TPWD 1983 F-30-R-8 #1818: Performance Report: Statewide Fishery Management Recommendations, Job A: Existing Reservoir and Stream Management Recommendations, Brazos River, 1982

PERFORMANCE REPORT As required by FEDERAL AID IM FISHERIES RESTURRTIUN ACT FederaT Rid Preject F—30-R~B Statewide Fishery Management Reccmmendatiens Jab A: Existing Reservcir and Stream Management Recemmendatiens Brazes River, 1982 Rebert L. Bcunds Iniand Fisheries Management Pregram Directer District II—R Bruce T. Hysmith District Management Superviser Charles D. Travis Executive Directer Texas Parks and Hiidiife Department Austin, Texas Ernest G. Simmens Rebert J. Kemp Chief, Inland Fisheries Directer cf Fisheries January 15, 1983 II III III'. l . \l ' WHWM' ' l1. Waited-f 'rwln‘i‘i whim—451' . wmtfli mew I [I II | '1' I .fil : I II I I T— 1.1? .Jl‘WTH-i'flfi. I k | I ‘ i 4' {i Fj- I. “Ft-'91 .1."- Tfi glmn-r'lsm |'.ief‘-'-i5_"""| :1! cm HENRI? Means max-'1 Ma tat-mag: s -, JWHfli-F in»: an: fins-11: wit-ml "| HR Hi- a-ar-{e 1m .- warm air“ 1H! "' sea fa] | | I I I; L JET-E fill-ac, : q film-”HI ' H mi‘r‘i‘ T‘ {than sari-mm | l I | I sees-5' ‘ HULK“; . 'I =Wfifl‘” ”"1 5‘s: was mine” meat "3'? *Hhsfi I | I I ”W i ;|: _ , ._ W “a 3&1.- . n. - in m_ 15:13“. 53"] ”*3- .. “d . ——- Performance Report Job R, District II-R 0bjective: To recommend habitat improvement, fisherman information, fish population manipulation, vegetation control, pollution control, fisherman access and facility development, and fishing regulations for existing and proposed public waters of Texas. 1. Summary: Twenty miles of the Brazos River below Possum Kingdom Reservoir, Palo Pinto County, Texas, was surveyed according to stream management manual procedures. Survey methods included water quality analysis, seining, gill netting, habitat and vegetation analysis, and assessing fisherman access and facilities. Major sport fishes included rainbow trout, channel catfish, white bass, striped bass, sunfishes (Lepomis sp.), spotted bass, largemouth bass, and white crannie. Management recommendations included increased mnnthly minimum instantanenus ‘FTDW from Morris Sheppard Dam and the introduction of smallmouth bass. II. Significant Deviation: None. III. Cost: $13,000.00 Iv. Prepared by: Bruce T. Hysmith John H. Mocz emba District Management Supervisor fissistant District Management Supervisor Don 8. Miller John R. Ballard is and Hi ife ec nician Fish and wildlife Technician Patrick H. Buchanan is an Hi ife Technician Date: January 15, 1883 AppflizgitEZF :é o ertagé Bounds Ro er L. McEabe 0—D Management Coordinator Issistant D-J Management Coordinator DESCRIPTION OF STUDY AREA The Brazos River is the third largest river in Texas (Pass 1981). It originates in west—central Texas as the Double Mountain, Salt, and Clear Forks of the Brazos, and flows southeasterly for approximately BAD mi to the Gulf of Mexico (Fig. 1). The river flows through most of the main land resource areas of the Texas-High Plains, Rollin Plains, North Central Prairies, Cross Timbers, Grand Prairie, 81ac lagnrairies, Central Basin, and Claypan Area, and drains about 42,800 mi . This study was conducted on approximately 20 mi of the Brazos River in Palo Pinto County between Morris Sheppard Dam, which impounds Possum Kingdom Lake, and Farm-to-Market Road (FM) 4. The dam is controlled by the Brazos River Authority which produces power for the Brazos Electric Cooperative System. The area is confined to the North Central Prairies land resource area and included the major tributaries Garland, Ioni, Eagle, and Dark Valley Creeks. This section of the river is generally clear, has 13 major pools, numerous riffles, and many backwater flats. These physical features vary greatly with releases from the reservoir. At low flow ( £220 cfs) many of the riffles and backwater flats dry up. During periods of high flow (22 1,000 cfs) the river rises 2—3 ft. The streambed gradient is 2.? ftfmi and depth ranges from 0.1 to 15 ft. Recreation is an important resource on this portion of the river. Topography in this section ranged from moderately wooded and grassy hills to thickly wooded or cultivated bottomland. Cedar, mesquite, and native grasses predominated surrounding hills. Cottonwood, cedar, persimmon, salt cedar, willow, and native grasses were abundant along the