TPWD 1965 F-5-R-12 #956: Fisheries Investigations and Surveys of the Waters of Region 1-B: Job No. D-2 A Study of Factors Influencing Game Fish Production in Waters of Region 1-B

--- Page 1 --- JOB COMPLETION REPORT As required by FEDERAL AID IN FISHERIES RESTORATION ACT Federal Aid Project No. F-5-R-12 FISHERIES INVESTIGATIONS AND SURVEYS OF THE WATERS OF REGION 1-B Job No. D-2 A Study of Factors Influencing Game Fish Production in Waters of Region 1-B Project Leader: Lawrence S. Campbell J. Weldon Watson Executive Director Parks and Wildlife Department Austin, Texas Marion Toole Eugene A. Walker D-J Coordinator Director, Wildlife Services December 14, 1965 --- Page 2 --- ABSTRACT Project data obtained under F-5-R are reviewed and reanalyzed to detect and identify factors that are common influences on game fish production. The material is presented in three sections. Section I contains a brief history of fishery production in 27 public reservoirs as indicated by gill net collections. Production for principal game and non-game species is graphed over a period of years. Gross production, water quality and hydrological data are similarly graphed. These briefs also contain information on the history and development of the reservoirs, their usage, and relationships with other waters. A brief discussion of factors and suspect factors that influence fish production is included and a list of references and stocking records are supplied. Section II contains an analysis and discussion of factors and suspect factors that influence game fish production in regional perspective. Princi- pal factors influencing production in reservoirs include: (a) stability of water levels and capacities, (b) water quality, (c) basic food production, (d) the inter-population influences of the principal species and (e) aquatic vegetation. The analysis indicates that the most common detrimental factor influencing game fish production in the region is the occurrence of a prolonged decline in water levels in reservoirs where river carpsucker and other proble- matic fish are abundant. The factors that influence game fish production in streams include: (a) stability of water levels and capacities, (b) permanence and volume of flow, (c) basic food production, and (d) water quality. The impact of irrigation on stream production is discussed, and the deterioration of water quality and increases in pollution, siltation, and aquatic vegetation are shown to be responsible for the reduction of game fish. Section III presents an evaluation of past management of regional waters. Following chemical treatments to control problematic fish in reservoirs, sampling with gill nets indicate: (a) more game fish were produced, (b) more pounds of game fish were produced, (c) fewer problematic fish were produced, and (d) less pounds of problematic fish were produced. The increase in production was nearly always ten times as great as pre-treatment production within the first three years following the management effort, and benefits were indicated beyond the sixth year in some instances. The results of efforts to control problematic fish in streams cannot be fully evaluated at this time, but preliminary results indicate that where project personnel received full coopera- tion, the work was effective. Efforts to control aquatic vegetation have been less successful. Maximum benefits from efforts to control vegetation have not lasted beyond a few months. In general, the restocking program has been effective in stocking new waters, recently renovated waters, and waters that have recently experienced great expansion. Other stocking is less effective and much of the effort was totally unsuccessful. --- Page 3 --- % JOB COMPLETION REPORT State of __ Texas Project No, _F-5-R-12) 00 Name: Fisheries Investigations and Sur- veys of the Waters of Region 1-B Job No. 0 D2 Title: A Study of Factors Influencing _ Game Fish Production in Waters _ of Region 1-BO Period Covered; __ March 1, 1964 through February 28,1965 0 Objectives: To identify the factors that are common influences on game fish production throughout the region and to determine the degree of influence. lL. To organize and analyze data influencing fishery production in regional perspective, (a) to identify, isolate and measure basic influences, (b) to determine interrelationships and to correlate these influences with reference to game fish production, and (c) to catalogue data according to specific waters, basic productivity and fundamental ecological types. 2. To determine additional data required to appraise past sampling efforts. 3. To secure the means of an accurate appraisal of past management efforts and factors that influence management results. 4. To provide a more reliable basis for advancing sound harvest regulations. 5. To determine the logical limits for future reconnaissance surveys. Procedures: 1. To review Literature, A. Available scientific literature dealing with basic factors that influence productivity was reviewed to provide understanding of normal population dynamics for the more common species. Seventeen additional publications dealing with population dynamics were obtained from other investigators and carefully studied. B. Data from known sources were compiled according to subject and specific body of water, (i.e. all data pertaining to Lake Nasworthy were grouped; all for San Angelo Reservoir placed together etc.). Fisheries data were obtained from other fisheries biologists and from state and federal fish hatchery stocking records. Only data meeting specific standards were used in the study. Hydrological data were obtained from the United States Geological Survey. the Texas Water Commission, and from local agencies. Climatic data were obtained from the United States Weather Bureau. Related biological data were obtained from the United States Public Health Service, the Soil Conservation Service, the State Health Department and other national or state organizations. --- Page 4 --- To determine additional data requirements and to appraise sampling efforts. A. All netting data were placed on master sheets for each body of water. The organization of data indicated month and year of each collection