this, an attempt was made to determine any population changes resulting from rough fish removal efforts. A limited creel census was conducted during June, July, and August of 1962 and 1963, with creel checks undertaken on one weekday and one weekend day of each week during this period. Data collected were used to determine any changes in fishing success. -2... A checklist of species mentioned in this report is given in Table 1. Findings: Inks Lake was treated on March 1, 1962, with liquid rotenone at 0.14 ppm for a selective shad kill under Project F—14-D-5, Job 16a36. From all visual evidence, the selective treatment was successful. Shad comprised 48.88 per cent by numbers and 10.57 per cent by weight of the fish collected during the 1961 resurvey as op- posed to 11.11 per cent by weight and 2.34 per cent by number of the fish collected through extensive netting immediately after thesnlective treatment. Figures from the 1962 survey show shad comprising 32.85 per cent by number and 17.11 per cent by weight. There was an extensive kill of fresh water drum resulting from the saloon tive treatment, although this Species was rarely collected by netting. In 13 months of netting, from 1961 to 1963, 9,485.69 pounds of rough fish were harvested. As shown in Table ”2, the majority of this total consisted of smallmouth buffalo, river carpsucker, and carp. Only 11.57 pounds of fish per surface acre, or 8.02 pounds of fish per 100 feet of net, were collected on Inks Lake from 1961 to 1962. The netting was carried out for only 13 of a possible 24 months, but if the figures-were expanded for a 24-month period, the end result would still not be ex- tensive enough to warrant the man-days Spent on the project. Baiting netted areas with cottonseed cake did not increase the rough fish harvest. Fyke nets were set in areas where smallmouth buffalo and carpsucker were ob* served to be schooling, but use of this type of net resulted in a collection of turtles and small channel catfish exclusively. Employment of hoop nets also met with negligible results. Limited creel censuses, which were conducted during June, July, and August of 1961 and 1962, revealed the success of anglers on Inks Lake during these periods. Tables 2 and 3 Show the number, size of fish, and other data collected during the creel censuses of 1961 and 1962 reSpectively. In 1961, the total fish per—man-hour for Inks Lake was 0.92. This figure seems to represent fair success for the fisher- man, but it should be pointed out that 37 per cent of the total catch was white bass, ficccus chrysops, which are caught seasonly. Also, 39 per cent of the total fish per— man—hour consisted of sunfish, Lepomis gpgi. In 1962, sunfish made up 72 per cent of the total fish per—manwhour on Inks Lake. The total fish per-men-hour was 0.81. From the data collected on the creel censuses, it is evident that the fishing on Inks Lake has not improved during the two years that this job was carried on. The table below illustrates the per cent of rough fish by weight and number as determined by experimental gill netting over the past eight years. The decided edge held by rough fish in previous years has been decreased during the 1962 pro— ject period. This seventeen per cent drop of rough fish in number was probably caused by the selective treatment of the lake for gizzard shad, rather than the harvesting of rough fish by netting. -3- LAKE INKS ROUGH FISH RATIO,, 1955 ~ 1962 1955 1956 1957 1958 1959 1960 1961 1962 Per cent rough fish (Number) 63 78 63 71 65 70 73 56 Per cent rough fish (weight) 74 74 78 71 74 79 79 80 After two years of operation of the project, the methods of harvesting rough fish have been somewhat exhausted and still there has been no discernible reduction of rough fish in Inks Lake. Because the lack of success of the job does not war= rent the man power Spent on it, it is recommended that the project be dropped. Another approach to improve fishing on Inks Lake will be undertaken in the immediate f /" Prepared by Richard L. White Approved by Zzéééézjégtzgi,dialofifézw Asst. Project Leader - Coordinator Date: August 30, 1963 Regional Supervisor -4- TABLE 1 A CHECKLIST 0F SPECIES MENTIONED IN REPORT SCIENTIFIC NAME COMMON NAME Lepisosteus osseus longnose gar Dorosoma cepedianum gizzard shad Ictiobus bubalus smallmouth buffalo Carpiodes carpio river carpsucker Cyprinus carpio carp Ictalurus punctatus channel catfish Pylodictis olivaris flathead catfish Roccus chrysops white bass Micropterus salmoides largemouth bass Chaenobryttus gulosus warmouth Lepomis cyanellus green sunfish Lepomis microlophus redear sunfish Lepomis macrochirus bluegill Lepomis megalotis longear sunfish Pomoxis annularis white crappie Aplodinotus grunniens freshwater drum .Homa .noQEo>oz no umnmnfl .hwmnceh mo mfiucoe mcflnno axed mxcH so come mcofluooafioo mcfluuoc oz ”ouoz t N©.oomm owom mm.aoh wma . mm.hmw NmH mm.Nm© mna NH.mN ©n.mNHH mm.N¢ON om.