TPWD 1954 F-6-R-1 #42: Creel Census and Check of Commercial Catch of Rough Fish from Lake Corpus Christi: Job Completion Report

TITLE: STATE Texas PROJECT NO. swan-m1 Job 3.6 MW PERIOD 9. :1. 53 g» 6 30 5h. JOB COMPLETION REPORT BY Alvin Flury Creel census and check of commercial catch of rough fish from Lake Corpus Christin OBJECTIVES: To estimate the total catch by Species and the relative abundance of each species in the catcha Also? to evaluate the commercial fishery as to earnings of netters and as to the control of rough and predacious fish. PRCCEDURE: a. Creel Census Two creel census stations were established? one at the Lake Corpus Christi State Park boat docks and one at Lacy'ss Camp._ The other three fishing camps were small and were not used for the censuso The stations were visited from approxim mately 6:00 aam. to 6:00 pm0 on six days per month at anproree mately five day intervalso Qne man could usually cover both stations adequately except on week ends when one man stayed at each station. Due to the small number of fishermen using the three smaller camps and the amount of effort needed to correctly fill out creel census cardsg the cards were not left at the (la-HIPS 9 Soon after the start of creel census it was found that counting all the fishermen on the lake would he impossibleo Although the lake is small (about 53000 acres) much of the water is in a long channel and large? shallow hay. It would take a man in a boat almost a full day to cover the entire lake. FINDINGS: as -2c The large proportion of trotline fishing (with hidden‘9 underwater lines) prevented an accurate count of fishermen. This part of the job was abandoned. Data were collected on fish census cards and included the date, number of fishermen in party, approximate number of hours fished; kind of_bait3 method of fishing and size and number of fish caughto Trotlines were usually recorded as having been set from 6:00 p.m. the previous evening until_6:00 a.mo the morning of creel census unless a shorter time was involveda Check on commercial catch of rough fiShc Commercial fishing is allowed on Lake Corpus Christi by permit only. Six permit holders were sent report sheets to be filled out and returned to the Game and Fish Commission office at the end of each montha These were in turn sent to Mathis, recorded, and returned to Austino Of the 66 reports that should have been filed; only 25 were received and eight of these reported "no fiSho” Creel census A total of #58 Sport fishermen was contacted during the ten month period from September 1953 through June 195M. Table I gives the general data taken from the creel census cardsa Fishu ermen were separated for comparison into two groups: still fishing (rod and reel; cane pole and throw lines) and trotline fishing. Only one card was filled out for use of artificial bait. The kinds and numbers of fish taken are shown in Table IIo One eel and seven gar are not included in this tablea Kinds of baits used and the fish caught on them‘9 when only one kind of bait was used is shown in Table III. Although 61% of the fishermen recorded on creel census days were using trotlinesy it is felt that a larger proporm tion of men using this method were missed than were bank fisherw men. Trotline fishermen caught 68% of the fish recorded, expended 79% of the manmhours of fishing and were 77% successful (at least one fish per party). They expended an average of 6.53 mannhours per fish caught (manuhours calculated by multiplying the number of men fishing times the number of hours the line was set) or al5 fish per man-“houro In general, larger fish, mostly yellow (flathead), blue and Channel catfish were taken by trotline than by stillfishing. The upper part of the lake, the impounded channel of the Nueces river; is accessible through private ranches and by boat, if water hyacinths don‘t block the passeso This area is reputedly the best