of fish or other data. Blanks indicated periods when samples were not taken. Only data from standard gill netting units or from the experimental gill nets used prior to the adaption of regional standards were included. B, Secondary master sheets were prepared for each primary species designating month, year, number and numerical per cent for each species and per cent by weight for each primary public water. C, A reorganization of "K" factor data were started, but findings are too incomplete to provide useful information. To obtain the means of appraisal of past management and factors that influence management results, A. Comparisons were made between pretreatment and postreatment samples of fish populations where management has been carried out. B, Additional field work was carried out to evaluate the results of past management, C. A comparison was made between samples taken prior to heavy stock- ing with hatchery reared fish and samples taken from the same bodies of water following such stocking efforts. D. Field Procedures In order to fill in blanks in project data and to maintain studies necessary to evaluate management, the following field investiga- tions were carried out: --- Page 5 --- Water No. Field Standard Gill Seining Studies of Man Investigated Trips Net Collections Collections Vital Functions Days Lake Nasworthy 6 22 12 X 36 Twin Buttes 3 12 12 xX 21 Concho River 20 48 60 xX 86 Lake Sweetwater 3 16 12 xX 12 Mountin Creek Reservoir 2 11 6 xX 8 Lake Balmorhea 2 12 6 xX 12 Lake Ascarate 2 8 7 xX 10 Champion Creek Reservoir 2 12 6 xX 8 Oak Creek Reservoir 2 19 8 Xx 14 Moss Creek Reservoir 2 12 9 xX 12 Devil's River i, 7 3 x 8 Rio Grande River 1 3 6 xX 3 Diablo Dam #1 1 4 2 xX 6 South Llano River 1 0) 8 xX 6 Nueces River 1 0) 8 xX 6 49 186 165 248 Although the number of gill net collections is slightly less than speci- fied in planning, the need for such sampling was significantly less than anticipated. Twin Buttes Reservoir did not impound as much water as expected and the North Concho River was reduced to a few pools. Other activities exceeded the work planned. Unforseeable circumstances make it impossible to complete all of the suggested procedures. (1) Approved plans specified that counciling service of a qualified statistician would be required. The contract for such ser- vice was not renewed in the 1964-65 period. (2) In many instances data were insufficient to permit the proposed analysis. (3) The nature of most of the data available were such that statistical analysis of an isolated factor was impossible or the degree of bias in sampling could not be taken into considera- tion. Findings: Throughout the remainder of this report references are made to a number of species of fish. The following checklist of species found in the region is presented to assure correct identification. Scientific and common names are those specified in "A List of Common and Scientific Names of Fishes from the United States and Canada", Second Edition, American Fisheries Society, Special Publication No. 2, 1960. In a few instances species not --- Page 6 --- listed in that publication are included. The scientific and common names of these fish are taken from "A Checklist of Texas Fresh-Water Fishes", by Clark Hubbs, Department of Zoology, The University of Texas, Division of Inland Fisheries, IF Series No. 3. Spotted gar Longnose gar Alligator gar Gizzard shad Lepisosteidae-gars Clupeidae-herrings Lepisosteus oculatus Lepisosteus osseus Lepisosteus spatula Dorosoma cepedianum Salmonidae-trouts, whitefishes, and graylings Rainbow trout Mexican tetra Stoneroller Mexican stoneroller Goldfish Carp Devil's River minnow Roundnose minnow Golden shiner Speckled chub Rio Grande chub Longnose dace Suckermouth minnow Plains shiner Sharpnose shiner Rio Grande shiner Texas shiner Bluntnose shiner Arkansas River shiner Chihuahua shiner Blacktail shiner Red shiner Plateau shiner Proserpine shiner Mimic shiner Ghost shiner Plains minnow Bullhead minnow Fathead minnow Salmo gairdneri Characidae-characins and tetras Cyprinidae-minnows and carps Astyanax mexicanus Campostoma anomalum Campostoma ornatum Carassius auratus Cyprinus carpio Dionda diaboli Dionda episcopa Notemigonus crysoleucas Hybopsis aestivalis Gila pandora Rhinichthys cataractae Phenacobius mirabilis Notropis percobromus Notropis oxyrhynchus Notropis jemezanus Notropis amabilis Notropis simus Notropis girardi Notropis chihuahua Notropis venustus Notropis lutrensis Notropis lepidus Notropis proserpinus Notropis volucellus Notropis buchanani Hybognathus placita Pimephales vigilax Pimephales promelas --- Page 7 --- Catostomidae-suckers River carpsucker Blue sucker Smallmouth buffalo Gray redhorse Carpiodes carpio Cycleptus elongatus Ictiobus bubalus Moxostoma congestum Ictaluridae-freshwater catfishes Blue catfish Black bullhead Yellow bullhead Channel catfish Flathead catfish Ictalurus Ictalurus Ictalurus natalis Ictalurus punctatus Pylodictis olivaris furcatus melas Cyprinodontidae-killifishes and topminnows Rainwater killifish Blackstripe topminnow Rio Grande killifish Red River pupfish Leon Springs pupfish Comanche Springs pupfish Pecos River pupfish. Devil's River pupfish Poeciliidae-mosquitofishes Pecos gambusia Largespring gambusia Big Bend gambusia Mosquitofish Atherinidae-silversides Tidewater silverside Serranidae-sea basses White bass Centrarchidae-sunfishes Spotted bass Guadalupe bass Largemouth bass Warmouth Redbreast sunfish Green sunfish Orangespotted sunfish Bluegill Redear sunfish Spotted sunfish White crappie Black crappie Lucania parva Fundulus notatus Fundulus zebrinus Cyprinodon rubrofluviatilis Cyprinodon bovinus (extinct) Cyprinodon elegans Cyprinodon sp. Cyprinodon sp. Gambusia nobilis Gambusia geiseri Gambusia gaigei Menidia beryllina Roccus chrysops Micropterus punctulatus Micropterus treculi Micropterus salmoides Chaenobryttus gulosus Lepomis auritus Lepomis cyanellus Lepomis humilis Lepomis macrochirus Lepomis microlophus Lepomis punctatus Pomoxis annularis Pomoxis nigromaculatus --- Page 8 --- Percidae-perches Dusky darter Percina sciera Logperch Percina caprodes Orangethroat darter Etheostoma spectabile Greenthroat darter Etheostoma