TPWD 1960 F-5-R-7 #542: Basic Survey and Inventory of Species, as Well as Their Distribution in the Clear Fork of the Brazos River in Region 3-B, Texas

--- Page 1 --- Report of Fisheries Investigations Basic Survey and Inventory of Species, as Well as Their Distribution in the Clear Fork of the Brazos River in Region 3-B, Texas by James Wilcox Assistant Project Leader Dingell-Johnson Project F-5-R-7, Job B-16 April 16, 1958 - March 31, 1960 H. D. Dodgen - Executive Secretary Texas Game and Fish Commission Austin, Texas Marion Toole Kenneth C. Jurgens & William H. Brow Coordinator Assistant Coordinators --- Page 2 --- ABSTRACT A total of 152 gill nets were set and 39 seining collections were made to collect 9,023 specimens of fish representing 31 species from the Clear Fork of the Brazos River and its watershed. Desirable game fish populations were found to be exceedingly scarce in the river but more abundant in lakes on the water- shed. Redhorse shiners (Notropis lutrensis) and stunted sunfish were found to be the most numerous species in the river while gizzard shad (Dorosoma cepedianum), channel catfish (Ictalurus punctatus), and small white crappie (Pomoxis annularis) were found to be very prevalent in the lakes on the watershed. The principal fisheries problems were, in general, found to be excessive populations of gizzard shad, river carpsucker (Carpiodes carpio) and stunted crappie and sunfish and widespread salt water pollution emitting from oil wells, which has apparently reduced considerably, or completely eliminated game fish populations in several local~ ities. --- Page 3 --- Job Completion Report Ly] = — — gj r— ‘inlay State of TEXAS Project No. P-5-R-7T Name: Fisheries Investigations and Surveys of the Waters of Region 3-B. Job No. B=16 Title: Basic Survey and Inventory of Species as Well as Their Distribution in the Clear Fork of the Brazos River in Region 3-B, Texas Period Covered: April 16, 1958 - March 31, 1960 OBJECTIVES To gather fundamental data on the above waters in regard to their physical, chemical, and biological aspects and to determine the distribution of the species present, their relative abundance: and the ecological factors influencing their distribution. PROCEDURE The Clear Fork of the Brazos River and its watershed was divided into upper and lower regions on the basis of its physical and botanical aspects. All physi- Cal, chemical and biological data were organized and analyzed in relation to the location from which they were collected. A total of 152 nets were set and 39 seining collections were made on the complete watershed. Of this total 134 netting collections and 32 seining collections were made in the region designated as the upper watershed and 18 netting collections and 7 seining collections were made in the region designated as the lower watershed. A greater number of netting and seining collections were made in the upper region than in the lower region because in the upper region there were more lakes to set nets in and more water suitable for seining. Altogether there were 29 seining collections taken from the river, 5 seining collections taken from tributaries to the river and 5 seining collections taken from lakes on the watershed. There were 12 netting collections taken from the river and 140 nets were set in lakes on the watershed. Netting was impossible in the river's tributaries due to shallow water and narrow creek beds. Some of the netting collections from lakes were obtained in conjunction with other Dingell- Johnson work. The nets used were experimental type gill nets, 125 feet long and & feet deep with five 25-foot sections of webbing ranging from l-inch to 3-inch square mesh. Five types of seines were employed in making seine collections. They included a 12' X k* commonsense seine, a 20' X 6° commonsense seine, a 30' X 6' bag seine with ¢-inch mesh, a nylon straight seine measuring 50' X 6! with +-inch mesh, and a nylon straight seine measuring 100' X 6' with $-inch mesh. --- Page 4 --- Specimens collected by seining were taken to the laboratory for identification and study. Samples of each species were preserved in 4 10 percent formalin solution. Specimens collected by netting were examined in the field for stomach contents and sexual development and were weighed and measured in order to obtain growth and condition information. All data collected was recorded on fish collections forms in the field and later combined and tabulated in the office. Temperature, pH, and turbidity was recorded at every third station. Water samples were also collected but it was found that reasonably extensive water analyses data were available by combining records obtained from the Texas Board of Water Engineers, the Texas Health Department and the United States Geological Survey. Physical and botanical observations were also made at various netting and seining localities during the course of the survey. No rotenone treatment of pools was attempted on the river or tributaries because of flowing water or the danger of flowing water in case of rain. It was feared that this flowing water would cause fish eradication on private property where permission had not been obtained to conduct such work. FINDINGS Although the division of the Clear Fork of the Brazos River into upper and lower regions was done on the basis of the physical and botanical characteristics found in each region, the exact line that was selected to divide the two areas. had to be chosen in a more or less arbitrary manner. No sharp line of topographical change exists, although there is a definite change in the topography and ecological aspects of the upper and lower regions. The most logical place to divide the water- shed was found to be at the Leuders Dam which is located almost on the county line between Jones and Shackelford Counties. This line extends upward between Haskell and Throckmorton Counties and downward between Taylor and Callahan Counties. Using these county lines as a division point between the upper and lower watershed of the Clear Fork of the Brazos River, Haskell, Jones, Taylor, Fisher, Nolan, and Scurry Counties are in the upper region. Throckmorton, Shackelford, Callahan, Young, Stephens, and