ML20039D977
| ML20039D977 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Clinch River |
| Issue date: | 01/06/1964 |
| From: | Auerbach S, Martin R, David Nelson OAK RIDGE NATIONAL LABORATORY |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20039D944 | List: |
| References | |
| ORNL-3530, UC-48, NUDOCS 8201060394 | |
| Download: ML20039D977 (300) | |
Text
{{#Wiki_filter:' 3 l.. , . c2 -J'f d88bd f- M 70 gp l j t /)],!@'l[O-. ss' - ' l
! {
,},.- -7 e 2"! REFERE!lCE 2-39 1 ;* -
6jy.; e a
~
5.i . ORNL-3530 fd '
; UC.. 48 - Eiclcsy cnd IA:scino ,
,, ]
s
',1
.;, . e -
.' -l*, .
GROWTH AND MOVEt.'.ENT OF St4ALLMOUm l i
.. g
- il - -
BUFFALO,. !CTIO5US BUBALUl(P./,?INE5SJE), s .; -
.- .a ;
IN WATTS BAR RESEP.VO'.', TENNESSEE
' ' ?;'. 3 1e 21 R. E. t/.crtin I 'i . 1. / uer'ec e'n O. J. Nelsen 4 .
1 1 l I l ? i ! 1 i j t q t o e tMNk g=.-x: do ff_}y . bgs,h_.k ---
*^
,i i; . -
- s
.t.- N ~
9 oY .fr. id:i -5. Q \o+ a: n-- -
;) *
% .'~s L. 2 -);*
i
- } , I c -l3-r. 4,5 Y
l.VT:d'4 w -r f Yo s N /o?! g (( 0:-~ M - O AZ P.lLG:i t' ATiO:.m t I. ADO!!!'JG.Tl
- o p e ra t o m., by. .
'i -
UNION C An 3 t C5 C C.7PO R ATION f or the
. ~
-j- - -
'I ' I
- U. S. A10 11C E i: E nC Y C OR.I.'. l SS :O:!
/i
./'\
/Q(
E~~8201060394 811231 1 PDR ADOCK 05000537 C. PDR -
. - w - .-
4 .% .: u. e
+
Y P
=
l
- e ,,
e i .
.? .
- .ECAL NOTif t -
_...,_,..e. Th4s repeet esy,e,er,ed ,es eseese el Co..ene. t spensered ,,;g, po,her.tha.Jiastsile . . .... . . . . _ .. noe the Comm.as:en, eer any possea noing en hebell of *ke Cw=*.isseeer, e
- A. Llekes e.e s erveney w represereveeen, esseessed se impfieJ. in s res,es* to the euweey, seei,leseness, or esefelaens of she infer =seles seeweseed en this report, or that tne use of ~
e., is .sie e,,.,e.es. .e.s.t. . ,r..e s s d.ui. d i.e eh. s .e, e .., .ee ta. ..
. ,,te sei, 4,i 9 si , .
- 8. Assewees e9y liabilieles ith renomet to the ese of. er for demete s re.etthms Ire.= the ese of say infamerieve, apperates, ee ed, er , recess disslosed in this renre.
As weed in she ebeoe. **persom eati.3 en behelf of the Cee.miss'en** iecludes eay employee se seneressee of the Ce=Eission. w ee;*eyee of such setenter, ee she ec at thee swh eeployee .
. 4 . ..= ut. .f - the Co.w a.ei er e. , tere. .I .weh. s e.,rn e, ,,e, .re s, disse.a.nees, e, ,\
,,eviesa euess es e., i.gs eres: tea ,w see es his oceler-eae e sem eae -i.h she C .i,sion, .
. .e his emptey.e.e . rh tesli seah sa.e., , . l i
l 1. l. e
. e
~~
, . ~
.s .
<=
, , . . ... -...e. . ... . . . .
. . . . .Q
> ...a.... .. . .s.n. ss . .s . . . . .
* .....~ ~ .. . . . . . . . . .
e e
i
% b _ _
ORNL-3530 Contract No. C-7405-eng-26
- HEALTH PHYSICS I3IVISION Radiation Ecology Section GBCA"TH AND IDVEE;T OF SFALI20UTd EUFFALO, ICTIOBUS BUBALUS (RAFINESO.UE), IN WATTS 3AR RES/OIR, TEINESSEE R. E. Mar. tin, S. I. Auerbach, and D. J. Nelson .
Sube tted as e thesis to the Feculty of the Graduate School of The University of Tennessee in partial ful'fillment of the requirener.ts for the deSree of Doctor of Philosophy in
.Zoolo6Y- -
[ s DATE ISSUED
~J A P. - 6 5 %
l l i
- OAK RID 3E NATIONAL LA3 ORATORY o .
Oak Ridge, Tennessee . operated by UNION CAESIDE CORPORATION for the U.S. ATOMIC EIRGY COMMISSION l l l
i k
-A _ w- - m m m ._m . .m m , _ _ _ , , . _ _ . .
.m _
ABSTRACT The smallmouth buffalo, Ictiebus bubalus (Rafinesque), population . of Watts Bar Reservoir, Tennessee, was investigated in order to describe
~*-
' ' ' _ its eBe distribution, Browth rates, dispersion, and importance as azi accu:allator of radionuclides. Measurements and scale samples were taken I from com=ercially-caught fish and fish caught in the ORNL ta6ging oper-ations. Scale impressions were analyzed for age and growth phenomena.
i l Dispersion of smallmouth buffalo was investi 6ated by conven ional tag - Stable and- ye - ~ - Si E6 methods and by autoradiographic analyses of scales. radiochemical composition of scales was eynMned by spectrographic anal-i
' ysis, flame ' spectrophotometry, and radioutric surveys.
Watts Bar smallmouth buffalo in the co =ercial catch ranged from four to fifteen years of age. The largest nu=ber of fish in the catch was from year class six, the youngest year class which was completely
' vulnerable to commercial fishing gear. Annulus formation occuzred prior to June. The total survival rate was found to be 49 per cent for year class six, 35 per cent for year class seven, 26 per cent for year class eight, and 19 per cent for year class nine.
The rate of change in weight as len6thincreasedwas1006/cm i f'ro fish exceeding 31 cm in total length. Absolute growth was 422 m at three years, 441 mm at six, 487 m at seven,' 522 m at eight,- and 609 m at nine. The species characteristically exhibited the largest relative growth during the second year of life. Conditions for growth - evidently had improved f. the past six years as was indicated by an increase in total length attained at the end of succeeding years. Growth ecmpensation was evident duzing the fourth and fifth years of life.
~
iii
L _ b . _ e _. -._ - _ - iv .
' ~
Calcium was the most abundant elenent in fish scales with at least tventy-three other elements present in varying quantities. Fish scales and bone vere found to contain radionuclides of ruthenium, ces-
; dum, zirconium, zinc, and. cobalt. Radiometric surveys'of' scales re- c j' of vealed the Watts Bar Reservoir small=outh buffalo population.vas a ,
relatively minor accu:::alator of radionuclides with only 0.08 per cent , shovira the presence of artificial?y produced radionuclides. Approxi-mately t5 per cent of the Clinch River fish and Tl per cent of the Ti . . . Whitq Oak Creek fish had accu =ulations. - Limited data on dispersion vere determined from conventional tags. Mach more dispersion and life history data were determined from autoradiographic analyses of scales. These dispersion data vere applied only to individuals because the number was too srall for generalizations for the population as a whole. All normal scales containing radionuclide accumulations were found to produce identical autoradiographic patterns of concentric ~ circles which were associated with growth of the fish in contaminated areas. This phenomenon was combined with conventional capthre-recaptu're methods of population estimates in a proposed technique of population studies., A laboratory experiment showed that scales could be tngged with cesium-134, but this radionuclide was found to accumulate in much '. larger concentrations in the soft tissues than in the bony tissues. ' , Data- on population characteristics of the smallmouth buffalo are biologically significant in that they increase our basic knowledge of this commercially important species. The dispersion study is especially important in that an entirely ncv technique of study was developed and found to be superior to conventional tagging methods.
ACKNOWLEDGE?T1'S
.:. This report.is based on a thesis, submitted to the University ofv .i".
-Tennessee in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the doctoral degree. The report describes research carried out in t'he Radiation Ecology Section, Health Physics Division at the 082 Rid e6 National Iaboratory. Ths research was supported by the Oe$ Riige Graduate . . . . .. . . .
Fellowship Progam .of the Oak Ridge Institute of Nuclear Studies. _ .. Appre :iat ion is expressed to Dr. James T. Tanner, Department of - Zoolo6y, UniversJty of Tennessee, for counsel and advice during the ' course of the study. Thanks are due the following: Mr. Harold Iatendresse, , Johnny's Fish Company, Knoxville, Tennessee, for assistance in data collections; ,Dr. Glenn Gentry and 1/ . C. E. Ruhr, Tennessee Game and Fish Corrission; and Mr. C. J. Chance a'nd Mr. G. E. Hall, Tennessee Valley Authority Fisheries Branch, for advice during h.he cour'se of the study. Gratitude is expressed to the following me$bers of the EltiL staff: Mr. W. D. Gude, Biolevy Division, for advice in autoradio-graphic techniques; Mr. J. E. Parham, Mathematics Division, for = - as'sistance in mathematical computations; and Mr. R.'C. Early and 1 Mr. N. A. Griffith, Health Physics Division, for ' assistance in d,'a'ta collection and preparation.
~ . . .
Y A
s 1 w l 1 vii i I.- COITIEITIS ~ I 13STRxC2..... ...................... ............................... 1u ACKNOWLEDGISTIS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . v
.,.....I., INTRODUCTION..... ......... ....................................
. 1. ,,
_.,II. REVIEW OF LITERATURE..............*............................. 5
. Population Characteristics....................... ............. 5 Age distribution . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 Dispersion................................................. 5
. .. Grevth......................................................6
~ ~ *
' Fish Scales in Population Studies . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . r. . . . . . . . . . . 7 -
Me th od s . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
- - - Scale fomation and structure *
..............................7 Accumulation of Radienuclides by Fish. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 III. STUDY AREAS, SPECIES, AliD IEIHODS OF STUDY..................... 12 Study Are as . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 .
Species Description............................................ . 13 IV. AGE DISTRIBUIION OF SMALLMOUIH EUFFAL0. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15 Specialized Methods............................................ 15 Annulus deteminstiens . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15 Tagboard strip canipulations . . '. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16 Analysis of Smalbouth Buffalo A 60 + 18 V. GROWTH OF SIMOUIH 3UFFALO. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25 Length-veight Relationship . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .'.'. . . . . 25 Growth An alys e s . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27 VI. STABLE AND RADI0 CHEMICAL COMPOSITION OF FISH TISSUES. . . < . . . . . . . 43 S table Chemis try. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . 43 ' Radiochemistry . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 46 Radiometric Surveys......................................I.~.'... 47 s ~ Scale Autoradiography.........................c.'............... 53 . Scale cleaning and mou 1 ting . . . . . . . . . . r. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 53 Exposure and develop e nt . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 54 C e s ium- 134 in S c ale TaS61 ng . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 59 G
-h- + -
w - ,7, , - . , -
1
._ b l
r viii l VII. DISPERSION OF SMALIl.10UTH BUFFALO. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 64 Conve ntional Tagging . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 64 Autoradiogram Analyses....................................
. . . . 69 VIII. DISCUSSION........................................,............ ~
g3 IX. SGOIARY AND CDUCLUSIOI;S . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .'. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . g1 DIBLIO5BAPHY . . . . . . . . . . < . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ;. . , , . 95 4
- e. P E
e e g 1 l l l e 4 so
- wor *
. 4 .
9 1 i A
t
- . CHAPIER I IN1'RODUCTION
,In ecological. investigations it is necessary to determine the
_ interspecific an.d intraspecific relationships between organisms, their effects on the physical environment, and effects of the physical en- . virnn e nt upon the organisms. The study of organisms in such an eco- .
,mlogical. investigation often follows the form of a population study-m '
- . e' designed to determine the characteristics of that populatien. A popu-lation is considered to be a group of organisms of the same species
~
occupying a particular space and possessing characteristics of the group which are not characteristics of the individuals of the group. So$e of these characteristics are: density, birth rate, death rate, age distribution, biotic potential, dispersion, and growth form (Odun, 1939). The primary objective of this study was to detemine the age distributilon, growth rates, and dispersion characteristics of a selected fish population in the Clinch River. Because this investigation.vas a part of the continuin6 Clinch River Study (Morton,1961), it included an investigation into the speciesA importance as an accun:alator of radionuclides. The smallmouth buffalo, Ictiobus bubalus (Rafinesque), vas~ selected for this investigation of population characteristics for . several' reasons. An examination of the fish tagging records of the Radiation Ecology Section revealed that the species is abundant in the 1
.,_, y --- '- - -- --
6w
. 2
.. area throughout the year. The species is com=eicially important as in-dicated by the fact that over one million pcunds are harvested annually from Tennessee Valley Authority impoundments. 'A preliminary radiometric survey of fish species from the: Clinch River indicated that-the smal] - " ' m ."'
f mouth 5uffalo was one of the biotic accu =ulators of radionucif. des re-leased into the river as vaste from the Oak Ridge National Iaboratory. l; The study of population characteristics was based on the exami-
- nation'of scales from the fish; 'It(.is'a Eeneral principle that the' '
8 6 scales register all the stages of growth of fish and that every factor - . 1 influencing this growth is expressed on the sculptured, outer surface - - 5 (Bertin,1958). Periods of rapid growth, retarded growth, and even ~~
"~
periods of spawnint; activity may be interpreted from the relative po- \ sition of marks on the scales of most fish. I4a (1910) established [ i that there is a cons' ant relationship between the size of the fish and ,t ( l the size of its scales. Examination of the outer surface of the scale ' I reveals the animal's current a6e. The knowled S e of age is essential in a j j the study of growth. In conventional growth studies the scales regu-l larly are used to compute the length of the fish at the end of previods
? .
growing seasons, as indicated by the spacing of year marks (Ricker,
- j
- r
~
1958). - - Emigration, imigration, and migration are movements of indi- .. viduals which may affect several of the population characteristics. The investigation of these movements now is limited to capture-recapture l study methods and conventional marking techniques. A rs,)or disadvantage exists in the conventional methods of markin6 fish. The attachment of metal or plastic tags to the animal's body has been shown to influence l its behavior and inhibit growth (Rickes,1942) e
,o e - _ _ . - N 3
- l. , A preliminary autoradio6raphic exe ination of scales from several
{ species of Clinch River fish revealed that the radionuclid'es had accumu-i lated in patterns of concentric circles. This accumulation was assu=ed to .be the result.of Srowth.of..the anical in a contaminated area. If 4.
. .2- ,.
- any of the nutrient materials used by the animal in forming new body tissues contain radioisotopes of essential elements, these icotopes will follow the same pathway as stable isotopes of the element and be incor-c Torated into these tissues When accumulation of radionuclides occursc ,l^- /.' .
- q. . :! ,
in the scales it can be detected by autoradiography. A compariscn of' ~ scale autoradiograms to the Browth of the specimen should reveal when that individual was in a contaminated area. -. . . . In recent years radioisotopes hava been applied eff-etively to the investigation of several phases of aquatic biology. Biological i productivity and rates of biogeochemical cycling have been measured by radionuclide methods. They have been used in the investi 6 ation of fish-diseases and nutrition. They also have been applied in tracing the movement of water and pollutants in water in hydrologic studies. Some application of radionuclides has been made to the marking of aquatic animals, but little success has been achieved. Most of these studies have been based on the use of radioactivity as a means of locating the , radioactive individuals. One such study was conducted by Kondrat'ev (1902) in which he tagged commercial fish species by holding them in water containing a weak concentration of radionuclides for several hours. Then these fish were released and recaptured by commercial fishing methods. The catch of fish was passed through tanks equipped ' with radiometric counting devices and the number of radioactive fish
~
k
, . vas recorded. This method had some success in testing the efficiency of co=nercial fishing gear.
Pendleton (1956) pointed out the advantages of radionuclides for t, marking animals in ecological . studies. The radionuclides are not-d'e '- * " 7.h - -
~
tectable by the senses of the animals and they are easily applied with mini =al handlirs to large groups of ani=als. Some techniques do not require that the organisms be captured, handled, or even seen by the
~
investigator. The radionuclides are' incorporated 'intoibe individual'd '.
, body, thereby tending to prevent loss of the tag. Sey=our(1958) dis- -
cussed the ta6ging of fish with radionuclides, but concluded that -- present-day carkics methods are =uch more practical. His objections to ' tagging fish with radionuclides were that tagged fish are difficult to , detect becauce of the shialding effect of water, the high energy radi < ation necessary in r'adioactive tags m15 ht have a detrimental effect on the fish, the fish tagged with radionuclides might co:.stitute a health hazard if consu=ed by hurans, and the identification of individuals' by such tags would be extremely co= plicated. However, Sey:nour appears to
- have considered using radionuclides pri=arily as a means of locating
fish, as most previous investigators have, done. Hooper, Podoliak, and ~ Snieszko (1961) stated that future use of radionuclides in the mrking of aquatic ani=als vill be only in situations where there is cocplete ,,_ control over the fish harvest or where the tagged fish can be handled,, , vithout danger to the public. G t
. v CHAPTER II REVIEW OF LITERATURE A. Population Characteristics :. er:crJ w l
l l 1. Age distribution ~ lotka (1925) concluded that a population tends to. develop a sta-
,,)le age distribution. Moyement of individuals from other populaticus or changes in environmental conditions may disrupt this balance. Hov - .
ever, the population eventually regains its old stability or a new one after the disturbance. Allee, et al. .(19' 4 9) discussed the relationships between age distribution and othef characteristics of the population. There is a preponderance of young individuals in the population soon ' after spawnirg because of the high fecundity of fish. However, the survival rates for young fish usually are lov because of the intense pressure of predation. Predation continues u .til the young fish reach a size where they no longer are suitable prey for larger fish. Survival rate is the factor determining the number of individuals entering a ne'..' age group.
