TPWD 1976 F-30-R-2 #1724: Performance Report, Federal Aid Project F-30-R-2: Statewide Fishery Management Recommendations, Job B: Management Recommendations for Proposed Reservoir and Other Pub

--- Page 1 --- PERFORMANCE REPORT As required by FEDERAL AID IN FISHERIES RESTORATION ACT Federal Aid Project F-30-R-2 Statewide Fishery Management Recommendations Job B: Management Recommendations for Proposed Reservoir and Other Public Water Projects Navasota River and Lake Limestone Robert L. Bounds Inland Fisheries Management Program Director District II-C Dwane Q. Smith District Management Supervisor Clayton T. Garrison Executive Director Texas Parks and Wildlife Department Austin, Texas David L. Pritchard Robert J. Kemp Chief, Inland Fisheries Director of Fisheries February 4, 1977 --- Page 2 --- F-30-R-2 Performance Report Job B - District II-C Objective: To recommend habitat improvement, fisherman information, fish II. EEL. population manipulation, vegetation control, pollution control, fisherman access and facility development and fishing regulations for existing and proposed public waters of Texas. Summary: Quarterly fisheries management surveys were conducted on the Navasota River to supplement existing knowledge of the ichthyofauna, aquatic macrophytes, physicochemical and stream channel characteristics; and to evaluate the quality of existing fish habitat and fisherman access. Lake Limestone Dam, currently under construction at River Mile (R.M.) 125 is scheduled for completion in early 1978. Impounded waters are expected to create a reservoir of 14,200 a. Impoundment will result in alterations in both physical and biological characteristics of the stream. Fishing access to the Navasota River is largely confined to highway crossings; facilities available for fishermen are deficient. Creation of Lake Limestone, with adequate fisherman access and facilities, could greatly improve fisherman utilization of the Navasota River. Quality of habitat for sport fishes could be enhanced by minimizing the re- moval of brush from the lake basin. Introduction of threadfin shad, Florida largemouth bass and white bass x striped bass hybrids is re- commended to supplement first-year recruitment and to better utilize habitat. Dissemination of fish stocking, evaluation and current fish harvest information to anglers through appropriate media is also re- commended. A continuous flow is needed for maintenance of the tail- water fishery and for conservation of the downstream riverine eco- system. Significant Deviation: Flooding of the study area and manpower limitations precluded em- ployment of some stream survey procedures as outlined in "A Manual of Survey and Management Techniques for Reservoir and Stream Management." Cost: $4,200 Man-Days 85 --- Page 3 --- IV. Prepared by: Dwane Q. Smith District Management Supervisor John M. Mitchell Fish and Wildlife Technician Date: February 4, 1977 Approved by: elt Z. Seu Roger L. McCabe D-J Management Coordinator Regional Management Supervisor --- Page 4 --- Methods and Materials Sampling was conducted at four stations selected to represent upper, middle and lower sections of the stream. Sampling locations were chosen to represent increases in stream order according to Horton (1945), and changes in land re- source areas from the headwaters of the Navasota River to its confluence with the Brazos River. Locations of sampling stations are described in the Survey Results and Discussion section of this paper. Surveys were conducted quarterly at each station to evaluate fish communities, aquatic vegetation and water quality. Stream channel parameters were re- corded at least once for each station. Aquatic vegetation was surveyed along 200-ft stream sections located at four sampling sites. Species collected were preserved with methanol and identified in the laboratory according to Correll and Correll (1975), Fassett (1975) and Muencher (1944). Fish samples were collected with a 20-ft x 6-ft, 3/8-in. ace weave straight seine. specimens collected were preserved in 10% formalin solution and identified in the laboratory according to Hubbs (1970) and Eddy (1957). Scientific and common names of fishes were listed according to Bailey,et al. (1970). Access and facilities surveys were conducted by visual inspection in con- junction with other survey efforts. Water temperature and dissolved oxygen were measured with a YSI Model 57 meter; specific conductivity was measured with a YSI Model 33 meter. Hydrogen ion concentration was measured with an Instrumentation Laboratories Porto-Matic Model 175 meter. Total alkalinity, chlorides, hardness and turbidity were measured with a Delta Scientific Model 50 meter. Total dissolved solids, nitrate-nitrogen and phosphate concentrations were measured according to Standard Methods (American Public Health Association, 1971). Flow data were obtained from the U. S. Department of the Interior, Geological Survey and were taken at State Highway 164 near Groesbeck (R.M. 145), at U. S. Highway 79 near Easterly (R.M. 105), and at U. S. Highway 190 near Bryan (R.M. 68). Locations of current flow gauging stations are shown in Fig. l. Results and Discussion Watershed Physical Characteristics The climatology of the Navasota River and its watershed is broadly character- ized as mild, with hot summers and moderate winters. The mean annual tem- perature is approximately 67 F, ranging historically from a maximum recorded 114 F to a minimum of -7 F. The length of the growing season averages about 250 days. Rainfall throughout the Navasota River watershed averages about 39 in. annually, with a maximum of 65.46 in. recorded in 1919, to a minimum of 17.69 in. in 1917. The period of heaviest rainfall normally occurs from April through June. The watershed also experiences recurring periods of drought and heavy rainfall. The most severe drought period occurred from June 1947 --- Page 5 --- through March 1957. Flooding of the watershed has been known to occur at almost any time of the year, but usually occurs during months having heaviest average rainfall. The Navasota River and its flood plain are typically comprised of a com- bination of various clays, silts, sands and