Eastland Counties are in the lower region. Physical Characteristics Upper watershed ~ The Clear Fork of the Brazos River arises in the south- eastern part of Scurry County from a series of small springs which flow sporadically and only in periods of heavy moisture. The river in this area is actually more like a creek, dry much of the time with shallow banks and a narrow bed. Permian red soils prevail in this area and much ef the land is in cultivation. When the river flows in this area, it usually contains much red and brown colloidal sus-~ pension. As the stream progresses through Fisher and Jones Counties a muitituce of creeks, many of which arise in Nolan and Taylor Counties, are added to the water- shed. This additional drainage area tends to create a more permanent stream, with wider banks and greater flow in the eastern part of the upper Clear Fork of the Brazos River watershed. This terrain is also for the most part flat cultivated land but contains more rolling pasture in the eastern areas. At Nugent, which is the eastern extremity of the upper region, average annual runoff figures for a period of 30.6 years equalled 91,770 acre feet. The minimum flow recorded during this period was 7,830 acre feet and the maximum flow recorded was 518,000 acre feet. --- Page 5 --- Lower watershed = The Clear Fork of the Brazos River below the Leuders Dam is a wider, deeper stream bed that often contains flowing water. The stream bed is primarily packed sand with limestone projections and there are many large trees along the banks. The water in this region is usually very clear and the stream is more deserving of its name as it continues further east. The vegetative cover on the black and gray soils of this region, the permanence of water, and the presence of many farm tanks and ponds are probably the main reasons for the less turbid waters of the area. The terrain in the lower watershed consists mainly of undulating pasture, and ranching is the chief land use. At Fort Griffin, near the eastern extremity of the lower region, the average annual runoff figures for a period of 30.8 years equalled 173,300 acre-feet. The minimum flow recorded during this period was 6,370 acre feet and the maximum flow recorded was 711,000 acre-feet. Aquatic and Shoreline Vegetation Upper watershed - Aquatic vegetation in the upper region is limited to various forms of algae and a few patches of bulrushes (Scirpus ), which are located near the eastern extremity, above the Leuders Dam. Shoreline vegetation is likewise limited. Mesquite is common and willows, hackberries, chinaberries and pecans are widely scattered at various iocations along the upper watershed. Sunflowers, and various weeds and grasses are the principal shoreline vegetative types. Lower watershed - Besides various types of algae, the principal types of aquatic vegetation in the lower region appear to be muskgrass (Chara) and coontail (Cerato- phyllum ). The shoreline supports a profuse vegetation with larger mesquites, pecans, hackberries, chinaberries, post oaks, and willows being the more common trees. Various grasses, vines, and brambles are also abundant. Pollution and Water Quality Because pollution and bad water quality occur in scattered areas in the water- shed, according tc where sources of pollution exist, no attempt will be made to give the results of this investigation according to upper or lower regions. The primary sources of pollution were found to be cil wells. Salt water escaping from these weils and invading the sub-surface water supply or flowing directly out of the ground appears to be the pollutant most seriously affecting the aquatic environment. Chlorides were found to be present up to 43,800 p.p.m. in one artesian spring on the banks of California Cresk. California Creek, which is the main tributary of the Clear Fork of the Brazos River, and the river itself were the only places where water quality and pollution data was obtained. This water quality data was obtained from the Texas Board of Water Engineers, the Texas Health Department, and the United States Geological Survey. Other areas where salt-water pollution was found to exist included the Clear Fork near Roby and near Eliasville, and the Old Hamlin City Lake. Old Hamlin City Lake is apparently devoid of all fish except for some very salt tolerant species. It has been stocked several times with-bass and catfish from the state hatcheries, but evidently these fish have not survived. Effluents going into the river near Leuders have been found to be primarily the washings from a limestone quarry and may even be beneficial to certain species. The largest shad found in any locality along the river were collected near the point where the effluent was being discharged. --- Page 6 --- Figures ay through 50 give a more complete account of the water quality of the Clear Fork of the Brazos River. Insufficient dissolved oxygen was not common and appeared to be a minor fishery problem. The pH values ranged from 7.1 to 8.4, while 7.7 was the average reading. For more specific and complete water quality information, the reader is referred to the above named figures. Fish Populations The results of the netting and seining collections can best be given in the following annotated species list and the fishery charts included in this report. An index to all charts, maps, and pictures is included in this report immediately preceeding the fishery charts. Figure 10 gives a complete summation of seining results, while Figure 39 gives a complete summation of netting results. Fishery information pertaining to more specific areas of the Clear Fork of the Brazos River watershed can be located by referring to the included index. A total of 9,023 specimens of 31 species were collected. These 31 species represented 11 families and 20 genera. Annotated Species List; ~- Lepisosteidae (gars) Lepisosteus osseus (longnose gar). This species is very dominant in some sections of the lower part of the Clear Fork of the Brazos River. Some stretches of stream in the lower area have apparently been practically denuded of small fish by this species. The gars in those sections were observed to be rather