©mmm HM.¢H dm.m¢¢H .mog on season Hoooa ..oz : .oz . .mnq . .oz warm monsooom BH-OH nonouoo NN-¢H noneoudom 0H.quH nwm Hm.omma wmm mflnmmmaqqm oa.wmma mm.©NN mm om.mm mo NH.m m oo.aa H .. . _ . . ;_ --.-r oo.wmm NHH ©¢.mqa mm mm.smm mm.ooo men ..... Hm.mhn moa oo.on¢ moH mw.H wm.ow .mon .oz .ooq .oz ..ooa .oz .ooq .oz HN-HH snow sm-om oooe oH-HH so: om-mu Hesse .ooa .oz omnmm hnmonnom .moq .oz Hm-wm sous: tawoa ammmzmomm a mm¢524fi .mHADmmm UZHHHMH HOMHZOU mmHm meQM mMZH WMQA mHmDOH mcoflccouu monocflpoa.€ mmmmmw woman. 0 mmmmmw.mmmmmmmmm mmmmmmm moooaooH ammmmmmmmw mEOmonom mnommo mmoumOmfimoa mMHommm maSuOH mcoflccnhu monocHUoH.< mammmw mammmmam and; mmmmmmm.mmmmmmmw ammmmmwmum mammmmmm mflmmmo wSQumOm Hmmwd mMHommm HH MAmQH .soumz new %umnnnmm SH weapons oz a canoe om.o N ...... I- ..... u- . ..... I- mnnflnoouome masoaoa. 00.3 m ...... I- ..... .. 54“ N a a am.os on _ as.mss om om.om a ms.a N mammmw mammmmwm ao.am ms mm.oo mm om.so ms Ho.mms oo mammmw mummmmmmm om.moo ms mm.smm on oo.mm w mo.os on mmmmmmm mmmmmmmw ...... -- ------ -- _----- -- oN.s a mmmmmmmmmw mammmmmm mm.o H Ha.mm m cm.sn N ..... -- mmmmmm.mmmmmmmmmwm .ooa - .oz soosoz .ooq .oz .ooq .oz .moq .oz .oon .oz Boson soooH a-m oooe HH-w so: om-ss noose on-o neonate tmoma MZDW OH wm4Dz<H mHADmmm UZHHHMZ flAOMHZOU mmHm mUDOm mMZH mMfiA A.chouv HH mqde mNmH H H H N o o m o a a .a a N oN NmH NHm OHH as am mH so NON omH Ho mHoooH INd:IIIIIIInIIIiuIIIIHI1IInIIIIHII1IHIII1HIIIAwIIIn:aIInIIIIuIIIIAIIIIHIIIIutIIJflIIIHWIIINWIiiAnIINMwIAlIiaIIIuIIIHIIIHIillllllllllilmmmm sH I I . I I I I I I I I I I I I H o m a H I H H I I oHooooo ooHoz so I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I oH SN om oH ooHHoom ooomooH mmm I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I m mN smH mm mm HHHmoon zwwmcnm H I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I H I oouooamomcmuo SN I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I H H oH m N eoHHoom sooooe Iam I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I m HN mN m ooHHooa noose owe I I I I I I I I I I H H I NH ow oNN so No NN m I I I I omoo ooHoz m I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I - I I N H Hooosuoz NH I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I m a m o H I I I I I ammo oooooom HQH I I I H I I H I N N. N o H m NN om SH m m H H H I I moon Hooosomsoq H I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I H I I I ooonHHoo soHHow m H I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I N I I ooHHooo 3oHHow aHH I I I I H I m H N H o I m m mH co HH mH w o I I I I :oHHooo Hoooaeo m I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I N H I nooHHm HHooooom H I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I H I - I I ooHH oHoo oN I H H I H o I N I o N N H N m I H I I I I I I I onto mmmmmwIIIIMMIIIMwIIImMII1mMIIumWIiHmIIImMIIIwwIIHmwIIMwIInwWIImmIIImmIIHmwIImHIIIHHIIImwIIHwIImIIIMIInwIIHwIIHWIIwIIiIIIIIIIIIIIIIII wmfiocH CH summed Hmwbfio mmHommm monocH cH no cod monocH cH Lu cog Elli; HooH .Hmeupt I mzee .mmHozmH we amoeao emHa no amazez .memzmu House mean mezH HHH mHmeH NOHH H H m I o H o o H H m m 0H mH hm hmH om 0H NH mm nmm mmm Hm mm mH¢HOH NNO I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I H mm NHH mom om Nm HHHNOOHO O I I I I I I I I I I I I I I H H N N I I I I I I oHooono oOHoz sOH I I I I I I I I I I I I m m N OO O I I I I I I I moon ooHoz m I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I N I H N anmcnm cacao o I I I I H I I H. I I I I I I H I I I I I I I I I OoHHooo oooOooHe ooH I I I I H I I I I H N m HH O as Os ON o H H I I I I ooHHooo Hoooooo m I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I H H I N I H nooosooe NH I H m I o H O m H I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I onto NN I I I I I I I I I I H I N I o o N OH H m I I I I moon sooosomsoH me I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I m HH oN MN I I HmHHosm “OONOOH NO I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I . m ON om mN O I OmHOoOo sooooa HoooH Nm ON sN NN NN HN ON OH OH NH OH OH oH IIHHIIINHIIIHHIIIHHNIIINII O N O m o N Hmwsfiu mmHUmmm NomH .HmDUD¢ I mzah .mmezmH Wm HEOD¢0 mmHm mo mmmzzz .mszmu Amado mM<H mMZH A.choov HHH mum<H