gravels. The headwaters region is generally characterized by marly clay soils which become increasingly more sandy as the river progresses southeastward toward the East Texas timber belt. The general land elevation of the headquarters region of the Navasota River is about 650 ft above mean sea level and decreases to about 185 ft above mean sea level at the confluence with the Brazos River. The Navasota River watershed is found within out-croppings of the Upper Cretaceous, Eocene, Oligocene, and Miocene strata. Formations of decreasing age are found as the river progresses from the headwaters toward the con- fluence. The principal outcroppings are largely comprised of consolidated marls, soft limestone, sands, clays, silty clays and sandy clays ( U. S. Army Corps of Engineers, 1965). Descriptive Data The Navasota River watershed is located in east-central Texas between 30° 20' and 31° 50' north latitude and 95° 55' and 97° 00' west longitude. The Navasota River, intermittent in its upper reaches, is largely a permanent stream which originates in southeastern Hill County about 1.5 m northeast of Mount Clam. The river is about 95 R. M. long from its source to its con- fluence with the Brazos River near Washington, Texas. The river has a drainage area of 2500 m* and an average streambed slope of 2.6 ft/m. The drainage system of the Navasota River is bounded on the east by the Trinity River drainage and on the west by the Brazos River drainage. The Navasota River Basin (Fig 2) is located within the Texas Biotic Provence (Blair, 1950). The principal tributaries are Christmas, Big, Steel, Lake, Clear, Camp, Cedar, Wickson, Carters, Lick, Gibbons, Peach, Holland, and Big Creeks in order of their confluence with the Navasota River from source to mouth. The Navasota River arises in the Blackland Prairie land resource area and traverses alternating Post Oak Savannah and Blackland Prairie land resource areas as it flows toward its confluence with the Brazos River (Fig 3). Such stands of timber as oak, pecan, elm, bois d'arc and mesquite are frequently found along streambeds throughout the Blackland Prairie regions; pecan, walnut and other water demanding trees are most commonly found along stream- beds within the Post Oak Savannah regions. Land use is largely for livestock production and agriculture (Dallas Morning News, 1973). The flood plain consists mainly of agricultural grazing land, much of which is classified as unimproved (U. S. Army Corps of Engineers, 1965). The Navasota River is relatively free of pollution (U. S. Army Corps of Engineers, 1971), but organic pollution, apparently the sewage effluent from the City of Mexia, has been reported (Rosenburg, et al, 1972). --- Page 6 --- Reservoirs Within the Watershed Lake Mexia, completed on June 5, 1961, was constructed on the Navasota River (R.M. 170) in Limestone County near Mexia by the Bistone Municipal Water Supply District. Lake Mexia was constructed for municipal and industrial water supply purposes. Lake Springfield is located on the Navasota River (R.M. 160) in Limestone County within Fort Parker State Park. Constructed by the Texas Parks and Wild- life Department, the lake is used for municipal and industrial water supply purposes and recreation. Camp Creek Lake is located on Camp Creek, a principal tributary of the Navasota River. Camp Creek Lake was constructed in 1949 for recreational purposes by the Camp Creek Water Company of Bryan, Texas. Other reservoirs constructed on the watershed include Teague Lake and Holman Reservoir, constructed by the City of Teague for municipal water supply; and Lake Normangee located within Normangee City Park, constructed for recreation. Proposed reservoirs to be constructed by the U. 8. Army Corps of Engineers include the Millican and Navasota #2 projects. The Millican dam site would be located at R.M. 24.1, and the Navasota #2 site at R.M. 83.4. Lake Limestone, currently under construction at R.M. 125, will be controlled by the Brazos River Authority. This project is scheduled for completion in early 1978. The earth and concrete dam will impound about 217, 494 a.-ft of water, creating a 14,200-a. lake. A primary function of the reservoir will be to serve as a source of cooling water for two proposed steam electric power plants to be constructed by the Texas Utilities Generating Company (Brazos River Authority, Pers. Comm., 1976). Endangered Populations The Navasota River drainage has been regarded as an area of transition, con- taining some fishes found only in Austroriparian drainages; others found commonly in the Brazos and Colorado River drainages are absent or found only in scattered localities within the Navasota River drainage (Blair, 1950). Fishes associated with more eastern or Austroripian drainages become more in- frequent and disappear from collections toward the western boundary of the drainage. Construction of proposed reservoirs on the Navasota River may be expected to create changes in the quality and quantity of fishes present. Species asso- ciated with lotic areas will be reduced in number or eliminated in areas where riffles or sandbars are destroyed, and in areas where streamflow is greatly reduced. Alteration of the river channel below the Millican dam site at R.M. 24.1 could result in the disappearance of the most southeastern pop- ulation of stoneroller (Campostoma anomalum) recorded from Texas. Bigscale logperch (Percina macrolepida) has been collected from the Navasota drainage, but is found in lentic habitat and probably will not be threatened (Rosenburg et al., 1972). --- Page 7 --- Stream Access Currently, access to the Navasota River is quite limited. Since the flood plain is almost entirely controlled by private ownership, access is limited largely to those few roadways which cross the stream. Sport fishing activity is largely confined to existing impoundments on the river and its watershed. Much of the fisherman access to these is limited by landowners, controlling authority or private club restrictions ( U. S. Department of the Interior, 1965). Streamflow Monthly streamflow data were obtained from the U. S$. Department of the Interior, Geological Survey for the period