lepidum Rio Grande darter Etheostoma grahami Sciaenidae-croakers, drum, and weakfishes Freshwater drum Aplodinotus grunniens Red drum Sciaenops ocellata Spot Leiostomus xanthurus Atlantic croaker Micropogon undulatus Black drum Pogonias cromis Spotted seatrout Cynoscion nebulosus Sparidae Pinfish Lagodon rhomboides Cichlidae-cichlids Rio Grande perch Cichlasoma cyanoguttatum Bothidae-flounders Southern flounder Paralichthys lethostigma Organization and Limitations of Report The choice in the order of presentation of findings was guided by three considerations. (1) The report is the best available condensation of previous findings and will serve as a convenient reference for administrators in the future. (2) The possibility of a future consolidation of federal aid inven- tory studies into a single publication dealing with the resource in state- wide perspective is considered. (3) In as far as practical, the material is presented in the order of objectives listed under that subheading on page l. With these circumstances in mind a table of contents has been included which further serves to indicate the scope and limitations of the findings. --- Page 9 --- CONTENTS Page Objectives 1 Procedures L Findings 3-4 Checklist of Species Found in Region 1-8 4-6 Organization and Limitations of Report 6 SECTION I A chronology of Game Fish Production and Related Data for the Principal Reservoirs Investigated Under Project F-5-R. 9 Areas of Texas Included Under Project F-5-R, (Figure 1) 10a Map of Region 1-8 with Principal Waters Indicated, (Figure 2) 10b I. Reservoirs Located on the Clear Fork of the Brazos River l. Fort Phantom Hill Reservoir l1l-17 2. Lake Kirby 18-24 3. Lake Abilene 25-31 4. Lake Sweetwater 32-39 5. Lake Trammel 40-46 II. Reservoirs Located on the Upper Colorado River 1. Lake Brownwood 47-53 2. Lake Sealy 54-58 3. Lake Santanna 59-63 4, Lake Scarborough 64-68 5. Hoards Creek Reservoir 69-75 6. Ballinger City Lake 76-80 7. New Winters Lake 81°85 8. Walley Creek Reservoir 86-90 9. Mountain Creek Reservoir 91-95 10. Oak Creek Reservoir 96-103 ll. Champion Creek Reservoir 104-110 12. Lake Colorado City 111-118 13. Moss Creek Reservoir 119-123 14. Lake J. B. Thomas 124-131 15. Lake Nasworthy 132-141 16. Twin Buttes Reservoir 142-144 17. San Angelo Reservoir 145-152 III. Reservoirs Located on the Devil's River Watershed 1. Lake Walk 153-158 2. Devil's Lake 159-164 IV. Reservoirs of the Pecos River Watershed 1. Imperial Reservoir 161-169 2, Red Bluff Reservoir 170-178 3. Lake Balmorhea 179-185 --- Page 10 --- Vv. Reservoirs of the Rio Grande Watershed 1. Lake Ascarate 186-190 SECTION IT Principal Factors Influencing Game Fish Production In Regional Perspective I. Principal Factors Influencing Production in Reservoirs 191 A. Basic Factors 191 l. Climate 191 2. Factors Associated with Water Supply 191-192 3. Water Quality Factors 192-193 4, Pollution 193 B. Biological Factors Influencing Game Fish Production in Reservoirs 193 1. Basic Food Production 193 2. Discussion of Factors Influencing Fish Production in Reservoirs 194-205 3. The Influence of Aquatic Vegetation in Reservoirs 205-206 II. Principal Factors Influencing Game Fish Production in Streams 206 A. The Impact of Irrigation on Streams 206-207 B. Water Quality of Regional Streams 207-208 C., Pollution 208 D. Siltation 208 E. Aquatic Vegetation 208-209 F. Net Effect of Foctors SECTION IIT An Evaluation of Management for Region 1-B 209 fatveduction 209 Chemical Control of Fish Populations in Reservoirs 209 A. Comparisons of Relative Abundance as Evidenced in Pre-treatment and 209-210 Post-treatment. Sampling. B, Comparisons of Abundance factual quantities of captured fish) As 910.21] Indicated in Pre-treatment and Post-treatment Sampling. C. Chemical Control of Fish Populations in Streams. 220 D. Chemical Control of Aquatic Vegetation, 220 E. The Restocking Program. 220 F. Conclusions and Recommendations 220 --- Page 11 --- SECTION I A CHRONOLOGY OF GAME FISH PRODUCTION AND RELATED DATA FOR THE PRINCIPAL RESERVOIRS INVESTIGATED UNDER PROJECT F-5-R Fisheries data presented are from gill net collections. The material in this section is the only existing measure of fish production for the concerned waters that permit comparisons over a period of several years. It is emphasized that studies, from which this information was taken, were originally designed for other purposes. With this consideration in mind, and in keeping with the primary objectives of this report, this section is intended to serve three purposes. The primary purpose is to convert to common measure and to reduce in bulk the vast quantities of statistical data accumulated under the project. To make the report concise and easy to examine, graphics are employed. These graphs present essential basic information and indicate major changes in hydrology, water quality, and other factors. The use of graphics tends to limit accuracy. In many instances the measurement of production trends is shown to be continuous when actually there were no samples taken during one or more years. Obviously, population trends during such period are unknown and may vary considerably from the trend indicated. The trend on the graph is regarded as a logical continuance that bridges blanks in project data. Graphs where gross game fish production is compared with hydrological or other basic data, should not be regarded as being accurate in the sense that they provide a true and proportional representation of the subjects. This is impossible because the means of mathematical measure are incompat- ible. There are no methods where per cent game fish, a relative value, can be statistically correlated with absolute values such as parts per million or acre-feet. The limited space used for graphs also prohibits representing two or more subjects in true perspective. It is virtually impossible to accurately present, in the limited space used for the graph, capacities of a. lake that may ordinarily fluctuate between 25,000 and 30,000 acre feet but that also increase to more than 100,000 acre-feet, and experience reduction below a thousand acre-feet. Even if such graphing was practical and it is proposed to compare capacity dynamics