- 2. ,
Dispersion Populations of stream fish in natural habitats cannot be assumed to be isolated tnits. In the absence of physical barriers movement of l individuals occurs between adjacent populations. The movement of fishes may be random (Thompson,1933), but more likely the movements have cause in population pressures, environmental changes, or migration behavior.
. l
)
l 11
__m _m .- _ 6 nink (1955) presented evidence supporting a ' concept of stream fish pop-i ulations being divided into sedentary and mobile groups. His data on I fourteen species revealed that each species included a sedentary group whici. remained near the point of capture and release and a mobile group - whic ranged more or Iess videly. Carp seemed tn adapt their" movements :- to thy ph'sical conditions of their habitat. They usually were seden - tary in stable habitats, but mobile in habitats subject to flooding. Some carp, the only rough fish- species included.in this work, ranged as " '"' - ' far au 200 miles. Gerking (1953), Iarimore (1952), Funk (1955), and : '
~
others have concentrated on the investigation of game fish movements, ' { bome ranges, and boming behavior. Game. fish are much less mobile than fi rough fish. Miller snd Bryan (1914) after =aking a' limited investiga- t 4 1 tion of t:ovements of fish in Tennessee Valley Authority impoundments, { concluded that the fish pcpulations of creek e=bayments studied were f core or less indepe. dent of the ccin reservoir and few fish moved back and forth between them. Present knowledge of the covements of rough fish is liMted because of the past emphasis placed on the study of game fish movements, but it is generally believed that rough fish do not maintain home ranges or exhibit homing behavior and that they range considr'rably farther than game and pan fish species. - 3 Growth Growth is defined as an increase in size. Rounsefell and Ererhart (1953) described growth by two different approaches. Absolute growth is the average size of fish at each age. .This size may be either length or weight measurements. The absolute growth rate curve is sigmoidal in shape and the inflection indicates the point at which the *
..m_
t 7
, rate changes from a continually increasing rate- to a decreasing rate of growth. Relative growth is defin'ed as percentage growth in which the increase in size in each time interval is expressed as a percentage of the size attained at the beginning of the time interval. Relative growth is most rapid in younger fish and constantly declines. Total lengths vere used in describing growth of smallenuth buffalo in this study because co==ercial fishermen re=oved the viscera before bringin6 the fish to the collection point. -
B. Fish Scales in Population Studies
- 1. Methods f.-
Carlander (1956) evaluated the methods currently used in studying . I age and growth. Recapture of tagged fish has been the method used in population studies by most investigators. Black (193l), Richer (1953), j Woodbury (1956), and ::ny others have found that'the presence of a tag on the fish's body inhibits growth and influences behavior. Hile (1941) analyzed the uses of length-frequency groupings for age deter-mination and found that considerable inaccuracies' existed becatise varying growth rates of individuals elirdnate peaks of abundance at j older ages. l'ost investigators agree that the interpretation of growth rings on scales, vertebrae, otoliths, opercular bones, spines, and fin rays is the best source of information on the age and growth of fish s ,
~
in natural habitats.
- 2. Scale formation and structure Van Oosten (1957) summarized infernation on the for=ation and development of teleost scales. The scale has its origin in a cass of
Y _. 8
' fibroblast cells in the der =al layer of the skin. This cell mass flattens out to form two distinct layers between which there appears a fibrous network. Surrounding osteoblast cells initiate the for-mation of the' bony layer by secreting calcium salts into the ostcoid - "
tissue. The fibrillary plate next appears as a thin sheet between the , bony scale and the 2cuer layer of osteoblasts.
. Growth of the fcr=ed scale is continued by addition to the
=argin of the bony surface layer and the deposition of thin fibrous .
layers belov .it. Since the surface layer grows by. deposition of un- ,
.terials at the edge, it does not increase in thickness with age and ,
thegarlysurfacesculpturingdoesnotchangeexceptforwear. This fact n:ake,s it possible to determine the age of the fish from its scales. The thickest pa'rt of the scale is always in the center. Scales nay be thought of as greatly flattened cones (Figure 1). The fibrillary plate is largely or entirely uncalcified and without vascular canals. The bony layer is composed of an organic fracevork impregnated with inorganic salts, mainly calcium phosphate and calcium
' carbonate . The surface sculpturing of scales has been described in ~
detail by Creaser (1926). ~ l . i i e#oAYi.?o.
-,feomv tarta
/
# ,. 's X
m M N N nereittaav e. ares Fig. 1. Cross-Section Diacram of a Fish Scale. .
9
~
C. Accur:ula' tion of Radionuclides by Fish The advent of ato:ic energy installations has led to the con-4 . tam nation of some aquatic environments with lov-level radioactive ' h vastes. The distribution of these radienuclides in any aquatic environ ' f ment vill vary v'ith the physical, chemical, and biological character 3 i t
,, istics of that environment. Concentrations of radionuclides vill vary between species and tissues and vill fluctuate according N food habits,
; life cycles, and seasonal changes. - A mcjor quantity of the radionu- '-- '- " I i
-
- clides within the b. iota vill be held by organisms which make up the -
primary trophic levels in the early stages of contamination of aquatic , habitats where the standing crop of producers exceeds that of the con- l j su:::ers. However, the radicnuclides will move to other trophic levels later where they cay be concentrated in large quantities (Davis and 1 Foster, 1958).
~
Krucholn, Geldberg, and Boroughs (1957) sur=arized the factors .
~
which contribute to the accumulation of radionuclides in living organ-isms. The accur:ulation and loss of radionuclides depends en their 1 physical half-lives and biological factors contributing to their in-corporation in, retention by, and disappearance from the organisms. I Water' characteristics, such as salinity, per cent composition of the dissolved solids, pH, oxygen-carbon dioxide ratio, and the presen[e of complexing agents, also affect the accumulation of radionuclides. The radionuclides of strontium, cesium, cobalt, and ruthenium are considered to be the most important vaste products released into the Clinch River from a bicaccumulation point of view. 'Iack of in-vestigation prohibits generalizations on the accuu:ulation of cobalt O ..
--- , ,. m. . _ .__ _ _ . _ __ __ _ __
V 10 , y fish, but the other radionuclides have been investigated to some ntent. Boroughs, Chipman, and Rice (1957) traced an ingested dose of
,s.;ium-137 in small tuna, Thunnus spp., and found the radionuclide was .
l .Acn up rapidly by the liver, heart, spleen, and kidneys, but was lost i npidly by these or6ans. Misele, Gonads, brain, and integument con-unued to accumulate cesium-137 faster than they lost.it. Davis and .
.: ster (1958) suggested that absorption was the primary method of .- - -
{
~
g :ssium uptake, but experiments .into this specific problem are incon-s'.usive . Data on cesium-134 upt oe by sunfish in this study support
- .e idea that radiocesiu= enters the fish's body in considerable anounts
. rough ingestion and accumulates in the soft tissues.
Jones (1960) discovered that bottom-feeding plaice, Pleuronectes tessa, accuculated nitrosyl ruthenium-106 in the liver and spleen eating organisms embedded in contaminated silt. The skin activity *
these fish was lov. When menhaden, Brevoortia spp., vere fed
.'.henium-106 there was only 0.05 per cent of the ingested dose re- ,
' *ning in the digestive tract after 128 hours. There was 0.25 per
- .t in the fish's body or on the skin surface and 0.01 per cent in
' on the gills. It can be concluded that ruthenium-lO6 enters the ,
'h's body by ingestion and accumulates in the active tissues, but
y in small quantities. ,
The radionuclides of strontium have been studied extensively use of their long half-lives and tendency to concentrcte in bony nttes. In one of the earliest studies on the absorption of radio-
' ides by. fish,- Procser, c_t t al. (1945) immersed goldfish, Caracsius tus (Linnaeus), in a 'solutien containir.g strontium-89 Th2y ,
V 11 determined that the gills, skeleton, and integum nt of large goldfish were ten to twenty times more radioactive with strontium-89 than muscle tissue. The scales contained about 80 per cent of the total
' activity of the integument and the bony element of the gills contained * /
more than the soft portions. Fat tissues were hi 6her than integu=ent-in strontium-89 accu =ulation. Miscle and eggs were the lowest in strontium activity. Brain, heart, liver, testes, and swim bladder Vere relatively low in strontium activity Of .the total radioacti tity . .
. of goldfish immersed in radiostrontium, tVo-thirds of the activity was in the integument, one-sixth in the- skeleton including the fins, and one-tenth was in +he gills in,cludin6 the bony ele =ent. Saurov (1957) found teieosts absorted strontium-90 from an environmental solution with a higher accumulation in scales and bone than in =uscle and internal or6ans. Biduell and Forc=an (1957) placed rudd, scardinius erythrophthalmas (Linnaeus), in fresh water tagged with strontium-90 and after 272 days found a high accumulation in scales,. a low" accu =u-lation in skin, and an inter =ediate accumulation in bone. Danil' chenko (1958) concluded that strontium-90 enters the vertebrate body arid settles in skeletal structures, replacing calcium. Ophel (1962) ob-served that shiners, Notropis spp., living in Perch Iake, Ontario, which had contained strontium-90 for approximately five years,. had a ,
whole body concentration factor of 950 time,s that of the water. The flesh of perch in the same lake had an avercge concentration factor of five, while the bone of perch had an average concentration factor of 3,000 at the equilibrium which was reached in the fifth year. Martin and Goldberg (1962) found 95 per cent of the radiostrontium fed to Pacific mackerel, Scomber japonicus Houttuyn, was excreted in
. e
~
k r 12 twenty-four hours. The remining five per cent was fixed for at least
;35 days with 80 per cent of this activity beir.g in the calcareous '
tissues. Boroughs, Chipmn, and Rice (1957) vorking with Tilapia observed that about 70 per cent of the radiostrontium accumulated in bone was readily exchangeable and that the recainder was firmly bound i 3 in a lattice or to an organic matrix with a slow turnover rate. It 2 can be concluded that radiostrontium enters the fish's body pri=arily through absorption and accumulates in varyin6 concentrations.in.all. -
, tissues. The highest accumulations occur in the bony tissues where --
~
the element has a slow turnover rate. t t t . I CHAPl'ER III SNDY ARIAS, SPECIES, AND METHODS OF STUDY - 1 A. Study Areas a t Data on fish in this study were collected from White Oak Creek, . the Clinch River, and Watts Bar Reservoir. White Oak Creek, the majer source of radioactive vaste contamination (Morton,1961), is within the backwaters of Watts Bar Reservoir and at full pool has an area in cxcess of five acres. White Oak Creek water is diluted an average of . 450 tfmas at the point where it enters the Clinch River, 20.8 river tiles upstream from the confluence of the Clinch and Tennessee rivers. Clinch River water is diluted an average of 5.6 times as it enters the Tennessee River at TRM 507 7 Watts Bar Reservoir on the main stream G
J w . .- -
/
13 of the Tex 2essee River is formed by Watts Bar Dam at TRM 529 9 This reservoir contains a surface area of 38,600 acres at full pool with a ~ sh'oreline of 783 miles (Fig. 2). ' I . (
. 3.
fS"4%.
. EWORY RIVER "'
' n*TE CAK o , CREEK mz-,
- 79. .
f WELTON MLL DA'J
.k
*t' TRM 560 )y (
A V j/
~
FORT LOUDOUN DAM l
* . raus3oj / -
. ,s ..> .
. U 4 . ARTS sAR reservoir t ,cfC ( >
{g [ - j- TauS40 ~
.W, y.? -
f)j WA TTS SAR Dat .
- TR:a SSO TERNESSEE Rivtt *
- ! ff Fig. 2. Clinch River and, Watts Bar Reservoir, Tennessee. '
~
ae B. SpeciesD'escription * ' The small nuth buffalo, Ictiobt$'s bubalus (Rafinesque) is a mem-ber of the Sucker Family, Catostomidae.' 'The species is videly dis-tributed from IM:e Erie south / to Mexico. -I6 is'co:: mon in the Missis'sippi,
/
Missouri, Ohio, and Tennessee rivers cnd their :larSer tributaries.
' / m, d
W ___ y. g _ - -- - '
V,
~
g The s=all::outh buffalo reaches a size in excess of 30 inches and 25 pounds. Scheff=cn (19%) reported a specimen 30 inches locs weighing 25 younds 8 ounces fro: Reelfoot Iake, Tennessee. A 33 8 inch speci=en weighing 23 Pounds was taken from White Oak Creek in May 1965 Speci= ens of 15 pounds are relatively co==on in comercial catches on TVA rerervoirs, but the average weight is near three pounds.
. The s=all :outh buffalo are botto=-feeders preferring raddy or silty bottoms. They eat both plant and ani=al foeds. Aquatic insects, mollusks, other small eqhatic animals, and alsae are co= :on in their -
diet. Iccal co==ercial fisher =en occasionally find their stomachs packed with plant seeds. Weiss (1950) reported that in scaron this species may pack their stomachs with cotton fro = cottonwood trees or the seeds of other plants and trees.' Since the introduction of carp which utilize the car foeds and habitats, the tvo species have been in direct ec= petition. However, both species are abundsnt in Watts .
~ Bar and this co= petition has not been observed to affect either spei:ies
(' i
. t adversely.
. f
<.,,.- Smallrouth e
buffalo evidently inhabit the deeper, swifter waters
'ofthelarderivers. No unss rigrations, such as spawning runs, have
'r
,- been,noted locally. They spawn in the early spring in sloughs and shallow wee,dy areas..
An eight to ten pound female lays 300,000 to
/' s
- 400,000 eggs whh<h are fertilized and scattered on the botto= and "
I. eft without parental care (Weiss,1950). There is undoubtedly a high
,J' .
.morte.lity ra.th for the eggs and young fish. In spite of this, the t . '
s.m l] utk. buffalo have flourished in the impound =ents of the Tennessee
' vail 6yjiuthority systen. They build up large populations. Yields of
- L .
./ l /
/
s
- 4 L ..- __ - _
V
~
y ~y 'q - 1 q ,
"*%.r w "
s - . s 1- _
* ^
g , 15
.;- 7 s 3 , .
3 I .. up to J00 pounds ptr c re.hcve been reported from s=all lakes in
-Missouri. ' '
t .: { J
':~,
w
- ,,..-~
.. s ,.
CHAP 1'ER IV
;l _
. 3
_ , .m.
'( ,
. . . 'N '.'
AGE DIS 2IBUT10N OF SMALIMOUTH BUFFAlf,
- 3 . . -
~
s N A. Specialized Methods
.c
~ .
. 1. Annulus determinations The scale method of age detemination was proved to be valid for
-> 'smallmou'th-buffalo by Schoffman ('1944) and by Eschmeyer, Stroud, and Jones (1944). However, annulus formation in this species is not dis-N
..tinat End this fact leads to s'o=e difficulties in age determinations.
Catting over is a ters applied to the presence of inco::;plete circuli between complete circuli. These inco=plete circuli are the result of L ' ( cessation of growth during spawning or adv'erse environmental conditions. Incomplete circuli may even be formed if the fish is injured. Known age burralo from Wisconsin vere examined and their scales were found to be similar to the Watts Bar fish. The annuli on the scales of the Wisconsin fish were not complete. This phenomenon can be considered to be a
-~~~
characteristic of the species. Gross inspection of the buffalo scales gave a good idea of the
, , different seasonal growth rates and was found to be useful in aging the fish. There was definite crowding of the circuli ictediately inside the
' annuli toward the focus or center of the scale which corresponds very well to the reduced growth rate that would be expected during the winter.
B
c
, e s ~
16 ,
, Annulus formation seems to be followed by vider spaces between the cir-
~
culi during the summer growth period which is due to.the increased growth rate in the sum =cr. . I Several criteria were established for defining the true annuli on scales of the s=allmouth buffalo. Usually there was some cutting over by the annulus in the lateral fields of the scale near the borders of the anterior and posterior fields. There definitely was some irre- - gularity or pattern change in the posterior field along the annulus which was most obvious in gross inspection of the scale impression. In many scales there appeared to be crowding of the circuli prior to annu-lus formation and vider spacing of circuli after annulus formation. The change in spacing was most obvious in the anterior field. In many in-stances the scale was observed to have cracked along the annulus during pressing.
. 8
- 2. Tagboard strip manipulations Two scales were examined from each fish on two different occa ,
'sions givin 6 four scales from each specimen in the calculations. In ,
Lorder to achieve the moct consistent results in annuli determinations, ta8b oard strips were employed in this study. A tagboard strip is a
. strip of paper which is laid directly over the pro,]ected image of the -
scale impression. The strip is r.arked at the focus, margin, and each - annulus of the scale on a radius through the center of the anterior field. The distance from the focus to each annulus and to the margin was measured in millimeters. A ratio was calculated between the dis-tance from the focus to each annulus and the distance from the focus e
- w. e
Y.
',- 17
..- to the margin. A figure representin6 the percentage of the total dis-tance from the margin to the focus was given to each annulus.
i Usually four. tagboard strips were made on scales from each fish. In some instances regenerated scales in the sample limited the readable a scales to less than four. The ta6b oard strips from one individual were co= pared to each other. When the distance ratio to the same annulus cor-i responded closely on all four tagboard strips the average distance - ' O .. I 1 i ratio was taken as the correct one. When obvious deviations existed be-tween corresponding distance ratios on any of the four ta6 oardb strips,
' the scales were reread to determine the correct location of the annulus.