October, 1975 to September, 1976. Measured at upper, middle and lower stations, mean monthly streamflow values correspond to historical streamflow and precipitation records for previous years ( U. S. Army Corps of Engineers, 1965). Figure 4 graphically illustrates annual streamflow patterns for upper, middle and lower stations on the Navasota River. Streamflow fluctuations for the months of October through February were slight to moderate with more dramatic increases seen from March through July. Streamflow was greatest in April and May and smallest in August. Streamflow fluctuations were greatest at the upper station and less pronounced at middle and lower stations where volume and drainage area are greater. Survey Results and Discussion Station I Location Station I is located on the Navasota River in Limestone County, on State High- way 164, approximately at R.M. 145, some 5 m east of the City of Groesbeck. Stream Channel Stream width varied between riffle, flat and pool areas of the stream. Channel measurements (Table 1) define the upper segment of the Navasota River as shal- low and narrow, with more clearly defined riffle, flat and pool areas than lower segments of the stream. Greatest pool depth of the station was 3 ft; riffle depth was 1-ft. Mean current velocity, recorded in March, was 2.12 ft/sec. (Fig. 17) when water level was slightly above normal. All segments of the stream, according to Lagler (1969), were classified as having a "rapid" current velocity during this period. Substrate composition was largely muck and clay (Table 2). Habitat Types Stream width measurements revealed pools were wider than riffles or flats. Pools were small and exposed with little submerged or overhanging cover. The stream study area consisted of approximately 20% pools, 30% riffles and 60% flats. --- Page 8 --- Water Quality Water quality (Table 3), while within recommended limits for fish and wildlife (McKee and Wolf, 1971), often exhibited the greatest degree of fluctuation at this station. Total dissolved solids approached the recommended limits for public drinking water (U. S. Public Health Service, 1962) in the month of September (Fig. 5). Specific conductivity rose to 1090 micromhos/cm in Sep- tember (Fig. 6). Values for other water quality parameters are presented in Fig. 7 through 14. Vegetation Quarterly surveys of a 200-ft stream section failed to reveal the presence of aquatic macrophytes from this area. Current velocity, wide fluctuations in volume of flow and turbidity are all probable contributing factors which pre- vent the establishment of aquatic macrophytes here and elsewhere along the Navasota River. Ichthyofauna The predominate species collected from Station I was red siner. Other species frequently collected were mosquitofish, bullhead minnow and bluegill. Species less frequently collected were longnose gar, gizzard shad, green sunfish and dusky darter (Table 4). The number of specimens collected was greatest in November and smallest in September (Fig. 15). Species diversity for Station I was lowest in March, but increased slightly and remained constant for sub- sequent collections (Fig. 16). Station IT Location Station II is located on the Navasota River at approximately R.M. 114, 5m west of the City of Marquez. AT this location, the river forms the boundary between Leon and Robertson Counties. Stream Channel Stream measurements revealed an increase in overall width for riffles, flats and pools from the preceeding station (Table 1). Pool and riffle areas were slightly less frequent. Greatest pool depth was 4.5 ft, depth of flats was 3 ft and riffle depth 1-ft. Mean current velocity (Fig. 17) recorded in March was 1.77 ft/sec. Predominate constitutents of the substrate were clay and muck (Table 2). Habitat Types Pool width remained greater than the width of riffles and flats. Pools were wider and somewhat deeper; but remained exposed with only a slight increase in the amount of available cover. Station II consisted of about 15% pools, 15% riffles and 70% flats. --- Page 9 --- Water Quality Measurements of water quality (Table 5, Fig. 7-14) exhibited fluctuations which generally were less pronounced than those seen upstream at Station I. Pattern and degree of fluctuation occasionally did not parallel other stations upstream or downstream, but were generally more similar to stations located further downstream, Vegetation No aquatic macrophytes were seen from quarterly surveys of a 200-ft stream section at this station. Ichthyofauna Red shiner was the predominate species collected from Station II. Bullhead minnow, mosquitofish and dusky darter were species frequently collected. Species collected are shown in Table 6. The number of individuals collected was. greatest in September (Fig. 15) and was considerably greater than March or November collections. Species diversity was also greatest in September collections when a slight increase was evident (Fig. 16). Station IIT Location Station III is located on the Navasota River at the Old San Antonio Road, 6m southwest of the City of Normangee (about R.M. 80). At this location the Old San Antonio Road serves as the north-south boundary between Robertson and Brazos Counties on the east bank of the river, and between Leon and Madison Counties on the west bank. Stream Channel Stream widths at Station ITI indicate the river channel continues to increase in width as it progresses toward its confluence with the Brazos River (Table 1). Other observations revealed the relative lack of riffle and pool areas. The river and its flood plain exhibited a broader and more uniform appearance. Stream measurements taken at Station III were more representative of the ex- tremes than of the pool, riffle and flat areas at this location. A fairly uniform maximum depth of 4 ft was maintained when flow was near normal. Current velocity (Fig. 17), measured in March, was rapid with a reading of 1.56 ft/sec. The substrate consisted mainly of sand (Table 2). Habitat Types Habitat at Station III has a wider, more uniform streambed and flood plain than the upper stations. The substrate, comprised largely of sand, differed from upper reaches of the stream (Table 