TPWD 1956 F-4-R-3 #252: Inventory of Species Present in Lake Whitney, Texas

JOB C©MELETION REPORT -' TE OF TEXAS Project Noe FhR3 Name _Fisheries Investig of S ecies Present in Lake Whitne Texas. Job Nov Bel Title. Invento Period Coveredzfl ‘Jnne_l_ lf ‘p-‘Qctober .l,.l Assessor 10 Lake Whitney is a clear-water impoundment containing 15,800 surface acres at normal lake levels ' ' 2a The lake is located on the Brazos River in Hill, Bosque, and Jehnson Counties approximately 38 river’miles upstream from Waco, Texas. The gates of the dam.were closed December 10, 195lo 3. The fish population.was sampled with gill nets each.month from June 1953 through October 1956, he The first three years of the lakes existence was the nest productive period for gene fisho 59 The fish population is slowly changing free game fish to rough fishn 6° Gizaard shad have increased from 27660 percent of the total fish netted a Lng the first period of survey to 63005 percent of the fish captured by nets during the third period of survey» 70 Game fish increased in average weight throughout the study but decreased from BODOh percent to 2&080 percent in nonber of total fish netted between the first_and last period of surveyo 8o Ihe number of largemonth bass decreased in the net catches as well as the r tiers harvest after the first year of surveys 9o White crappie showed a noticeable decrease in the net catch and a very sharp decrease in the anglers harvest after the second year of surveya 100 Black crappie and Kentucky spotted bass showed a very sharp drop in numbers following the first period of surveyo 110 White bass increased from 0061 percent to 608% percent of the total fish netted between the first and third period of surveya ' . .. ,/ OBJECTIVES_ To determine the species present and their relative abundance and to determine the ecological factors influencing their distributionu Lake Whitney is located on the Brazos River_in Hill, Bosqne, and Johnson Counties approximately 38 river miles up stream.from Waco, Texas¢ The Whitney Dam.and Reservoir was constructed by the Corps of.Army Engineers for flood control, development of hydroe- lectric power and recreational purposeso The gates of the den were closed December 10, 1951 and the lake reached conservation pool level in April l95h, Lake Whitney is a large, clearawater impoundment 37 miles long at elevation 520, which is the top of the power poolo It has a shoreline 19! miles long characterized by limestone bluffs interspaced with long stretches of gently'sloping beaches. A drainage area of 17,656 square miles is controlled by the dam, which backs up 15,800 surface acres of water with a maxinum.depth of 95 feet at normal lake level. Approximately onenthird of the lake area has a depth of 10 feet or less which is conducive to good fisheries pro- ductiono Part of the timber was cleared from.the lake bottom.before impoundment began but much of the timber along the original stream.bonks and some of the smaller brush in the general lake area was left standings Excellent accomodations are offered to the public by over 50 modern fishing camps and concessionso The lake has been heavily fished and pleasure boat riding and water skiing are rapidly becoming a major pastimea Gill nets were used to collect random samples of the fish populationo The nets were 100 or 125 feet long and.hod.meshes of l to 3 inches measured on the square. A major part of the netting was done with nets conposed of'meshes lfi-inches in size. Nets ting stations of various ecological types were selected in order to typify the different enviromental areas of the lakes Esta taken from the netted fish included their length7 weight, sex, and degree of gonadal development» Scale samples were collected from many of the game fisha Notes were made of any fungus or parasites found on the fish» Samp- ling sas also done with.minnow seines during:most months of the years Collections were made with rotenone from several stationso The seined and rotenone samples were preserved in 6 percent formalin and taken to the laboratory to be counted and identifiedo Table l is a cheklist of all species collected from Lake Whitney during the entire period of studyo DISCUSSION Consideration will be given to each.nojor species of fish and the changes that took place in the population of those Species throughout the period of study” Table 2 records the number and species of fish that have been stocked in Lake Whitneyu Table 3 shows the results of the seine collections made during the last consent of the surveys Table h records