with gross game fish production, the graph would have meaning only in the general trends indicated. All graphs in this section and those in the sections that follow that deal with more than one variable, are intended to denote major trends. They are sufficient for that purpose but are not intended to serve any other purpose. The second purpose of this section is to provide a convenient and compact reference that indicates where various data for individual waters may be found. References listed are the only known sources of information for the reservoirs. Stocking records are the only such records located for the con- cerned waters. The third purpose of the section is to present brief discussions of factors and suspect factors that, in the opinion of the author, appear to influence game fish production in the individual waters. This is done to provide those unfamiliar with the area with the observations and opinions of one intimately associated with the subject. This is also done in some instances to provide a brief accounting for otherwise unexplained or unmeasured phenomena. --- Page 13 --- - 1 Qa 1 1 iy | ! ! icceamk ad Susews 4 wom ws wavews Vern i 2 eee Hy aswse | | y | | ( ' fl | | ] L . _ | i aawan | xHeee +4 + + we + + + . ay EE + +f ++ wire i +t i ptut comm yf asain mpvecnpseniaparaie sii i” . F i+ tle ttt [+ +z eaty "yhete sity state bla Saakcal “ahert bath | Eile etd aty "ttt T Beery spenby (seFqunog 1€) g-T uoTzey g eely suTd T very sTenby (seTqUM0D 61) g-¢ uoTsey YSG-a qoeforg Zepuy pepntour SeX9]T, Jo seory [T emagta --- Page 14 --- =|OB- FIGURE 2 Sweetwater I | | Colorado 4) Big Springs -B PUBLIC WATERS OF REGION @ Abilene Concho River ii vga ay Cele ona ad © + a re Shia s asst fe + * + + + + + + * Ot fe 4° a sels a ates +F * et te + + Ay < LO Pa age tee tay et enter Ftayh C3) El Paso fiver og wo fi 1 on Ou a enol < | os wo | Vv) Llano River 4 ht gs ony et ah nN ene YANTRA ag iy My ul i : if i ie , ha i a Ne Wg \ a it k Mh “| i if rm J " \ rot ys i ge Mount eens * tage det rat ye Cae Te RER «* 8 ane SOS Sead sett eS S. yet ae Ss wey * Hh + nts + ty * ae at +. * #4 et, t +fat te A + fee! pa Ss et lad att sttt Vaz * + + + + t + ah + & 3] “oft ‘aA 1. O ° ls ad > Oo &F hi > oh oO H% N-aA ooo Oonm > m& a dd oO iu a, hi ® Od CGeM OM — fr] ame) | on ®o ° Oo w dt oo oO a> S£Fonnno wm & Om > OV % & Oo oO » vo QF Oo & oO ® & -d CO tied wO OvYPpvpondeos COHA EH OL SG ‘AO O Ems aN Sets AO hed Ou HBS BFovro en o4ooooor- a i=] om MM Md MH BOH SM A PH A aaa eaOA DOA iIsTMHYHAAHMa2orFracn > ee @ . eo 6 © © © © © © OHA a NOAM OL DAA Wt 13.Lake Colorado City 14.Moss Creek Lake n > a Bm) & fe) = n «3 = oO rm rw Ao O-d Bs oO Om > do & on oO Hon mom oO 9 jaa rome) ooo epee ov 0 oO DS 0 me xox <x Ppa Ba oF a NHN WD oO & 4aa4 ad o wo = o ws 0) 4 a ao Oo cra] (aa oa o i=) (1) ae 0) 4 na qo A > o (=) fon) oH -eservoir t 12 21.Red Bluff Reservoir 22.Lake Balmorhea 23.Lake Ascarate REGION 1-8 Brazos River Watershed Rio Grande River Natershed Area.......++.--58,947 square miles, or 22.42 ver cent of the State. Public Waters ..Estimated at 28,952 acres, with storage Colorado River Watershed Pecos River Natershed “a? ate ++ ++ + + + + + + + + capabilities that exceed 2 Million acre feet Population .....0ver 866,154 veovle Devils River Watershed --- Page 15 --- -ll1- Fort Phantom Hill Reservoir Location Fort Phantom Hill Reservoir is in the Brazos River Basin in Jones County 5 miles south of Nugent on Elm Creek. Ownership and History of Development Fort Phantom Hill Reservoir is owned and operated by the city of Abilene for municipal water supply and recreation. Permit No, 1249 issued August 9 1937, authorized construction of a dam on Elm Creek to create a reservoir of about 73,960 acre-feet and an annual diversion of 30,690 acre-feet of water for municipal water Construction started in June 1937 and was completed in October 1938. Other reservoirs owned by the city of Abilene include Lake Abilene and Lake Kirby. Abilene also has the right to purchase water from Hubbard Creek Reservoir. Physical Description The dam is rolled-earth. 70 feet high with the top of the dam at eieva- tion 1,650.0 feet above m.s.l. The reservoir has a capacity of 74.310 acre- feet and a surface area of 4,246 acres at spillway crest. A sedimentation survey in 1953 reported that the reservoir trapped 2 654 acre-feet of sediment in 14.8 years. History of Fisheries Investigations and Management Prior to 1956. both Toole and LeSeur had made limited investigations of the fishery in Fort Phantom Hill Reservoir. Av inventory survey was carried out under federal aid in 1956. Subsequent sampling of game fish production was carried oa under Projecr No, F-5-R until 1964 when the reservoir became the responsibility of Project No. F-7-R, A commercial fisherman netted the lake for smallmouth buffalo in 1957-58. and again in 1959-60. Stocking Record For actual number of fish stocked, multiply entry by 1,000. ‘Records are for the 1954-1964 decade). __ 19541955 1956 1957 1958 1959 1960 1961 19621963 1964 Largemouth bass fry 182 10 87 91 100 70 65 fingerling 10 2 i) 32 28 Sunfish fingerling 3.5 £25 40 White crappie fingerling 1 Channel catfish fingerling 6 1 12) 44.5 8 --- Page 16 --- ~12- Total largemouth bass fry: 605,000 or an average of 60,500 per year. Total largemouth bass fingerling: 62.500 or 6,250 per year. Total sunfish: 4,150. Total white crappie: 1.000. Total channel catfish: 65,301 or 6.530 per year. Discussion Data are less than required to accurately depict trends for individual species. It appears that game fish production increased between 1956 and 1960. This increase is attributed to an increase in volume and greater stability of water levels. It would also appear that the overall trend in game fish pro-~- duction has been one of increase. The general trend in water levels has been upward and volumes have been more stable. Observations include an apparent. low food production in insect life, the frequent occurrence of prolonged turbidity. and the frequency of occurrence of rough waters that apparently results from the lake being located in a natural trough that aligns with the direction of the prevailing southwesterly winds. The net effect of