poor and on the average, weighed only one pound. In one particular netting location in the lower river, gars were so active and perhaps so ravenous that there were approximately 20 of them in the gill net before the survey crew had it completely set out. There were no gar taken in the upper reaches of the watershed and none collected from lakes in either regions. Thus, considering the whole river, its tributaries, and the lakes on the watershed, gar accounted for only 2.45 percent of the total fish netted. Clupeidae (herrings) Dorosoma cepedianum (gizzard shad}. This species was aboundant in both netting and seining collections composing 9.42 percent of the total seining sample and 23.95 percent of the total netting sample. This was the highest percentage, by number, of any species taken by netting. The river, itself, was particularly heavily infested with this species, with over 35 percent of the fish taken from the river being shad. They were large averaging over 10 ounces, while the shad taken from the lakes averaged only 2.5 ounces. Catostomidae (suckers and buffalofishes) Ictiobus bubalus (smallmouth buffalo). Most netting stations in the river yielded this species, but they were not as prevalent in the lakes. This species has a high commercial value and is netted commercially in Lake Fort Phantom Hill. The difficulty of access and netting in the holes in the river, where the majority of this species exist, prevents a more wide-scale commercial utilization of these fish --- Page 7 --- from the Clear Fork of the Brazos. Carpiodes carpio (river carpsucker). This is the dominant sucker in nearly all West Texas waters. They were taken both by net and seine and were widely dis- tributed throughout the watershed. The presence of this species constitutes a serious fishery problem in some lakes on the Clear Fork of the Brazos River drainage, especially since no utilization of the species by either man or fish has been ob- served. . Cyprinidae (shiners and minnows) Cyprinus carpio (carp). This species is sub-dominant to the river carpsucker but does constitute a fishery problem in lakes where it occurs. Carp have more utility than river carpsuckers and they are becoming more and more fished for in many West Texas lakes because of their large size, tremendous strength, and willingness to fight when caught. , Notemigonus crysoleucas (golden shiner). Although this species was taken by net and seine, it was taken only from lakes. It is not believed to be native in the Clear Fork of the Brazos River, or its watershed, but is known to have been introduced as a forage fish by the state fish hatcheries, Notropis lutrensis (redhorse shiner). This is the dominant shiner in the Clear Fork of the Brazos River and its tributaries. They constituted over 44 percent of the fish taken by seining for the whole watershed. These minnows are particularly abundant in the sporadic, intermittent streams of the upper part of the Clear Fork. Notropis volucellus (mimic shiner). Only nine specimans of this species were collected from the complete watershed. They were collected from a number of different types of habitats, but were always in very much of a minority. Five were collected from lakes and four were collected from the river and they were taken from both the upper and lower watersheds. Notropis buchanani (ghédst shiner). Only two specimens of this species were collected. These collections indicated that the fish prefers running, muddy waters. Pimephales vigilax (parrot minnow). Nearly all of the 149 individuals of this species collected were taken in the bigger waters of the middle and lower reaches of the river. Some localities in the lower river were saturated with these minnows. While taking a collection from the Pitt Taylor Ranch, in the lower river, thousands of these minnows were observed trying to swim up stream into the water pouring over a small dam. Pimephales promelas (fathead minnow). This species was found in abundance in the upper reaches of the river and appears to be dominant over the parrot minnow in this area while the trend is apparently reversed in the lower river. Ameiuridae (freshwater catfishes) Ictalurus punctatus (channel catfish). Only occasional specimens of this fish were obtained by seining and netting in the river and its tributaries. The species was very abundant in netting collections taken from the lakes and composed almost 23 percent of the number and almost 4% percent of the weight of the total netting --- Page 8 --- sample. This fish is very much sought after by West Texas anglers and is frequently stocked from the state fish hatcheries. Ictalurus melas (black bullhead). This species was taken by net and seine from both the river and the lakes. It appears to be more abundant in some of the smaller lakes, which apparently have no flathead catfish, than in any other waters. Ictalurus natalis (yellow bullhead). This species appears to be more prevalent in the river than in the lakes and was very much outnumbered in the fish collections taken from the lakes by the black bullhead. Pylodictus olivaris (flathead catfish). This very desirable food fish is much sought after by anglers and apparently serves as an effective bullhead control in lakes where it occurs. Only four specimens of this species were collected, but this is attributed to a fault in the means of sampling (ie. the small meshes of the nets used are not effective in capturing this species) and to the probability that these fish lie on the bottom in a lethargic state for long periods of time. These fish are known to be taken by anglers in several of the lakes on the Clear Fork of the Brazos River watershed where they were not taken in the fish collections. Cyprinodontidae (killifishes and topminnows ) Fundulus notatus (blackstripe topminnow). The only locality in which this topminnow was seined was a tributary of the lower part of the river. Fundulus kansae (plains killifish). This species was collected from the Old Hamlin City Lake which contains large amounts of chlorides which are believed to be the results of nearby oil wells. The killifish was not taken from any other locality. Cyprinodon rubrofluviatilis (Red River