shoreline, while the bottom— land vegetation consisted primarily of pecan, cottonwood, oak, low shrubs, and native grasses. Mean annual rainfall in this immediate area is 28 in: in the headwaters of the Brazos River it is 18 to 20 in (Pass lSBT}. METHDDS AND MATERIALS Sample stations were located at or near the confluence of each major tributary (Fig. 2) in compliance with Stream Survey Procedures, Texas Parks and wildlife Department Management Survey and Reporting Procedures. Each of the four stations were sampled quarterly from April 1881 through February 1882. Hater samples were collected from a pool at each station at the surface, mid-depth, and immediately off the bottom (Figs, 3, 5, I, and 9). A YSI Model Sl—A oxygen analyzer was used to measure temperature and dissolved oxygen (00). A Leeds and Northrup Til? portable meter was used to measure pH. Specific con- ductance was determined by a YSI Model 33 S-C-T meter. Total alkalinity, total hardness, turbidity, and chlorides were determined with a DRPEL Hach Portable Engineers Laboratory. Transparency was measured with a Secchi disc. Depth, width, and current velocity were measured along a transect of a pool and of a riffle at each station (Figs. 3 through 9). A portable Lowrance Fish Lo-K—Tor or a yard stick was used to determine depth. A steel tape was used to obtain channel width. Current velocity was measured with a General Oceanics Model 2030 digital flow meter. Historical flow data were obtained from the Brazos River Authority. Substrate composition was determined from samples collected with a Nildco Model 196 bottom dredge along the same transects. The percent of stream in pools, riffles, and flats was noted. Condition of fish habitat was noted and recorded during all collection trips. Bottom types, littoral zone development, abundance of aquatic vegetation, canopy density, and abundance of submerged cover (boulders or log-jams) were criteria for identifying fish habitat improvement needs. Species composition and distribution of aquatic vegetation were determined each trip. Aquatic vegetation was identified according to Fassett (1940) and Correll and Correll (lQTS). Fish community was sampled with seines and gill nets. Seine collections were made in pool and riffle habitats at each station with a 29-ft bag seine constructed of 0.25-in nylon mesh. An estimated 2,500 ft of stream bottom was sampled at each site. Samples were preserved in 10 percent formalin for subsequent identification and enumeration. Pool habitat at each station was sampled with a single gill net set per trip. Monofilament gill nets 200-ft long and 8-ft deep were used. Mesh size increased by 0.50win increments from 0.50- to A-in at 25—ft intervals. Total catch was sorted, counted, and bulk weighed by species. Species identification followed Anon. (1968) and Eddy (1969]. Common and scientific names used in this report were in accordance with Robins (1980). Individual weight and total length (TL) and stomach contents were recorded for selected species of sport fish. Scale samples were collected from white bass for age determination. Pectoral spines were taken from channel catfish for age and growth analysis. Information recorded with each scale and spine sample included: (1) sex, (2) TL in mm, and (3) weight in g. Scales were pressed on acetate slides and examined with a Bauch and Lomb Tri-simplex microprojector. Each scale was analyzed for the presence of annuli and the age of each fish was then noted. Spine samples were sent to the Texas Parks and Nildlife Department Heart-of-the-Hills Research Station for age determination and growth computation. Length—weight relationships for channel catfish were calculated by using the model: Log 10 Height (g) = a + (b) Log 10 Length (mm). Where: a = intercept of the regression b = slope of the regression. Coefficient of condition (K) was calculated using the following formula: N105 “Ts“— Hhere: weight in g N L length in mm. Public access and fisherman information needs were evaluated by determining if existing facilities and sources of information were adequate to support optimum utilization of the fishery resource. Fish population information was used to determine needs for changes in harvest regulations. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION Physicochemical Characteristics Data collected in this study show water quality in this section of the Brazos River will sustain fish life (Tables 1 and 2; Swingle 1949, Brown l95l, Lee l9?l, and Bardach et a1. 19l2). However, the data do not illustrate the effects of hydroelectric generation on water temperature and flow regimes. Eimmerman et a1. (l980) reported temperature fluctuations of 12—13 F per 28 hours in this section of the Brazos River during April, 19?9 due to discharge. Depending on the frequency of occurrence, abrupt changes in temperature could alter spawning patterns, and affect egg incubation andfor fry development of fish fauna (Nalburg et a1. 1981 and Hubbs l9l2). Fish Habitat Fish habitat in this section of the Brazos River included a stream bed of muck, detritus, clay, silt, sand, gravel, rubble, bed rock, and boulders. Primarily, muck, detritus, and clay were found in the lower stations farthest from the dam except for a portion about l.5~2 mi upstream from FM 4 which was scoured bedrock. Since Possum Kingdom Reservoir acts as a sediment trap, the river immediately below the dam was clear, and had a stream bed composed primarily of gravel and rubble. The pool:riffle:flat ratio was 5:4:1. The pools were from 80 to 400 ft wide and had a 2.1—8.3 ft average depth (Table 2). Boulders and rocky bluffs in most of the pools provided cover for flathead and channel catfish, largemouth and spotted bass, and other sport fishes (Fig. 10). Shallow pools and back- water areas provided suitable spawning habitat for sport fishes (Fig. 10). The riffles with their dense growth of algae, pondweed, water star-grass, and sago pondweed provided habitat for a variety of forage fishes and invertebrates. Nursery areas were provided by riffles and backwaters. There were no areas on the river where there was a complete canopy, but partially shaded areas provided by black willow, cottonwood, oak, elm, cedar, and salt cedar trees extended 10 ft from the bank in many areas. Eleven species of aquatic vegetation were encountered during the survey (Tables 3 and A). None were considered problematic. The most limiting factor for habitat seems to be volume of flow. Variation in flow regimes alters fish habitat and water quality (Neel 1953, Halburg et al. 198]). Meter level fluctuates about 2-3 ft (Figs. 3 and 10} in this section of the Brazos River as a result of normal hydroelectric power generation. During low discharge (9—20 cfs), most riffles and many backwater flats, or approximately 49 percent of this section, is dewatered (Fig. ll). Monthly median flow from" Morris Sheppard Dam for l9?8-198l varied from 20 to 2,393 cfs (Fig. 12). Flow" frequency distribution (Fig. 13), based on discharge from Morris Sheppard Dam, indicated over one-half (53 percent, TIA days) of the time during 19T8el981 (1,461 days) flow was'd20 cfs; hence, a four-year median flow slightly less than 20 cfs. Therefore, from 19f8-1981, 49 percent of the stream habitat was dewatered 53 percent of the time. A condition which our data indicated was insufficient to maintain adequate sport fish production. Insect Community Numerous insect larvae (Trichoptera, Diptera, and Ephemeroptera) were observed during collections at all stations. Cloud and Stewart (l9?4a and l9TAb) reported 30,40 species of insect fauna in riffle communities of this section of the river. Sport fishes were observed feeding at the surface on adult mayflies. These insects were an important food source in the river as reported by Forshage (1992). Fish Community Fora e Fishes: The most predominant forage species were red shiner, blacktail shiner, and inland silverside (Table 5). Threadfin shad were collected in spring during their spawning run, but apparently were not abundant in this section of the river during the rest of the year. Gizzard shad were found during all seasons, but were generally too large (average TL = ll in) to be used except by the largest predators (flathead catfish and striped bass). 