2). Streambanks are wooded and have considerable overhang. An overall increase of cover in and above the stream was noted. Station III consisted of about 80% flats, 10% pools and 10% riffles. --- Page 10 --- Water Quality Measurements for water quality (Table 7) revealed generally lower total alka-— linity than at other locations (Fig. 7). Values for other water quality parameters are shown in Fig. 5-14. Vegetation Two species of aquatic macrophytes were recovered from Station III in the Sep- tember survey. A vegetation survey of a 200-ft transect revealed the pre- sence of yellow water lily (Nuphar advena) and arrowhead (Sagittaria falcata). Yellow water lily occupied less than 5% of the stream area surveyed and arrow- head occupied less than 1%. No aquatic macrophytes were observed during pre- vious or subsequent surveys. Ichthyofauna Twenty-two fish species (Table 8) were collected at Station III. Greatest species diversity among the stations surveyed was found here (Fig. 16). While species diversity was greater, total number of fish collected from this station was not as great as for stations located upstream (Fig. 15). Mosquitofish and red shiner continued to be most abundant. Largemouth bass, white crappie, black crappie, other centrarchids and darters were collected. Station IV Location Station IV is located 2 m north of the City of Navasota on State Highway 6 (about R.M. 11). At this location, the Navasota River serves as the eastern boundary of Brazos County and the western boundary of Grimes County in their southern reaches. Stream Channel An overall three-fold increase in stream width was seen for this station when compared with the upper-most survey station on the river. Station IV ex- hibited a maximum width of 70 ft and a minimum width of 59 ft (Table 1). Pool, riffle and flat areas of the stream were discernable, but did not vary greatly in width. Maximum channel depth recorded at this station was 5.8 £ts average depth was 4.2 ft. Substrate composition was largely sand, muck and clay. The presence of rubble and boulders was also noted (Table 2). A current velocity of 3.34 ft/sec. was recorded in March (Fig. 17). Habitat Types The Station IV area contained the greatest amount of cover within the stream, and consisted of snags and boulders. Considerable overhang was found along stream banks. This station consisted of about 80% flats, 10% pools and 10% riffles. --- Page 11 --- 10 Water Quality Values for water quality parameters (Table 9) were found to be within re- commended limits for fish and wildlife (McKee and Wolf, 1971). Fluctuations of water quality parameters were observed, but only phosphate value fluc- tuations were greater than at other stations (Fig. 14). Other water quality data are shown in Fig. 7-14. Vegetation No aquatic macrophytes were observed from quarterly surveys of a 200-ft stream section at Station IV. Ichthyofauna Ten fish species were collected from the Navasota station (Table 10). Red shiner, ribbon shiner and silverband shiner were collected in greatest numbers. Figures 15 and 16 indicate a decline in numbers and species diversity. This is probably more accurately interpreted as a measure of the difficulty in- volved in the collection of fishes from this station. Swift current, nu- merous snags and deep water greatly hampered collection efforts. Recommendations Navasota River and Lake Limestone A. Habitat Enhancement: 1. Technical assistance should be provided to the controlling agency to minimize destruction of potential fish habitat by brush clearing operations. 2. An inspection of the lake basin should be conducted to identify areas which may be deficient in fish habitat, and to identify for future marking existing structures in the basin which may be expected to serve as fish attractors. 3. Structures for the shelter and attraction of sport fishes should be installed in areas deficient in habitat and at locations of fishing piers. 4. A continuous discharge is recommended to maintain a tailwater fishery and for conservation of the fauna in the lotic and riparian ecosystems below the dam. B. Angler Information: 1. Buoys should be installed to identify the location of natural structures which may be expected to attract and shelter sport fishes, and to identify the locations of proposed fish attractors. --- Page 12 --- D. 11 Information regarding fish stocking and the results of any subsequent evaluations of such stockings should be disseminated to anglers through appropriate media. Permanent sources should be identified from which current fish harvest information may be obtained. Information should be obtained, assessed and disseminated to anglers on a weekly basis. The controlling agency should provide maps locating access and facilities, fish attractors and river channel. Population Manipulation: Ls Stocking of threadfin shad is recommended for the reservoir as a supplement to existing forage populations needed to establish and sustain stocks of sport fishes. Since no largemouth bass were recovered from quarterly fisheries surveys of stations above R.M. 125, first-year recruitment from existing brood stock may be low. Stocking of Florida largemouth bass is recommended to supplement first-year recruitment of young- of-the-year largemouth bass in the reservoir. Stocking of white bass x striped bass hybrids is recommended to pro- vide an additional sport fish which may more efficiently utilize the open water (pelagic) habitat of the reservoir. Conditions associated with new reservoirs, survival and growth from previous stockings, and the absence of competition from other open water predators suggest good survival and growth of these hybrids may be attained in Lake Limestone. Vegetation Control: No vegetation control is recommended. Pollution Control: No recommendations for pollution control are made. dt Access and Facilities: (See Figure 18) At least six concrete launch ramps with catwalks and adequate parking facilities should be constructed to provide boating access to the lake. Ramps should be located in the lower, middle and upper areas of the lake. Park areas should be constructed in upper, middle and lower reaches of the lake. At least five desginated park areas, with electrical hook-ups should be constructed in areas within close proximity to the water and near launch ramps. These areas should have adequate drinking water, restrooms and public shower facilities. At least one fishing pier or jetty should be constructed within each --- Page 13 --- 12 of the five recommended camping areas. Such facilities are needed to provide fishing access for the elderly, handicapped and non- boaters. 