TPWD 1954 F-5-R-1 #65: Inventory of Species Present and Their Distribution in the Middle and South Concho Rivers, Texas

’ STATE m__ Texas _ FRQJECT HG. FMSMle, Job Ewe PERIOD June 22, 1953 m June 12, 1955 Job Completion Report Lawrence Campbell cirLE Inventory of species present and their distribution in those portions of the Mid— " ' . .- . . . We; Ediehand South Concho_Rlvers occuring Within Tom Green, Reagan, Irion and Schleicher -.~...-l.c,«_<<_cww-..~:vee~ ”or - CountiesguTexas. GEQEGTIVES To determine distfiibution of species present, their relative abundance, and the ecological factors influencing their distribution. METEODS Forty~seren seining collections were made at fifteen locations on the South and Middle Goneho watershed. In nearly all collections both 26 ft. i" mesh bag seines and 15 ft. %” mesh common sense seines were used. To estimate relative abundance a count was made of all individuals taken in sixteen collections.' Four collectins were taken in each type stream habitat, and the resulting data analyzed on a seasonal basis. In other collections data pertaining to species distribution only was recorded and in addition to the above equipmentj six ft. and four ft. common sense seines and 1/8" mesh fry aeines were employed. Sixteen gill net collections were made. Experimental nylon gill nets measuring 125 ft. x 8 ft. in depth and made up in five, 25 ft. sections, were set at eight stew tions. jMesh size for these nets increased progressively in each following section at onemhalf inch intervals beginning with l” mesh and terminating with a 3" mesh section. Three rotenone collections were made, one for each stream sub“ division. Data pertaining to numerical and weight percentage was taken for each species recovered and the volume of water treated estimated. in all collections most of the fish taken were identified and counted in the field However" some individuals whose identity was questionable were preserved in 10% forces lin and a sample of each species was saved for a laboratory collection. 3 FINDINGS For reasons discussed in the Completion Report for deb dml, it is considered dew sirable to report distribution and abundance of species data under titles need to dew note the three ecological associations found in the watershed. 1. Spring fed. permanent flow, clear water association. {Description and dism cussion in report for Job Aml. Shown on map stations 5; 1o. ii and 12} Seining Collection Results A. Spring areas {Stations 5 and 10) Estimations based on total counts for four seasonal collections. .3 If; g: G} (D *1, l-Ei _J cf D?! H 35%. Specie 1. jMeeeetema eengeetum 1 .3 2. Cempeetome anomalum 38 10.9 3. Gembueie affinis 113 32.7 t. Pimephales vigilex 2? 7.8 5. Etheostoma spectebile 31 8.9 6. Notropie bucheneni 12 3.6 T. thropis emebilie 11 3.2 8. Netropie venustue 18 5.2 9. Lepemie cyenellue #1 11.8 10. Lepemie megeletie 21 6.1 11. Lepomie euritus 2% 6.9 12. Lepemie meeroehirue 2 .5 13. Lepemie mierelephue 2 .5 1t. Pemexie ennuleris 2 .5 13. Gheenebryttue eorenariue h 1.2 Tetele 3h? 100.1 B. Clear water, permanent flew areas below springs. (Stations 11 and 12) Eetimete baeed upon four seasonal collections. Species Number Tetel % 1. Doreeema eepedienum St 6.5 2. Mexeeteme eengeetum 36 h.3 3. Carpiedee earpio 18 2.2 t. Campoetema enemalum 63 7.§ g. Pimepheles vigilax 61 7.3 6. Netropis venuetue 121 1h.5 T. Netropis lutreneis 183 22.0 8. Neteepie pereebremue A .5 9. “eteepie emabilis 9 1.1 10. Mierepteeue ealmoidee 3 .h 11. Micropterue punetetue h .5 12. Gheenebryttue coroneriue 9 1.1 13. Lepemie eyenellue 11h 13.7 1t. Lepemis megelotie 61 7.3 19. Lepemie maeroehirue 6H T.6 16. Lepemie mierelophue 13 1.6 1?. Lepemie euritus 2 .2 18. Pemexie ennularie 12 1.h 19. Ietalurue punetetue 2 .2 20. Piledietue e1iverie l .l Tetele 83h 100.2 Netting Results A. Netting in spring fed, clear meter, permanent pools created by Stilmm een end Christeva1 Dame {Stations 11 and 12). Estimate based on six netting colleetiens. Species Number Tptel Weight % by Number 6 by Weight lbs. 025. 