trotline fishing in the lake and is used especially by a number of local fishermeno Many fishermen set trotlines and run and bait them.once every one to four or more daysa In practice it was found impossible to contact or even count accurately the fishermen using this systemo “3... Still fishermen comprised 39% of the total recorded in creel census. They caught 32% of the fish taken, expended 21% of the manehours and were 60% successful. In still.fishing, an average of 3.76 manuhours were needed to catch a fish or .27_ fish per man—hour. This method accounted for all the crappie, bass and sunfish taken, many of the channel catfish and most of the fresh water drum. All still fishermen were contacted in or near the Lake Corpus Christi State Park slough. Little still fishing is practiced on other parts of the lake; there are few suitable beaches, several piers furnishing most of the sites. A total catch of 73l fish was recorded in creel census. Channel catfish were most numerous (hl.9%) followed in order by blue catfish, drum, sunfish,.yel1ow catfish, crappie, bass and bullhead in that order (Table II). Turbidity and changing water levels inhibit large populations of bass and sunfish. Twenty-four kinds of-bait were used by the fishermen contacted (Table III). Cut fish, notably buffalo with some shad was by far the most pOpular due to easy availability. werms were used chiefly by still fishermen, shrimp was used in both methods while white laundry soap cut into one inch cubes was used mostly on trotlines set so the bait was just at the water surface.‘ Among these four most pepular baits, soap was the most consistent fish getter but the fish taken were usually the smaller channel and blue catfish. Check on commercial catch of rough fish. According to the seventeen rough fish catch reports turned in during the eleven months, the total catch of the six commercial fishermen from Lake Corpus Christi was as follows: 2821 buffalo- at 13,259 lbs. (h.7 lbso average), 3 carp at he lbs. (la.3 lbs aver— age), 281 gar at 2M7? lbs. (8.8 lbs. average), and 55 drum at 1%? lbs. (2.8 lbs. average). These figures are certainly not complete as not even "no fish" reports were turned in in #1 instances. Neither are they accurate. Some of the fishermen came from rather distant towns on one or two trips lasting two or three days each, there was no way to check the accuracy of their reports. At least one fish- erman had no scales and estimated the weights of his catch by adding onemhalf the dressed weight to get the total, explaining that the fish lost one—third their live weight when dressed. One man reported catch- ‘ing TlO suckers and 110 carpsuckers from the lake in one month; neither Species has been otherwise recorded from this lake (this report was discarded). Soon after the beginning of the job, the market price on buffalo drOpped from 17 cents to 10 cents per pound, "f1eeced" (dressed) weight, and frequently the markets would not take any fish at any pricea Buffalo were the primary marketable rough fish and the few carp in the catch were considered equivalent to buffalo, They were sold to markets for shipment to north and eastern states, to local fishing camps for bait or hawked on the streets of small towns. Gar and drum were sold by the latter method at about ten to fifteen cents per pound, Rough fish are bought for food in south Texas largely by farm laborers, espeCially during the Lenten season. Fishing gear used by commercial fishermen was 3” or 3%“ square mesh gill nets hung on a tight tOp line and hanging free. No weights or floats were used except to locate.the net and to keep the top line tight. Nets four feet deep by 100 to 1,000 feet or more in length were set. Following the figures here gatheredj admittedly inaccurate, the commercial fishery on Lake Corpus Christi was valued at from one thousand to fifteen hundred dollars for the eleven months