4, Fisherman access to dam and tailwater areas should be developed. Developments should include all weather roads and lighted parking areas for both tailwater and dam. G. Fishing Regulations: No changes in existing fishing regulations are proposed. --- Page 14 --- 13 Literature Cited American Public Health Association. 1971. Standard methods for the examination of water and wastewater. (13th ed.). New York, 874 pp. Bailey, R. M., et al. 1970. A list of common and scientific names of fishes from the United States and Canada (Third Ed.). Amer. Fish. Soc., Spec. Publ. 6:1-149 Blair, W. F. 1950. The Biotic Provinces of Texas. Texas J. Sci. 2:93-117. Correll, Donovan and Helen Correll. 1975. Aquatic and wetland plants of the southwestern United States. Stanford University Press, Sacramento, California. 1792 pp. Dallas Morning News. 1973. Texas Almanac. Dallas, Texas 704 pp. Eddy, Samual. 1957. How to know the freshwater fishes. William C. Brown., Dubuque, Iowa. 253 pp. Fassett, Norman C. 1957. A manual of aquatic plants. The University of Wisconsin Press. Madison, Wisconsin. 405 pp. Horton, R. E. 1945. Erosional development of streams and their drainage basins, hydrophysical approach to quantitative morphology. Bull. Geol. Soc. Amer. 56: 275-370. Hubbs, Clark. 1970. Key to the freshwater fishes of Texas. (Unpublished.) p. 1-31. Lagler, Karl F. 1969. Freshwater fishery biology (2nd ed.). William C. Brown Company, Dubuque, Iowa. 421 pp. McKee, J. E. and Harold W. Wolf. 1971. Water quality criteria. California State Water Resources Control Board Publication 3-A, December, 1971. 548 pp. Muencher, Walter C. 1944. Aquatic plants of the United States. Comstock Publishing Co., Inc., Ithaca, New York. 374 pp. Rozenburg, E. R., R. Kirk Strawn, and William J. Clark. 1972. The composition and distribution of the fish fauna of the Navasota River. Technical Report No. 32. Texas Water Resources Institute. Texas A&M University. U. S&S. Army Corps of Engineers. 1971. Environmental study of the Navasota River watershed. Vol. I. Texas A&M University. Fort Worth District. B-9-29, U. S. Army Corps of Engineers. 1965. Review of reports on Brazos River and tributaries, Texas covering Navasota River watershed. Report, July. --- Page 15 --- 14 U. S. Department of the Interior. 1965. Revised report on the fish and wildlife resources affected by Millican, Ferguson, and Navasota Site No. 2 reservoir projects, Brazos River and tributaries, Navasota River Basin, Texas. Fish and Wildlife Service, Albuquerque, New Mexico. p. 5. U. S. Public Health Service. 1962. "Drinking water standards." Title 42- publication; Chapter 1 - Public Health Service, Dept. of Health, Educ., and Welfare; Part 72 - Interstate Quarantine Federal Register 2152, Mar. 6, 1962. --- Page 16 --- 15 ee: . ca — N \ rAN -- — sgt So “éhimes co | ~~ Brazos River | —_——<— = eo me Navasota River a Survey Sites * Stream Gaging Station (USGS) Figure 1. Locations of survey sites and streamflow gaging stations, Navasota River, 1976. --- Page 17 --- 16 stroriparian Balconian Navasota River Basin Figure 2. The location of the Navasota River Basin within the Biotic Provinces of Texas (Blair, 1950). --- Page 18 --- 17 Brazos River _--. 2.2... 2. Navasota River 1. Blackland Prairie 2. Post Oak Savannah Figure 3. Location of Navasota River with respect to Blackland Prairie and Post Oak Savannah land resource areas. --- Page 19 --- 18 mw Upper Station 4.5 @ Middle Station 4.0 %* Lower Station 3 Log X streamflow (ft~ /sec) Figure 4 . Navasota River mean monthly streamflow, October 1975 - September 1976. --- Page 20 --- 19 Total dissolved solids (mg/1) 500 100 50 0 <4 =) wa Zz GH tA a Gq 3) Fo £& € € fF £€ § FF F = g rt rt ct Station Station Station a II III Figure 5. Navasota River quarterly total dissolved solids values, 1976, 450 400 350 300 250 200 150 AON Teh Tar qdas Station IV AON --- Page 21 --- 20 Conductivity (micromhos/cm) 1200 1100 1000 900 800 700 600 500 400 300 200 100 = a. — _* a 2 s oS — a qa wn 2 Fo & § 2 F &£ @ ¢ jF £€ € €$ FE £ 8 Station Station Station Station I II III IV Figure 6 . Navasota River quarterly specific conductivity values, 1976. --- Page 22 --- 21 Total alkalinity, CaCO, (mg/1) 200 150 z B = . 5 i e © 6 Br Fy ° 6 Fe a iM 6 Ri ee ‘J 4 A H As} < 4 e as] < R he as] < ct cr i v Station Station Station Station I II ELI IV Figure 7. Navasota River quarterly total alkalinity values, 1976. --- Page 23 --- 22 150 125 100 a — 60 & o iy ° a r= oO 50 25 0 = Oo n Zz ty a = Pp £ @ ¢ F € # 3 rt rt Station Station IT IT Figure 8 Navasota River quarterly chloride values, 1976. AeW Tar qdas Station IITr AON Ie}! Tar qdas Station IV AON --- Page 24 --- 23 Temperature (C) 35 30 2 unr 15 10 cs q ie] 2 o ae ea P=] ic) Ff -£ g 6 PoE 6f 8 part ct Station Station I Hae Figure 9 , Navasota River quarterly temperature values, 1976. 1ey ERE WAAL w c) ue] ct Station TTT AON ae Tar ao om Ke] ct Station IV AON --- Page 25 --- 24 05 (mg/1) 14 13 12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 0 ———_—————_ t+-—__ +t +—_—t cy tn Zz = wn Zz q id) Zz Q wn 2 Pog € € F £€ € F FF &€ ¢ F§ F EE € 8 ct ct rt rt Station Station Station Station [ Il LOL. Iv Figure 10. Navasota River quarterly dissolved oxygen values, 1976. --- Page 26 --- 25 Hydrogen ion concentration (pH) 9.0 8.5 7.0 6.5 AP] Figure 11. Tarr adas AON Station Navasota River qq uy : I ie 6 . oy br e 0 oy iS ra © 5 in ‘J < Hi be as) 4 a Ee ae ct a au Station Station Station II TIT IV quarterly hydrogen ion concentration values, 1976. 