pupfish). This species appears to be the dominant fish in the Old Hamlin City Lake where the water is too salty for most other species and was collected only from this locality. Poecilliidae (mosquitofishes) Gambusia affinis (mosquitofish). The mosquitofish is common in backwater sloughs and quiet pools throughout the watershed. They were the second most common fish in the seining collections, and are considered to be very desirable to man because of their practice of eating mosquitos. Serranidae (basses) Rocecus chrysops (white bass). This species is not indigenous to the Clear Fork, but has been introduced in some of the lakes on the watershed. Although not many of these fish were collected, Fort Phantom Hill Lake is known to have a large population. Centrarchidae (black basses and sunfishes) Micropterus salmoides (largemouth bass). The evasive nature of these fish makes them difficult to capture in nets and seines. It is therefore difficult to arrive at an accurate estimate of their occurrence. The data collected would --- Page 9 --- indicate, however, that they are much more common in some of the lakes than they are in the river. Chaenobryttus gulosus (warmouth bass). One fish of this species was taken from Lake Daniels on the lower Clear Fork watershed. These fish are often stocked by the state fish hatcheries. Lepomis cyanellus (green sunfish). This sunfish is common throughout the watershed and is a desirable species to the angler when it attains a reasonable size. However, very few of these sunfish collected were large enough to be fished for and some individuals, only 2-inches long, were full grow, sexually ripe, fish. Lepomis microlophus (redear sunfish). This is one sunfish that generally attains a desirable size in West Texas waters. Only a few individuals of this species were collected. These were probably present because of hatchery stocking and very likely not native to the stream. Lepomis macrochirus (bluegill). This is the dominant sunfish in the Clear Fork of the Brazos drainage and was abundant both in lakes and in the river. None of these fish were of a desirable size, probably due to overpopulation. Some individuals were sexually mature at a length of two inches. Lepomis humilis (orangespotted sunfish). Even under ideal conditions these sunfish do not attain a very desirable size, and all of the individuals collected from the Clear Fork were extremely small. This species is apparently subordinate to the other native sunfish. Lepomis megalotis (longear sunfish). This is one of the more dominant sunfish species in the Clear Fork. They appear to prefer running stream areas, but were very abundant in the upper reaches of the river whether the water was running or was standing in pools. These fish, like the other species of sunfish, appeared to be stunted. , Pomoxis annularis (white crappie). Practically all the bigger waters of the Clear Fork and its watershed contained white crappie. They were particularly abundant in the lakes. However, not many were collected that were a desirable size. Pomoxis nigromaculatus (black crappie). Two specimens of this species were taken from Lake Sweetwater. They were very large crappie and in very good condition. It is nearly certain, however, that these fish were stocked in that reservoir and are not indigenous to the watershed. Percidae (perches and darters ) Percina caprodes (logperch}. This apparently unimportant species was collected only from Lake Trammell on the Clear Fork of the Brazos River watershed. Since this fish is hard to collect by seining, it is possible that this was present in some of the other seining localities but missed, Sciaenidae (croakers, drum, and weakfishes) Aplodinotus grunniens (freshwater drum). This species was taken from only --- Page 10 --- two lakes on the watershed. These fish are apparently hard to sample by the use of seines and gill nets as very few have been collected in lakes that are thought to have relatively high populations. , Prepared by James Wilcox Approved by Z [ech ape St Y Assistant Project Leader Director Inland Fisheries Division Date August 8, 1960 --- Page 11 --- AN INDEX TO CHARTS, MAPS, AND PICTURES IN THIS REPORT I. Fish Collection Charts and Maps Figure A. Seining: Master list of seining locations .............. 1 1. Complete upper watershed a a a) a. collections from the river ....... a 8 see ‘ 3 b. collection from tributaries ....... 4 ce. collection from lakes .......... 5 2. Complete lower watershed... ...... 2.0. eee eeeeee 6 a. collections from the river. ........0.8.28 28 eee eae 7 b. collections from tributaries ..........e.4..¢ 8 9 ec. collection from lakes . . see ew oe ew 3. Complete upper and lower watersheds ‘geubinad eee ee ee we we ow @ LO a. collections from the river ............4.2..6.66.2. 212 b. collections from tributaries ...............4.. 12 ec. collections from lakes ... 7. » 13 d. a comparison of upper and Lower paterehadia fish populations: » 14 B. Netting: Master list of netting locations ... «ee o's « « 15 1. Complete upper watershed - summary of net sclleckions eae a» w» 16 a. collections from the river ............2..80 8888 17 (1) Doty ranch. 2... . ee. eee eee ee 18 (2) Davis ranch ..... . ee et te 19 b. collection from lakes ...........2...0.0.808088484 20 (3) Old Anson Lake. 2... 1... ee ee ee eee BL (4) New Anson lake... . 1... ee eee ee ee BO (5) Old Hamlin lake... .........0.008008084 23 (6) New Hamlin Lake. . 2... Le ee ee ee ee ee. (7) Lake Trammell 2... 1... ee ee te ee 25 (8) Lake Sweetwater... 2. ee eee eee ee ee BE (9) Lake Abilene... 2... ee 27 (10) Lake Kirby... rr | (11) Lake Fort Phantom Hill... .- sade wg BD 2. Complete lower watershed - summary of net collections * 2 exe's g 30 a. collections from the river .......4.4.684808 ee ee se 31 (12) Putnam ranch... . 1. wee te te te tt 32 (13) Ledbetter ranch... 0... ee ee ee ee ee tt, 33 (14) Taylor ranch... . 2... 2... eee ee ee ew ele 3h (15) Price ranch... . ee ee ee ee tt kt tk 35 b. collections from lakes... .. 2... . 2... eee eee es 36 (16) Lake McCarthy... .......-. 0005 e e ee eee 37 (17) Lake Daniels ...... . . 