studied. If a regular market with a fair price was available, the lake could certainly produce a better crOp of rough fish. Many gar are killed and discarded by the fishermen because their price does not usually compensate for the difficulty of marketing them. If more rough fish netting was done, it might, as a sideline, furnish an effective method of gar control. From my observations, I do not believe that any appreciable number of catfish or other game fish are removed from the lake by commercial fish— ermen a SUMMARY Creel census was held at two stations on Lake Corpus Christi every fifth day for the period September 1953 through June 195%. A total of #58 fishermen was contacted and their fish counted and measured. Fishing methods used were trotline and still fishing. The first method was used by 61% of the fishermen contacted who caught 68% of the fish. Still fishermen comprised 39% of the total and caught 32% of the fish. Tables were prepared fromthe data gathered to show man~hours spent fishing, fish caught per manwhour and precentage of suc- cessful fishermen (Table I), kinds and numbers of fish caught (Table II) and kinds and numbers of fish caught on different baits (Table III). Inaccurate figures reported by commercial fishermen gave an estimated value of the commerw cial fishery at from one thousand to fifteen hundred dollars for an eleven month period. Because it was impossible to estimate the total number of sport fishermen on the lake at any time and because of the failure of commercial fishermen to report catches, it was not possible to calculate a total catch from the lake. Considering the light fishing pressure on Lake Corpus Christi, it is not thought to be practical to continue creel census beyond the first segment. TABLE I Lake Corpus Christi Creel Census General Data - . tmmmwf... .'; . .. .r- h'w_'-T-.-'n-'-m .............. ..........-~.-- Trotline Fishing Tmflel (continued) Nan Hour :- . a D I 9 I' a O a Man Hour Men. H.011? Fish Per "1' Fish Per :1 ' FiSh P81" f...) —4 {are at 43—4 com (SRO U.) PD [\‘3 Table ll Lake Corpus Christi Creel Census Channel Blue i.“iLch Flathead Black' '” “icl. White Catfish Catfish Bullhead Catfish Bass Sunfish Crappie Drum Table ll (continued ) Channel Blue ‘ Flathead Black “ White I VI] Date Catfish Catfish Bullhead Catfish _ Bass ' Sunfish Crappie Drum Totali 2-2 2 5 a m _ l5 2 3 25 . 9 3 8 - a m 9 - 2 22 it 5 l6 2 l a '2 a - 22 ' 19 u l — - - m - _ l 22 l - a - 2 m 2 _ 5 get. ll 30 2 l 2 26 2 5 _77 - 3~l 3 2 ~ — ~ ~ ~ 3 ' 9 6 h 3. a 5 u - 2 _ 12 ll 2 2 a 2 a - w 2 8 - l6 l3 9 a l a m l l 25 21 u a - - - a a - a 26 lo a _ a - a a - l8 _ ar. 32 2k _ 8 m _ 3 6 72 '-l m u w m - m w _ . a a 6 _ - - _ a _ - c _ ll 2 3 — _ a _ _ 8 ll 15 l _ - l u 2 l 3 8 21 3 3 — _ a 3 7 2 18 27 - - — _ m m _ a m :pr. 2 6 m l — 5 8 l3 37 o — - m a a 3 , ' 9 m w w 3 ~ 9 _ - 2 _ 3 3 a l _ _ w l - ~ w w w 5 _ l 2 3 3 __l 1 a - a a a a 1 c _ a a — m m w a l l 2 - a _ a .2 3 m w - l Farcentages #1.? Table 111 Lake Corpus Christi Creel Census Baits Used shite' Crappie *Drum *Blue *Flathead' i{Black tSunm Catfish Catfish Bass fish :ut Fish 100 65 86 22 3 a _ a 13 122 worms 37 70 1 1 3 m 18 _ 7 3O shrimp 37 ST 12 8 u m 18 a a 22 soap 32 8A to 25 _ m m l u 66 sunfish. 2h 75 2 15 u u a m a 21 Vinnows 20 55 6 w a a a 3 23 52 érayfish 12 78 1 a m a a - a 1 liver 12 66 7 3 a m a m a 10 ghicken _ Guts 6 83 a l m a - a a 1 Reef Heart 6 50 l w n a w a a 1 fiussle 5 80 5 2 a a - a l 8 iidney h 100 w _ - a _ a a a raked Hook 3 66 2 8 - a m w - 10 small Shad 3 33 3 m 1 m m a a h I! 3 Meat 3 33 w an m m m =- m ... *rasshoppers 2 100 13 15 n a u a a 28 frogs 2 100 u a a a a a a a rabbit 2 100 a m a a a a a a Dough balls 2 50 w m a a a m m a .5nails 2 50 — a a a a a a a 'serries l 100 a a a a a a a a toldfish l 100 u a a a a a a a -P1ugs l 100 m e e 2 e r r 2 _.ut Squid 1 0 m a m a a a a a f m When only one kind of bait was used.