the frequency of occurrence of foodctmnms from fish collected.by gill nets during the last seuento Table 5 is a tabulation of data from. the gill net collections made during the last period of survey and shows pertinent information regarding each species of fiche Table 6 is a conparison of the changes in the not catch and average weight and "KT factor of several species for the three periods of study. Table 7 is a comparison of the game fish and rough fish populations and shows the percentage of change between various.periods of the surveyo Table 8 shots the water depth areas of Lake Whitney and the percentage of the lake area that is covered by various depths of eatero Table 9 shows the high-water frequencies that will be theoretically attained over a period of yearso LARGEMUUTH BASS The most productive years for largenouth bass.in.Lake Whitney were during the first two and onemhalf years of its existencea As long as the rising water inundated new ground during the initial filling of the lake, the bass population was active and shoued signs of a rapid increase in numbersa But, as the smaller vegetation completed its cycle of decay and the areas of submerged vegetation became bare, the bass population was less active and apparently began to decrease in numbers. Naturally, many of the bass harvested “uring the later part of the survey were larger than those taken during the first part f the study, but the total harvest in both pounds and numbers became smaller as the lake aged. Bass accounted for a progressively smaller percentage of the fish netted during each successive segment of the survey. Reference to the netting data shows that this spe- cies represented 3.69 percent of the total fish netted during the first study made on the lake, but dropped to 2.h8 and 2.00 percent between the first and letter surveys represents a drop of #6 percent in the bass population during three and oncwhalf years as shown by the gill net collections. As the same methods of survey were used throughout the entire study, it seems that the population decrease indicated is reasonable. The angler's harvest followed a similar but more pronounced trend. manor! secs-run BASS The Kentucky spotted bass population is on a rapid decline. The species was once as abundant as the largemouth bass but drOpped very sharply in the percentage of the total bass harvested during the second and third segment of the survey. The Kentucky spotted bass accounted for only 0.22 percent of the total fish netted during the last year of sure way as compared with 3.69 percent of all the specimens captured in the first survey. The ecological requirements are probably more exacting for the Kentucky spotted bass than are required for the largemouth bass. Our experience was to find the species more closely associated with rocky creeks and,firm.sand beaches. The Kentucky spotted was more active than the largemouth bass during cold weather. The species is a hard fighting fish when hooked and was very popular with the fishermen. The white bass population came from fish that were in the Brazos River prior to the forwation of the lake. Very few bass were captured during the first year of the survey but the population expanded rapidly until they were taken quite frequently in the not cut» shes. White bass accounted for only 0.61 percent of the total fish netted during the first survey, but composed 3.38 and 6.8M percent of the fish captured in the remaining ”= two surveys. ghe increase from 0161 to 6.8% percent between the first and last surveys represents an approximate 1000 percent rise in the white bass population. Fishing for white bass is becoming more popular on Lake Whitney. n;;s~ - agar to search for the early morning schools of whites, or sand base as they are sometime called, and many good catches were made of that species while fishing for only an hour or 'two during the early sort of the day. The white bass_is given considerable credit for his voracious foraging habits upon the schools of small shad. ' WHITE CRAPPIE White crappie are the most abundant of the two species of crappie that are found in Lake Whitney. Grappie are very popular with the fishermen and are fished for more consistently than any other species. Iota from the creel.census that was performed on —' Lake Whitney from August 1953 through Qctober 1955 reveals that fishermen caxght 87 pounds of crappie per surface acre from that lake during the 2Temonth'period. The creel census also showed that the harvest of crappie was not as good during 1955 as it had been in the two