commer~- cial harvest on lake production cannot be determined. Jhe production trends that indicate an increase in smallmouth buffalo and a corresponding decrease in river carpsucker warrant further study. Observations and inquiries tend to indicate the fishing reputation for the lake is less than desirable. References A. Fisheries Investigations Project F-5-R-4. Job Completion Report 6-18. “Inventory) Project F-5-R-5 fob Completion Report B-18 (inventory) Project F-5-R-6. Job Completion Report B-22, (Resurvey) Project F-5-R-7. Job Completion Report B-17,. (Watershed Survey) Project F-5-R-1l, Job Completion Report B-32, (Reconnaissance) B. Hydrological aod Water Quality Data Texas Water Commission Bulletin 6408 Waited States Geological Survey. Water Supply Papers and Records City of Abilene Water Department Records Records of the State Health Department --- Page 17 --- Figure 3 HYDROLOGICAL DATA FOR FORT PHANTOM HILL Gage Depth Figure Acre Feet 76,000 74,000 72,000 70,000 68,000 66,000 64 5000 62,000 60,000 58,000 56,000 Sl »000 52,000 50,000 9 46,000 lh, ,000 42,000 40,000 38,000 36,000 <td Water Levels 1953 1954 1955 1956 1957 1958 1999 1960 1961 1962 1963 196) ear apacities 1953 1954 1955 1956 1957 1958 1959 1960 1961 1962 1963 196 Year --- Page 18 --- Figure 5 ehh WATER QUALITY DATA FOR FORT PHANTOM HILL Chlorides Parts Per Million 1953 195h 1955 1956 1957 1958 1959 1960 1961 1962 1963 Year Figure 6 => Alkalinity Parts Per Million 180 170 160 150 140 130 120 1953 195h 1955 1956 1957 1958 1959 1960 1961 1962 1963 Year --- Page 19 --- -15 FISH PRODUCTION FROM FORT PHANTOM HILL RESERVOIR Game Fish Production , Largemouth bass crigure 7) 20» White cra pric (Figure 6 : = *, Per Cent Per Cent 156 L %, By 5 a By 4 *e | aS Number Number *, a + Be 2 ee \ come 10§ *, : & Per Cent > ' am aime emit . Per Cent ‘ Weight a Ns in 6 oa EE -” Weight L 0 56 57 58 59 60 “él 62 63 6h 65 0 "86 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 Year Year Channel catfish crigure 9) 0s White ba@SS igure 10) 20 Per Cent Per Cent 7 By By 15 £ Number Number 5 8 ees. 2 Bb i Ba 3 10 Per Cent Per Cent 5 [ By By Weight = ss Weight Nia a = 0 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 6h 65 0 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 6h 65 Year Year --- Page 20 --- -16 Per Cent By Number 0 aS 8 Gas Per Cent By Weight Per Cent By Number ios fs | Per Cent By Weight _———e FISH PRODUCTION FROM FORT PHANTOM HILL RESERVUIR Principal Non-Game Species Gizzard shad ¢igwe 1) Year River carpsucker (#igure 13) Year Per Cent By Number fee 8s Per Cent By Weight Per Cent 50 By Number 40 : Carp (Figure 12) 15 lh 12 10 Md 8 7s 6p oF Le ° 3 or, ) 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 6h 65 Year . (Figure, )omMallmouth buffalo - “i se oe al 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 6h 65 Year --- Page 21 --- Principal Game Fish (Per Cent) OZ, 6 F Principal Non-Game Species ( Per_Cent) aij Figure 17} 000 Capacity 69,000 Acre 6), ,000 Feet 60,000 52,000 48,000 Game Fish,), ,000 Number 40,000 (Per Cent)36,000 FORT PHANTOM HILL RESERVOIR Prine 1pae Production (rigure 15) Principal Producti on. 4 Figure Number ) ovinotpan 2 (Weight ) Game Fish 2° (Per Cent)24 3 , % , @B ® = Y ¥; y Principal 20 ZA 4; y 4, Non-Game 7 4, Ga Oa Gi Species 5 é 7— 4. Ja yA Oz (Per Gent) / 4 an 0 1956 1957 1958 1959 1960 1963 196 Year Year 70 Chlorides 65 Parts Per 60 Million i : hs i : s\ cane 0 f : | I Fish 35 F . i = Number 30 m a r f (Per Cents i i i r SEE EBB 90 ; Year "6 57 $8 59 60 61 62 63 6h Year 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 35% o% 55% 65% 50% 55% 35% hos 55% 65% 50% --- Page 22 --- -18- Lake Kirb Location Lake Kirby is located 5 miles south of Abilene on Cedar Creek in Taylor County. Cedar Creek is a tributary of the Clear Fork of the Brazos River. Ownership and History of Development This project is owned and operated by the city of Abilene for municipal water, but it was used for irrigation of small acreage in the beginning. Con- struction was authorized by Permit No. 1051 dated January 23, 1928. Water rights were for an appropriation of 14,000 acre-feet annually for municipal water and 284 acre-feet for irrigating 142 acres. The dam was completed in 1928 with impoundment and diversion of water beginning at that time. Physical Description The dam is earthfill, 4,200 feet long and 50 feet high with the top of the dam at elevation 1,795.5 feet above m.s.l1. The lake has a capacity of 7,620 acre-feet and a surface area of 740 acres at elevation 1,785.0 feet above m.s.l. The drainage area above the dam is 44 square miles. Approximately 880 acre-feet of storage have been lost through sedimentation since the dam was constructed, History of Fisheries Investigations and Management Limited investigations by Marion Toole, then Director of Inland Fisheries, and. LeSeur were carried out in the mid 1940's. However, the difference in the sampling equipment used does not permit accurate comparisons of data. For that reason the survey completed under federal aid in 1959-60 and periodic sampling under the resurvey and reconnaissance programs that followed are the only data that are used for the purposes of this report. Lake Kirby went dry in 1953 and was subsequently restocked in 1954. Stocking Record For actual number of fish stocked multiply entry by 1,000. 