1. Daresema cepedienum 115 58 10 40.2 15.9 2. Gerpiodee eerpio 60 216 0.0 21.0 57.5 3. Mexeetome eengeetum 32 6A 0.0 11.2 17.1 h. Apledinetue grueniens 12 3 2.0 h.2 .8 S. Lepieeeteus Deeeue 18 12 1.0 6.3 3.3 Species Number Total Weight e by Number 3 by Weight lbs. oas. 6. ilodictos olivaris 2 A 6.0 .7 1.0 7. Micropterns salmoides t t 1.0 l.t 1.0 8. Iotalurns pooetatns 6 9 8.0 2.1 1.0 9. Lepomis sp. 3% M 8.0 11.9 .5 10. Pomoxis annolsris 3 t.0 1.1 .0 Totals 286 376 8.0 100.0 100 5 Retenone Collection A. Gollection by rotenone made approximately two miles northeast of Station 8. Area.treated approximately .25 acre ft. Species Number Total Weight % by Number % by Weight lbs. oas. l. Dorosona cepedianom 13 l l 8.3 5.5 2. LMioropterns salmoides 20 l h 12.5 6.3 3. lotaluros ponotatus 5 l 5 3.2 6.7 h. Chaenobryttus coronarius 3 O 2.0 2.3 5. Lepomis cyanellus 29 t 7 17.6 22.6 6. Lepomis macroohirns 26 3 2 16.0 15.8 7. Lepomie megalotis 1t h l 9.0 20.5 8. Lepomis enritns' A 11 2.6 3.h 9. Lepomis humilis 3 7 3.1 2.h 10. Lepomis ponctatns 3 6 3.1 1.9 11. Lepomis microlophns 1h 1 h 9.1 6.3 l . Hybrid sanfishes 9 l 2 5.8 5.7 13. aaebuaia affinis 12 '2 7.7 .6 Totals 155 19 13 100 0 100.5 Orangethroated darters (Etheostoma spectabile) were in spring areas only. Sneh spring communities were dominated by small plankton feeders and by suns fishes. in other clear water associations, sunfishes averaged 32% of the total for ail type oollections. Green sunfish (Lepomis eyanellus) and west» ern lonear {Lepomis megalotis) were more abundant and have the greatest area of distribution. however. yellowbelly sunfish (Lepomis anritus) and warmouth see {Shaenobryttns coronarius) were often larger and are preferred by fish« omen. Bluegill {Lepomis macrochirns} were the more abundant species in large CI" er pools. especially where aquatic vegetation was heavy. These fish usually appear to be stunted. Common mosquitofish {0ambusia affinis) were the most abundant species taken and were in all localities where a swift stream flow was not prohibitive. These fish were especially numerous in shallon'backwaters. Blacktail shiner (Notropis vennstns) and red shiners (Notropis lutrensis) were eonoentrated in swifter water and in the deeper pools below riffles. Below springs. in olear water associations where there was appreciable current, gizm eard shad iDorosoma cepedianom) and gray redhorse suckers (Moxostoma congestum) increased in numbers and may possibly be the dominant species in some communim ties. Downstream as transition into murky water association occurs and in ire rigation reservoirs, river carp suckers (Garpiodes carpio) become more abundant ovér Moxostoma. u...- 11. Mnrhy Slnggish Flow Association S.ining Collections . *JihkflWWDJE-JQWCDHJCfim—FTUJWH teteteiezeieieseteie 18731310 A. I’m-I ear impoundments on Spring and Dove Creek and on the Sonth Concho near Shrietm val Dam and Gardner Dam (Stations 7} 8, 9, 13, 1M and 15). Estima es baeed on o a four eeesonal collections. Specie“ Number % Total Lepisostens osseus 5 .7 Doroeoma cepedianum 31 4.3 Cerpiodes carpio 27 3.7 Moaostoma congestnm 2 .3 Cyprinue oerpio 2 .3' lotiobue bnbalus 6 .8 Aplodinotus grunniens 9 .6 Notemigonus chryeoleucas 13 1.8 Pimephalee vigilaa 22 3.0 Peroine caprodes 18 2.5 Hybognathus placitus 14 1.9 Gambnsia affinis 1&0 19.3 Notropie neonates. 