previous years. From January through October of l95h fishermen averaged catching 32 crappie per hour of fishing time. During the same period of 1955 fishermen caught an average of only 0.10 crappie per hour of fishing time. It is well known that crappie fishing has not been good on Lake Whitney since that time. The cause of the poor crappie harvest during the last two years is difficult to determine from data collected in our' netting survey. However, a review of the data does show that only 1.5M crappie were captured to per 100 feet of gill not during the last year of survey as compared to l.80 crappie caught per 100 feet of net during the previous period of surveyo :his represents a drop of 1% percento Although it is not as large a drop as shown by the data from.the creel census, it is probably indicative of a declining crappie pepulation. As crappie are difficult to accurately survey with a gill net in lakes containing lots of brush, it would be better to study the crappie population in Lake Whitney with gear and techniques more suit- able for the problems involveda BLACK CRAPPIE The black crappie population had decreased rather sharply in Lake Whitney during the past three yearso When the netting survey was first begun, black crappie were found in the net catches almost as frequently as white crappie. Black crappie accounted for 3028 percent of the total fish netted during the entire first period of study as compared to 701% percent of the fish accounted for by white crappie. During the next period of study the black crappie percentage had dropped to Oohl while the white crappie percentage had risen.to 9O9Qe The pOpulation of hlack crappie has continued to be low since the in- itial netting surveyo Fishermen express their preference for the black species and a larger population of the fish would he highly welcomedo "inst CATFISH.AND YELLOW CATFISH Lake Whitney is a good channel cat lake and has produced many excellent catches of that specieso The fish are usually very fat and‘show signs of rapid grostho There are a number of limestone bluffs containing many holes, and vast areas of thick brush and large boulders that offer ideal spawning facilities for catfisho Channel cat represented 5972 percent of the total fish netted during the first survey and 3oh9 and #031 percent of the fish collected during the other two surveyso The average weight per fish for east period of survey was 0095, 1039 and 0089 of a pound respectivelyo The harvest of fish was 1023, 006% and 0095 of a fish per hundred feet of net, beginning with the first surveyo The yellow cat (flathead) population of Lake Whitney is good and offers fair catches to those the like to trotline for that specieso Yellow cats were not caught very frequently in the gill nets, which was not surprising as most of the nets were floated in the upper eight feet of satero 0F. , __‘ .7. * W F333 Hhe fish population of Lake Whitney is slowly progressing toward the rough specieso Reference is given to Table 7 which records the changes in the composition of the fish population and shows the percentage of cheese from one period of inventory to anothero It also shows the percentage change between the first and last periods of studyo It will be noted that the game species dropped in percentage by number throrax - the entire study but regained part of their percentage by weirl " °gs the last segment of the surveyo The gain is reflected in the average weight per gene fish which shared a continuous rise throvghcut the period of studyo Host of the gain in the rough fish population resulted from an increase in the number of shad, which showed a yearly gain of approximately 50 percent over the previous period of studye It is amazing that the rough fish population has not increased even more rapidly than it has due to the vast numbers of game fish that have been harvested in comparison to the small number of rough fish that have been taken from the lakeu RECOMMENDATIONS It is recommended that the monthly netting of Lake Whitney be discontinued; but that some provision be provided for an occasional check on the lake to obtain current data regarding the fish populationo It is recommended that a study of the crappie be made to try to find reasons for the recent small harvest of that species from Lake Whitneyo It is further recommended that the large concentrations of carp that spawn in the flooded basins during lake rises be killed as it would involve only a.minimum of chemicals and laboro It is also suggested that test strips of wild buckwheat or similar