When the tagboard strip examinations vere completed the age of the individual was compared to the total length. If the len6th was out of proportion to the fish's apparent age, the scales were reexamined to detemine if the correct age had been calculated. In most instances i such fish were determined to have had exceptional grovtEl, either fast j or slow, and the calculated age was allowed to stand. , A preliminary age-frequency grouping was made after the comple-tion'of scale readings and annuli determinations. Fish in each age group were arranged accordin6 to total length. The median total-length for each a6e group vas determined. Individuals which deviated videly from the median vere reexamined to verify their calculated age. Most of the deviants were found to be in the correct age group and to have had an ex".remely fast or slow growth rate which had placed them on the margin of the size range for their age group. L
Y - 18 i . 3 Analysis of Smallmouth Buffalo Age i - After the final determination of the age of each individual all the specimens were grouped into year classes. A year class designation indicate _s_ that the fish has lived throu6h it certain number of vinters, year class 1 had passed through one vinter, but had no annulus. . Year class 2 had passed through two vinters and had one annulus. This methnd of year class desiEnations coittinues throu6h year class 15 which had , ,, _ passed through fifteen vinters and had fourteen annuli. . ce=LYS-N L Nan
. > a 40 NNE 30 -
Ns509 4 20 e to - _ _ _
- 5 n O
i + i JUJ j ! ; y
; ; d>
m go . _ j f i- l l i l 5 o --- l 5 0 I a I ' 3 .
~ J AUGLST o
i g
; ,0 --
_f N = 257 l w
- 50 ,
o l i I "O SEP1EM9ER ~ g 30 N = 212 J ' 20 - L i o - -;
- l 4 o 8 9 c , it 12 13 64 IS 4 5 6 7 YE AR CL A$$
h
! Fig. 3. Age-Frequency Distribution of Watts Bar Smit 11 mouth Buffalo by Month of Collection.
.y 4
19
. Figure 3 represents the age-frequency distribution for the i
monthly collections of smallmouth buffalo from Watts Bar Reservoir for June, July, Augusr,, and September 1962. FI6ure 4, page 20, represents the age-frequency distribution for the four-month total. Figure 5, page 21, represents the length-frequency distribution of Clinch River small-mouth buffalo for 196o and 1951, and the Watts Bar smal1$outh buffalo for the su==er of.1962. . . . . :. . The smallmouth buffalo of year class 6 vere the =ost co==on in . the commercial catch from Vatts Bar during June, July, and August 1962 (Figure 3). However, year c1' ass 3 fish became most numerous in the Septe=ber catch. This was due to recruitment into the vulnerable size during the late su=mer. The nets used by the co=mercial fishermer. were of three inch mesh, and therefore, vere selective for fish that had reached a size of approxicately h00 c=1 in lensth. Daring June, July, and August, only the fish in the year class 6 and upwards had reached this minimum catchable size in large numbers. As the emperatures rose during the cutter and growth rates increased, fich of year clas,c 5 be-came large enough to be caught in large numbers. These data do not mean that either the fifth or sixth year class was dominant. The smallmouth buffalo in Watts Bar probably correspond to the heoretical aSe distribution curve for fish if the population is stable. The - younger year classes contain larSer numbers of individuals and b'ecome . succeedingly smaller in each following year as the' result of cortality. There is a smaller number of individunis in each succeeding year class unless a dordnant year class is formed by exceptional survival for one year class allowin8 a large number of individuals to enter the next
e . y
- 20 .
one -t - toatt 40 4 3S e k ' . '. ' '
-- 30 )- .
I .. i27. 25 H' I i
, J i
! s s ,, '
E E
-l'-
l tS - i 1 J., to i-.-i S _ - L--. i I 4 5
!t -ti _c__
6 7 8 9 'O to t2 e3 e4 e5 YEAR CLASS Fi E. 4. Age-F:equency Distribution of Watts Bar Smallmouth Buffalo for Total Collection. year class. No indications of such a dominant year class were found in the sEallmouth buffalo population in Watts Bar Reservoir. The length-frequency distribution graph of Clinch River and Vatts
- Bar smallmouth buffalo (Figure 5, page 21) illustrates the effect of not selectivity. Commerical fishin6 Bear allows only the larger individ-uals of year class 4 to be captured, althou6h it is probable that more individuals of this year class are present than individuals in year class 5 or 6. The Greater frequency of the smaller size fish in the
.o . _.
21 m"'S'M b a , i e Ca tssO__ !. _l N o 308
/
, _ JI -v.J t . ; _ _ __ ___
E I I I i I
-a 3
- CR 1964 - P N m 347
$ g E* [ 'k I [
.. . y, ___/ t t .
'l
~
,c . al .
we test l = = 127: ' Il \ t I
. l \ l !
te i , t .i 400 4S0 500 550 600 650 . 700 750 000 SSO 200 250 _300 350 107AL LEWTH lmm)
.- i - Fis. 5. Length-Frequency D'istribution of Clinch River-Sm11 mouth Buffalo for 1960 and 1961, and Watts Bar for 1962.
catches from the Clinch River in 1960 and 1961 resulted from the use of nets made of smaller cesh. A mininum nesh size of about one inch was used on the Clinch River, whereas the minicum mesh size on Watts Bar vas-three inches. l Assuming that the h tts Bar smallmouth buffalo nui'ers are repre-i sentative frem year class 6 throuEh 10, the survival rates for the species in these year clesses were calculated by the formula: Nt+1 s=p t ~~' vhere N t = the number of fish in any year class and ;ftd = the number of fish in the succeeding year class. Four hundred and ninety fish per thousand in year class 6 enter year class 7, 350 of year class 7 enter year class 8, 260 of year class 8 enter year class 9, and 190 of year
I .
~ '
22 .
- f. class 9 enter year class 10. The number of individuals in the year classes older than ten was too lov for calculation of survival rates.
Survival rates for Watts Bar smallmouth buffalo appear to be higher than those calculated from data on Wisconsin fish (Frey and Pedracine,1938). The Wisconsin fish had 580 individuals per 1,000 survivin6 from year class 3 to 4, 130 from year class 4 to 5, 'hoo from
, year class 5 to 6, and 130 from year class 6 to 7 The Wisconsin data t
vere characterized by the presence of dominant year classesc
. Time of annulus formation affects the results of population studies where scale reading forms the basis for age determinations.
Table I shows the calculated average total length at the last annulus for fish in each year class. These data are grouped according to month of collection. Calculated lenSth increment since the last annulus was observed to increase steadily from June through Septe ber in all year classes except eight, where the June group had 3 cm more crowth since the last annulus than the July collection of the same year class. .This increase in length since the for=ation of the last annulus would indi- .
- cate the annulus is formed sometime prior to June in Watts Bar small-
~
~
mouth buffalo. Average total length at capture revealed an expected increase in total length between June - July and between August - September in most year classes. However, in all the year classes there was a noticeable decrease in the average total length between the July and August collections. These data indicate that the larger fish from all year classes are caught in June and July and that the smaller fish of the same year classes are caught in August and September. Presum-ably, fish caught in August should have an added month's growth over S j
. 1
Y .- 1 i . l
' ~
23 l I. TABLE. I CAIfUIATED AVERAGE TOTAL LENGTHS (BY MOITfH) Month Average Total Average Calculated Calculated length Col- Inngth (r.::n) Total Length (mm) Increase Since Age lected N at Capture at Last Annulus Last Annulus 4 Jun 53 451 424 ~ 27 Jul 11 453 426 27 Aug 17 441 406 35 Sep 7 473 437 , 36 ,. 440 .e 19 o 3 Jun 177 459 :- . j - Jul 67 470 - 449- - 21 Aug 58 461 436 25
- .Sep 90 469 439 30 6 Jun 180 470 454 - 16 L
Jul 117 473 457 16 Aug 86 469 450 19
'Sep 75 475 449 26 Jun 72 482 470 12 7
Jul 53 488 474 14 Aug 474 456 18
'70 21 Sep 30 477 456 t
. 8 Jun 12 536 521 15 Jul 38 498 486 ,12 Aug 21 490 473 17 Sep 8 500 475 25 9 Jun 9 551 540 11 Jul 6 549 537 12 Aug 3 500 481 19 Sep 2 478 459 19 l
10 - Jun 3 650 643 7 Aug 1 526 505 21 11 Jun 1 500 495 5' Jul 1 736 714 22 Aug 1 545 523 22 l Jun 1 625 6 19 6 13 . 1 15 Jun 1 850 842 8 l
- a. ._c_ _ = . _ _ . - - - _
I Y .. l ..- . 24 . . those caught in Jt:1.y. Since ail the collections were taken froa a region on the main stream of the Tennessee River, it is possible that smallmouth buffalo populations from different tributaries combine to form the Watts Bar mainstream population. If different growth rates existed in the various tributary populations, it vould be possible that a segment of the Watts Bar population with a faster growth rate could
' move into the fishing area early in the summer and that a seg=ent with s
a slover growth rate could arrive later. This possibility of a seg- ., ._ ... _
~.~
mented population could not be tested fror. data 'in this study becatise , all collections were made in the same area. . Recruitment is defined as the addition of new fish to the vull-
~
~
nerable population by grovt}i of smaller size' categorf es. Ricker (1933) described the modal age in the frequency distribution of the catch as lying quite close to the first year in which recruitment can be con-sidered complete. Year class 6 was the modal age in the catch of Watts Bar smallmouth buffalo. The sr allest sixth year class fish caught vas h00 mm in length. Net selectivity allowes most fish less than h00 mm , in length to pass through the 3 inch mesh. Data in this study indicate that recruitment is complete at age six and that fishing pressure is equal on all fish from year class 6 upward. Recruitment was determined for year classes four through nine _ ._ by back-cQulation of the total length at previous annuli. Total . length of 400 mm was considered the minimum size for fish caught in 3 inch mesh nets and the percentage of fish exceeding this minimum length at each age was determined (Table II). Increasing growth rates for Watts B2r smallmouth buffalo in their early years have resulted in
~
t , I..-
- 25 .
4 . f ,, . younger fish being recruited into the fishery each year for the past s five years. TABLE II PER CEh*I' VULNERABIS AT EACH AGE Year Class 4 5 6 7 8 9 Me
~
o o .- o, o o' o . 1-l 2 1 0 0 0 84 26 6 2 1 5 3 , i 4 loo 98 72 29 18 15 5 - 100 99 91 76 55 6 - - 100 100 100 loo CHAPTER V
~
GROWTH OF SMALU40UTH BUFFALO
. A. Iength-veight Relationship .
~
In the tagging operations at Oak Ridge National Laboratory dur-ing 1960 and 1961, 655 smallmouth buffalo were taken from the Clinch River. These fish were measured to the nearest one-half centimeter and weighed to the nearest ten grams. In the no'rmal course of oper-ations all the fish-tagging data are recorded on IBM record cards. The 4
.r. .
26 .
~ len6th and weight data on the smallmouth buffalo were uced in calcu-lating a regression equation of veight as a function of len6th. This equation expressed the rate of change in fish weight as total length increased. Calculations vere made by IBM ~T09q computer. The lenSth-ve16d relationship of the 655 smallmouth buffalo from the Clinch River
=
e . m
- S"4% ,
I
-m
_ L ii I . I l ,
! I I h
/
l l i l I I l I . . / '
,, .I ! I i l i l
} !
l l i _._ , l l
! ! l I i___j i l I_' I !
!!Iii i ~ t l I i ! I .
~ ~-~
!! :l1 !
I i 7 h . l i 3Sco iIi i jT - '
- i i'
6
' I i : .
I. . I I i i l l I : I
- 33. !! I l l .V -
I /l l veo
/- I l /- l I
~
t l l 17 1 - 1 - 1 i l I / . i i
'K . .
l
'Y.k. s ; .
l Ei [l ggt i i t '
... r
+
i i , m q- .i j dillw I i l i l l l
*"Y~w . so u u a 3
w .o u n u LEPsGTM tuoil Fig. 6. Length-Wei;ht Relationchip of Clinch River St:milmouth Buffalo. . 1
(_ . 27 1.
..- is illustrated by the scatter graph (Figure 6) with each point repre-senting one individual. The calculated regression line is plotted on the graph.
Weight of a fish is considered to be a function of length (Hile, 1936). If the form and specific gravity of a fish were constant through-out its entire life the relationship between length and weight could be i expressed as a constant. The len6th-weight relationship is expressed usually by the formula: W = aL"
' vhere W = veight in grams, L = total length in millimeters, a is a con-stant, and n_ is an exponent. The calculated regression coefficient (a) is 0 9976 and the exponent (n_) is 3 These data result in the formula for the rate of change in fish weight:
3 i W = o.9976 L The 95 per cent confidence interval on a is (0 9749 - 1.0204). Stand-e.rd error of the re6ression coefficient is 0.0116. The len6th-veight regression line may be used as a nomogram for the conversion of measured total length to estimated weight for smallmouth buffalo within the length range' covered by the nomogram. B. Growth Analyses Growth rate calculations were made on 1,271 smallmouth buffalo collected over a one week period each in June, July, August, and September 1952 from Watts Bar Eccervoir. Total length of each fish 9 &~
f
~
. : 0
~
to the nearest millimeter was used in conjunction with the distance ratio between focus-annulus and focus-margin of scales from the age determination study. The total length of each' individual at each pre-vious annulus was determined by use of the. formula (Bertin,1993): _ e 5=r*L m t - where Ly = total length of fish at the time the. first annulus was formed, ey = distance from scale focus to the first annulus, e = dis- - tance from scale focus to margin, and Lt = total length of fish at
~
capture. This for=ula is based on ,the fact that the size of the scales increases proportionally as the size'cf the fish increases. Annulus distance ratios and the individual's total length at time of , capture were recorded on IBM record cards. Total length of each fish ' at each successive annulus was back-calculated, sumaed, and averaged for each year class by conth of collection. All calculations were made by IBM 1420 Computer.
- Absolute growth is the average size attained by the fish at each
, age. Length was the parameter selected for describing the growth of .
Watts Bar smallcouth buffalo because the fish were sacpled at a local fish wholesale house after having been gutted on the lake by co==ercial fishermen. 'Absolute growth of the smallmouth buff alo has varied videly over the past fourte'en years (Table III).- The number of individuals in the older age groups (ten, eleven, thirteen, and fiftcen) was too small for accurate generalizations on these year classes. The calculated total length at the end of the first yccr's growth has increased stead-ily from 93 ta for year class nine through 134 en for year class four.
~
c.... . ..
! ~
TABIE III' , -(. 4 . .g ABSoIUTE GROWTH OF SMALDiot1TH BUFFAID Calculated Total Length Average at Successive Annu11 Average Total 3^ "" Iength (m) 6 7 8 9 10 at Capture 1 2 3 4 . 5 . Age N 451 134 303 422 4 88 82-246 206-400 368-48't 391-520 119 277 382 441 463 5 392 420-543 75-181 152-372 257-445 36-502, , ,, 412 hs3 110 253 348 471 m , 6 458 400-595 71-175 147-344 232-465 312-534 380-559 e 480 104 233 318 385 432 465 . _ 7 225 430-594 71-215 143-372 238 485 299-508 363-550 398-562.u 219 306 372 422 459 487 . 502 103 8 79 61-179 146-318 245-450 311-522 356-54o 397-576 424-594 451 600 412 493 522 9 20 535 465-650 98 207 290 355 458 71-149 152-268 230-406 296-457 363-489 402-552 428-598 446-631 381 439 491 535 57A 609 619 120 231 314 . 10 N 526-8 ; 89-177 205-290 279-378 337-459 384-531 421-604 452-676 479-733 505-797
$94 91 165 258 328 397 444 476 35 538 577 11 3 65-125 140-191 210-280 270-42o 330-508 370-559 400-596 430-633 460-670 495-71 500-736 ,
e k es
~.
C .- I . I .
. .- 30
~r ..
.The increase in calculated total length at the end of the first year's
{ Erowth amounted to 5, 1, 6, 9, and 15 mm respectively for year class i *
} eight through four.
The relationships.between absolute growth of the various. year- , classes-are apparent in Figure 7. The dashed lines connect the length for year classes nine throu6h four at corresponding ages. The increas-
. ing' slope of the dashed lines indicates that Watts Bar sm11 mouth buffalb have been increasing in total length in each' successive year'#
class. The increase in absolute growth for successive year classes .
= -- -
probabl:4 ves the result of improved food availability through rer. oval -- -=-- of competing fish by commercial fishing. Fishing pressure on the sen11=outh buffalo has increased in Watts Bar Reservoir since 1958 when 15,687 pounds ve.e caught through 1961 when 59,328 pounds were caught. The increase in fishing pressure vould . 6 0** 443 m ' -
#l .
>=
, 7
_ a= i ,. y
/[ l
,/
l r
~
/ /l
$ l em -
/
~
~~
E l ,- 'l .- 300 - -.- , ,~.~~~ ,.,., j j ! . ..
,co ? __.__ .
/ __. . -:_...__ _.
o 3o u o r 3 ej .