38 3. Complete upper and lower watersheds aounined - “Sumneey “of set collections ... a a 1] a. collections Fron ihe wiver oo Fe Ba we we we ewe ee ee we s w 6 YO b. collections from lakes .... oe » 4l c. a comparison of upper and lower ‘waterehed 2 "fish populetdom: - 42 C. Checklist of species... 1... 0.2. ee eee ee ee ewe kw kk 43 --- Page 12 --- 10. AN INDEX TO CHARTS, MAPS, AND PICTURES IN THIS REPORT (Continued ) II. Water Quality Charts and Maps Figure A. Chemical analysis at various stations on a yearly average basis... yy B. Chemical analysis at various stations on a monthly basis 1. State Highway 70, north of Roby... 1... ee eee ee ee ew AG 2. U. S. Highway 380 at Leuders ... te ee ww ew ww ew HG 3. Farm road crossing 701, east of Eliasville ace ee ee oo a | OF 4. U. S. Highway 283 at Fort Griffin. ........-4...4.2.2... 48 C. Individual chemical analysis in suspected pollution areas 1. California Creek in the Avoca oil fields ............ 49 2. The Hamlin Lakes ..... 21 © © © © © © ee © © © ew ow ew ew we ew e) 50 III. Pictures A. Dry bed of the Clear Fork of the Brazos River near its extreme upper limit in far western Fisher County. . « OL B. Intermittent stream area of the Clear Fork of “the Heacon River in western Fisher County ..... . . 52 C. Pool on the intermittent stream area “of the Clear Fork of the Brazos River in Fisher County... . . « # » ~ 2 « 53 D. Semi-permanent water of the Clear ‘Fork of the ‘Brazos River in eastern Jones County. . . . 2 ee 54 E. Confluence of Cottonwood Creek aud the Clear Fork of the Brazos River above the Leuders Dam in eastern Jones County. . » «2 » 59 F. Patches of bullrushes above Leuders Dam in eastern Jones "county . . . 56 G. The Leuders Dam on the Clear Fork of the Brazos River near iain Texas, in eastern Jones County ...... - « OF H. The dam at Eliasville, Texas, on the lower reaches of “the ‘Clear Fork of the Brazos River in southern Young County .......... 58 IV. Map showing locations of seining, netting, and water sampling stations . 59 --- Page 13 --- dikes Figure 1. - Master list of seining locations showing dates when seining was 10. LL. 12. 13. 14. 15. 16. done at each station. Seining locations on upper Clear Fork of the Brazos River * Springs on A. R. Willingham Ranch in southeastern Scurry County July 18, 1958 Sterling Willingham Ranch in southwestern Fisher County July 18, 1958 Nettleton Ranch in western Fisher County July 18, 1958 Noles Ranch in northwestern Fisher County July 19, 1958 Dirt road crossing in north central Fisher County July 19, 1958 Highway 70 crossing north of Roby in Fisher County July 19, 1958 and June 22, 1959 Roy Eaton Ranch in northeastern Fisher County July 24, 1958 J. R. Murff Ranch in northeastern Fisher County July 24, 1958 Cecil Edward Ranch in eastern Fisher County July 24, 1958 Carriker Ranch in eastern Fisher County July 24, 1958 Highway 180 crossing east of Roby in Fisher County July 24, 1958 and June 22, 1959 Turner Ranch in eastern Fisher County July 24, 1958 and June 22, 1959 Highway 57 crossing in eastern Fisher County June 22, 1959 Dirt road crossing in southwestern Jones County July 24, 1958 Farm Road 126 crossing in southwestern Jones County July 24, 1958 Dirt road crossing in southwestern Jones County July 24, 1958 --- Page 14 --- le. Figure 1. - Master list of seining locations showing dates when seining was done at each station - continued Seining locations on upper Clear Fork of the Brazos River * 17. Farm Road 707 crossing at Truby, Texas, in Jones County July 24, 1958 18. Highway 277, 83 crossing southeast of Anson in Jones County July 23, 1958 19. Williams Ranch near Nugent, Texas, in Jones County July 24, 1958 and June 23, 1959 20. Mack Doty Ranch near Nugent in Jones County January 15, 1959 and June 23, 1959 Seining locations on tributaries of the upper Clear Fork of the Brazos River 21. Highway 277, 83 crossing on Mulberry Creek southeast of Anson in Jones County , July 23, 1958 22. Farm Road 1193 crossing of Elm Creek south of Nugent in Jones County July 24, 1958 and June 23, 1959 Lakes on the upper Clear Fork of the Brazos River and its watershed where seining was done 23. New Hamlin Lake in Jones County October 17, 1958 24. Old Hamlin Lake in Jones County October 17, 1958 25. Lake Trammell in Nolan County June 4, 1958 and August 19, 1959 26. Lake Kirby in Taylor County July 15,1959 and October 15, 1959 Seining locations on the lower Clear Fork of the Brazos River 27. Ed Davis Ranch below Leuders Dam in Jones County March 10, 1959 28. J.C. Putnam Ranch in southwest Throckmorton County March 11, 1959 29. Below Pitt Taylor Dam in Stephens County August 26, 1959 --- Page 15 --- 13. Figure 1. - Master list of seining locations showing dates when seining was done at each station - continued 30. Below Crystal Falls Dam in Stephens County August 25, 1959 Seining locations on tributaries of the lower Clear Fork of the Brazos River 31. Dirt road crossing on Salt Prong of Hubbard Creek in Shackelford County October 29, 1958 32. Highway 283 crossing on Mills Creek in Shackelford County August 25, 1959 Lakes on the lower Clear Fork of the Brazos River and its watershed where seining was done 33. Lake McCarthy near Albany in Shackelford County October 29, 1958 * The Brazos River Watershed in arbitrarily divided into upper and lower regions by the Leuders Dam. --- Page 16 --- 14. Figure 2. - Results of seining collections from the upper Clear Fork of the Brazos River, its tributaries, and lakes on its watershed from April 16, 1958 through March 31, 1960 Species Number Percent of number Gizzard shad 485 10.93 River carpsuckers 60 1.35 Carp 30 0.68 Golden shiner 9 0.20 Redhorse shiner 1,838 41.43 Mimic shiner 6 0.14 Ghost shiner 2 0.04 Parrot minnow 39 0.88 Fathead minnow 369 8.32 Channel catfish 37 0.84 Black bullhead 20 0.45 Yellow bullhead he 0.94 Plains killifish 85 1.92 Red River pupfish | 160 3.61 Mosquitof ish 564 12.71 Largemouth bass 31 0.70 Green sunfish 132 2.97 Redear sunfish 6 0.14 Bluegill 269 6.06 Orangespotted sunfish 46 1.04 Longear sunfish 139 3.13 White crappie 61 1.38 Logperch 6 0.14 Totals 4 436 100.00 --- Page 17 --- 15. Figure 3. - Results of seining collections from the upper Clear Fork of the Brazos River from April 16, 1958 through March 31, 1960 