1954 1955 1959 1963 1964 Largemouth bass fry 75 fingerling 30 5 20 Sunfish fingerling 5 White crappie fingerling .30 Channel catfish .60 --- Page 23 --- -19- Discussion In keeping with standards adapted for the purposes of this report, statis- tical data do not provide a sufficiently substantial basis for determining factors that influence production. Game fish production, as shown in the accompanying graphs, has been adequate but problematic fish are apparently increasing. Observations and inquiries tend to establish that the water quality is excellent, turbidity is nearly always high, harvest of large white crappie and flathead catfish is common, but the harvest of other game fish is meager. Because of its unique characteristics and small size, Lake Kirby offers the opportunity of studying the inter-relationship between carp, river carpsucker and flathead catfish References A. Fisheries Investigations Project F-5-R-7, Job Completion Report B-16. Project F-5-R-7, Job Completion Report B-26. Project F-5-R-8, Job Completion Report D-1. B. Hydrological and Water Quality Records of Abilene Water Department. United States Geological Survey Water Supply Papers and Records. --- Page 24 --- ~20- HYDROLOGICAL DATA FOR LAKE KIRBY Water Levels cigure 19) Gage Depth 1776 a STIR Hh Wo eamne esses. se: e0-oi ‘abe a RAAB S SLL ena A ONE pa TRY Ae 1953 1954 1955 1956 1957 sil 1959 1960 1961 1962 1963 ear Capacities (rigure 20) 2000 1900 1700 1500 Acre Feet 1300 1100 900 700 500 300 100 | a 1955 1956 1957 1958 1959 1960 1961 1962 1963. Year --- Page 25 --- -o1- WATER QUALITY DATA FOR LAKE KIRBY 23 Chlorides (rigure 21) 21 | 19 § Parts / Per 17 Million 15 | 1953 195k 1955 1956 1957 1958 1959 1960 1961 1962 1963 ear Alkalinity crigue 22) 160 155 150 Parts 140 Per Million 135° 130 125 120 115 110 Tso ae Re eee i Se ce HERE ae ee re, 4 Mice Karta ee ti fe CRM AN aeae AMR EOC 1953 195, 1955 1956 1957 1958 1959 1960 1961 1962 1963 Year be dat --- Page 26 --- Per Cent By Number Per Cent By Weight ~99- Per Cent By Number (eS ep Per Cent By Weight FISH PRODUCTION ?ROM LAKE KIRBY Game Fish Production Largemouth bass crigure 23) White crappie crigure 2h) | Per Cent By Number ss 8 ey Per Cent By Weight 1960 1961 0 1960 1961 Channel catfish (Figure 28) - Flathead catfish (rigure 26) ~ Per Gent By Number ~! Per Cent *~ By % Weight 1960 "1961 --- Page 27 --- -34- FISH PRODUCTION FROM LAKE KIRBY Principal Non-Game Species Gizzard shad (igure 27) Carp (Figure 28) eo Per Cent By Weight ‘3 Ea 8 1960 1961 Year Year 0 1960 1961 1 ' River carpsucker (rigwe:2) Weight 1 fe) 1960 1961 Year --- Page 28 --- 100 Principal 90 Game Fish 80 Lee Cent) ise F, 50 Principal 0 Non-Game 30 Species 20 (Per Cent) 10 LAK KIRBY Principal Production | (Number ) (Figure 30) 100 Principal Production ( Wel ght ) (Figure 31) Principal 90 jf: Game Fish 80 (Por Gent) bs | O Z 50 fF Principal )O F Non-Game 30 FF Species 20 £: (Per Cent)10 F: Ul --- Page 29 --- -25- Lake Abilene Location Lake Abilene is located ten miles southwest of Abilene and six miles north- west of Tuscola in Taylor County. The dam is on Elm Creek, a tributary of the Clear Fork of the Brazos River. Ownership and History of Development The reservoir is owned and operated by the city of Abilene for municipal and industrial water and for recreational purposes. Earthwork was completed in May 1921, and deliberate impoundment begun August 1, 1921. Original Permit No. 253 granted in 1918 allows use of 1,675 acre-feet of water. The anti- cipated storage of 45,000 acre-feet was not reached, Actual storage is 9,790 acre-feet. Physical Description The present dam is 3,400 feet long and 51 feet above creek bed, with the top of the dam at that elevation 2,031.3 feet m.s.1. Maximum storage capacity is 9,790 acre-feet, and area is 641 acres when the lake is at spillway capa- city at elevation 2,018.8 feet above m.s.l. History of Fisheries Investigations and Management Lake Abilene was initially surveyed in 1958 to determine species present, relative abundance and distribution. Subsequent investigation was a part of a survey of the Clear Fork of the Brazos River Watershed. There has been no management other than stocking. Stocking Record Available stocking records began in 1946. From that year until 1951 over 120,000 largemouth bass fry were stocked. In the record that follows, the actual number of fish stocked is obtained by multiplying the entry by 1,000. 1951 -:1952,——«i1953 19541955 1956-1957 Largemouth bass fry 70 11 80 fingerling 10 10 Sunfish fingerling 6.8 3.5 2 White crappie fingerling 295 .90 1, Channel catfish fingerling 1325 3 4.5 3.5 --- Page 30 --- -26- 1958 1959 1960 1961 1962 1963 1964 EOD OL 9OS 94 Largemouth bass fry 92 70 fingerling 4 26 Sunfish fingerling White crappie fingerling Channel catfish fingerling 20 I ee“ _—— SSFSSFSSSSSSSSSSSsFsFeFeF Total largemouth bass fry stocked in the past 13 years: 323,000 (over 24,000 per year.) Total largemouth bass fingerling stocked: 50,000 (over 3,800 per year). Total sunfish stocked: 12,300 (less than 900 per year). Total white crappie stocked: 3,350. Total channel catfish: 45,566. Discussion It would appear that past hydrology has exercised great influence on game fish production. Water levels in Lake Abilene have been relatively unstable, As shown in figures 32 and 33 there was an overall recession from 1957 to 1960. During that period game fish declined slightly and problematic fish increased slightly. Unfortunately we do not have netting data for the critical period between 1960 and 1964. But between 1961 and 1964 a second decline in lake levels occurred. By 1964 the relative abundance of game fish had greatly diminished, and non-game fish, principally carp and river carpsucker, had greatly advanced. It is suspected that these extreme recessions and factors accompanying them, are largely responsible for this reduction. The basic hydrological trend between 1954 and 1964 has been one of recession broken by occassional significant increases. The overall trend in game fish pro- duction has been one of decline. It is also noted that increases in river carpsucker and increases in chlorides occurred during the same period. It is logical to assume that instability of water level has tended to reduce game fish production by repressing or actually preventing reproduction of some game species. The expansion of silt over much of the basin is probably detrimental and aquatic vegetation is a factor that may pose a threat to future production and harvest. Because of its small size and other attri- butes Lake Abilene provides the Opportunity of economical study of experi- mental management and harvest. References A. Fisheries Investigations Project F-5-R-6, Job Completion Report B-23 (Inventory) Project F-5-R-7, Job Completion Report B-16 (Watershed Survey) Project F-5-R-9, Job Completion Report B-32 (Reconnaissance) Project F-5-R-12, Job Completion Report B-28 (Harvest Regulations) --- Page 31 --- Gage Depth Acre Feet ey HYDROLOGICAL DATA FOR LAKE ABILENE Water Levels (igure 32) — pbs: eens okenc yam paves Stas ae AMEE