1S J A AON --- Page 27 --- 26 Total hardness CaCO3 (mg/1) 250 225 200 175 75 50 25 0 Station Station I IL Figure 12, Navasota River quarterly total hardness values, 1976, TAL qadas Station ELL AON aed Tar 150 125 100 qdas Station IV AON --- Page 28 --- 27 3.0 2.5 2.0 1.5 1.0 0.5, 0 = an wn Zz Qa n G ) ° # = s <4 F Ei 8 S B ad et 4 Station Station I It Figure 13, Navasota River quarterly nitrate nitrogen values, 1976. Tar wo ie) us] ct Station EET: AON aed TAL adag Station IV AON --- Page 29 --- 28 PO,=P (mg/1) 0.6 O25 0.4 0.3 0.2 Osi foo 0 ot 5 a ty on 2 F g€ § ¢ FF -€ g 8 & ae Station Station I IL Figure14 . Navasota River. quarterly phosphate values, 1976. Ie Tar qdes Station EEL AON Te Tar qadas Station IV AON --- Page 30 --- 29 250 200 a 4 “150 2° co) ro a ~ cI < 100 3 ra) @ oO . i [ rT] 0 i = Mar Sept Nov Mar Sept Nov Mar Sept Nov Mar Sept Nov Station Station Station Station I II He a & IV Figure 15. Navasota River composite catch data from seine samples, 1976. --- Page 31 --- 30 15 I 14 lll collection sites Species collected (no) Mar Sept Nov Figure 16. Navasota River periodic species diversity of ichthyofauna by station, 1976. --- Page 32 --- 31 4.0 > 3.5 pa] on ~— § 3.0 B 4 2.5 o ed S$ e 2.0 a ce] a 5 3 1.5 I> 1.0 0.5 I II III IV Station Figure 17, Navasota River mean current velocities, March 1976. --- Page 33 --- 32 Dz 54 ior bal eo i M Boat Ramps @ Fishing Piers | | Park Areas Figure 18. Location of proposed access and facilities, Lake Limestone, Navasota River. --- Page 34 --- 33 Table 1. Stream widths, Navasota River, 1976. Stream width (ft Station Station Station Station I TT Lit IV TC Ee a er Riffle 11.0 18.0 39.0 59.0 Flat 17.5 31.5 44.0 67.0 Pool 225 34.5 51.0 70.0 --- Page 35 --- Table 2. 34 Stream substrate types of the Navasota River, 1976. Percent composition by station Substrate type Muck Detritus Clay Silt Sand Gravel Rubble Boulder Bedrock I II III IV 60 z8 10 10 5 5 5 2 20 30 6 10 5 20 6 5 5 10 70 60 3 10 2 5 2 0 1 3 0 0 0 5 etl, antl. as =! 100% 100% 100% 100% --- Page 36 --- 35 Table 3. Navasota River water quality, 1976. Station I Parameter Mar Jul Sept Nov Temperature (C) 20 28 31 19 Dissolved oxygen (mg/1) 8.4 6.0 13.0 6.6 pH 7-5 Ted 8.7 Ted Conductivity (micromhos/cm) 650 215 1090 675 Total alkalinity (mg/1) 110 160 170 70 Chlorides (mg/1) 130 90 130 90 Total hardness (mg/1) 120 190 240 220 Turbidity (JTU) 45 50 59 17 Secchi (in) 7.25 6.0 13.0 14.0 Total dissolved solids (mg/1) 432 119 479 414 Nitrates (mg/1) 2.920 0.864 0.266 0.177 Phosphates (mg/1) 0.163 0.114 0.170 0.085 --- Page 37 --- 36 Table 4. Navasota River seine samples, 1976. Station T Gatch/1000 £t2 Species Mar Sept Nov Longnose gar 0.4 0.8 Gizzard shad 232 Red shiner 116.2 35.8 200.0 Bullhead minnow 10.8 8.8 Mosquitofish 0.4 6.7 17.7 Green sunfish 1.1 Bluegill 0.4 0.8 13.25 Dusky darter 1.7 --- Page 38 --- 37 Table 5. Navasota River water quality, 1976. Station II Parameter Mar Jul Sept Nov Temperature (C) 21.0 28.0 26.5 16.0 Dissolved oxygen (mg/1) 8.3 6.3 6.4 6.6 pH 7.5 8.2 7.6 7.7 Conductivity (micromhos/cm) 680 30 350 430 Total alkalinity (mg/1) 100 83 80 110 Chlorides (mg/1) 110 20 50 80 Total hardness (mg/1) 170 80 100 190 Turbidity (JTU) 125 150 64 34 Secchi (in) 6 4 6 11 Total dissolved solids (mg/1) 474 116 224 346 Nitrates (mg/1) 0.530 2.658 1.994 0.177 Phosphates (mg/1) 0.065 0.114 0.098 0.052 --- Page 39 --- 38 Table 6. Navasota River seine samples, 1976. Station IT Catch/1000 ft2 Species Mar ——~—=CSeptSO™~C~SCSCN Red shiner 36.4 156.4 60.0 Blacktail shiner 0.7 Bulihead minnow 0.7 L2a.1 13.3 Channel catfish 3.6 1.6 Mosquitofish 0.7 24.3 Warmouth 0.3 Bluegill 1.4 Dusky darter 8.6 0.8 --- Page 40 --- 39 Table 7. Navasota River water quality, 1976. Station III pn Parameter Mar Jul Sept Nov ne eae a nner SnD SC a a ee ee Temperature (C) 18.0 26.6 27.0 16.0 Dissolved oxygen (mg/1) 8.0 6.0 5.6 an pH 7.3 7.7 7.5 7.1 Conductivity (micromhos/cm) 600 190 378 285 Total alkalinity (mg/1) 70 40 80 90 Chlorides (mg/1) 110 30 50 50 Total hardness (mg/1) 130 50 120 120 Turbidity (JTU 45 55 64 50 Secchi (in) 7 4 3 10 Total dissolved solids (mg/1) 394 108 200 218 Nitrates (mg/1) 0.930 2.038 1.130 0.665 Phosphates (mg/1) 0.033 0.065 0.057 0.078 --- Page 41 --- 40 Table 8. Navasota River seine samples, 1976. Station III OO Gateh/1000 fe 2 Species Mar Sept Nov Gizzard shad 0.6 Golden shiner 1.0 Blackspot shiner 6.0 Pugnose shiner 1.6 Ribbon shiner 5.0 Red shiner 19.3 6.8 24.0 Sharpnose shiner 3.3 0.6 Mimic shiner 0.6 Bullhead minnow 6.3 1.8 6.0 Tadpole madtom E2 Mosquitofish 7.6 32.5 12.0 Green sunfish 1.0 Warmouth 0.6 4.0 Bluegill 133 Sef 12.0 Longear sunfish 9.0 Largemouth bass 0.6 White crappie 0.6 2.0 Black crappie Laz Bluntnose darter 0.6 Slough darter 0.3 Logperch 0.3 Dusky darter 0.3 --- Page 42 --- 41 Table 9. Navasota River water quality, 1976. Station IV Parameter Mar Jul Sept Nov Temperature (C) 19.0 27.0 29.8 17.0 Dissolved oxygen (mg/1) 9.1 6.2 7.0 6.2 pH 7.2 6.8 7.8 Fad Conductivity (micromhos/cm) 650 312 760 390 Total alkalinity (mg/1) 110 90 110 70 Chlorides (mg/1) 100 70 80 40 Total hardness 140 120 160 90 Turbidity (JTU) 80 250 82 95 Secchi (in) 6 4 4 7 Total dissolved solids (mg/1) 471 221 294 L71 Nitrates (mg/1) 1.700 1.728 2.126 0.910 Phosphates (mg/1) 0.132 0.179 0.399 0.121 --- Page 43 --- 42 Table 10. Navasota River seine samples, 1976. Station IV Catch/1000 ft2 Species Mar —CSept. SSCS Pugnose shiner 0.6 Ribbon shiner 10.6 Red shiner 11.2 0.7 Silverband shiner 8.7 Bullhead minnow 1.8 Channel catfish 0.7 Blackstripe topminnow Ins Mosquitofish 2.0 White crappie 1.1 Dusky darter 1.25 --- Page 44 --- Ls IT. 43 6-Year Management Plan for the Navasota River and Lake Limestone Stream Description The Navasota River begins about 1.5 miles northeast of the community of Mount Calm in Hill County and flows for a length of about 195 R. M. to its confluence with the Brazos River near Washington, Texas. The Navasota River drainage begins in the Blackland Prairie and traverses alternating Post Oak Savannah and Blackland Prairie land resource areas as it flows toward its confluence. The marly clay soils of the head- waters region become increasingly more sandy as the river flows south- eastward toward the East Texas timber belt. The Navasota River drainage, found within the Texas Biotic Province, is bounded by the Trinity River drainage on the east and on the west by the Brazos River drainage. Water quality of the Navasota River varies with