/
DO
' , --~~- **= **_ "
CNC YEAR PdTER.45 Fig. 7 Absolute Growth Rates of Watts Bar Smal3nouth Buffalo. o O e. 8 e
I v , 31
- i. .*
i
. result in decreased population density, in turn leading to improved '
food availability. However, smallmouth buffalo density data are not availabic at this time. Absclute growth in weight was calculated from data on year *
- i . , nJ classes five through nine. The average' calculated total lengths for these year classes at annulus k, 5, 6, 7, and 8 (Table III', page 29)
- vere averaged. These average total lengths were converted to estimated
~
~~ ~
veights by use of the length-veight regression nomogram (Figure 6.page t 26). Watts Bar smallmouth buffalo had an average weight of 895 g at the time their fourth annulus was for:ed. The fish gained 275 g dgring their fifth year of life, 260 g during the sixth, 290 g during the seventh, and 35% g during the eighth. Insufficient nu=bers of individ-uals in the sample from other year classes prohibited calculatier. of veight increases,in other years.
~
The average annual growth incre=ent (Table IV) is largest for the second year of life in all year classes where adequate nuibers exist in the sample. In year classes four through nine the second year's growth exceeded that of the first year by 35, 39, 33, 25,' 13, j and 11 mn respectively. In year classes ten, eleven, and thirteen l the average annual growth increment for the second year of life was ! less than the first. The smaller increment for the second year of lire in these three year classes is questioncble because of stall nudbers of l individuals in these year classes and the fact that annulus determina-tions of these older fish are subject to considerable inaccuracies. In year classes four through nine the third year's growth was less than that of the second year by 50, 53, 48, 44, 29, and 26 cm respectively. ' O m
*
- 32 i.* .
r TABLE IV AVERAGE MmUAL GROUTII INCREISiT (12) Year Year - class 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 14 13 4 _ 134 169 119
~
5{ 119 158 105 59
. 6 no 143 95 64 7 'i 104 129 85 67 47 33 '" '
8 103 116 87 60 50 37 28 - 9 98 109 83 65 57 46 35 29 - Io 120 111 83 67 58 52 44 36 38 . 11 91 74 73 90 69 47 32. 29 33 39 13 113 93 75 50 57 43 32 37 31 32 31 25 15 119 170 36 77 68 59 43 42 43 25 17 17 17 9 The decrease. in e.verego annual growth increment continued through suc- - ceeding years after the second year's growth for all year classes exam-ined. Houever, there were some fluctuations up and down, probably as a result of some favorable growth seasons. A graphic illustration of the annual Growth increr.2nts (Figure 8) clearly shows the relationships _, between the amount of total length added each year by year classes nine through four. Apparently the habitat conditionc for fish during their first threc years of life have been improving in Watts Bar Reservoir since 1951, the year of spawning for year class ninc. Each 1 year class has been successively larger at the time it formed its first, e
33 on nDL N EG hadst 48 0 46 0 t
/k -
44 0 YEAR CLASS 4 [ i
/\ s E
*1 !
k 7 *
*d 400 8 /
3 9g , s . E
- 80
\
o - a' - 0 5 .
) 60
- l i I
40 N i 20 It
. O 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 4
YEAR - ( i I Fig. 8. Average Annual Growth Increments of Watts Bar Smallmouth Buffalo. . i j second, and third annuli. There was one unexplained exception where 9 the difference var only 2 rea. Year class seven had a smaller Growth l increment during its third year of life then year class eight. l
34 Absolute growth of Watts Bar smallmouth b'uffalo was compared to growth of the species in other areas (Table V, page 35). Calculated lengths at each age for year classes four through nine vere averaSed. These data were compared to back-calculated growth data on smallmouth , buffalo from Grand Iake, Oklahoma (Thompson,1950), Wister Reservoir, nklahoma (Hall, 1951), Chickamauga Reservoir, Tennessee (Eschmeyer,
,StroQ,andJones,194),andReelfootlake, Tennessee (Schoffman,194).
Sm11muth buffalo in Grand Iake, nk1nbo=a, vere larger than those in ~! Watts Bar at the end of the first year. The species was similar in , size at the end of two years in both areas. HovcVer, Watts Bar.small-mouth buffalo at three, four, and five years of age verc larger than those in Grand lake by 40, 53, and 6o =n respectively. smallmouth buf-falo in Wister Reservoir, Oklahoma, exceeded tnose in Watts Bar Reser-voir at every age fmp one through six. This species is larger in Reelfoot lake, Tennessee, than in Uatts Bar at every age from one , through seven. N 11 muth buffalo growth data from Grand Iake, Wister Reservoir, and Reelfoot Iake were only parts of pre-impoundment studies which included any fish species. The above-mentioned reports only - described the growth and did not attempt to analyz'c it. h11muth buffalo growth in Chickamauga Reservoir, a mainstream reservoir located immediately downstream from Watts Bar, should have been more similar to the growth of the species in Watts Bar than the growth of smallmouth buffalo in any of the other three areas. However, Chichacauga smallmouth buffalo were considerably smaller at ages one and two than Watts Bar fish. The Chickamauga fish were collected in 19W and the Watts Bar fish were collected in 1952. It is possible that growth conditions have improved considerably in both reservoirs ) 1 1 -~ __ _m_________._________.__
~~
~
'l __
i TABLE V ,
~' ' ;~ " '
T(YfAL LENGTHS (MM) 0F SMALUf0UTH BUFFnId
~
Grand b ke, Winter'Res., Chickamauga Res., Reelfoot Lake, Watts Bar, Oklahoma Okinhoma Tennessee Tennessee Tennessee Thompson, Eall, Eschmeyer, Stroud, Schoffman, Age 1962 1950 1951 and Jones 1944 1944 1 111.4 154 9-218.4 127 0 96.5 284 5
'2 248 7 215 9-256 5 342 9 162.6-182 9 388.6 3 344 7 264.2-304.8 408 9 ,
439 4
.' ~. _ ..
u 4 393 0 302 3-340.4 487 7 467 4 5 429 8 337.8-370.8 520 7 543.6 .
- ~
6 ' 460 7 571 5 59K.'4 7 490.0 ,, 647,7 8 - 522.0 - 9 782 3 12 835 7 . h e I s 4
v .
~.
~.- 36 during the ei 6hteen year time lapse betvcen the two collections. No other possible explanations were found for the difference.
Relative growth is percentase growth in which the increase in
- sizeinhachtimeintervalisexpressedasapercentageofthesize
. I attained at the beginning of that time interval. Relative grovth was calculated by dividing the annual growth increment by the total length of the fish at the beginnin6 of that year (Table VI).
- . Relative growth in cost species is cost rapid in the younger p n. .. . 2.,
fish and constantly declines. If fish size at hatching vore considered -- - to be zero the percentage growth at the end of the first year vould be , infiriite. Undoubtedly smallrouth buffalo at , hatching have a censurable size, but lack of data on these small fish prohibited detemination of ' the exact relative growth for year one. Walker and Frank (1952) re-4 ported fish in year class one had reached a total length of approxi-mately "O mm within one or tuo tenths citer hatching, iridicating a teasurable size at the time of hatching. Watts Bar s=:llrouth buffalo were concluded to correspond to the theoreticcl relative growth curve with a high rate of relative growth during the first year and a con . stantly declining rate in succeeding years. - Per cent growth per year was averaged for the first eight years of life for Watts Bar smallmouth buffalo in year classes four through nine. When these da,ta are compared to per cent growth of snallmouth " buffalo from other areas (Thompson,1950; Hall,1951; Eschmeyer, -
' Stroud, and Jones,1944; and Schoffman,1944) come striking dissimi-1, larities are seen. Relative growth of Watts Bar buffalo averaged 125 I
i per cent for the second year of life and was exceeded only by Wister Reservoir buffalo which had 170 per cent Srowth durin6 the same year. A L
~ ~ - . . - ' , . _ . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. -....---..c----..- -~~-. .. -~~ ~ -- -
I e' l l
~ ~' ~
TABIE VI t PER CENT GROWTH PER YEAR , i Year Year 6 6 10 11 12 14 ' l
. Class 2 3 4 5 7 9 13 4 126.1 39 2 ,
5 132 7 37 9 15 4 - 6 130 0 37 5 18 3 99
- . v 7 124.0 36.4 , 21.0 12.2 76 _
9 8 126.0 39 7 ; 21 5 13 4 87 6.1 9 - nl.2 40.0 22.4 16.0 11.1 7.6 58 . ._ 10 92 5 35 9 21 3 . 15 2 11.8 89 6.7 - 6.6 - - ,. 11 81 3 44.2 37 8 21.0 n.8 72 6.0 65 72 13 82 3 36.4 ~ 17 7 17 2 11.0 74 79 6.2 6.0 55 4.2 15 142.8 47 0 18.1 13 5 10 3 6.8 6.2 6.0 33 2.1 2.1 2.0 1.0 o - t
.
- u ,
..b b
^
^-
y _ . g I *
).. .
38
- i .
! , Urand Iake, Reelfoot, and Chickannuga buffalo had 27, 36, and 82 per j cent growth respectively during their second' year. Watts Bar fish had I
39 Per cent growth during their third year which exceeded that of all the other areas. Grand Lake buffalo had 20.per cent, Wister 19 per ,, .. cent, and-Reelfoot 13 ,per cent during the third year. Respective relative growth rates fo$- Watts Ear, Wister, Grand Iahe, and Reelh'oot
~
during the fourth year vere 20,19,13, and 6 per cent. During the - fifth year they were 13, 7, lo, and 16 per -cenc. Wister cr.d Reelfoot . . both had 10 per cent relative grovth during the sixth year which ex-ceeded the Watts Bar rate of 9 per cent. During the seventh year Watts ;
- Bar s=allmouth buffalo had 7 per cent relative growth which was exceeded by Reelfoot's 9 per cent. During the eighth year Watts Bar fish had a rate of 6 per cent. Variations in relative growth rates for s=all:0uth buffalo from different arecs in the third throu5h eighth years of life indicate extrinsic factors, such ct habitat changes or' variations in food availability throrch changing population densities, are influencing 1
the increase in size. Instantaneous growth rate is the natural logarithm of the ratio . cf final size to initial size for a unit of time,- usually one year. . Instantaneous growth rates for Watts Bar small=outh buffalo vere com-puted from ali the calculated average total lengths of all fish in each age group for each previous year. Annual instantaneous growth rates (Table VII) indicate the highest value for any year occurred in the l-2 year interval in yecr cle=s fifteen. The rates then steadily de-alined to a lov in the eleventh year class. The datr. for year classes ten through fif teen cannot be considered valid because of the low
O 4 0-
-- 1 1
- 3 . 0
.- 1 0 3
- 1 0 2
s 2
- x I *
. ': 0
?
*f -.
1 l 0 2 1 1
- 9'20o 3
0 1 o 0 1 8 0 1 5 2 3 .c. , 0 . . . ':. .. 0 0 - r 1
- . 0 0 f .
9 0 8 8 0 S 1 . 6 5 3
, .I E - ,
0 0 0 T 9 . A , 0 0 o . R . - H ) r 9 8 8 8 8 T ' . , 6 6 5 5 W a - 0 0 0 0 O e y 8 R 0 0 0 0 I G ( , I V S l 8 8 8 7 8
- U a 8- 5 6 5 7 5 E o v r 7 0 0 0 0 0 L E B N e 0 0 0 0 0 A A v T T n N ~I 7 8 7 6 8 8 8 A e - 5 7 0 6 6 6 T 0 0 0 0 0 0 S m 6 N i 0 0 0 0 0 0 I T .
L 7 6 4 3 3 4 5 A 6 7 8 0 1 1 0 9 U - 0 1 1 1 1 0 N 5 o. . N 0 o 0 0 0 0 0 A 5 3 2 8 5 4 9
' o.
1 1 2 1 4 1 409 11 1 1 7 5 1 1 3 . 0 0 o o 0 0 0 0 0 6 1 9 9 1 2 6 6 4 4 6 9 9 9 9 2 6
- 1 1 1 1 1 6 3 1 3 1 1 s
0 0 0 0 0 0 o o 0 9 2 2 8 7 7 8 5 8 5 3 2 2 2 0 3 3 0 6
- 3 3 3 3 3 3 0 8 2 3 3 3 3 t .
0 o 0 o 0 0, o 0 o 0 2 5 6 1 3 7 1 7 8 3 9 8 . 4 3 0 5 4 5 9 9 8 s - 8 8 8 8 7 7 6 5 1 0 0 o 0 o 0 o o 4 8 ' 0 0 s n rs aa 4 5 6 7 8 9 o el YC l n1 3 5 1 , 7 ' .
. . 4<
V , l
. number of individuals in the samples. However, there was a constant rise in the first year's annual instantaneous growth rate from year i class nine '
through year class five, followed by a slight decline in 5 year class four. The annual instantaneou's rates of growth for these year cla E es in the second and succeeding years do not appear to have - followed a particular pattern, but rather to havs fluctuated from year ' to year with the variations in environmental conditions. Instadtaneous - groph rates also were calculated on a monthly basis, but the data vere - inconclusive because of the slight differences in rates. ' Growth data on Watts Bar smallmouth buffalo were co=pareil to
- I the, growth of buffalo in Wisconsin (Frey and Pedracine,1938). com-I ,
l parisons. vere conplicated by the fact that the Wisconsin data included i g the largemouth buffalo, Ictiobus cyprinella (Valenciennes), in small ilu:6ers with about equdl numbers of s:rllrouth buffalo and blach buf-falo, I. niger (Rafinecque). Visconsin buffalo vere found to have the most growth during their second year of life. The Watts Bar buffal'o
! population also has the most growth during their second year. These f data suggest that smalltouth buffalo characteristically have a higher
}
f absolute growth rate during their second year of life, which may be the l result of a change in food habits after the first jear of life. f -
) Watts Bar buffalo averaged 5 m less than the Wisconsin fish at
, the end of the first year, but exceeded the Wisconsin buffalo by 12 mm e
i in the second year, 32 m in the third,18 m in the fourth, and 4 m I j in the fifth. Watts Bar buffalo vere 8 m shorter than the Wisconsin i
. fish in year class six. Year class seven Watts Bar fish averaged 19 m i
_J, .. _ __ ______ _____ _____ -
? . . -
j ..- ,
~
- i. '
j - - 41 - t . -
- f. longer than Wisconsin buffalo. The Wisconsin collection was cade up L of large numbers of fish in year classes two throu6h four, whereas, the ~
/
~ '
r Watts Bar collections were larger for year clasces five through seven. I - Iarge nu=bers of Wisconsin buffalo were found within a single ..: .-1
- 1 age group which suggests a de=inant year class. There also was evi-dence that the Wisconsin fish had cycles of abundance with good , seasons coming every third year. Watts Bar data gave no indication of. dominant
~
year classes or a cyclic population. '
.c
. Ice (1912) reported that estimated fish growth in earlier yecrs _. f.
of life, as determined from scales of the older fish, often was less
- i. , than the observed growth. This observation, known as Rosa Lee's phenos- ,
t . enon, has been accepted as a true characteristic of sc=e fish popula-tions (Hile,1936J. A comparison was = de of absolute growth in early years for year classes six thrcush fifteen which vere assumed to be equally vub:erable to the ec=:ercial fishing. There was a steady de-crease in the calculated total lengths in early years frun yehr class six through year class nine, but up and down fluctuations followed through year class fifteen. These fluctuations tend to preclude the presence of Ice's phenomenon in the Watts Bar smallrouth buffalo popu-lation. However, data on year classes ten through fifteen are ques-i- tionable because of small numbers of fish of these ages in th'e sa=ple l -
, Data on year classes six through nine only suggest the presence of I
g Ice's phenomenon. In order to adequately test for the presence of this phenomenon samples of the same year class should be taken in several successive seasons to avoid possible bias introduced by differing Greuth L
=4 ,
/,
g . .
- i 42 1 ~rstes in different years. Collections in this st'udy were limited to
- one year.
[ c The term growth compensation has been applied to a phenomenon in fish species where individuals that had grown rapidly in early life were . { cyproached-in size in succeeding years by individuals which had a rela-t
; tively slow growth rate in their early years. Growth compensation f cpparently is produced by a change in the relative rate of increase
- f among the larger and smaller fish in any age group. Scott (1949) pointed I ou'tkhatgrowthcompensationisassociatedwithadecreaseintheaver- -
1 l age yearly increment. Inspection of the avarage annual growth increments
- I r- of Watts Bar small=outh buffalo (Figure 8, page 33) revealed that there ,
i . { . was a complete reversal-in the relative position of the annual growth ,j increments for year classes four throu6h nine beginning during the i
? fourth year of life and continuing through the fifth year. This re-j versal indicates that the large fish which had Grown rapidly during . .
- t' their first three years of life start slowing down in their growth iate .
t-during their fourth year of life and that the sms11 fish with a slow initial growth rate begin to grow at a relatively faster rate. Growth ^ compensation does exist in the Watts Bar smallmouth buffalo population. O 6 e w --
- Y '. ,
4 I. '
~
CEAPZER VI SIABLE AND RADIOCHEMICAL COMPOSITION OF FISH TISSUES
'*~
A. Stable Chemistry , A composite sample was made up of approximately four scales from each individual in the June collection of Watts Bar smallmouth buffalo. .
+ This sample was oven dried at lOV C. .
,' An ash sample was sent to the Spectrochemical Iabora'.ory of the Oak Ridge National Laboratory Analytical Chemistry Division fo:- spectro-i
. graphic analysis. The values reported (Table VIII) were visual estl-ates takenfromastandardplateandusingacommong$aphitematrix. These values are to be interpreted as approximetions and are within the range of 1/2 to 2 times the actual concentrations.
One ach sample was put into solution by alternate cddition of I concentrated ECL, 30 per cent 22 H 0 , c n entrate HNo3, and .1N HCL, , l vith each step bein6 preceded by complete evaporation. The sample fin-ally was brought: to twenty-five milliliter volume with distilled water. This sample was analyzed by flame spectrophotometry by the Oak Ridge National Iaboratory Analytical Chemistry Division. Results of these stable chemical analyses are given in Table IX, page 45.