Species Number Percent of number Gizzard shad 3 0.10 River carpsucker 19 0.64 Redhorse shiners 1,699 7199 Mimic shiner 1 0.04 Ghost shiner 1 0.04 Parrot minnow 18 0.61 Fathead minnow 369 12.50 Channel catfish iL 0.37 Black bullhead 12 0.41 Yellow bullhead 7) 1.42 Mosquitofish 413 14.00 Largemouth bass 1 0.04 Green sunfish 111 3.76 Redear sunfish 3 0.10 Bluegill 102 3.46 Orangespotted sunfish 16 0.54 Longear sunfish 129 4,38 Totals 2,950 100.00 --- Page 18 --- 16. Figure 4. - Results of seining collections from tributaries of the upper Clear Fork of the Brazos River from April 16, 1958 through March 31, 1960 Species Number Percent of number Gizzard shad he 35.00 Carp h 3.33 Redhorse shiner 28 23.34 Ghost shiner 1 0.83 Channel catfish 1 0.83 Black bullheads 4 3.33 Mosquitof ish 26 21.67 Largemouth bass 1 0.83 Green sunfish 3 2.50 Longear sunfish 10 8.34 Totals 120 100.00 --- Page 19 --- 17. Figure 5. - Results of seining collections from the lakes on the upper Clear Fork of the Brazos River and its watershed from April 16, 1958 through March 31, 1960 Species Number Percent of number Gizzard shad hho 32.21 River carpsucker Ta 3.00 Carp 26 1.90 Golden shiner 9 0.66 Redhorse shiner 111 8.13 Mimic shiner 5 0.36 Parrot minnow 21 1.54 Channel catfish 25 1.83 Black bullhead 4 0.29 Plains killifish 85 6.22 Red River pupfish 160 11.72 Mosquitofish 125 9.15 Largemouth bass 29 2.12 Green sunfish 18 1.32 Redear sunfish 3 0.22 Bluegill 167 12.22 Orangespotted sunfish 30 2.20 White crappie 61 447 Logperch 6 0.44 Totals 1, 366 100.00 --- Page 20 --- 18. Figure 6. - Results of seining collections from the lower Clear Fork of the Brazos River, its tributaries, and lakes on its watershed from April 16, 1958 through March 31, 1960 Species Number Percent of number Longnose gar 1 0.11 Gizzard shad 12 1.42 Redhorse shiner 491 58.11 Mimic shiner 3 0.36 Parrot minnow 110 13.01 Fathead minnow 17 2.01 Channel catfish 6 0.71 Blackstripe topminnow 15 1.78 Mosquitofish 76 8.99 Largemouth bass 9 1.07 Green sunfish 14 1.66 Bluegills 73 8.63 Orangespotted sunfish 10 1.19 Longear sunfish 8 0.95 Totals 845 100.00 --- Page 21 --- 19. Figure 7. - Results of seining collections from the lower Clear Fork of the Brazos River from April 16, 1958 through March 31, 1960 Species Number Percent of number Longnose gar 1 0.15 Gizzard shad 12 1.92 Redhorse shiner 447 70.45 Mimic shiner 3 0.47 Parrot minnow 110 17.57 Fathead minnow 2 0.32 Channel catfish 6 0.96 Mosquitofish 21 3.36 Green sunfish 3 0.48 Bluegill 21 3.36 Longear sunfish 6 0.96 Totals 626 100.00 --- Page 22 --- 20. Figure 8. - Results of seining collections from the tributaries of the lower Clear Fork of the Brazos River from April 16, 1958 through March 31, 1960 Species Number Percent of number Redhorse shiner 50 29.77 Fathead minnow 15 8.92 Blackstripe topminnow 15 8.92 Mosquitofish 50 29.77 Largemouth bass 4 2.38 Green sunfish 11 6.54 Longear sunfish 1 0.60 Bluegill 22 13.10 Totals 168 100.00 --- Page 23 --- 21» Figure 9. - Results of seining collections from lakes on the lower Clear Fork of the Brazos River, and its watershed, from April 16, 1958 through March 31, 1960 Species Number Percent of number Mosquitofish 5 9.80 Largemouth bass 5 9.80 Bluegills 30 58.83 Orangespotted sunfish 10 19.60 Longear sunfish 1 1.97 Totals 51 100.00 --- Page 24 --- 22. Figure 10. - Results of seining collections from the Clear Fork of the Brazos River, its tributaries, and lakes on its watershed from April 16, 1958 — March 31, 1960 Species Number Percent of number Longnose gar 1 0.01 Gizzard shad 97 9.42 River carpsucker 60 1.13 Carp 30 0.57 Golden shiner 9 0.17 Redhorse shiner 2,329 hh 10 Mimic shiner 9 0.17 Ghost shiner 2 0.04 Parrot minnow 149 2.82 Fathead minnow 386 7.31 Channel catfish 43 0.81 Blackstripe topminnows 15 0.29 Black bullhead 20 0.38 Yellow bullhead he 0.79 Plains killifish 85 1.61 Red River pupfish 160 3.03 Mosquitofish 640 2.2 Largemouth bass ho 0.76 Green sunfish 146 2.76 Redear sunfish 6 0.12 Bluegill 342 6.47 Orangespotted sunfish 56 1.06 Longear sunfish 147 2.79 White crappie 61 1.15 Logperch 6 0.12 Totals 5,281 100.00 --- Page 25 --- 23% Figure ll. ~ Results of seining collections from the Clear Fork of the Brazos River from April 16, 1958 through March 31, 1960 Species Number Percent of number Longnose gar L 0.03 Gizzard shad 15 O.41 River carpsucker 19 0.53 Redhorse shiner 2,140 59.85 Mimic shiner rn 0.11 Ghost shiner 1 0.03 Parrot minnow 128 3.58 Fathead minnow 371 10.37 Channel catfish 17 0.48 Black bullhead 12 0.33 Yellow bullhead he 1.18 Mosquitofish 434 12.13 Largemouth bass 1 0.03 Green sunfish 114 3.19 Redear sunfish 3 0.08 Bluegill 123 3.44 Orangespotted sunfish 16 0.45 Longear sunfish 135 3.78 Total 3,576 100.00 --- Page 26 --- 2k. Figure 12. - Results of seining collections from the tributaries of the Clear Fork of the Brazos River from April 16, 1958 through March 31, 1960 Species Number Percent of number Gizzard shad he 14.58 Carp 4 1.39 Redhorse shiner 78 27.07 Ghost shiner 1 0.35 Fathead minnow | 15 5.21 Blackstripe topminnow 15 5.21 Channel catfish 1 0.35 Black bullheads 4 1.39 Mosquitof ish 76 26.39 Largemouth bass 5 1.74 Green sunfish 14 4.86 Bluegill 22 7.64 Longear sunfish 11 3.82 Totals 288. 100.00 --- Page 27 --- 25. Figure 13. - Results of seining collections from lakes on the Clear Fork of the Brazos River watershed from April 16, 1958 through March 31, 1960 Species Number Percent of number Gizzard shad 4ho 31.05 River carpsucker 41 2.89 Carp 26 1.83 Golden shiner 9 0.64 Redhorse shiner 111 7.83 Mimic shiner . 