0ther species of forage included bullhead minnow, mosquitofish, and small bluegill and longear sunfish. S ort Fishes: Sport fishes comprised 28 percent of the fish community in the study area. Relative abundance of sport fishes ran ed from 18 percent in April to 3? percent in February (Tables 6 through 9). Hhile there was seasonal variation in total gill net catches, the numbers of sport fishes remained fairly stable. Predominant sport fish included channel catfish and white bass. Other sport fishes collected were flathead catfish, striped bass, white bass x striped bass hybrid, sunfishes (Lepomis sp.), spotted bass, largemouth bass, and white crappie. Channel catfish was by far the most frequently collected sport fish comprising 18 percent of total catch and 63 percent of sport fishes (Fig. 13). They were found most often at Stations 1 and 2 which were closest to the dam. According to Nalburg et al. (T981) they were often abundant in the warm tailwaters of turbid main-stem or tributary rivers, but are uncommon or absent in clear, cold tailwaters. Two reasons for this nonnconforming behavior in the Brazos River could be better habitat and greater abundance of preferred food. Generally, upstream from station 3, the river is characterized by deeper pools, shorter riffles, and a greater abundance of green algae than below Station 3. Seasonal mean weight varied from 2.8 lb in the spring to l.l lb in the winter with an overall mean of 1.5 lb (Tables 6 through 9). Growth of channel catfish in the Brazos River (Table 10) was equal to or faster than growth in other waters (Table 11). Length weight regression was computed to be: Log 10 Height (g) = —6.4 + 3.6 Log Length (mm). 10 The calculated slope of the length—weight regression (3.6) was compared (t—test) to isometric growth (3.0). Channel catfish in the Brazos River grow significantly (P-< 0.01) faster in weight than in length. Good growth was further substantiated by an excellent K of 1.238 which was greater than the range of mean K (0.35-1.12) reported by Carlander (1969). Seining did not indicate an abundance of young-of-the-year (TOY) channel catfish (Table 5) which suggested low reproduction. Recruitment since 19?8 has apparently been low to non-existent as no Age I and II fish were collected (Table 10). Channel catfish are omnivorus (Carlander 1969 and Miller 1966) and in this study green algae (Chlorophyceae) was the predominant food item; occurring in ?9 percent of the 56 fish stomachs examined. Frequency of occurrence for unidentified fish remains was 16 percent, and 13 percent for insects. Flathead catfish did not appear in the study area until spring and summer (Tables 6 through 9) and then only in the lower sections (Fig. l4). Mean weight was 7.9 lb. Mhite bass were found throughout the study area (Fig. 14), but were absent in spring gill net collections (Tables 6 through 9). Contrary to angler reports, our data indicated white bass were low in abundance. Although TOT white bass were not collected, the presence of ripe females and flowing males in December suggested a reproducing population. white bass may be recruited from Lakes Possum Kingdom and Granbury. Mean weight of white bass was 0.?5 lb and the oldest fish collected was Age II. Angler catches of striped bass have been reported throughout the study area. Our data, however, indicates these fish concentrate in the upper portion nearest the tailrace (Tables 6, I, and 8). Mean weight of striped bass caught in gill nets averaged 4.2 lb. Spotted bass, largemouth bass, and white crappie were extremely low in abundance in this section of the Brazos River (Tables 6, I, and 9; Fig. 14). T0? spotted and largemouth bass were collected during the summer in Dogleg Riffle at Station 3. TOY spotted bass were more abundant than Y0? largemouth bass (Table 5). TOT white crappie were not collected. Sunfishes collected included bluegill, longear sunfish, and green x longear sunfish hybrids (Tables 6 through 9). Rou h Fishes: Rough fish were not considered problematic. Smallmouth buffalo were the most frequently collected rough fish (Tables 6 through 9: Fig. 15). Less common were carp and river carpsucker. Golden redhorse were captured during February. In general, our data indicated a single-species (channel catfish) sport fishery in this segment of the Brazos River. The reduction of habitat caused by low stream flow, and extreme fluctuation in water temperature can limit the abundance of many sport fish species (Neel 1963, Hubbs 19?2, and Nalburg et a1. 1981). Certainly forage did not appear to be a problem since this portion of the river contained an abundance of minnows and insect larvae (Cloud and Stewart 19?4a and l9?4b and Eimmerman et a1. 