sei ses PAIN PANE 1953 195) 1955 1956 1957 1958 1959 1960 1961 1962 1885 196k, Year Capacities (igure 33) 105200 F 95200 F 8,200 | 7200 6,200 5 200 }, ,200 3,200 25200 1,200 200 4) ae ROR ARs a eer: UIDs ASN aap IRC ea si SW eM PACD I aa F rena 1953 195 1955 1956 "1957 1958 1959 "1960 1961 1962 1963 196) --- Page 32 --- -28- WATER QUALITY DATA FOR LAKE ABILENE 60 Chlorides (Figure 3) 55 50 & hS § ho 35 Parts Per 30 Million 25 20 15 10 1953 1954 1955 1956 1957 1958 1959 1960 1961 1962 1963 196) Year Alkalinity (igure 35) Parts 20 Per Million 210 ibainlie datas Go cet ee 1953 195h 1955 1986 1987 1958 1939 1960 1961 1962 1963 19%, Year --- Page 33 --- 29 Per Cent By Number Per Cent By Weight Per Cent By Number Per Cent By Weight yn Ww F&F PH OO ra) & 88 GARIN festa oH MMM A RF 30 10 0 FISH PRODUCTION FROM LAKE ABILENE Game Fish Production Largemouth bass (igure 3) ho White crappi e(rigure WE 2 ee ay, of “ew ¢? Per Cent 30 a By —____,44—- ares; 20 a on * _ Cent 4 ; “SS my f° | Weight 1958 1959 1960 1961 1962 1963 196k o 1958 1959 1960 1961 1962 1963 196] Year Year Sunfish (Figure 39) Channel catfish (rigue 38) 6 os Per Cent 5 ont .y By i = Number o* 12 ey ; eT lat Per Cent 2 By % 1958 1959 1960 1961 1962 1963 196) ) 1958 1959 1960 1961 1962 1963 19¢ Year Year --- Page 34 --- efit= FISH PRODUL. ION FROM LAKE ABILENE Principal Non-Game Species 5 : Gizzard shad (Figure 10) Carp (Figure 1) hoy oe 2 ee 50 Per Cent | osm Per Cent By 3 |} By 0 é Number Number Oe © Se ama 30 2 . 20 Per Cent i Per Cent : By 1 By 10 & Weight ; —_—— Weight i 0 1958 1959 1960 1961 1962 1963 196) 0 1958 1959 1960 1961 1962 1963 196) Year Year : 5 River carpsucker crigure 12) Others (rigure 43) a Wl (Golden shiners) Per Cent By 20 Number a 8 eS 15 10 Per Cent By Weight 5 0 1958 1959 1960 1961 1962 1963 196k 0 1958 1959 1960 1961 1962 1963 196, Year Year --- Page 35 --- LAKE ABILENE Principal Production Principal Production 100 | ( Number ) (Figure lj) 100 f ( Weight ) (Figure 5) Principal 90 Principal 90F Z, - Game Fish 80 , - - Game Fish 80 | 4, yj =n (Per Cent) 70 y, y, — (Per Cent) 70 y y i “B 2\| ¢ g & a 2 4 Gg F Principal ho /, y cea Principal )0 y Fa Non-Game 30 4 0, fa Non-Game 305f 0 Ea (pesies 8) 20 Z y f= Tees me 4 7a a “ | 75 ie a a A Le ee = “ » ‘Boe _ Witiciesie abe “fom sige A ais eo ) 1958 1960 196) Z 0 1958 ©1960 ~—-:196 1 Year Year Pete ped Factors Influencing Game Fish Production 8,200 60 Capacity 75200 (Figure hé) Chlorides 55 (igure 17) Acre Feet 6,200 Parts Per 50 4,200 | caniaiaiae, =O 7 2,200 30 - Game Fish 1,200 Game Fish 25 ] : Number 1,000 Number 20 5 | (Per Cent) 200 (Per Cent) 15 | a 5 ae 2 oe oe Someones LO 5 A i = 58 60 6h Year 60 64 Year 85% 80% 35% 80% 35% --- Page 36 --- 59. Lake Sweetwater Location Lake Sweetwater is in the Brazos River Basin in Nolan County, 6 miles southeast of Sweetwater. The dam impounds Bitter and Cottonwood Creeks. Ownership and History of Development The reservoir is owned and operated by the city of Sweetwater for munici- pal water and recreation. The dam, authorized by Permit No. 1053, and issued in 1928, was completed in 1930. The lake first filled to spillway level in 1936 and water was first diverted to the city for filtration in June 1935. This reservoir and Lake Trammel served as the sources of water for the city of Sweetwater until Oak Creek Reservoir became the main source in 1955. Physical Description The dam is rolled-earth, 2,600 feet long and 50 feet high with the top of the dam at elevation 2,128.8 feet above m.s.1. The lake has a capacity of 11,900 acre-feet and a surface area of 630 acres at elevation 2,116.5 m.s.l. The drainage area above the dam is 104 square miles. History of Fisheries Investigations and Management With the exception of cursory examinations by Toole and other early investi- gators no fisheries studies had been carried out on Lake Sweetwater prior to 1957, when the first inventory survey was carried out under federal aid. This work was completed in 1958, and estimates of game fish production were main- tained through resurvey and reconnaissance efforts and during the course of completing the survey of the Clear Fork of the Brazos River. In 1960 the reservoir was chemically treated to drastically reduce or eliminate existing fish populations. Following restocking, information on game fish production was obtained through further reconnaissance efforts. Stocking Record For actual number of fish stocked multiply entry by 1,000. 1952_._1953 «1954 +1955 +1956 1957 1958 __ Largemouth bass fry 40 1 74 50 fingerling 20 10.3 Sunfish fingerling 2.8 White crappie fingerling -70 Channel catfish fingerling 10 205 6.25 Flathead catfish fingerling --- Page 37 --- -33- 1959 1960 1961 1962 1963 1964 Largemouth bass fry 50 53 45 11 fingerling 48 9 4 Sunfish fingerling White crappie fingerling Channel catfish fingerling 37 5 1 Flathead catfish fingerling 74 Total largemouth bass fry stocked: 324,000. Total largemouth bass fingerling stocked: 83,200. Total sunfish stocked: 2,800. Total white crappie stocked: 700. Total channel catfish stocked: 61,750. Discussion The most important factor to be considered in reviewing data for Lake Sweetwater is the management effort carried out in August 1960. This work was carried out in order to reduce or eliminate problematic fish whose abun- dance was indicated by sampling during the spring of that year. The graphs include only the data from experimental gill nets and standard gill netting units. Extensive gill netting with two and three inch nets indicated the degree of dominance by river carpsucker and gizzard shad was greater than that shown. Subsequent netting indicates that game fish may expand and grow rapidly even in receding waters, providing those waters are free of carpsucker and other problematic species. The city of Sweetwater has reduced demands on Lake Sweetwater for municipal usage and the lake should be more stable in the future. --- Page 38 --- ths References Fisheries Investigations Project Project Project Project Project Project Project Project Project Project -R-5, Job Completion Report B-21 (Inventory) -R-7, Job Completion Report B-16 (Watershed Inventory) -R-8, Job Completion Report B-22 (Resurvey) ~h, Job