5 0.36 Parrot minnow | 21 1.48 Channel catfish 25 1.76 Black bullhead 4 0.28 Plains killifish 85 6.00 Red River pupfish 160 11.29 Mosquitefiah 130 9.18 Largemouth bass 34 2.40 Green sunfish 18 1.27 Redear sunfish 3 0.21 Bluegills 197 13.90 Orangespotted sunfish IT @) 2.83 Longear sunfish 1 0.07 White crappie 61 4.30 Logperch 6 0.43 Totals 1,417 100.00 --- Page 28 --- 26. Figure 14. - A comparison of the relative abundance of the different species of fish in seining samples collected from the upper Clear Fork of the Brazos River watershed with the relative abundance of the different species of fish in seining samples collected from the lower Clear Fork of the Brazos River watershed during the period from April 16, 1959 through March 31, 1960 * ** Rerare; Cscommon; Asabundant Species Upper watershed Lower watershed ye] Longnose gar Gizzard shad River carpsuckers Carp Golden shiner Redhorse shiner Mimic shiner Ghost shiner Parrot minnow Fathead minnow Channel catfish Black bullhead Yellow bullhead Blackstripe topminnow Plains killifish Red River pupfish Mosquitofish Largemouth bass Green sunfish Redear sunfish Bluegill Orangespotted sunfish Longear sunfish White crappie Logperch 2) 1awaiiwpriiii iy DQAPArPrDADWrPWDWIAQAADADADAPrPA WW! LaagarI AawPr! { %* This chart was compiled on an arbitrary basis with the following factors taken into consideration. (1) percent of each species represented in the total seining collections from the upper or lower watersheds (2) the number of locations where the species was collected ** (1) consideration must be given to the fact that some species are more difficult to collect by seining than are others when analyzing the data herein given (2) consideration must be given to the fact that the shallow waters of the upper watershed was more conducive to seining than were the deep waters of the lower watershed and for that reason some species may have not been collected in the lower watershed that were, in reality, present. (3) consideration must be given to the fact that the Clear Fork of the Brazos River's watershed was divided into upper and lower regions on a sharp line selected on a more or less arbitrary basis and that, in reality, the physical, chemical, and biological characteristics of the upper and lower regions overlap. --- Page 29 --- ai. Figure 15. ~ Master list of netting locations showing dates when netting was done at each station Netting locations on the upper Clear Fork of the Brazos River 1. Mack Doty Ranch near Nugent, Texas, in Jones County January 15, 1959 2. Ed Davis Ranch above Leuders Dam in Jones County March 10, 1959 Netting locations at lakes on the upper Clear Fork of the Brazos River watershed , 3. Old Anson Lake in Jones County December 10, 1958 New Anson Lake in Jones County December 9, 1958 Old Hamlin Lake in Jones County October 17, 1958 New Hamlin Lake in Jones County October 17, 1958 Lake Trammell in Nolan County June 4, 1958; June 5, 1958; August 19, 1958; and November 23, 1959 - cake Sweetwater in Nolan County July 28, 29, 30, 1959 and November 2h, 25, 1959 Lake Abilene in Taylor County June 24, 25, 1958 10. Lake Kirby in Taylor County July 15, 16, 1959; October 15, 1959; and December 3, 1959 ll. Lake Fort Phantom Hill in Jones County April 23, 1959 and July 17, 1959 f oO AN NA ww \oO Netting locations on the lower Clear Fork of the Brazos River 12. J. C. Putnam Ranch in southwest Throckmorton County March 12, 1959 13. Morris Ledbetter Ranch in northeast Shackelford County March 12, 1959 14. Pitt Taylor Ranch in northern Stephens County August 27, 1959 15. WN. G. Price Ranch near Eliasville, Texas, in Young County February 18, 1959 Netting locations at lakes on the lower Clear Fork of the Brazos River watershed 16. Lake McCarthy near Albany, Texas, in Shackelford County October 30, 1958 17. Lake Daniels in Stephens County February 19, 1959 and June 12, 1959 --- Page 30 --- Figure 16. - Summary of netting collections in the upper Clear Fork of the Brazos River and lakes on its watershed from April 16, 1958 through March 31, 1960 Species Number Percent Total weight Average weight Percent Average by number lbs. OZS. lbs. OZS. by weight KN Gizzard shad 848 25.41 167 11 3.16 7.00 2.06 Smallmouth buffalo 48 1.44 122 7 2 8.81 5.70 2.43 River carpsucker 223 6.68 273 10 1 3.63 12.74 2.57 Carp 76 2.28 82 3 1 1.30 3.82 2.40 Golden shiner 85 2.54 14 6 2.71 0.67 1.43 Channel catfish 751 22.51 1,021 10 1 5.77 47.56 1.85 Black bullheads 329 9.86 kT 13 2.33 2.22 2.87 Yellow bullheads 20 0.60 12 8 10.00 0.59 2.42 Flathead catfish 3 0.09 8 12 2 14.67 0.40 1.49 White bass 19 0.57 17 6 14.63 0.81 2.16 Largemouth bass 58 1.73 125 6 2 2.59 5.84 3.22 Green sunfish 1 0.03 5 5.00 0.01 3.19 Redear sunfish 2 0.06 7 3.50 0.02 4 OL Bluegill sunfish 122 3.66 20 12 2.72 0.97 4 88 Longear sunfish 1 0.037 13 13.00 0.04 4.65 White crappie 748 22.42 230 3 4.92 10.71 3.29 Black crappie 2 0.06 1 8 12.00 0.07 2.95 Freshwater drum 1 0.03 9 9.00 0.03 2.49 Total 3,337 100.00 2,148 5 100.00 --- Page 31 --- Figure 17. - Netting collections from the u March 31, 1960 Species Gizzard shad Smallmouth buffalo River carpsucker Channel catfish Black bullheads Largemouth bass Green sunfish Bluegill sunfish White crappie Totals Number 66 10 12 ll 114 Percent of number 57.89 8.77 10.53 0.88 4,38 2.63 0.88 4.39 9.65 100.00 29. Total weight los. 43 22 il ou OZS. 14 13 10 Average weight los. OZS. 10.64 2 3.50 15.08 4 13.00 11.20 2 0.67 5.00 2.60 2.36 Percent of weight 46.39 23.47 11.96 909 3.70 6.48 0.33 0.86 1.72 100.00 pper Clear Fork of the Brazos River from April 16, 1958 through Average Tad 3.47 3229 2.48 2.26 2.33 2.82 3.19 4.88 3.05 --- Page 32 --- d. Figure 18. - Results of one net at netting station No. 1 on the Mack Doty Ranch in Jones County, in the upper Clear Fork of the Brazos River during the period from April 16, 1958 through March 31, 1960 Species Number Percent Total weight Average weight Percent Average of number lbs. OZSs. lbs. ozs. of weight "K" Smallmouth buffalo 5 100.00 12 13 2 9 100.00 3.32 Totals 5 100.00 12 13 = = 100.00 -- Hee Figure 19. - Results of three nets at netting station No. 2 on the Ed Davis Ranch in Jones County in the upper Clear Fork of the Brazos River during the period from April 16, 1958 through March 31, 1960 Species Number Percent Total weight Average weight Percent Average of number lbs. O25. lbs. OZs. of weight a Gizzard shad 66 60.55 43 14 10.64 53.79 3.47 Smallmouth buffalo 5 4.58 9 3 1 13.40 11.26 3.25 River carpsucker 12 11,01 11 5 15.08 13.87 2.48 Channel catfish 1 0.92 y 13 4 13.00 5.90 2.26 Black bullheads 5 458 3 8 11.20 4.29 2.33 Largemouth bass 3 2.76 6 2 2 0.67 7.51 2.82 Green sunfish 1 0.92 5 5.00 0.39 3.19 Bluegills 5 4.58 13 2.60 0.99 4.88 White crappie 11 10.10 1 10 2.36 2.00 3.05 Totals 109 100.00 81 9 ; 100.00 --- Page 33 --- Figure 20. - Netting collections