location and volume of flow. The waters of the Navasota River generally may be described as alkaline and somewhat turbid, with moderate concentrations of chlorides, nitrates and total dissolved solids. Fish habitat and species diversity of fish populations vary with locations. Channel and flathead catfishes are the most frequently harvested sport fishes. Red shiner is the pre- dominant forage species. Fisherman access is largely confined to highway crossings; facilities for fishermen are deficient. Lake Limestone, a 14,200-acre reservoir located at R.M. 125, is scheduled for completion in early 1978. The primary function of the reservoir will be to provide a source of cooling water for steam electric generating plants. Needed water will be sold by the Brazos River Authority, the controlling agency of the reservoir, to the Texas Utilities Generating Company. Development of Lake Limestone can provide a resource with much potential for improvement of the fishery of the Navasota River. The implementation of appropriate fishery management techniques could prove helpful in the realization of such potential. Further, Lake Limestone can greatly improve fisherman access to the Navasota River through the development of adequate facilities for the accommodation of anglers. Management Recommendations _1977 Man-Days A. Habitat Enhancement 1. Provide technical assistance to controlling agency to minimize destruction of potential fish habitat by brush clearing operations. 4 2. Inspect lake basin to identify areas which may be deficient in fish habitat and identify for future --- Page 45 --- 44 1977 con't Man-Days marking existing structures which may con- centrate fish. 6 3. Install brush shelters in areas deficient in fish habitat, and at fishing pier locations before inundation. 12 4. Coordinate plans with controlling agency for main- tenance of continuous flow release to tailwater areas. 4 Sub-Total 26 Angler Information 1. None recommended. Population Manipulation 1. None recommended. Vegetation Control 1. None recommended. Pollution Control 1. None recommended. Fisherman Access and Facilities 1. None recommended. Fish Harvest Regulations 1. None recommended. 1977 TOTAL 4° 26 1978 _ Man-Days Habitat Enhancement 1. None recommended. Angler Information 1. Disseminate fish stocking and evaluation data to anglers through appropriate media. 2 --- Page 46 --- 45 ee 1978 con't Man-Days 2. Identify sources for obtaining weekly fish harvest information. 4 3. Encourage controlling agency to provide maps locating access and facilities, fish attractors, river channel, etc. 2 Sub-Total 8 C. Population Manipulation 1. Stock threadfin shad (10/a.). 6 2. Stock Florida largemouth bass (100/a.). 15 Sub-Total 21 D. Vegetation Control 1. None recommended. E. Pollution Control 1. None recommended. F. Fisherman Access and Facilities 1. Coordinate construction of concrete launch ramps, park areas and fishing piers and provide technical assistance (see attached map). 10 2. Coordinate and provide technical assistance for development of fisherman access to tailwater and dam areas. | Sub-Total LS G. Fish Harvest Regulations 1. None recommended. 1978 TOTAL 44 1979 Man—Days A. Habitat Enhancement 1. None recommended. --- Page 47 --- 46 1979 con't Man-Days B. Angler Information 1. Construct and install marker buoys at locations of natural and artificial fish attractor/ shelters. 15 2. Disseminate fish stocking, evaluation and current fish harvest information to anglers through appropriate media. 2 Sub-Total 20 C. Population Manipulation 1. Stock white bass x striped bass hybrids (10/a.). 6 Sub-Total 6 D. Vegetation Control 1. None recommended. E. Pollution Control 1. None recommended. F. Fisherman Access and Facilities 1. None recommended. G. Fish Harvest Regulations 1. None recommended. 1979 TOTAL 26 1980 Man-Days A. Habitat Enhancement 1. None recommended. B. Angler Information 1. Disseminate stocking evaluation and current fish harvest information to anglers through appropriate media. Sub-Total 5 --- Page 48 --- 47 1980 con't Man-Days C. Population Manipulation 1. None recommended. D. Vegetation Control 1. None recommended. E. Pollution Control 1. None recommended. F. Fisherman Access and Facilities 1. None recommended. G. Fish Harvest Regulations 1. None recommended. 1980 TOTAL 2 1981 Man—Days A. Habitat Enhancement 1. None recommended. B. Angler Information 1. Disseminate stocking evaluation and current fish harvest information to anglers through appropriate media. 5 Sub-Total 5 C. Population Manipulation 1. Stock white bass x striped bass hybrids (10/a.). 6 Sub-Total 6 D. Vegetation Control 1. None recommended. E. Pollution Control 1. None recommended --- Page 49 --- 1981 con't Man-Days F, Fisherman Access and Facilities 1. None recommended. G. Fish Harvest Regulations 1. None recommended. 1981 TOTAL 11 1982 Man-Days A. Habitat Enhancement 1. None recommended. B. Angler Information 1. Disseminate stocking evaluation and current fish harvest information to anglers through appropriate media. Sub-Total | C. Population Manipulation 1. None recommended. D. Vegetation Control 1. None recommended. E. Pollution Control 1. None recommended. F. Fisherman Access and Facilities 1. None recommended. G. Fish Harvest Regulations 1. None recommended. 1982 TOTAL 5 48 --- Page 50 --- 49 f Boat Ramps © Fishing Piers | Park Areas Location of proposed access and facilities, Lake Limestone, Navasota River. --- Page 51 --- APPENDIX F-30-R-2, Job B Navasota River --- Page 52 --- Appendix A Maps Navasota River --- Page 53 --- Brazos River. Navasota River Survey Sites Stream Gaging Station (USGS) “* Locations of survey sites and streamflow gaging stations, Navasota River, 1976. --- Page 54 --- Kansan stroriparian Chihuahuan Balconian Navasota River Basin The location of the Navasota River Basin within the Biotic Provinces of Texas (Blair, 1950). --- Page 55 --- Brazos River. .2.. we nee wee 2 Navasota River___ = =o wk. C4 1. Blackland Prairie 2. Post. Oak Savannah : Location of Navasota River with respect to Blackland Prairie and Post Oak Savannah land resource areas. --- Page 56 --- Ee Fa Boat Ramps @ Fishing Piers [| Park Areas Location of proposed access and facilities, Lake Limestone, Navasota River. --- Page 57 --- Appendix B Seining Navasota River --- Page 58 --- Navasota River seine samples, March, 1976. Station I. Total Total x Wt x Length Catch/ 5 Catch/ 2 catch wt wt range length range 1,000 ft 1,000 ft Species — , (no) (gm) (gm) (gm) (mm) (mm) (no) (gm) Longnose gar 1 , 0.42 Red shiner 279 16.25 Misquitofish 1 0.42 Bluegill 1 0.42 --- Page 59 --- Navasota River seine samples, March, 1976. Station II. nn Total Total x Wt x Length Catch/ 2 Catch/ 9 catch wt wt range length -Tange 1,000 ft 1,000 £t Species . (no) (gm) (gm) (gm) (mm) (mm) (no) (gm) ea rca mente Red shiner 102 36.42 Bullhead minnow 2 Os el Mosquitofish 2 O.'41 Warmouth 4. 