vegetation be planted on the lowlands that are exposed during periods of water drawdowno This would concentrate the base when the areas flood during rises with the possibility of greatly increasing the fishermens harvest of basso Prepared by Robert No Hambric - Approved by__(”2‘_4gu;‘4_‘__n _g_g‘L;W,_ Assistant Project Leader Chief Aquatic Biologist Date ....... .7 __. _ . . _ . __________ - . _ _ 60 Table lo _Checklist of Fish Species From Lake Whitney: Texas, 1953~56u Common.Name . Scientific Name Spotted gar Lepisosteus pm mductus Longnose gar Lepisosteusm osseus Gizzard shad. Dorosoma cepediarmml Mexican Jumper Astyanw fasciatus Smallmouth buffalo Ictiobus bubalus River carspucker Cagpiodes cagpio Grey redhorse ' beostoma coggestm Carp Cmflnus carpio ' Golden shiner Netemigonus crysoleucas Pugnose minnow Q-sogveodus aniline Sharpnose shiner - Wotropis ogyrhypchus Brazos river shiner Notropis brazoSensis Pallid shiner Notropis.amnis Blacktail shiner (spottail) Notropis venustus Red Shiner (redhorse) Notropis lutrensis Sandshiner . thropis deliciOSus Plains minnow Hypognathus placita Therot minnow ' Timephales v igilan_ Fathead minnow = Pimephales promelas Stoneroller Campgstcmaw anomalum Southern channel catfish Ictalurus punctatus Black hullhead Ictalurus melas Yellow- hullhead Ictalurus natalis - Flathead_catfish fplodictus olivaris Edackstripe tOpminnow . Fundulus notatus Gambusia Gamhusia affinis White bass‘ ' Roccus ch: sows Kentucky‘spotted.bass. Micropterus pgnctulatus Largemouth black bass Mdcropterusm salmoides Warmouth Ghaenobryptus gages Green sunfish. Lepgmis cyanellus W Redear sunfish Lepcmis microlophus“ Bluegill sunfish. Lepgmis macrochirus Orangespotted sunfish —:nl_.l . .x Legemis humilis-w~~T Yellowbelly sunfish Lepomis anritus White crappie Pgnoris annularis Black crappie Pomonis nigromaculatus Logperch Porcine carprodes Freshwater drum Aplodinotus grunniens “able 2o Stocking of Fish in Lake Whitney, Texas by State Fish Hatcheriesu Species 1950 1951 Total Largemouth black bass 50,000 120,000 170,000 Black crappie 110,000 110,000 Channel catfish 150,000 150,000 Bream (Bluegill and Bedear) h0,000 to,000 Whrmouth bass h5,000 h5,000 Total 395,009 120,000 515,000 m, ecoHo mu woesHem ow mowowom QOHHoodwooo ow.assooc cw meow mpoowoos Howe noeeoowc Honcho mpooeom assess QOHHoodoe wannabe ow HodoH Qwsamem area stHm wmowr assessment m 000m meet . m oon mWWHWbooo ofiHbos. Hr comm Scorsese messes Booed»: mum m ,8 mom oweoou Amomwosmov quwm rr.4m mesa mWHEoH. H ooom mHsHse sashes H oaom wsueoe_awsoos wow momm stQWneeewo dopseooos H ooom assesses Hmm rnmm evade comm w 0004 Woodcoww oweddom omen _ H ooom Haemoscsew eHmnw doom ww 00mm mason asbwwmw m ooom womoms oneness \ m Crow stoaHHH acumen: mH Home oeosmoowoddoe oneness H 000m boawosow H 000m ea HsdHo on meonoooow ow Ocofiscoooo ow moon Hesse woos memo QOHHocdom 6%.QHHH Emacs Boas Seascape Hohhot accosooc Hmwm dwcosmo 00¢06oc Hmmma meoowoo moon doHQoBdeHoUHo meco com weapons moon moose 0H eoaoH Zoo ow meow monsoon somoamdwoo macaw some twee masseuse. accede mos o w o o o no Hoomoomo mos m w o o o :4 wondrous cocoboH oneness 0 mm we mw m Hmw need some as me o o 0 m5 fissmososew deow doom 0 Hm o o 0 4w stomeH oneness o m r Hm 0 HH szeo confines o HHw m m. H mow wHoow escapee o m H o o Hm msomwssaoc mass 0 m o o o mw _.0m.ma 00.Hm 00.00H me.0mem 00.00H mmmm aspen m0.0 no.0 no.0 no.0 em.na m0.0 mm .sssn no.0 0H.0 04.0 0m.0 mm.0 me.0 0H memesn0_aosnm 0m.0 em.a mm.0 0a.m 0w.00 H0.a mam sadness moons 00.0 00.0 no.0 sm.0 «0.:H mH.m «an essence assesses no.0 «0.0 0m.0 no.0 no.0 00.0 m nonsense _0m.0 ee.o sm.a 00.m ne.mu 00.m as when senescence .e0.0 m0.0 ma.0 0m.0 em.e no.0 w some awesome assesses _ew.0 0m.a om.0 Hm.m 0m.mma no.0 mom omen scone m0.0 no.0 ma.m no.0 me.m 00.0 m smashes assesses H0.0 no.0 em.o no.0 e0.H 00.0 m assesses needs no.0 mm.0 0«.0 mm.m m0.mma Hm.: mma swoopso awesome senescence no.0 no.0 no.0 no.0 m0.0 H assess meadow a0.0 no.0 Ho.a 0m.e me.aoa ma.a so arse 00.0 no.0 0w.a 00.0 mw.ea mm.0 w nanosecs ease a0.a 00.H s0.H 0m.0a No.00m mm.: «on nonessesso ea.m 0w.0 No.0 Ha.ea 0m.0em 00.m 0ma anemone no.0 m0.ma me.0 oa.0n ea.000 m0.m0 ”ohms eons essence ma.a 0m.0 00.m em.a 0m.awa mm.a a: new oaseenon mm.o 0H.0 econ me.a om.mm me.o on new awesome pma.ooa new oez.ooa one sensem no sesame Hosea cheese senses aspen cheese Sofia mwgom flm..n.m MO .02 Hflmfimv» .mbd. he Pfimohmm mfigom .HO Pfiwehmm Hmflga mwfiomgm .mmmH espouse finches. mmmfinopsoeoz snooping sowed Bonn esofipooaaoo pom Hate scam spam mo soapogpce .m macros .0...”