from the lakes of the upper Clear Fork of the Brazos River watershe April 16, 1958 through March 31, 1960 Species Gizzard shad Smallmouth buffalo River carpsucker Carp Golden shiners Channel catfish Black bullheads Yellow bullheads Flathead catfish White bass Largemouth bass Redear sunfish Bluegill sunfish Longear sunfish White crappie Black: crappie Freshwater drum Totals Number 782 38 211 76 85 750 324 20 3 19 55 2 117 1 737 2 1 3,223 Percent of number 24.26 1.18 6.54 2.36 2.63 23.27 10.05 0.63 0.09° 0.59 upval 0.07 3.63 0.03 22.86 0.07 0.03 100.00 Total weight OZS « lbs 123 100 262 82 Ly. 1,016 yh 12 8 17 119 19 228 1 2,053 31. ° bh Ww aoe NOM WwW HDvwor«n Pe be O DOWN EO bh iy) PE nD re Average weight lbs. OZS. 2.53 10.21 3.89 1.30 2.71 5.69 2.19 10.00 14.67 14.63 2.69 3.50 2.73 13.00 4.96 12.00 9.00 Percent of weight 6.02 4 88 12.78 4.00 0.70 49.51 2.16 0.61 0.42 0.85 5.80 0.03 0.97 0.04 11.12 0.08 0.03 100.00 d from Average ng 1.94 2.20 2.58 2.40 1.43 1.85 --- Page 34 --- Figure 21. - Results of three nets at netting station No. 3, in Old Anson Lake, in Jones County in the upper Clear Fork of the Brazos River watershed during the period from April 16, 1958 through March 31, 1960 Species River carpsuckers Channel catfish Black bullheads Golden shiners Bluegills White crappie Totals Number LL 25 Percent of number 8.00 4h 00 4.00 8.00 4.00 32.00 100.00 Total weight lbs. OZS. 4 5 14 LO 3 4 3 13 20 6 Average weight OZS » 2.50 3-27 3.00 2.00 3.00 1.63 Percent of weight 21.16 71.78 0.92 1.23 0.92 3.99 100.00 Average Kn 2.87 2.27 2.71 2.51 435 3.64 --- Page 35 --- Figure 22. - Results of three nets at netting station No. 4, New Anson Lake, in Jones County, on the upper Clear Fork of the Brazos River watershed during the period from April 16, 1958 through March 31, 1960 Species Number Percent Total weight Average weight Percent Average of number lbs. OZS. lbs. ozs. of weight "KN River carpsucker 13 7.92 16 10 1 446 16.51 3.00 Channel catfish 91 55.49 15 3 13.22 74.67 2.28 Black bullheads 5 3.05 1 3 3.80 1.18 2.45 Largemouth bass 1 0.61 2 1 2 1.00 2.05 2.57 Longear sunfish 1 0.61 13 13.00 0.81 4.65 White crappie 53 32.32 h 13 1.45 4,78 3.71 Totals 164 100.00 100 11 100.00 --- Page 36 --- 4, Figure 23. - Results of three nets at netting station No. 5, Old Hamlin Lake, in Fisher County, on the upper Clear Fork of the Brazos River watershed during the period from April 16, 1958 through March 31, 1960 Species Number Percent Total weight Average weight Percent Average ' of number lbs. OZS. lbs. OZS. of weight "K" No fish were obtained Ree * Figure 24. - Results of three nets at netting station No. 6, New Hamlin Lake, in Jones County, on the upper Clear Fork of the Brazos River watershed during the period from April 16, 1958 through March 31, 1960 Species Number Percent Total weight Average weight Percent Average of number lbs. OZzSs. lbs. ozs. of weight "K" Channel catfish 5 10.63 14 , 10.76 1.46 Black bullheads 3 6.39 6 2.00 4.62 1.87 Largemouth bass 2 4.25 3 6 1 11.00 41.54 2.55 Golden shiners 2 4.25 5 2.50 3.84 2.16 Bluegills 11 23.40 15 1.36 11.54 3.21 White crappie 2h 51.08 2 4 1.50 27.70 2.75 Totals 7 100.00 8 2 100.00 --- Page 37 --- 35. Figure 25. - Results of twenty-one nets at netting station No. 7 in Lake Trammell, in Nolan County, on the upper Clear Fork of the Brazos River watershed during the period from April 16, 1958 through March 31, 1960 Species Number Percent Total weight Average weight Percent Average of number lbs. ozs. lbs. ozs. of weight "Kn Golden shiner 69 12.47 12 3 2.82 4.93 2.13 Channel catfish 74 13.38 157 k 2 2.00 63.72 1.66 Black bullheads 251 45.39 25 3 1.61 10.20 2.48 Largemouth bass ll 1.99 2g LO 2 11.09 12.00 2.76 Redear sunfish i 0.18 2 2.00 0.05 3.67 Bluegill 62 11.21 11 9 2.98 4.69 3.62 White crappie 85 15.38 10 14 2.04 AL 2.65 Totals 993 100.00 2h6 13 100.00 --- Page 38 --- Figure 26. - Results of forty-one nets at netting station No. 8 in Lake Sweetwater, in Nolan County, on the upper Clear Fork of the Brazos River watershed during the period from April 16, 1957 through March 31, 1960 Species Gizzard shad River carpsuckers Carp Golden shiner Channel catfish Black bullheads Yellow bullheads Largemouth bass Bluegill sunfish White crappie Black crappie Totals Number 598 102 54 8 189 10 20 28 86 1,105 Percent of number 54.11 9.23 4,89 0.72 17.12 0.90 1.81 2.54 0.72 7.78 0.19 100.00 Total weight OZS. lbs. go 141 47 1 2h 12 50 27 a91 14 2 12 oO oon wo 13 13 Average weight lbs. OZS. 2.43 1 6.13 14.15 2.00 1 2.16 5.40 10.00 1 12.75 2.00 DLT 12.00 Percent of weight 15.35 23.85 8.07 0.16 36.26 0.57 2.11 8,51 0.16 4.70 0.26 100.00 Average nye 1.14 2.16 2.52 1.43 1.53 1.96 2.42 2.92 3.87 2.51 2.95 --- Page 39 --- Figure 27. - Results of twenty-eight nets set at nettin the upper Clear Fork of the Brazos River through March 31, 1960 Species Gizzard shad River carpsucker Carp Golden shiners Channel catfish Black bullheads Largemouth bass Redear sunfish Bluegill White crappie Totals Number 26 46 208 54 19 218 585 Percent of number Medd 7.86 0.17 0.69 35.56 9.23 1.37 0.17 3.25 37.26 100.00 37. Total weight lbs. he 372 14 al 118 217 OZS. 13 10 10 il g station No. 9 in Lake Abilene, watershed during the period from April 16, 1958 Average weight lbs. OZS. 1.88 14.61 2 13.00 2.50 1 12.62 4.15 2 10.00 5.00 3-05 8.67 Percent of weight 0.53 7-27 0.48 0.11 64.43 2.42 3.64 0.06 0.62 20.44 100.00 .in:' Taylor County, on Average mn +60 2.15 2.47 1.66 1.74 2.87 4.30 Ol 3.51 3.69 --- Page 40 --- 8, Figure 28. = Results of sixteen nets set at netting station No. 10 in Lake Kirby, in Taylor County, in the upper Clear Fork of the Brazos River watershed during the period from April 16, 1958 through March 31, 1960 Species Number Percent Total weight Average weight Percent Average of number lbs. OZS © lbs. obs. of weight "Kn Gizzard shad 82 24.92 9 12 1.90 7.49 1.49 River carpsucker 11 3.35 3 10 5.27 2.79 2.18 Smallmouth buffalo 1 0.30 1 4 1 4.00 0.96 2.80 Carp 13 3.95 17 a 1 5.23 13 27 2.61 Channel catfish he 12.77 39 14.86 29.98 1.78 Flathead catfish 3 0.91 8 12 2 14.67 6.73 2.50 Largemouth bass 1 0.31 3 2 3 2.00 2.40 2.12 Bluegill sunfish 1 0.31 1 1.00 0.05 2.78 White crappie 175 53.18 7 4 4,32 …