~
S=al b uth buffalo scales have a nineral residue content of N .05 Per cent by veight. Moisture content of the scales was not determined. Calciumwasbyfarthemostabundantelementamountingto0.1h2mg/g fresh veigh't of the scale. There followed in decreasing abundance: sodium, potassium, manganese, zirconium, iron, aluminum, lead, silicon, e
- L3 1
V, ..
~
i . 4 44 s . . i { TABLE VIII I SPECTROGRAPHIC ANALYSIS FOR SIABLE ISOTOFES IN FISH SCALES , i __ 1 l Element Ash Content (ppm) 4 I ~~
; Sodium $000 - 10000'
+
. Potassium 500 - 1000 -
- Manganese 200 - 300 Zirconium Iess than 200 Iron' , 50 - 100 -
Aluminum 20 ::ldo . Imad Less than 100 - 4 Silicon ' 20 - 50 . Cobalt Less than 50 . Chromium . Less than 50 1 Tin Iess than 50 i Zin: Less than 50 Molybdenum Iess than 50 . j Nickel Iess than 50 t Rubidium 10 - 20 .. l' * -
! Strontium 10 - 20 i .
, l Titanium Iess than 20 i
, Vanadium Iess than 20 g .
Boron 5 - 10 . I l Copper Trace - 10 _.. i Lithium' 1-5 S { Silver Traces - b r
} .
L s L e
*P t
y TABLE IX FIAME SPECTROPHOTOMEIRY ATTALYSIS FOR STABLE ISOTOPES IN MSH SCAES
- Ele =ent .
Ash Content (opm) -
. Strontium 266 ,
I Calcium 308,000 . Potassium 1,720 5 Sodium 9,160 , Cesium 1 . I Rubidium
~
1 r f cobalt, chro=iun, tin, zinc, colybdenum, nickel, strontiu=, rubidiu , l cesium, titanium, vanadium, boron, copper, -li-tium, and silver. A con.- j parison of ash content of strontium (0.266 cg/g) to that of calcium (308 mg/s) shows a stable strontium-calci 2m rctio .of o.394 x 10-3 in fish scales. , VanOosten(1957) sum =arizeddata$nfishscaleanalysesandre-ported that fish scales were co= posed of 41 to 84 per cent organic pro-tein and up to 59 per cent mineral residue in air dry matter. The -- J moisture content of menhaden scales was 20.6 per cent-, organic d tter . content k6.8 per cent, and mineral ash content 32.6 per cent. Chemical compounds and elements present were mainly Ca f?O 4
) and Caco with lesser 3 3 amounts of Pg3 I#04 )2, CaF2 ' I"2CO3 , Nacl, Fe, S, As, Cao, Ugo, P 0 , and 25 CO *'
2 .
~
L
N
\
i l ' :' 46
~. Results of stable chemical analyses of small=outh buffalo scales I (Tables VIII, page 44, and IX, page 45) agree with Van Oosten on the I
importance of calcium and the presence of magnesium, sodium, and iron in fish scales. Van Oosten did not discuss the other ele =ents found in . this study. - . B. Radiochemistry ' * -
--Bones and scales of s=allmouth buffalo from the Clinch River vere ' - - '
f analyzed by gab' spectrocetry ucing the ORITL Iov-level Radiochemic'al Iab- . - ^ - . 1 cratory. Bone samples were prepared by re=oving the flesh, clecning in *
!. tap-water, oven drying at 104* C for twenty-four hours, and pulverizing. -
Scale samples were prEpsred by scrubbing them in tap water to re=ove '1 f spidermal tissues and d'rying at 104' C for tventy-four hours. The sem- _ ples were analyzed for gama emitters; zuthenium-106, cesium-137, and
! cobalt-60 vere found to be present (Table X). , i '.
i - 3 . l r
. TABLE X RADIOCHFJf! CAL COMFOSITION OF SMALDDbTH BUFFAIO
, BONES AND SCAIES x i0-7 pc/g - l06 60
. Tissue Ru Cs 137 Co ,
, Bone 135 -
Bone 108 108 Scales ' 347 198 D e
-n .r _ y ... --
N. _ _ 47 Of the four msjor radionuclide contaminants in the Clinch River, 5 strontium-90, cesium-137, cobalt-60, and ruthenium-lo6, only strontium-90 can be considered a bone seeker.
! Nelson and Griffith (1962) in analyzing white crappie from the Clinch River found an average accumu ' '
latTon of strontiium-$O of 120 ppe/g in bone. However, strontium-90 l\
..concentrationsinbonewerefoundtovaryfrom30pe/gto2970pe/s in white crappie bone.
It can be assumed that strontium-90 was present i t e in the bone and scales of smallmouth buffalo, but no analyses were made for this radionuclide. [ Scales and bony tissues of fish scalyzed in this study were found . to contain radionuclides of ruthenium, cesium, and cobalt. T$eseele-1 v ments are not bone-seckers and it would not be expected that they should I
! be found in large quantities in bony tissues. Analyses of other tissues probably would have revealed higher concentrations of these radionu-clides, but this study was cor.cerned only with those radionuclides ac-cumulated in bony tissues except for strontium-90.
~
Fewofthiefish taken in this study contained enough accumulated radionuclides in their scales and bones for accurate analysis. - C. Radiometric Surveys .. Radiometric surveys were made of fish tissues to determine the quantity of activity from accumlated radionuclides. Scales were prepared by scrubbing them in tap water and drying at 104* C. Bones ' vere scraped clean, screbbed in tap water, and dried at 104* C for ! twenty-four hours. Gross ga-a ; counts were made of the dried samples ! l +. ,
= _ - _ . _ . . . . . - . , _ ~ - . .. . _ - . . . . . . . .
t . ., i V, ' ' 1 . . - . j , . . , . .-
,.. 1,8 1- ,, using a gamma spectrometer equipped with a 3 by 3 inch sodium-iodide
[ crystal with a 1 by 1 inch well. Gross beta counts were made of the 1 same samples using a counter equipped with a Geiger-muller tube. A l
'cosparison of the sensitivity of these two counting methods is made 'in ,
Table XIr -
. Beta surveys revealed the presence of accumulated radionuclides l .. in tissues which shoved ~no gamma activity. The high sensitivity of beta counting'results from the fact that 'Co , S' #
-YW, Zr -Nb 90, Rul06,, _
2 106
- ; Rh . , Cs137, and Ce144 -Pr144 decay primarily by negative beta particle '
i caission. Of the radionuclides found in fish scales from the Clinch River, only Zn with 98 5 per cent decay by orbital electron captuie 4 . . 1 and 15 per cent decay by positive beta particle emir.sion does not de- '
' cay primarily by neSative beta particle emission.
The primary purpose of the radiometric surveys was toL determine ~* i .
- f . from which fish the scales vould be autoradiographed. Moct of the auto- . .
lj radiographic exposure of No-screen X-ray film is produced by beta par- . i- , ticles, therefore, gross beta counting was selected as the best method cf screening the scales. Radiometric ; surveys were made with a Model D47 ! Gas F1.ov Counter manufactured by Nuclear-Chicago Compady. The counter' i .
- was equipped with a "Micromil" vindow and automatic sample changer.-
Results of this counting were grouped by capture location and' month of-
- capture. , Frequency distribution of the counting results of all the
! Clinch River 'sma11nouth buffalo appear in Figure 9.. Figures-lO 'through - 13, Pages 50 through 51, show the frequency distribution ,of beta counts t cf scale sanples from the Watts Bar:smallmouth buffalo for the months of
~ June through September respectively. .
.y m -.--,,we,e,,--ee w---,w. -v- e- r - s= =
- w ,
-l: :
.- 49 '
TABLE XI - COMPARISON OF BETA AND GAI2fA $URVEYS OF FISH TISSUES i Species Gross Beta cpm Gross Gat:ma cpm Capture Iocation Scales Bone Scales Bone Carpsucker
" White Oak Creek 45-111 0
" 63 0
. " 40 184 0 '
" 191
.- ." 28 117 105 c "
v 0 4 ' .. ""
" 39-114 111 0 01 -
23- 38 66 o 0~ Watts Bar 2 - kh White Bass . CRM 19.0 0 Gizzard Shad " 0 0 0 - Sunfish Hybrid 0 0 0 White Oak Lake O-
.i "
" 6- 13 7 0 0-Flat"Bul.1 head " O 14 0 O 41 -
0 n ". - 1 n 32 - 210 Warmouth " 50 - 0 Bluegill " 9 10 0 0 j'
" 4 4 0
" 21
" 8 10 0 0 White Crappie O 16 0 0
" White Oak Creek 0 6 0
- i. " 0
" O 27 0 0
" 0 2 0 0
" 0 6 O' O
" 0 0 0 0 White Oak Iake 0 8 Black Crappie White Oak Creek 0 0 Smallmouth Buffalo " O 6-10 0 , O 43 200
" 55 o
" 95 208 0 0
" ~
75 132 0 0 Watts Bar 0 Yellow Bullhead White Oak Creek - 31 - i
" 55 -
0 21
~
Channel Catfish "
- O Golden Redhorse " 380 -
_ .0
, 4 5 0 0
" 2. 6 l
" 0 0 ?
yoldfish 2 6 'O O Carp White Oak Iake .21- 37 58 - i CRff 20.0 ~ 4- 5 595 i
" 0 6 0 5 o i Iargemouth Bass o o White Oak Creek 0 0 0 1
0 ! eeg
+
. I
\
l s
~
0.g ' -
- yseCLAS$'840
,* gg OR%L.Ls.0e4 78264 42.93 w I BatCS 2o h, l p b
E l
- gso -
,- j.5 .
r__ '
;j j . . .
1 0 E ff . i ._ _ _m . , , , , , , , , e0 es e2 #3 e4 t$ to 57 98 99 26 63 94 t* 6 96: 217 382 454 476 . s . . ,,, .. . Fig. 9. Frequency Distribution of Grocc Beta Counts of Scales . from 146 Clinch River Sunlicouth Buffalo. 3, O*.'.'.".f.... 1 i 9397 MI i s.,, p .
! I i
a y T.ni ,
. .t
} ,
w l y to -,
. l, _ . . t. i -
r , i n 'i; i,l j! t j t
- i
' . .. _ . .!l._" . . . ;i : L h,____ !
- I - i
~
i i ,*I Il 1
- I : i .
io a n b !'is*a ir 5 it 's ll d_.1 a_it._ __ ' i4 e is i7 .. ,, ao as a s . .. , a... . Fig. 10. Frequency Distribution of' Gross 3 eta Counts of Scales - from 509 Watt.s Be.r Sealk.outh Buffalo Cau6ht in June 1962. , , (t
,, O".'f.*?...
is.ss > t e.. l w. . .. g. _. i - g ,I 20 . g - 7" y5 ,, , . (dlc., !!br o
-*p-' '
r I i I Ig- . _N = - to se it E3 se e$ es t? se ,9 to 29 22 . s c. mars see m.a .. Fig. 11. Frequency Distribution of Groc'c'Ecta Counts of Scales
' from 293 Watts' Bar Sc.allmouth Buffalo Caught in July-1962 dB
e a 51
.e e .'. fer's 4 i l~ '
AUGU$t 42.66 w i .... e (w 3 i 5 l
] -
? y to -- - i -l
.s. . . -- .
g , I - i li
, nr _._ !_]! IIn_ _ .l ,
to 49 42 13 84 IS t$ 17 48 69 2f' 29 22 , s ssw.o ~. Fis. 12. Frequency Distribution of Gross Beta Counts of Scales
- : from 257 Watts Bar Smallmouth Buffalo Caught in Augast 1962.
l*l.". .'?.n.
'
- 6 t I l 4 3 ,,
a cwec. l w ' - ( ,, _ _ _ _ _ t . . E l l Il ! l 5 S' t , I
--frijOR - * ..
i -is i , i J._ I..__J___l; ;;.!,/i ! 'L __ ! __. L i i ! j
.. -l .l . I F' wlt!! ah !Ti"_i',_r; c -lL ;i i i y to n et is 14 'S 's 67 e 69 20 at 22 a sw >< e.,~..
Fig. 13. Frequency Distribution of Gross Beta Counts of Scales from 212 Watts Bar Smallmouth Buffalo Cau6h t in September 1962. 9 Thirty-two scale sa=ples and three back;;round counts were in each counting group. A preset count of one hundred was reached for each sample and back[;round. The background varied from day to day by as-=uch as two counts per minute. Counting data vere converted to counts per minute. The -hichest background ma,tsurement in cach countin6 group was used as the background for that particular Group. When the counts per minute for any single scale exceeded tbq bigtest back6 round for thnt group the sample was selected for. autoradiography. A total of 1,271
e - .-_. _ _ _ xw. ~ o - .2 _
.a a ~ ,
V ,.
- l:
52 .
- s=allmouth buffalo scales from Watts Bar were surveyed and 342 of these individuals were selected for scale autoradiography. All of the 146 Clinch River smallrouth buffalo were scale autoradiographed.
A co=parison was made of the nu=ber of individuals in each monthly sa=ple of s=211=outh buffalE from Eatts Bar Reservoir which - exceeded the average background for that countin8 Group. In the June group from Watts Bar 49 9 per cent of the fish exceeded the average background. The percentage increased in the July group to 51.8. In i August the,perce.7tage..again increased to 59 2. The.Septer3er group was the highest with 61.4 per cent of the samples exceeding the sveraSe back-ground for the group. This =2y mean that the radionuclide content of i s=allmouth buffalo scales in Watts Bar Reservoir increased during the - t summer of 1962, but a thorough investigation is needed to test this , supposition. Small: Math buffalo from the Clinch River would be expected f to have a hie crh percentage exceedin6 the average background because the . group is cuch closer to the source of conta=ination. Of all the s=all- . mouth buffalo taken from the Clinch River in 1961 and 1962, 60.4 per cent of the samples exceeded the average background for 'the group. Comparison cf the counting results was questioned because of operational difficu.1 ties encountered during counting the samples. The "Micromil" vindow of the gas flow counter was damaged and had to be re-placed with an aluminum foil vindow (1 mg/cm ). This. changed the ef-ficiency of the counter and caused a noncorrectable variation in back-ground readingr.. With the "Micromil" vindow the average backg$ Ound was . 4 I 12.66
- 3 245 cpm at the 95 per cent level of significance. 'However, l vith the aluminum foil vindev the average back round5 was 13 97 o.965 cpm at the same level of significance. When the scale counts are at .
n
~'
m._,,e-53 s
..' such a low level that few exceed background, the confidence interval becomes critical and must be very exact for the comparisons to have meanin6-D. . Sca..l.e Autore'diography .
1.' Scale cleanin6 and mounting
._Several different n.ethods were tested for cleani.E.6 the scales to remove epidermal tissues. Scales were placed in a solution of pepsin' and HCL at various concentrations to d$ gest the epidermis. This method
~
- proved to be unsatisfactory because there was some breakdoun of th'e bony structures when the solution was highly acid. Solutions of lov acidity had no apparent advantage over tap water in re=oving the epidermis.. , ,
Scales were sothed in tap water for several hours and then scrubbed by hand. This metbod was effective, but too time consuming. The most efficient method of cleaning scales was found to be placin6 them in tap vater and allowing the epider=al tissues 'to decay . at room temperature. During this process the scales were placed on a shaker which provided continuous, sicv agitation. Usually less'than two weeks were required for the epidermis to disintegrate. The scales then vere rinsed several times in tap water. Then they were placed between sheets of blotting paper and weighted and allowed to dry at room temperatures for about two to three weeks. This method was adequat for
, removing the epidermis and flattening the scales. However, some radio-activity was lost into the water durin6. sotking. Origin of the radio- .
activity was not determined. It is probable that most came from the radionuclides.vithin the epideruds, re.t'her than from the bony parts of
.the scales.
3/, .
~
Dried, flattened scales were counted on glass microscope slides for autoradiographic exposure. The inner'or fibrillary plate surface was fixed to the glass. Fish scales have the shape of flattened cones and have a tendency to bend or buckle away from the slide when the , cement dries. Several, different types'of cesant were tested in fixing , the scales to the slides. The most successful method of mounting the - scalYs involved the use ,of subbed slides. Dipping the slide int,o a e subbing solution coats the surface of the slide with a substance which - is m' ore easily adhered to than clean glass. Slides were subbed in a - solut' ion of five grams of gelatin, one-half gram of chrome alum ,
**# l' # # #1** 1*# "'**#' 811d*" **#* ### # # # '
(Cr2(804)3
^
.i e twenty-four hours after subbing before scales were mounted on them. .
Scales were held on the, slides by a s, mall drop of Eastman 910 cement and pressed flat for several minutes, then allowed to air dry at room temperature. This method 6cnerall, was successful, but in severa.1 in-stances the scales buckled away from the slide during dryins. The . , slides were labeled and mounted on 8 by 10 inch sheets of carb' ard for - exposure. -
- 2. Exposure and development Scales,of sufficient activity were exposed in 10 by 12 inch cassettes and weighted to prevent the slides from shifting position on _
.the film. The outer sculptured surface of the scale was placed toward the film. At first a layer of Saran Wrap was placed between the scale and the film to prevent any chemical reactions from moisture diffusing -
out of the' scale. SaranWrapeffectivelypreve.7tedanymoisturefrom reaching the surface of the filn from the scale. However, sufficient I e
W .