1980). Seasonal and flow—induced immigration of white and striped bass, and the introduction of catchable rainbow trout in the tailrace below Morris Sheppard Dam during November - March, provides a temporary enhancement to the fishery. However, we feel the existing sport fishery should be permanently enhanced to provide _year-round fishing. Public Access and Facilities Public access to this section of the Brazos River is limited to a 1 mi portion of the river between Morris Sheppard Dam and the Texas Highway 16 bridge and the FM 4 bridge crossing. There are numerous private access points and access can be gained in many cases with permission of the land owner. The only facility is a small camp area with toilets provided by the Brazos River Authority immediately below the Morris Sheppard Dam. Canoe and float trip enthusiasts utilize the river frequently between March and October. Heavy use of the area near the Texas Highway 16 bridge coincides with our ”put-and- take” rainbow trout program. Although trash recepticals are provided near the highway 16 bridge access, toilet facilities are not available. Throughout the year other anglers utilize the tailrace and the large pool adjacent the Possum Kingdom State Fish Hatchery, especially for white bass and striped bass. Fisherman Information Due to the "put—and—take" rainbow trout fishery and the use of the Brazos River by canoeists and float trip enthusiasts, the recreational and fishing opportun- ities on the river are well known within a lDD-mi radius. Dallas-Fort North Metroplex and local news papers publicize angler catches and rainbow trout stocking. Fish Harvest Regulations Changes in fish harvest regulations in this section of the Brazos River are not needed. MANAGEMENT RECOMMENDATIDNS Physicochemical Characteristics To alleviate the abrupt temperature changes and the high water level fluctuation in the study area, minimum flow should be increased (Table 12). According to Lyons (1939) recommended monthly minimum flow in this section of th Brazos River (0.3.8.5. Station No. 08089000, at FM 4, Palo Pinto County, Texas should vary from 42-403 cfs with maximum flow occurring May-September. Our recommended monthly minimum instantaneous flow (discharge) at the Morris Sheppard Dam (Table 12) is based on an average between an upstream monthly minimum instantaneous flow and a downstream monthly minimum instantaneous flow. This average flow was selected to compensate for non—recorded inflow from tributaries between the 0.3.8.5. gaging station at South Bend, Texas and Morris Sheppard Dam, and for the influence of runoff from tributaries between the dam and the U.S.G.S. gaging station at FM 4. Fish Habitat An increase in monthly minimum instantaneous flow (Table 12) in this section of the Brazos River would allow for increased sport fish production by reclaiming all or a portion of the estimated 49 percent of the stream course dewatered during low flow (i20cfs)..At the recommended flows an estimated 85 to 100 percent of the stream course would be watered most of the time, as opposed to 51 percent under current flow regimes (1918-1981). Fish Community The sport fishery in this section of the Brazos River would be enhanced through the implementation of recommended flow regimes. Additionally, the introduction of smallmouth bass would further enhance the fishery through increased species diversity. Smallmouth bass prefer a stream with a gravel or rocky bottom, clear, cool water, riffles, boulders, and pools over 4-ft deep (Emig 1966). In spite of extreme fluctuations in water temperature, this section of the river meets most of these requirements. Smallmouth bass might prove more suitable than native black basses to the existing environment. Because of increased utilization and public interest, the annual rainbow trout ”put—andwtake“ stocking Program should be continued. Public Access and Facilities Existing access and facilities are generally adequate for present public usage, however, chemical toilets should be installed at the high use area near the Texas Highway 16 bridge. Fisherman Information Fisherman information should be publicized through local and Dallas-Fort North Metroplex newspapers. Fish Harvest Regulations Existing fishing regulations are adequate at this time; therefore, no recommendations are made.