0.35 --- Page 60 --- Navasota River seine samples, March, 1976. Station III. Sn needa Total Total x We xX Length Catch/ 2 Catch/ 9 catch wt wt range length range 1,000 ft 1,000 ft Species (no) (gm) (gm) (gm) (mm) (mm) (no) (gm) ee er i i a i ea ar ne eaticcnemtetmi Pugnose shiner 5 1.66 Red shiner 58 19.33 . Sharpnose shiner 10 3.33 Bullhead minnow 19 6.33 Mosquitofish 23 7.66 Wafmouth 2 . 0.66 Bluegill 4A 1.33 Bluntnose darter “2 0.66. Slough darter 1 0.33 Logperch . . 1 0.33 --- Page 61 --- Navasota River seine samples, March, 1976. Station IV. a Total Total x Wt Xx Length Catch/ 4» Catch/ 2 catch wt wt range length range 1,000 ft 1,000 ft Species . (no) (gm) (gm) (gm) (mm ) (mm) (no) (gm) sigs esi i tgs pamper emcee tn an a pi a Pugnose shiner 1 0.62 Red shiner 18 11.25 | Silverband shiner 14 8.75 Bullhead minnow 3 1.87 Dusky darter 2 1.25 --- Page 62 --- Navasota River seine samples, September, 1976. Station I. Total Total : Wt X Length Catch/ 45 Catch/ 9 catch wt wt range length range 1,000 ft 1,000 ft Species (no) (gm) (gm) (gm) (mm) (mm) (no) (gm) Gizzard shad 1 13 13 - 111 - 0.8 10.8 Bullhead minnow 13 10 0.8 0.5-1.0 37 26-51 10.8 S| Red shiner 43 32 0.7 0.5-2.0 37 29-47 35.8 26.7 Mosquitofish 8 4.5 0.6 0.5-1.0 33 30-37 6.7 3.8 Bluegill 1 2.0 2.0 - 47 - 0.8 ie, Dusky darter 2 3.0 1.5 1.0-2.0 53 45-60 5 Oy 2) --- Page 63 --- Navasota River seine samples, September, 1976. Station IT. Total Total x Wt x Length Catch/ 9 Catch/ > catch wt wt range length range 1,000 ft 1,000 ft Species (no) (gm) (gm) (gm) (mm) (mm) (no) (gm) Secs pe neces ree larncoseseecessosissi menses oss aeras ese eee escapees Bullhead minnow 17 15.0 . 88 0.5-1.0 40.0 30-45 12.4 © « Os? Red shiner 219 215 98 0.5-2.0 38.0 25-57 156.4 LS wa Blacktail shiner iL 1 140 ~ 42.0 ~ 0.7 0.7 Mosquitofish 34 23 0.68 0.5-2.0 32.0 23-41 24.3 16.4 Channel catfish 5 8.0 1.60 1.0-2.0 44.0 40-48 3.6 5.7 Bluegill 2 2.0 1.0 1.0-1,.0 38.5 38-39 1.4 1.4 Dusky darter L2 25.0 2.08 1.0-4.0 59.0 47-72 8.6 1729 --- Page 64 --- Navasota River seine samples, September, 1976. Station III. I an Total Total xX Wt xX Length Catch/ 2 Catch/ 3 catch wt wt range length range 1,000 ft 1,000 ft Species (no) (gm) (gm) (gm) (mm) (mm) (no) (gm) sees cict-toanmmpeeeeeeeeepeap eee ne a sa camden Gizzard shad TV 1 11.0 a a - 105 - 0.62 - 6.90 Bullhead minnow 3 3.0 1.0 1.0-1.0 37 36-39 1.87 1.87 Red shiner 11 545 0.5 0.5-0.5 33 29-36 6.87 3.43 Mimic shiner . 1 0.5 0.5 - 37 “ 0.62 0.31 Sharpnose shiner 1 1.0 1.0 - 49 = 0.62 0.62 Ribbon shiner 8 165 0.9 0.5-1.0 39 36-41 5.0 4.68 Tadpole madtom ) 2.0 1.0 1.0-1.0 40 37-42 1525 1.25 Mosquitofish 52 41.6 0.8 0.5-1.0 33 26-39 32.50 26.0 Bluegill 6 8.0 1.3 1.0-3.0 42 39-57 3.75 5.00 Largemouth bass 1 TT. 0 11.0 - 97 - 0.62 6.90 White crappie 1 7.0 7.0 - 90 = 0.62 4.37 Black crappie 2 300.0 150.0 86-214 197 86-214 1.25 187.50 --- Page 65 --- Navasota River seine samples, September, 1976. Station IV. Total Total xX Wt x Length Catch/ 5 Catch/ , catch wt wt range length range 1,000 ft 1,000 ft Species (no) (gm) (gm) (gm) (mm) (mm) (no) (gm) Ribbon shiner 16 10.0 0.6 0.5-1.0 33 27-38 10,6 6.6 Red shiner il: 2.0 2.0 - 51 - 0.7 1.3 Mosquitofish 3 4.0 1.3 1.0-2.0 39 35-45 2=0 2.7 Blackstripe topminnow 2 2.0 1.0 1.0-1.0 37 36-38 1.3 1.3 Channel catfish 1 2.0 2.0 - 53 - 0.7 £3 --- Page 66 --- Navasota River seine samples, November, 1976. Station I. oor ere ee Total Total x Wt x Length Catch/ 2 Catch/ 5 catch wt wet range length range 1,000 ft 1,000 ft Species (no) (gm) (gm) (gm) (mm) (mm) (no) (gm) nen ane eee re er a ee re Gizzard shad 2 39 19.5 14.0-25.0 125 110-139 Dee 43.3 Bullhead minnow 8 8 1.0 1.0-1.0 47 44-50 8.8 8.8 Red shiner 180 180 1.0 0.5-2.0 39 33-47 200.0 200.0 Mosquitofish 16 10 0.6 0.5-1.0 35 30-41 17.7 11.1 Green sunfish 1 3 3.0 - 55 - LiL 303 Bluegill 12 8 0.7 0.5-1.0 31 26-38 13.3 8.8 --- Page 67 --- Navasota River seine samples, November, 1976. Station II. a Total Total x Wt x Length Catch/ 9 Catch/ 9 catch wt wt range length range 1,000 ft 1,000 ft Species (no) (gm) (gm) (gm) (mm) (mm) (no) (gm) ae ie ae a i Bullhead minnow 16 18.0 4.5 0.5-2.0 46 39-58 13.3 15.0 Red shiner 72 96.0 L3 0.5-2.0 43 34-52 60.0 80.0 Channel catfish 2 360 LS 1.0-2.0 58 55-61 1.6 205 Dusky darter 1 2.0 2.0 - 62 - 0.8 1.6 --- Page 68 --- Navasota River seine samples, November, 1976. Station III ttt dt Total Total 5 3 Wt x Length Catch/ 5 Catch/ , catch wt wt range length range 1,000 ft 1,000 ft Species (no) - (gm) (gm) (gm) (mm) (mm) (no) (gm) atepeaenmeiatnatmmenipencaermean vein pers tit te a a ct Bullhead minnow 6 35 1.1 0.5-2.0 43 37-51 6 30d Golden shiner 1 6.0 6.0 - 88 - 1 6.0 Blackspot shiner 6 6.0 1.0 1.0-1.0 48 - 6 6.0 Red shiner 24 27.0 Ll 0.5-3.0 44 30-59 24 270 Mosquitofish 12 3¢5 0.5 0.5-1.0 32 22-44 12 34.5 Green sunfish 1 6.0 6.0 - 73 - A 6.0 Warmouth 4 20.0 5.0 1.0-7.0 61 35-75 4 20.0 Bluegill 12 39.0 343: 0.5-24.0 47 31-112 i2Z 39.0 Longear sunfish 9 19.0 261 1.0-4.0 48 41-65 9 19.0 White crappie 2 56.0 28.0 5.0-51.0 120 81-159 2 56.0 --- Page 69 --- Navasota River seine samples, November, 1976. Station IV. cence Total Total x Wt xX Length Catch/ 9 Catch/ 9 catch. wt wt range length range 1,000 ft 1,000 ft Species (no) * (gm) (gm) (gm) | (mm) (mm) (no) (gm) a White crappie 1 155 155 - 223 - Lvl 172 --- Page 70 --- Appendix C Gill Netting Navasota River (none this segment) --- Page 71 --- Appendix D Standing Crop Navasota River (no data this segment) --- Page 72 --- Appendix E Age and Growth Navasota River (no data thi…