- 55 drying eliminated the need for the protective layer between the scale 4 .
and film. Several different types of autoradiographic film vere tested to find.the fastest and clearest method. ,NI3-2 and NI3-3 liquid e:211sions were painted directly on the ou'ttr surface of =ounted scales. Liquid ~
~
emulsions were highly unsatisfactory because the scales bent and buckled
<. -away ihrem the slide uMer ;1.e -shrinking i!Tfluence of the drying e=ulis on/-'
Euckling occurred durin6 development and fixing also. This caused some difficulty in the preparation of pe.~anent slides. Distortion'cauced
.- ' by the secle buckling-rendered the autoradiograms unreadable.
Stripping film 'was placed directly on the sculptured surface of the scales which vere mounted on glass slides. Type AR .10 and AR .50, , stripping fil=s were tested. The AR .10 vas unsatisfactory becau'se of its lov sensitivity which required a lengthy exposure period ct the lov activity exhibited by cost fish secles. T,Te AR .50 stripping filn . which is approximately ten ti=es = ore sensi-ive than AR .10 p' roved to , be partially c:stsfactory and was used for preliminary analyses and for - the laboratory ..agging experiment. Both types of stripping film caused considerable buckling of the scales iuri:ig; d:7ing and development and vere not suitable for permanent records. ' No-screen X-ray film was the best material for scale autoradio-- graphy. However, this film is not particularly~ sensitive. A tdtal . exposure of about 2,000,000 counts over back 5round was needed to pro-duce a readable pattern or image. Exposure times for the 5'ish scales
- ranged from ten days to nine months. Autoradiograms exposed for a long periodof'timewereexpectedtoshouevibe'n'ceofso=eexposurefrom
.l4#* ~' 56 ,
. ' naturally occurrinE radionuclides. Robeck, Henderson, and Palange
-(19S4) reported that the natural radioactivity in fresh water is ex-tremely lov and that the radioactivity in aquatic organisms is at or I
'below 2 x 10" dpm/g. There were no obvious differences in the number .
or distribution of exposed photographie gralns in the background arcas ,
^
betweenscalesandthenumberordistributionofexposedgrains[atho,se areas of scales' where there were no accumulations of radionuclides.
. Development and fixing methods were the same for all films used. .
They. vere developed for five to ten minutcc in Kodak D-19_ Developer at 20' C. As soon as the image started to appear on the film the develop-ment was stopped by placing 'the film in tap water at 20' C for about p thirty se,conds. Leaving the film too long in the developer resulted in .. over-development causind the background areas of the film to become darkened. Film was c1* eared and fixed immediately in DuPont X-ray Fixer and Hardener at.20* C for at least ten minutes. Film was then washed for at least fifteen minutes in running tap water and dried in a du'st- , free drier with circulating air at' room te=percture. Photograph:.c nega- -
.tives~were made of the scale autoradiograms and these negatives were .
used in producing prints for permanent records. Prosser, et al. (1945) autoradiographed sceles of goldfish which had been immersed in a pond water solution of strontium-89 at 0.6 pc/ml_ . -
.for.six hours. . Examination of these scales revealed concentric rings and greater activity in the thick area at the base of the scale than in the thinner areas. It was concluded- that the concentric bands did .
~
not correspond to grouth rin6s, but rather to areas of different thick-n,e s s . e e p e y .n
e n. 57
~
. Micrometer measurements were made of the thickness of smallmouth buffalo scales in this study. All scales were found to increase in thickness from the margin to the focus. Vrany autoradiographed scales showed tne greatest ratioactivity was in the thin mar 6 nal1 areas. In comparing results of this stud,y. to those of Prosser, g al., it is significant to note that fish in this study had lived in contaminated areas and actually incorporated radionuclides into structural material,
~
'in the scales, thereas, fish in the other study were simply immer.=ed in ,,
*P the tagged solution for a few hours where it was impossible for grovth to occur. The presence of any radionuclides in the goldfish scales must -
have been due to imperfect cleaning methods prior to autoradiography. s . The first step taken when fish scales containing radionuclide , accu =nlations ver'e found to produce cutoradicaraphic patterna of concen-
~
tric circles was' to determine if all the scales from an individual vould produce the same pattern. One smallmeuth buffalo var teten from miite Oak Creek with scales which counted oser 440 beta counts _ove background. . All the scales, more than one thousand, were. removed from one side of this fish and labeled on the inner surface with india ink. The'se scales were cleaned, pressed, mounted in order, and autoradio6raphed with No-screen X-ray film. Subsequent development of the film shoved that all the- nor=al,
. scales of.the fish had the same pattern of concentric circles (Figure
~
14). Some recenerated scalec produced an exposure over the entire re-generated portien of the scale with the concentric circle pattern being resumed at the point where normal growth resumed. Someo ' f the regener-ated scale: produced no exposure at all. '[t was concluded that scales
s
==wr
.~
.: 58 *
~
-UNCL A$$1 FLED j PHOTO 58218 i
i l 9 r k' Fig. 14. Autoradiogren of Scales froci a Single Smallnouth Buffalo from Uhite 0 9. Creek. which grev while the fish was 'in a. conte.minated ' area accunnlated radio-nuclides in the region of scale growth. Scales vbich were regenerated . While the animal was in a contaminated area contained accun:ulated radio- . nuclides in the regenerated portion of the scale. However, scales which were regenerated while the aniral was in a noncontaminated area exhibited no accunnlated radionuclides in the regenerated portion. These data
+-
tend to deny the translocation-of radionuclides from one portion of-th'e iscale to another. Autoradiographic examination of fish scales was established as a valid method of dctormining the dictribution of accu =ulated rad'ionu-clides in the bony surface layer of the, scale. - icre'are several prob-9-
,- ,r- . , - . . , . - , -- , - -. , - , - - - ,. . , . , , ,.,,-,..,v, , -- , . - . - - -e, ,. , , , .
59 1 ems yet to be solved in the perfection of this technique. Most impor-tant is the availability of a film sensitive enough for the lov activity in the scale to produce an exposure within two or three weeks. Films currently in use require up to 2,000,000 counts over background irradi-ation to produce an adequate; image. On this basis, the moct active . I scales vould produce a readable image on No-screen X-ray film in'three to seven days. However, this hiSh degree of activity was unusual and tne most active scales from the Watts Ear ' collection exhibite'd onJy 215 t
, beta epm, which required over two months of exposure time to produce an acceptable image. Scales counting less than 20 beta epm produced no readable images because the time required for exposure was so long that natural background irradiation and chemical reactions produced
. . . ~
fogging of the film and eliminated the scale image. , E. Cesium-13h in Scale Tag 31ng . In the early autoradiographic cxaminations of scales from fish - caught' in contenir$ted areas the patterns of concentric circles led to s - the idea that radionuclides are accumulated in scale structures as growth occurs. If these rings could be identified with residence in a contaminated area it would be possible by bach calculation to trace the movements of fish in relation to contaminated and noncontaminated areas. 2._- A laboratory experiment was designed to test the feasibility of tagging
~
fish scalce with radionuclidec and using' the accumulations to identify the fish. Bluegill, Icpomis macrochiruc Rafinesque, and varmo'uth, Chaenobryttus
. coronnrius (Er.rtrs=), vere celccte; Ior be tsssing atte:@t because of
~. . 4 60 . .
their small size and . ease of feeding and maintain'ing in aquaria. Fish - were maintained individually in ten gallon aquaria which vere submerged 1in a water both for temperature control. Aeration was provided to each I cquarium. Periodic veights, measurements, and whole body gam =a counts cf the fish were-taken. Three scales.were taken from each fish at the
~
start of-the experiment and periodically during the course of the 'experi-
~ ment.' Mounted scales were autoradio6raphed with Kodak AR .50 stripping
?
film. 'The fish were fed earthworms. Worms were vashed in tap water prior to tagging. They were tagged by placin6 them in 25 ml of a - =- solutiion of cesium-134 for three to eight hours at a concentration of 6 spproximately 1.1 x 10 dps. Fish were divide,d into three groups. Experimental fish from non- ,, contaminated areas vero fed only tagged food during the experime:4t. , Reciprocal fish from contaminated areas were fed only noncontaminated' food. Control fish from noncontaminated areas roccived concenteminated .- food. - 4 The tagging experiment was only partially srecessful. There were . two reasons for lack of success. Growth was evider.t in only one of the fish, therefore, the others did not deposit new scale material. Cesium-134 is not a bone-seeker and only a small percenta6e of the ac-cumulated radionuclide was deposited in the scales'of the fish that did Analyses of autor:.diegrams of scales from the varmouth which grew
~
showed that fich.seales can be marked with an accumulation =of radionu-clides for use in identifying the animal (Figure 15). The margin of
.the 'ecale appears'in the Icft side of the picturc, A narrou'line of exposed photographie grains var evident extending from the top to the .
e f _. _ _ _ - _ . _ _ __.__.um._ ___._________.__________..._____.__-._______-__+sv____.a
.4
~
- 61 .
I. ~. ,. '
..a ..
t
. -. UNCL A$$1FIED
~
, ,f . . ,, '* * .e .e . PHOTO 59942
. s , -
6 - -i- , .
. t . ' . *+ . . ,
1
. ,, g. . e
-.y ', **
+ (,D .e , . ., ,
-7 . . *
, y . .. . ,
I
.1 . . , .
* . . .,. o
,s.. .
. i
..,.s.,
5
.s. .=-* . . .
. ~ . . .
3,
. ,a
., .c } .s *
,1
. s. - . . .
i L . x.%'. -
j, .. .
r .. .g
..s-
. .i.
, z. a . . .
- s. .
- 1. .
), , , - . . ,
s.
.;-s ..
t , , 4 l ., . . .
- r. ..
- l. . . .- .
. '- . . .s
.?
.- * .* g F16 15. Autoradiogram of the Posterior 1'.ar61n of a Scale from a Warmouth Tagged with Cesium-134. T' botton'of the picture along the m r$ n1 of the scale in the, area where grouth has taken place. This line of. exposed grains indicated the pres-cnce of accutmilated cesf u:n-131;. .Uldely. scattered expo.ced photographic grains were observed over the ent. ire surface of the autoradiogram.
~
~
62
^
, These were caused by background irradiation. There were no radionuclidd accu =alations in scales of the experimental. fish which vere fed tagged food, but did not grow. The lack 'of accu:milation in these scales indi-cates that radionuclides are accumalated only in those portions of the scales which actually are groun $n t)}e contaminated area.
Experimental fish which had been fed only tagged food vert dis-sected upon co=pletion of the experiment. T1: sues were separated and
~
oven dried fy twenty-four hours at 104* C. 'Sa=ples we're counted'in 25 by 150 2::m glass tubes in a ga= a spectrometer equipped with a 3 by 3 - inch sodium-iodide well detector. .The counter was calibrated with
' cesium-137 All samples and backgrounds were counted for five minutes each in the 0 555 to 0.844 Mev portion of the '6"-* spectrum where cesium-134 exhibits characteristic photopeaks. Recult: of the radio chemical analysis of these tissues are shown in Table XII.
Distribution of cesium-13k in the fish's body was conrared to the - work of Boroughs, Chipman, and Rice (1957) who found that an icsest'ed . dose of radiocesium in small tuna accuzzilated rapf dly in the liver, heart, spleen, and kidneys, but was lost rapidly from these organs. Masele, gonads, and skin continued to accur:: alate cesium-137 faster than they lost it. The largest accumulations of' cesium-134 in this experi-ment vere in the testes, muscle, and liver and spleen. Generally the
~~
gills, gastrointestinal tract, and eyes were intermediate. Bone, skin and scales, and fins had the lowest accumulation of cesium-134 of any tiscue tested. .
. ~..
O g G e e
s,
. 63 TABLE XII CESIUM-134 ACCCWIATIOH IN FISl! TISSUES Cesium-134 Accu:::alation
. Tissue , (x 10-2 pc/gdryweight)
Bluegill , Gills (including bony element) 3 20 0.06 i- Mascle - - 8 58 2 0.04 Testes 8 75 t 0.42 Bone , 1.11
- O.02 Gastrointestinal tract (cleaned) -
1.84 i O.04 Skin and scales 1.21 0.01
~
Liver and spleen 4.17 i O.08 Warnouth e Gille (includin- ter.-/elenent) 1 56 t 0.02 - FMscle , 3 75 *^0.02 . Testes 8 71 i O.42 Bone 0.65 i b.',33 Gastrointestinal tract (cleaned) 3 21
- O.05 Skin and scales ~
1.24 i O.02 l Liver and spleen 4.08 i O.08
- Fins O.70 i 0,,02
... Eyes .
2.14 i O.05 e
_ - ._. _ . . =- g , ,. 4 CHAPIER VII DISFERSION OF S?MLIMOUTH BUFFALO [ A. Conve,ntionalTagging There are several methnds of marking living fish for future recognition. Fish may be marked by mutilat$on, such as fin-clipping, branding, or tattooing. The rest cocr.on marking method. is the attach- , ment of tags. In the tagging operations of the Radiation Ecolocy See- . tion, Oak Ridge l'ational laboratory, At1rina type plastic tags were uted. These tags were numbered and labeled for return through the TVA Fish and Game Section. The tags were attached by monofilament polyethylene ,4 line inserted through the muscles ventral to the posterior portion of the fish's dorsal fin'. These tags were used in the tagging operations of 1960 and 1961. . In 1960, 3L7 snallrouth buffalo were tagged. There vere ten tag returns from this group. Five of these returns were from co::r.ercial
. fishermen and five vere in Radiation Ecology Seccion hoop nets. A total of 309 smallmouth buffalo were tagged in 1961. There were three returns .
from.this group: two in Radiation Ecology Section hoop nets and one from com:a.erical fishermen. Table XIII shows data on small=outh buffalo cove-ments as revealed by examination of tag return records. Tag returns represent-2.8 per cent of the fish tagged in 1960 and 1 per cent of .
' those'ta5ged in 1961.
~
A comparison was es.dc of the length.and vaight changes between capture and recapture of rough fish species ta'giel during 1960 and 1961. l-
w , 1- 65 .
. TABLE XIII
. SMALUCUTH EUFFAID !DVDSC AFTER TAGoING .
Time Distance Tagging Tagging Iapse Moved Direction - Date location (Days) (Miles) Moved 7-6-60 cm419 5 129 15 1 , Downstream , 7-9-60 cm4 20.8 154 16.4 7-13-60 cm4 21.8 287 - 1.0 . CRM 21.8 306 2.4 f715-60
- 8-10-60 cm! 21.8 365+ 450.o+ ,
, 8-15-60 ca! 21.8 259 o.7 8-26-60 cm4 18 5 298 49 .,
9-7-60 cat 17 5 109 13 1 9-14-60 cm4 17 5 275 29 Upstream 8-11-60 cm4 17 5 577 35 5 Downstrer.r." 4-17-61 cm.I 19 4 50 0 5-19 -61 cm4 20.8 38 o - 6-16-61 ca4 20.6 199 43 0 Do.metrean "This individual moved 17 5 miles down the Clinch River and 18 miles upstream in the Tennessee River. . This co=parison was made in an attempt to determine if tagging exerted a detrimental influence on the growth of individuals. Adequate data for this comparison um availabic on eleven fish (Table XIV). e
1
. .- 1 66 -
l TABLE XIV 1- ' LENGTH AND WEIGhf CHMiGES BEDTEEN TAGGIUS AND RECAPIUP3 .
/ *
- Tagging Recapture Time Iength Weight Iength Ve16h t Iapr.e s
.(mm) (s) (Days)_
species - .(m) (s) . 1890 500 1700 '287 Smallmouth Buffalo- 520 385 710 . 306
" 400 850
~'
385 850 559
" 395 980 1280 h30 1220 275 ,
" 440 101;o 415 1050 50
" 420- '
530 2000 286 River Carpsucker 530 1930
*4 490 1600 263 SO5 1560
" 11Q0 470 1300 279
*490 500 1700 159
- " 500 2090 790 390 '800 30 5 . ,
Carp 395 2120 585 2000 h03 Golden Redhorsc 605 . Tag returns from the 1960 and 1961 tagging operations revealed great variations in movements of smallmotith buffalo betwee'n tagging and recapture. From a total of thirteen tag returns the fish vere determined --
*to have moved distances ranging frcm 0 to over 450 miles during a time .
lapse between tagging and recapturc which ranged from 38 to $77 days. The speed of movement ranged from 0.01 to 0.22 river miles per day for . One fish hed moved 2 9 river miles up-the eleven fish which' coved. ' stream. One had moved 17 5 miles down the Clinc River and 18 miles o O
md'~ .- ,
' 67
- upstream in the Tenneesee River. The remsinder of fish which moved vent downstrena. It is possible that.captur'e, handlinE, and attachment of the fish a greater the tag reduced the vigor of the animal givin 6 tendency to move downstree.m' vith the current rather than exerting the '
energy necessary to move upstream agaihst the current. Commercial fish-
~
ing operations occur in the areas downstream from the tagging area.
.Samplirg upstream might have revecled that some of the iridividuals moved upstream after tagging. .