Completion Report lbr23 (Control of Fish) -5, Job Completion Report 18 all (Restocking) > Job Completion Report B-32 (Reconnaissance) = ae 1, Job Completion Report B-32 (Fisheries Reconnaissance) 9 9 -10, Job Completion Report B- B-32 (Fisheries Reconnaissance) -l -12, Job Completion Report B-28 (Harvest Regulations) Hydrological and Water Quality Data Texas Water Commission Bulletin 6408 City of Sweetwater Water Department Records United States Geological Survey Records Texas State Department of Health, Water Pollution Control Division --- Page 39 --- aihe HYDROLOGICAL DATA FOR LAKE SWEETWATER Water Levels (Figure 8) Gage ah Depth 22 siahsleissaeasaeanay ip ine SAL ERR OLN Ne as AG SE iba cis ara Ror eRIGTaR Esa anes sang Saar A OG HAH PONS 1953 198k 95s 1956 1957 1958 1989 1960 1961 1962 1963 196) Year (Figure 9) 11,0005 I, Capacities eines in cup nme it NO ee 1953 195 1958 96 1957 1958 “I9s9 1960 1961 1962 3963 19ehe Year --- Page 40 --- -46- (Figure 50) WATER QUALITY DATA FOR LAKE SWEETWATER Chlorides 140 130 120 Parts Per 110 Million 100 1953 195h 1955 1956 1957 1958 1959 1960 1961 1962 1963. 19° (Figure 51) Alkalinity Parts Per 150 Million 10 1953 19%h 1955 1956 1957 1958 1959 1960 1961 1962 1963 196k --- Page 41 --- -37- Per Cent By Number Per Cent By Weight Per Cent FISH PRODUCTION FROM LAKE SWEETWATER Game Fish Production Largemouth baSS (igure 52) White crappie (rigue 53 608 y Z 10 a I 50 : iv Per Cent ? 4 = : = By 8 a U hop i Number 7 a . Fi : : Pee Ue 6. 4 | 30F) f 5 : : i h = | 20 : a Per Cent 3 | i | By ae | = TL F Weight 1 | i 0 53 sh 88 56 67 S859 60 61 62 63 6h 053 Sh 5S 56 57 SB 59 60 61 62 “63 6 Year Year 50 Channel catfish cigue s) Sunfish crigure 5s) ; ho OF :: Per Cent E 30 By 30 20 2 8 ee : 20 FF 4 Per Cent ? 5 By 10} Weight . pi seg 0 53 Sh 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 . --- Page 42 --- -38- Per Cent Per Cent By Weight Per Cent By Number Per Cent By Weight 3 FISH PRODUCTION ‘ROM LAKE SWEETWATER Principal Non-Game Species -0O 53 au 55 56 at teat? 6 a 62 63 64 o, River carpsucker iewe 58) a ee 5.59 60 61 62 63 6h Carp (Figure 57) t a a a HMw Euan M0 O Per Cent By Weight 53 Sh 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 6l Year , | Bullheads (rigure 59) 25 Per Cent 20 Ff By A Number 15 E 10 Per Cent By 9 Weight fp 0 53 Sh 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 GL Year --- Page 43 --- LAKE SWEETWATER Principal Production ~rincipal Production 100 (Number ) (rigure 60) 00 (Weight) cisure 61) Principal — 99 - ‘Principal 90 {4 4 Game Fish 80 = y, Game Fish 80 [ a ; (Per Cent) 70 | oa 0 (Per Cent) 70 | = Y 7. 60 = 8s 7 y Of, 60 = Y Principal co Es — y yy, Principal so = y Non-Game ho a | y A Non-Game },0 S y Species 30 = = y, 4, Species 30 | — Z (Per_Cent) 0 - El y y (Per Cent) 0 5 Z cd ma ca | : 10 SO ee 45 7 a 34% 7 on fe) ” 56 57 58 59 60 61 62. “63 ch “65 fe) ” 56 oT “8 “59° “60° “él “62. 63 “6s 5 . Year Year Principal Factors Influencing Game Fish Production 11,000 (Figure 62) lO Fy (Figure 63) Capacity 10,000 | Chlorides 100 fs Acre Feet 000 : Parts Per 90 | : 7 ae | a Million r 3 ; B 6,000 | i 60 rl 5,000 | "| 50 = Game Fish 4,000 | i Game Fish 140 | i Number 3000 i Number 30 i (Per Cent}? »000 a (Per Cent) 20 m suammam 1,000 | apme iia oO r - Ss ouiiaeinekie en 89 CO BL 62 «63S Year ~ e768 69 60 61 62 "63 6b Year 20% a ~ 706 108 25% 90% 20% 1% 70% 10% 254 90% --- Page 44 --- Lake _Trammel Location Lake Trammel is on Sweetwater Creek, a tributary of the Clear Fork of the Brazos River, approximately 7 miles southwest of the city of Sweetwater in Nolan County. Ownership and History of Development Lake Trammel is owned and operated by the city of Sweetwater for municipal water and recreation. The reservoir was constructed in 1914 for municipal water and has served that function ever since. In addition to capture of run- off, water is pumped from Oak Creek Reservoir near Blackwell and stored in Lake Trammel . Physical Description Reliable engineering data are insufficient for a complete description. The reservoir was originally designed to impound 3,183 acre-feet of water and to cover 230 acres when full. However. siltation of unknown quantity has reduced the storage capacity. History of Fisheries Investigations and Management Prior to 1958, only seining collections had been obtained from Lake Trammel. In June of that year a full scale investigation was initiated and this inven- tory was completed in 1959, Following studies were limited to resurvey or reconnaissance checks of game fish production. Stocking Record For actual number of fish stocked multiply entry by 1.000. ___1952 195319541955 «1956 «1957 «1958 Largemsuth bass fry 40 10.3 41.5 231 fingerling 5.8 Sunfish fingerling 1 6 208 White crappie fingerling lied ol of Channel catfish 2a5 1.8 204 1959 1960 1961 1962 1963 1964 Largemouth bass ~ fry 110 66 10 45.9 fingerling 4 5 Sunfish fingerling -20 -40 White crappie fingerling 4 Channel catfish 250 37 5 1 --- Page 45 --- ahi Total largemouth bass fry stocked: 554,700. Total largemouth bass fingerling stocked: 14,800. Total sunfish stocked: 5,000. Total white crappie stocked: 6,300. Total channel catfish stocked: 50,250. Discussion In view of the continued presence of river carpsucker in the lake for more than eight years, the unknown factors that have curbed their expansion are deemed worthy of a more detailed investigation. This circumstance is especially significant since the lake has experienced significant reductions as in the 1956-1958 period and between 1961 and 1964. Other circumstances worthy of further study include the relationship between production of centrar- chids and marginal vegetation and the factors that favor reproduction of that group. References A. Fisheries Investigations Project F-5-R-6, Job Completion Report B-24 (Inventory). Project F-5-R-7, Job Completion Report B-16 (Watershed Survey). Project F-5-R-9, Job Completion Report B-32 (Reconnaissance). Project F-5-R-9, Job Completion Report D-l (Fisheries Problems). Project F-5-R-10, Job Completion Report B-32 (Reconnaissance). F-5-R-1 Project 11, Job Completion Report B-32 (Reconnaissance). B. Hydrology and Water Quality Data Records of city of Sweetwater Water De…