112 15.5 Notropis lutreneis #1 5.7 Ictalnrns punctatne 5 .7 Ameinrue natalis 21 2.9 Ameiurns melee 3 .h Morena chrysops 11 1.5 Micropterue salmoides 11 1.5 Micropterus punctulatus 1 .1 Lepomie megalotie 67 9.3 Lepomie oyanellne 33 h.5 Lepomie microlophus 27 3.7 Lepomis auritua 7 1.0 Ponoxie annularie 61 8.9 Lepomie macroehirus 91 5.7 Totals 725 100.1 Netting Collections Imponndmente on Spring and Dove Creek and South Concho River (Stations 7, 9. 13, 15}. Estimate based on six eeaeonal collections. Speoies Number Total Weight % by Number % by Weight lbs. 028. Doroaoma cepedianum 195 90 9 51.5 37.3 Garpiodes carpio MO 89 0 1h.2 39.7 Monostoma congestnm 18 31 8 6.9 12.8 Aplodinotas grunniene 10 h 2 3.6 1.6 Lepisoetene oseeus h 10 2 1.4 9.2 Pilodictne olivaris 3 9 2 1.1 3.7 lotalnrns pnnctatus h h 8 l.h 1.7 Pomoais annularis 6 1 1 2.1 .4 Mioropterns salmoidee l 1 h .4 .9 iMorone ohrysops 13 3 9 h.6 1.3 Snnfiahes 37 h 2 13.2 1.7 Totals 281 2A2 15 99.9 99.8 Rotenone Collectione Pool treated located approximately one mile from Station 15. Area treated about 1.5 acre ft. 6‘ 56 Species Number Total Weight % by Number % by Weight Lbs. Oz. - Doroeoma cepedianum l23 to 3 l5.h 30.1 Carpiodes carpio 21 36 0 2.6 27.5 Moxostoms congestum ll 1% 2 l.h 10.5 Aplodinotus grunniens h l O .5 .7 Cyprinus carpio 12 h 9 1.5 3. 3 Iotalnrus punotatus 1h 6 2 1.5 t.5 Pilodictns olivaris h T 3 .5 5.3 'Micropterns salmoides 8' h 0 .9 3.5 Pomoxis annularis 9 3 2 l.h 2.2 Sunfishes 102 1A 1 12.6 10.h Small forage fishes* 500 3 11 61.6 2.2 Totals 818 133 1 100.0 100.u % m Estimated number for genus Notropis, Hybognathus, Gambusia and Pimephales. The greatest number of species.found in any association in the watershed occur in murky sluggish flow assodations. Most of these pools are created by reservoir impound» ments and Blacktail shiners (Notropis vennstus) and Bed shinere (N. lutrensis) were usually found in the upper portions of such pools and were numerous below the water outlet. Netting results, rotenone collections and stomach analyses of game fish indie cate that giaaard shad (Dorosoma cepedianum) as the most important forage species. Sun» fishes. especially green sunfish and western longears, are common and bullheads (Ameiuw rue and A. melee), log perch (Percina cap nodes)and flathead catfish (Pilodictus olim varie) were taken only in this habitat. III. Silty Intermittent Pool Association. Description and discussion in report for Job Awl.- (Appended map stations 1,2 & 3 Seining Collections Turbid, intermittent pools at Stations 2 and 3. Estimate based on four seasonal collections. Species Number % Total Donosoma cepedienum an ll.5 Carpiodes carpio 61 16.0 Cyprinus carpio 37 9.7 Aplodinotas grunniens T 1.8 Gambusia affinis 111 29.8 Notropis venustus 25 6.6 Notropis'lutrensis 32 8.h Notemigonue crysoleucas 6 l.6 Lepomis oyanellns 31 8.1 Lepomis megalotis 1h 3.? Morone chrysops _ u 1.0 Lepomis macrochirus 7 1.8 Ictalurus punctulatus l .3 Mienopterus salmoides 2 .3 Totals 382 100.1 Pool location approximately 3/h miles sonthwest of Station 3. Rotenone Collections approximately one acre ft. Area treated (3h Species Number Total Weight % by % by Lbs. 02s. No. Wt. Dorosoma cepedianum 37 ll 0 lh.50 h.6 Carpiodes carpio 76 9h 9 28.80 37.0 Cyprinus carpio 22 78 8 8.6M 3l 7 Ictiobus bubalus u 12 0 .38 t.8 Apiodinotus grunniens 77 27 O 30.00 10.8 Moaostoma congestum h 7 h 1.57 2.8 Ictalurus punctatus 2 3 h .78 1.7 Sunfishes 33 7 2 12.72 2.8 Totals 255 2h9 12 100.16 99.9 Gill nets were not set in this type association because suitable netting sites were not available. Although largemouth bass (MicrOpterus salmoides), white bass (Morons chrysops), blacktail shiners (Notropis venustus) and red shiners (Notropis lutrensis) were taken in this habitat, their presence