The study of plants and animals is desi6ned primarily to obtain . information about the'ir opera, tion under natural conditions and studies of physiology or behavior of organis=s held, under abnormcl ecclegical conditions may be misleading (Woodbury,1956). When a tag is attached , , to a fish's body abnormni conditions are created which decidedly affect the anime.1's phfsiology and behavior. Richer (1942)concludedthat ' trapping, handling, renovin5 the . fins, and even the presence of a seg resulted in little or no mortality; but that the tag, presumably by , interfering with feeding, vitiated estimates of populations made from recoveries of line-caught fish. Rousefell and Everhart (1953)' reported that the chief drawback of the mark-recapture method of population esti-mates, lies in the assu=ptions that the tagged fish do not suffer any . increased mortality and that the recaptured fish are observed and re-1 c corded. Black-(1957) demonstrated that some,physiolo6 cal diffi.,ulties . DcRoche vere imposed on fish in the process of capturin6 and marking it. (1963) Presented data indicating that monel metal jaw tag's on adult lake trout produced a reduction in growth rate which coatinued with increas-( l ing effcet throughout the life of a tagged fish. Ricker (1953) reversed
- 68 -
his opinion that mnrkinC inposes no increased mortality on fish and reported a frequent effect of marking is extra mortality among marked fish, either as a direct result of the mark or tag, or indirectly from the exertion and handling incidental to marki,ng operations. In either event recoveries will be too few to by, reprqsentative; hence population Gstimatei made from them vill be too great and rates of exploitation vill be too small. Conventional' tagging mthods nomally are used to determine the , moveg.cnt of fishes between the time of tagging and recapture. However, , many instances of abnormal behavior of tagged fish have been reported. Ricker (1953) reported that tagged sunfish usually evim to the bottom and burrov into vegetation i==ediately after being released. This be- . havior might make them more apt to remain in the same area and be recaptured then untouched fish. Farking may cause less feeding or less moving and reduce the che.nce of beins caught. Tecsins of cc:e fish re- - sulted in increased or core erratic movement for some time. Results of the OKIL Radiation Ecology Section tagging operations a cf 1960 and 1961 indicate t'st the presence of tags on s=allmouth buffalo
~
nas a detrimental effcet on the animal. Only five smallmouth buffalo tag returns were accompanied by accurate lerigth and veicht measurements. These fish had experienced length losses of from 5 to 20 mm. Four of the fish had had v,eight losses of from 70 to 190 g and the other had ,
. cained 10 g. The-timo lapse between tagging rand re:apture ranged from 50 to 306 days. Of a total'of' eleven rough fish tag returns aceq=panied
, by accurt.te. length and weight measurements nine fish lost length and two . hcd no length chence between tagging and recapture. Seven of the cic.*en fish lost veight and four gained veight during the time lapse. There , 4
----__O--.--_____________ ______.____-__________.______.,_______,,_,_____-,_______l_
.y ._ .. . ._ .
~
69 ,
. vere many observations of open wounds where the monofilament line passed
~
through the dorsal muscles of the tagged fish. Such vounds undoubtedly 4 would be a drain on the vitality of the anitcal. - . B. Autoradiogram Analyses Autoradiogramsweremadeofscalesamplesfrom14hD11nch, River
~
smallmouth buffalo. Tenofthesesa=ples(7 percent)containedsuf-
. ficient radioactivity to produce readable autoradiograms. Scalec:mples
. fron 342 Vatts Ear sn:allmouth buffalo vere autoradiographed. Cnly one ,
of the samples (0 3 per cent) produced a readable ir. age. The autoradio-grams were conpared to in:pressions of the same scales in order to determine rovements of the fish in and out of contaminated areas. , Pm=11muth buffalo 1 (Figure 16) hatched in the sprinc of 1955 in a noncontaminated area. It lived unt.11 the spring of 1959, four-c.omplete sessens, in the noncontamint.ted area. This fish formed its ., fourth annulus in the spring of 1959 at a total length of 422'm=. It
- entered the contaminated area at the start of its fifth growing season immediately after formation of its fourth annulus. The fish was cap-tured at CRM 217, 0 9 mile upstream from the mouth of White Oak Creek, on April 1, 1960. It had remained in the contaminated area since the spring of 1959 and had added 18 mm in length durin6 that time. The fish was 440 n
- m long and weighed 1,222 g at capture. Scales from this specimen averaged 13.h beta counts per minute exceeding background at capture. .
Smal1~outh buffalo 2 (Figure 17, page 70) hatched in the spring of 1956 in a noncentaminated area. It lived until the spring of 1960, four co=plete seasons, in the noncontaminated crea. The fourth' annulus
=e .
1.
.. s
~
. . 70 .
- . .s .
.........-........,s....,,_ ' .,
. . . UNCL A35d FIED e PHOTO.
m.,, . 61928 .. -. l s r; , 3- .
-. . *a . .
.1 . .
a. 4 s . i.
. 1
. <.aL..'.. . .. ...-- .. J Fig. 16. Autoradiogram of Scales from Lmallmouth Buffalo 1.
. UNCO. AS $tFIED i PHOTO 61623 g .., .
i
- -l .
t-
- t; l
.- . s i - .!.
I f. t.
* . .I .
.f
- s. *
. .a _,..
e s .
- i e . .
. .. . e. -
t ) g i' ['-
. Fig.17. . Autorr.liogrca of Scales . frca smaDmouth Buffalo 2.
e
+.
'* ' 4. .
. .t .
7... 71 - , i vas formed in the spring of 1960 when the fish had a length of 365 mm.
'2
'U At this time the animal moved into a contaminated area and remained' through its fifth growing season. The fifth annulus was formed in the
. spring of 1961 when the fish was kl8 mm long. It remained in'the. con-
, ; taminated area until capture in,,pite .0ak Creek on November 6,1961. .
(,- It was 440 mm long and vei6hed 1,345 g at capture and' scale' samples , 6 averaged 144 beta. cpm over background. This specimen had been in a 4 contaminated area for over one year and liad.added 75 mm length during y
, ,this time.
.. -Smallmouth buffalo 3 (Figure 18) hatched in the sprins of 19% ii2 a noncontaminated area. It lived five completed years in the'noncontami-
~
- nated arer. until the spring of 1961. Just prior to annulus formation in
+he early sprin61*t entered a contaminated aree. at a length of 412 m.u.
UNCL ASSIFIED PHOTO 61722 l
. i I
1 s . l 1
~
.. Fig. 18. Autoradiogrcm of Scales from Smalhouth Buffalo 3.
72 4
.' This fish remained in the contaminated area from the spring of 1961 un-til its capture in White Oak Creek on November 13,1961. It was 420 mm long and weighed 1,h65 g at capture and its scales averaged 300 beta cpm
/
per scale.over back 8round. .
$nallmouth buffalo 4 (Figurd 819) hatched in the spring of 1936 in a noncentaminated azua. It lived five completed years in the noncon-
- taminated area until the summer of 1961, at which time it coved into a '
conthminatedareaatalengthof414cm. It remained in the contaminated
~
area until its capture on January 23, 1962, in White oak creck. At cap-ture this fish was 440 mm long and weighed 1,045 g. Its scales avereged 2 beta cpm per scale over background. uwcussirico
. PHOTO 61119
. . + ,..- -
-i
. ..;, .g .
}- .
- .- , n .
e,;- 7 , n- ;
,N,
- s. .-
.,r... .'.,
e- . i .,
~ ,'
r E' * . .
, <a
- 1? c
~
' ~; .
-- 1.# * .
.s .
, ... . . . . . .. . . . ,... ...............u
- . Fig. 19. . Aittoradiogram of Scales frat Saslhouth Buffalo 4.
e
1
.' 73 Smallmouth buffalo 5. (Figure 20) hatched in the spring of 1957 in a noncontaminated area. It lived three complete years in the noncon-taminated area until the summer of 1960, at vruch time it moved into a contaminated area at a length of 304 z=n. This fish remained in the contaminated area throu6h fon:htion o'f its fourth annulus, sum:ter of
< 1961, and until its capture on November 13, 1961, in White 0ak Creek.
It was 400 z=n long and weighed 975 g at capture. Scale samples averaged l ' 205. beta eps per scale over background. Small=outh buffalo 6 (Figure 21) hatched in the spring of 1957 in a noncontaminated area. In the sursner of 1961, after four complete i growing seasons, this fish moved into thr contaminated area at a length UNcL A$$'FIED P
, , HOTO 61718
. f i
s - s: .: . ,
} ~
~
.. i !
, ,1 ,.'
.s . . , ~ .s
=
. : w.
. . .. ! a.. ,-
- /
Fig. 20. Autoradiogram of Scales frcr.1 Smallmout.h Buffalo 5
.. 74 ,
. . - . . - - - -* s g f MOTO 41720
~ .
v. s
~
. .1 3 .; .
(i a
'^ '
? .
., . . ;mb
... . .s 5
,- . -1 s.. .
..1 .
i ,,
. ;\j, .
1.*.~. . s.
. . . . . . '..e
. t
.. .. > 7, .
,1 4 .
i r 9
- 4 '
1
;- 2.
p
, u .,a
- ..s m.T(.
U . = .. u u.,: .. . ..: .u . &:.. .. Fig. 21. Autoradiogram of Scales frca Smal]nouth Buffalo 6. *
'of 361 m. It retained in the contaminated area until capture on :' py 10, 1962, in White Oak Creek. At capture it was 410 m long and'veighed ,
953 g. . Scales averaged 8 beta cpa per scale over background. . Sma11routh buffalo 7 (Figure 22) hatched in the spring of 1956 in . a noncontaminated area. It remained .in the noncontaminated area for over three years. This fish moved into the contaminated area in the vinter of 1959, during its fourth gro.eing season, at a length of 359 m. It remained in the contaminated area during for=stion of its fourth annulus, . .
' spring of 1960, and through formation of its fifth annulus, spring of 1961. It was captured en May lo,1962, in White oak creek at a ' length of $20 m nr.d vcicht of 3,969 c. Scale sacples averaged 82 be-ta epn per senic over background.
l m .m
75
~ ~ '
UNCL A551FIE D f' PHOTO 41924 A l l Fig. 22. Autoradiogram of Scales frcm Sm11 mouth Buffalo 7. - Scllmouth buffalo (Figure 23) hatched in the spring of 1957 in a noncontaminated area. It entered a contaminated area ittediately after forzation of its second annulus, probably the spring c ' 1959 ~ This fish was 271 mm long at formation of the second annulus. It re-mined in the contaminated area until some time during the vinter of 1959-1960 when it Icft the contaminated arca at a length of 304 r=n. The animal was in a nonconta=inated ama until its capture on June 29, 1962, ,)uct prior to the formation of its fifth annulus. This fish was-
, captured at CRM 16.0 at a length of h60 mm and weight of 1,k10 g. Scales averaged 6 beta cpm per scale over backcround at capture.
Smallmouth buffalo 9 (Figure 24) hatched in the spring of 1957 in a nonconicuinated crea. This finh rer.aiind in the noncontaminated
-. ._ =. ..~ .. . . - .
. g_ n .w_ . . .a2. .. +- - . - ..
6%* ..- ._ .. . R r -
.'e- t e
- i. .. .,4 . .
. 76 .
a
- j. '
3 '
. .j uMCL AS$1FIED
+ . .
.
- r PHOT..O 61916,.y
+
. . .r.-
r ,. + s, - 4 . . .
-t .
= *
. . ? , .'.
~-
. . . ;,. - t.
.. . . 1
._ .. s . . .
. .r. ...- ,
. , . . . 1 d
- . e
~
.- t - .. .
4 . . . .
.i . . . - . t. , .. .
p r.
- y. . ,
I ; i *e . c ,,,.. ,, ,,,j
- .x . . y. . .
- c. _- c _. ;__ .. .
Fig. 23. 'Autoradiogram of Scales; from Smallmouth Buffalo 8. ...
?
. g-- - * . . _ _.. . .. _ . .
.. . . ., UNCL A $ $! F I E D
[ ,
' Ptt3. 70 41723,. .
s
. g.
.s : +
1 ; \ . {- I .
. .. j. ,s . ,
., .r
,. -t . .. . 4 - A , .i . - 4 .- , . , . . 4 . . ... . E
,.... . L_ , .
7 ,;u .
, . s
. r .
~
- c. .
. . v. ..
- . r.
- 3. -
. . e.
-I.
. . ..~.' . - .o e .
).
, . ..'i .
1 (Fig. 24. - ' Autoradiogr:.:a of Scales frc:a Smallmouth Duffalo -9. - 4 i ' 1 S
'g ..
,k . ah +
-+
y
- . . . - . , . . ~ . . . - . . . - _ .. . . - - . - . . , ...
. . . .. . i .
. ,; 77 ared for over tt'o years. During the vintor of 1959-1960 it entered a contaminated area at a length of 29h ir.T.. This animal remained in the
, -contacinated area throu5h the forrr.ation of its third annulus and until the for=ation of its fourth annulus. It left the contaminated area in the spring of 1961 at a length of 368 cm. This fish was caught on
. .. s ..
August 4,1962, at approximately mile Sk2 in the Tennessee, River. At capture it was 460 n= lon6 and scales averaged 215 beta cpm per scale over background. - * - -
- Small=outh buffalo 10 (Figure 25) hatched in the spring of 1956 in a contaminated area. It remained in the contaninated area for two full.. growing. see. sons until it left in the su= er of 1958. This individ-
.ual moved into r. noncontaminated area and remined throuBh the summer of-d 1959 In the fr.ll of 1959 it returned to the area of conto:1rationAd UNCL A!$!P f gg PHLTO 41925 g.
E i .
) ,
. f,,...*.
. Fig. 25. I.utoradiocrsm of Scales 'f cia Small=cuth Buffalo 10.
?
w
78 remained for over one year, until the summer of 1961. It again left the contaminated area and remained away until itc c6pture on December 19, 1961, at the mouth of L'hite Oak Crech.
! ApparentJy this animal had ,just returned to the area of -contamination at the time of its capture.
- Smallmouth buffalo 11 (Figuie h6) hat'ched in a contaminated, area .
in the spring of 1957. It remained two full growin6 seasons until the su er of 1959, at which 41ce it entered a noncontaminated area. This fish was 201 mm long ar, the time it left the area of contamination. It ' rema4ned in the noncontaminated area for two complete growing seasons . until the su:::mer of 1961, at which time it returned to the conteminated area at a length of 326 mm. It was caught on December 23, 1951, in
~
. Vnite Oak Creek at a icngth of 340 mm.
i u c.sssrma ~' PHOTO 419U l l
- l . .
# l- , *e
\ -
t Fig. 25. 1.utoraiiogran of Scales from Sr..alJmouth Luffalo 11.. 9
, .- < _ . . _e _- . _ . . _ ,
g_
.t
- In defining the contaminated area.only the immediate vicinity of t
' ^ '
White Oak CreckI can be considered. Of the eleven sr.cllmouth buffalo-with readable autoradiogra:ns -eight were captured in Wite Oak Creek, . one
~
at CM4 21~.7, one at5 CM416.0, and one a,t TF.M $2, approximately; forty -
~
seven miles below the moutit oEWhite' Oak Creek. A high concentration. of radionuclides is assumed to.be necessary in order for an animal to
- accumulate _ sufficient quantities in.the, scales for autoradiogram ex-posure end these high concentrations are precent only.in White _ Oak Creek. ,i
[ One hundred and forty-six small nuth buffalo from the Clinch River vere l subjected to scale autoradio6raphy. Only ten of.these fish had. scales- ,
' containing-sufficient' activity for autoradiogram exposure indicating i:
- the contaminated-area is rather small. If surface area is considered- . .g
-: as a measurement of available fish habitat, Wite -Oak Creek -(estimated
- surface area of 'five acres) comprises less than O.02 per cent'of Vetts
~
Bar Reservoir (38,o60 e.cres)'at full pcol. If small=uth buffalo vere : i
; equally dispersed over the entire area of Watts Ecr Reservoir" approxi- -
- mately 0.02 per cent of the animals could be expected to enter Wite j i
. 0ak Creek or reside there if the species were'not vide ~rangin6 One ,
!- ,1 individual out of 1,271 captured from the Vatts Bar area (0.08 per cent). .I-
- showed autoradiographic evidence of residence in White Oak Creek. Small'
- numbers-.in the sample prevent conclusions as to the percentage of the.
smallmouth buffalo population in Watts Bar which actually enters, White [ Oak Creek. a Fovements of indiiriduals which were determined by, autoradiographic
- _ analyse
- in' this study can bc considered. ac. curate. Ho.cver, general- '
i' . .
- izations made.concerning~ the smallrouth buffalo population as a whole i .
+- , a3.m__._ _ _ . i_ _ _ _ . . ___I___~__._ _ m.___.. __ _ __ __
.1 80 e
- are questionable because of the small nuv.ber of autoradiographed indi-viduals involved. Age of the individual seemed to have some influence. ,
.on movement. None of the fish apparently left the area of hatching be-fore it was two years old. . The area of hatching here is defined as being eitheranoncontaminatedoraconta$inate area. The two fish , hatched in :
a contaminated area left at the'end of their second year of life. One of these-(Figure 26, page 78) returned to the contaminated area.at the . start of its fifth year of life. . The other (Figure 25, page.77) . re-turned to the contaminated area durins the' fall of its fourth year of -
; life. All.the fish hatched in noncontaminated areas moved into the con-taminated area rio. earlier than two yerirs and no 'later than five years after ha,tching. This may mean that smallmouth buffalo are relatively sedentary for two yeers after hatching, then move upstream into the
. tributary creas, possibly maturing; serae.lly and entering the upstream areas to spcun. # ,;e of seraal caturity is not ka.ovn for this species. P Total length of the individuals at the time of covement into or ^
out of a contaminated area was exanined. There was no apparent corre-
- lation between size and movetent. Total length at the time of'such movement varied from 271 to 422 mc:.
'In the eleven fish' examined autoradiocraphically there were sixteen instances where movement' occurred between noncentaminated and
, contaminated areas. Twelve of these moves coincided with resumption of growth at the t' ime of annulus formation. This fact vould indicate that
- the majority of the moves occurred during the late vinter or early spring. There have been.no recorded mass movements er nigrations of
- this-spc:cies in Watts Ear, the Clinch River, or anywhe e else.