is attributed to entrapment, recession of the flowing stream to an intermittent pool condition. Mosquitofish (Gembusia affinis) and freshwater drum (Aplodinotus grunniens) appear capable of adapting to this environment. Green sunfish (Lepomis cyanellus) and bluegill (L. macrochirus) are not uncommon. However, a complete dominance of this association by river carp suckers (Carpiodes carpio), longnose gar (Lepisosteus osseus) and gizsard shad (Dorosoma cepedianum) is overwhelming. SEMMARY 1. Field work for this job was done in conjunction with Job A-l. (Basic Survey of the South and Middle Concho Rivers.) 2. Fortyuseven seining collections were made at fifteen stations, sixteen gill net collectins were taken and three pools were treated with rotenone. A.total of 39 species from ten families were taken by all methods of collects ion for the entire watershed. U.) s. Three ecological associations were found to exist and seining, netting and rots enone collection data was analyzed on that basis. 3 Spring bed, permanent flow, clear water associations were dominated by sunfishes, I ’2 CI especially green sunfish and western longear sunfish and by small plankton feeders. o. The greatest number of species found were in murky sluggish flow associations and most communities were dominated by river carp suckers. However, game species were more numerous than in intermittent pool associations and were probably larger in aver» age size. 7. Silty intermittent pool associations were characterised by an overwhelming dom~ inance of all species by river carp suckers and carp. Few game fish were taken in col- lections and conditions oftenimdicated that survival of all game fishes, excepting sun— fiehes, was unlikely. Checklist oi Fisn Species from South and Middle ‘ K ..«-" Concho RiverS, e313 22: i9 3 “ June 13, 195” dommon Name Scientific Name 1. Longnose gar Lepisosteus osseus 2. Gisssrd shad Dorosoma cepedianum 3. Smallmooth buffalo Ictiobus bubalus t. Blach.buffaio Ictiobus niger 5. River carpsncher Carpiodes carpio 6. Gray redhorse sucker Monostoma congestum 7. German carp Cyprinus carpio 8. Golden shiner Notemigonus crysoleucas Q. Plains shiner Notropis percobromns 10. Blacktail shiner Notropis venustus ll. Red shiner Notropis lutrensis l2. Texas shiner Notropis amabilis l3. Mimic shiner Notropis volucellus it. River shiner Notropis blennius l3. Ghost shiner Notropis buchanani lo. Plains minnow Hybognathus placitus l7. Parrot minnow imephales vigilax 18. Flathead minnow Pimephales promelas lo. Southern channel catfish Ictalurus punctatus 20. Black bullhead Ameiurus melee 21. Yellow bullhead Ameiurus natalis 22. Flathead catfish Pilodictus olivaris 23. Common mosquitofish Gambusia affinis at. White bass Morons chrysops 25 Spotted b inch bass Micropterus punctulatus 2t. Largemouth.blach bass - Micropterus salmoides 27. Warmouth bass Chaenobryttus coronarius 28. fireen sunfish Lepomis cyanellus 29. “potted sunfish Lepomis punctatus 30. Redear sunfish Lepomis microlophus 31. Fluegill Lepomis macrochirus 32. Qrangespotted sunfish Lepomis humilis 33. Yellowbellv sunfish Lepomis auritus 3t. Wes tern l.o.ngear sunfish Lepomis megalotis :5. ‘Whit e creppie - Pomoxis annularis 36. Logpercn Percina caprodes 37. 3rangethecaL da.rter Etheostoma spectabile 38. Frci.water drum Aplodinotns grnnniens Hybrids Lepomis macrochirns X L. punctatus Leno mis hamilis a L. cyanellns w .. m /_. \ / __ odE .. l O a... x... fig :33: _. xmmau wzamnm a . {ed km. vQ§OLQe$U Ms .(hm. . M. O . m . a a _ o a. . .w W {cm £2256 +3 . . ”.35 N H se .3.” a O _. W D. . . V (PM. . mm M u. n H x: .5.» d _ {SQ Reboot m. H W . MéFW . . w W . Qw>.m . g thUkMeK O§U§Qb waQQE—x i netwokwg‘ .4 N w .vxtbm $3. . $3ka the IV .563. “It"