4 D _ . , , , , ,----w.-, .-n *
.'. 81 '
A large number.of regenerated scales were observed in the small - mouth buffalo scale samples. Autoradiograms revealed that when scales were regenerated while the fish was in'a contaminated area there vas an I even distribution of accu =ulated-radionuclides over the ent, ire regener- . ated_ portion of the scale. , Fig 3re 19,,page 72) indicates the rapidity vith which' scales are regenerated. Autoradiograts of the three normal scales indicate that this individual was in the contaminated area from
. annulus formation in the spring of 1961 until its capture on'Janua y'23,,
.1962. During this period of time.the regencrr.ted scale was formed.
Two regenerated scales shown in Figure 16, page 70) were formed
~q. -
prior to the individual's entry into the contaminated area. These scales had resumed
- the nor=31 grovth pattern of circuli for= tion by the time the fish started to accumulate radionuclides, therefore, .there was an accu =alation only in those parts of the scale which vere for cd while .
the animal was actually in the area of cor. tar.ination. - The clascic concept of scale growth advanced by Creaser (1926)
~
and Van Oosten (1957) is that growth is not equal around the entire margin of. the scale at the same time, but thet detached portions may be forming at the same time. These portions-usually unite to form a con-tinuous circulus. The lateral fields of the scale are limited in size. by the proximity of the adjacent scales in vertical rows and the anterior field is limited'by the density of the lower layc;; of dermis into which the scale penetrates. The position of cutting-over of the circuli which . usuelly is in th: pesterior region of thy, lateral scale fields indicstes b
y . _ C 4.,, .
.4 .
4 82
. growth co=mences in the anterior field and progresses around the margin of the lateral fields, thus giving the ridges.the ' appearance of extend-
. ing from the anterior field laterally around both sides of the scale in .
t a rosterior direction. Analyses of the autoradio6 rams reve led that growth of seales of year class four smallmouth buffalo and older begins in the lateral fields
$(Figure 16). Grouth next occurs in the posterior field (Figures 19, 21, and '22) and finally, occurs around the entire margin of the scale- (Figures 17,'18, 20, 23, 24, 25,-and 26). Thece data indicate that smallmouth
. buffalo scales corrience growth in the lateral fields, followed by growth .
, in the posterior and anterior fields respectively. This information on
} the progress of scale growth is in contrast to the classic concept and may give an-indication of the reason for incomplete annulus formation in the cycloid scales of' sone fish species. Examinatica of preliminary autoradiogrcus of scales from several different species of fich revealed that accumulated radionuclideo were evenly distributed throushout the fibrillary plate layer of the scale. ,
'This distribution was evident when scales were expeced with the lover I
surface of the scale next to- the film. These same scales when exposed
-vith the bony layer next to the film showed the characteristic concen-tric circle pattern of other scales from.the same fish. One ccale in - - -
Figure 23, shows n spot of exposure in the center. 'The ." hot spot" re-
, sulted when the bony surface' layer of the scale va.s broken allowing the s
underlying fibrill2ry- plate's accumulated radionuclides to expose the . filet. These dk .ta cuccost that the bony layer'of ,thc ccale acts as a 5 shield which prevents beta particles emitting fro-t the radionuclidec
--a,----_- .
s;--
~ - .
-f, c 83 accunulated in the fibrillary plate from passing through to expose the-film.
CHAPTER VIII DISCUSSION ,
. An analysis of the Watts Bar small=outh buffalo population can
.- be made by applying data obtained in this study to a catch curve cal-culated from the 1962 Watts Bar Collection (Figure 27). ~ The catch 1
i.
.= SPu.
I. i i I i r
..S __ ._ _ _ _ . ---_. _ . . . . _
I {
- e t I
- [
1 o.S 9 y v A o
-o S --
. ..o -
_ l- . - l, . i
~
/I.. I ni . S 6 , . . .o . ,3 vtan 1962'- 61 60 59 So S, S6 SS S4 S3
. Fig. 27 Catch Curve of Watts Bar Sc.alltouth Duffe.lo for 1962.
e O _m______ m-
- = .-
g .~ . . . - -
)- .c - - -
4
- g. , . . ,
84 *
}-
curve. is based on the log frequency of.the number of individuals in each year class in the catch plotted against aSe. The ascending left
~
b - limb ~ of the curve represents 'the age groups which are incompletely vulnerable. Thc descending right li=b represents those yecr classes Small numbers .of individuals in year which were completely vulnerable. 1-2 classes ten and older invalidate any assu:r.ptions made in that portion of the curve. . The, rate of co=cercial fishing .on Watts -Bar Reservoir has I changed ' considerably over the past five years. Fishing was neCliGible + . during 1957 because there were no organized co=cercial fishins oper-e ations on Watts Bar and. sport fishermen rarely take this species. Com-merical fishing cc:=lenced on _ Watts Bar on a limited scale in 1958,- when _ , 15,687 pounds (dressed veight) of small=outh buffalo vere re=oved from 4 .
- the icke. This catch
- represented a catch per unit effort of. 7 34 pounds /ycrdofnet/ year. In 1958 the nr.ts urt.d vere rts.de of 4 and 5 inch mesh which selected for Jarger fish than the 3-inch nets ased .
2 - . later. Fishing pressure increased considerably-in 1959, when 54,035 . This represents pounds of smallmouth buffalo were taken from the Me. P an increase of.345 per cent of the 1958 catch. Catch per unit effort i
.vas 12.01 lbs/yd/ year. In 1960, 63,705 pounds of smallmouth buffalo were remoted from Watts Bar. This was 118 per cent of the 1959 catch . ..
and represented a ca'tch per unit effort of 14.16 lbs/yd/ year.' In 1961,
'59,328 pounds were caught. This vs.s 93 per cent of the 1960 catch and
- i represented a' catch per unit effort of 1318 lbs/yd/ year. -Daring t hese
- l. .
i years the fishing tortality was- relatively constant and the stallcouth
- . buffalo population apparenU.y did not suffer depletion as was indicated
' by the catch per unit _ effort. .
i
--N s y e~:, ,,n-.,,g -, , nn.p.. . ,--.n , , m g g ,., w n m , e a ,.,: . y .,m . m l, ,.r .,-m n,-, ,- w.A-.N .,+. , , d ,. ,.nn. n_m.m--,,.l,' , , , + - , , - ,-,,e , ,
s . W . E < 85 There v.s a heavy influx of commercial fishermen in 1962, when 161,303 pounds of smallmouth buffalo vere tc. ken from Watts Bar. This was 272 per cent of the 1951 catch. A catch per unit effort could not be deter =ined for 1962 beenuse of irregular fishing and varying numbers or fishermen vorking the Eake.' Hove'ter, the catch durin5,the first three months of 1963 has been considerably less than in previous years and the smallmouth buffalo population in Watts Bar apparntly e has been
~
somewhat depleted by the heavy fishing pressure of'1962. If this depletion proves to be true it will become mare apparent in later catches and population studie,s in Watts Bar. y I A catch curve with a convex right linb can be produced by any one of three conditions within a population (Ricker, 1956). Continued , recruitment at later years can produce a convex curve. Eovever, data from this study ir.dicate that reentitr.ent is conpleted by ase six and a j that there is no continu tier. in later ycars. Table II (pnge 25) in- ' dicates there is a definite trend touard ycunger fish being r'ecruited, but an adequate examination of recruitment trends can be made only by
~ .
continued samples over a period of years.
~
A steady increase in rate of fishin5 vith age can produce a con-vex catch curve. The rate of fishing in Watts Bar could not be accu-rately determined frem available data, but it can be assumed that the population is sampled representatively since recruitment appears to *
, occur abruptly. There are no indications that fishing pressure increases vith c~c for the Watts Ear s::.allrouth buffalc.
An increase in the rate of natural cortality with age of the fish can produce a convex catch curve. Since recruitment appears to be
s.
. 1 - a . --
w., .. 86 abrupt and the older fish are not subjected to increased fishing pres-
.sure, it can be assumed that an increase in the rate of natural ror-tality,as'the fish become older is responsible for the convexity of the Watts Bar smallmouth buffalo catch curve.
No matter when year classes t and .-l are sampled, the ratio of
;their abundance is a measure of the survival rate which existed during the first year that the younger year class became vulnerable to fishing.
~
Therefore, survival rates pertain to past years. The. slope of the catch curve in any Eiven part vill represent the survival rate at the time the fish in question were being recruited into the fishery. Data from the age distribution of Vatts Bar smallrtouth buffalo (Table.1, page 23) give some indication that a segmented population may <
. exist-in that reservoii. The higher percentages of scales exceeding
' background counts in August and Septe=ber night sust; eat the movement
~
of an increating nurzber of Clinch River smalk:outh buffalo into the , fishing area. However, additional investi ation 6 vould be necessa'ry .to
~
establish the Clinch River fish as a. segment of the Watts'Bar popula-
~ tion.
Broad generalizations on the -relative importance of the small- ' ' mouth buffalo as an accumulator of radionuclides vould be speculative if based on the available data. Major radionuclides in White Oak Creek -
., are acedmulated by the species in quantitics 1.hich generally have varied with the -degree of exposure by residence in White Och. Creek.
The body burdens should vary with the concentration in the environment of both stable and- raiicicotopes of the particular element,- essentiality of the element, and the physical e.nd chemical state 'of t 2e element.
s
~
87
.~.
Smallmouth buffalo undoubtedly take up radionuclides both by inscstion and absorption, depending on the element. When the population is considered as a whole, the smallmouth buffalo is a relatively minor accumulator of radionuclides. . Only 0.08 .- per cent of the. Watts Bar smallmouth buffalo definitely showed an . accumulation by scale analyses. Approximately 6 per cent of the Clinch , River s=allmouth buffalo definitely showed an accumulation. Approxi- - mately 77 per cent of the.Uhite Oak Creek smallmouth buffalo -cont [ined e large accu =ulations of radionuclides in their scales. These data es-phasize the iuportance of distance from the source of contamination as
. a factor in the accumulation of radionuclides within a specific popula-
.~
tion. The small percentage of Clinch River fish shoving accumulated radionuclides probably is .due ,to the limited size of White Oak Creek,' the e. ly area where the concentration of radionuclides is great enough for accu.calation' to occur in measureale quantities. This licite: ion of .m habitat teans that only a saall percentage of the total population can remain in the contaminated area for any length of time. A comparison was made of the total length of smallmouth buffalo
~
vhich had resided in contaminated areas to the total length range of ^ Watts Bar smillr.outh buffalo. Watts Bar fish in year class five ranged fro's 420 mm to $40 mm in total length. Year class six fish ranged fram i 400 mm to 570 mm. Evidently, net selectivity prevented the capture of the sm2ller year class five fish. There were five (5) fish of year class five from the cuntaminated area:. vith total lengths of 340, 400, 410, 440, and 460 nm. All these fish 'ould fall voll within the range for their year cla :: ith the pastible excer.tiqn of the fish msacuring
~
L
.. ' . ' . v.5 w . = . , . . . . = . , ..,. J m. - a
s 3-88 340 mm. This smaller fish was, one of those which had hatched in the contaminated area, left the area for two years, and returned to the contaminated area approximately six months prior to capture. There were five (5) year class six fish from the contaminated areas with total lengths of 420,440,440,466,and320mm. All these fish fell well within t,he total length range for their year class. These data tend to suggest that growth of the smallmout,,h buffalo is not affected by periodic residence in an area contaminated with radionuclida vastes." The fact that fish have definite patterns of radionuclide ac- . cu'mulation in their scales results in the possibility of a new technique - for studying populations. Identification of resident and transient individuals in a population has long been a problem. Capture-recapture ' methods of population estimates have no provioion for separating these population segments ihto their relative numbers. Ynen capture-recapture estitates are rade there is al.mys the possibility that transient in- s dividuals are cauSht and tagged. When these are releaced they resume
- their movements and may leave the area. This loss of tagged individuals
, from a study area can result in bias causing the population to be over-estimated. - '
When individuals reside in a contaminated area they have definite patterns of radionuclide accumulation in their scales. All the members of any particular year class would exhibit the same pattern. These patterns can be used as identifying marks. Autoradiographic examination of radionuclide accumulation pat-terns in fish scales can be used in conjunction with capture-recapture estiestes of population cotimates. ~ This application vould follow a definite series of steps: (1) The selection of an area'of study would e
89 be limited to an area where an adequate concentration of' radionuclides existed for the resident individuals to accumulate them in the scales. (2) The area should be effectively blocked off with nets to prevent the escape of tagged individuals durin5, the capture-recapture phase of the study. (3) A conventional capt,ure-recapture estimate should be made of the total nudber of fish within the area. This method is based on the assumption that the ratio of the nudber of fish captured and-marked during the first collection to the total nu'Eber of fish in the area is the same as the ratio of marked recaptures to the total catch. during the second collectien. (4) Scale sanples vould be taken from all individuals in both collections. ihe scales vould be radiometrically 8 surveyed and those with sufficient activity would be autoradiographed. , Autoradiographs vould be analyzed to identify the ' resident Individuals in the sa:ple. Then, only.the nunbers of resident individuals from ths capture-recapture operation veuli be considered in estimating the size of the re:iiant population. The nt:ber of transient individusis within the area at the . ime of study also could.be estimated from the nu6ers n of nonresident fish. .. Tagging of fish with radionuclides is a definite poscibility at the present-time. Large numbers of fish could be tagged in holding ponds with little effort and later released into natural habitats for population studies. Systematic use of scale autoradiography could be used in identifying these tagged individuals.' Scales were observed to regenerate rapidly and to accumulate larg6 qqtntities of radionuclides durin6 regeneration in contaminated areas. R2= oval of a key scale or - st311 group of eccles from ell individua.ls ,to be tagged, then holdinc the fich in a pond with a sufficient concentration of bone-ceekin6
.- 4 ..
~ e 90 .
radionuclides, would result in a group of fish tagged in a consistent manner. Tagged fish could be identified later by removal of the key scales from all~ recaptured individuals and either radiometrically sur-
-veyin6 or autoradiographing them.
1
- Id radionuclide tagging, 'sef6btion 'cf the radionuclide is of primary'importance. Effective half-life (T,ff) of tile radionuckide mst be
' considered. The T,ff of an element is the time required for the radio-active element fixed in tissue of the animal's body to be diminished 50 per cent as a result of the combined action of radioactive decay and biological climination:
i (T)(T) r b T,ff = T +T b r vhere Tr.= physical iflf-life, and Tb = bi logical half-life. Strontium-90 appears to be an execllent radionuclide for tecgins pur- ,_ poses because of its affini y foz bone end its physical half-life of 27 7 years. However, in the selection of a radionuclide for tagging 9 the health hazards mast be carefully analyzed and the application must be kept under strict control. Any populat!on study is biologically significant in that it in-creases our knowledge of the, organism and the characteristics of'the
~ ~
population. The age distribution and grovth of smallcouth buffalo in
- Watts Bar has been described. This infort.r.ation is basic and may be used in-contanction with later studies of a sintilar nature in determi-ning the history of this co==creially important species in Watts Bar .
as a ::;neget.ent tool for the regulation of thio fishery. a 9
91 The dispersal study.is especially significant, in that an en-tirely new technique of study vac developed and compared to a conven-tional taSSing study. Even theuch the numbers of individuals involved - in the study vere small, considerably :ure data vere derived from the - autorcdiographid analyses of" scales' than from the taS5 ng i _ returns be .-
. cause conventional tagging and recovery can only locate fish at . single points in time while autoradiesrephic records of scales provide a con-tinuously recorded history. When large numbers of fish with sufficient P
- radionuclide accunalations in their scales are available for autoradiography, the natura3 dispersion of these fish without the
. detrimental effects of conventional ta6s m2y be' determined.
-~
CHAF Z3 IX SUEfARY AUD COHCLUSIO"S The smallmouth buffalo, Ictiobus buhalus (Fafinesque), popula-tion of Watts 3ar Reservoir, Tennessee, was investigated in order to
- describe its age distribution, grevi.h rates, dispersion, and importance as an accumulator of radionuelides. Measuremente and scale samples'
. were taken from commercially-caught fish and fish caught in the OFRL~
tagging operations. Scale irpressions were analy:cd for aSe and growth pheno =ena. Dispersion of smallaouth buffalo was investigated by con-ventional tagging methods and by autoradiographic analyses of scales. - Stable and radiochemice.1 compo:ition of senles was determincd by
~
.'. ~~. 1
. . 92 spectrographic analysis, flame spectrophotometry, radiometric surveys, and garma spectrometry.
Watts Bar smallmouth buffalo were found to correspond to the theoretical distribution for stable fish populations where large num-bers are present in the younger year classes and succeeding year classes become~1ess' numerous as a result of mortality. The largest n' umb'er of
- fish'in the commerical catch was in' year class six, the youngest year
- class which was completely vulnerable to.the co=mercial fishing gear.
3 No indications were found that a dominant year elass existed in the - Waf.ts Bar population. . Survival rates were calculated to be L9 per cent for year class 4
. six, 35 Per cent for year class seven,.26 per cent for year class eiSht, ,, ,
and 19 per cent for year class nine. Annulus formation vas concluded ~to be prior .to June for. Watts Ear srallmouth buffalo. There were some indicaticns t.5a: the htts Scr population is made up of sageents which v >
' have different grovch rates associated with tribute.ry habitat diffe'r - ,
ences. Recruitment was found to be' complete at age six and commercial.
~
. . fishing pressurc .vas equal' on all fish from year class six upward.
The calculated length-veight relationship of Clinch River s=all - mouth buffalo revealed that the fish had isometric growth which is-characterized b'y an unchanging body form and specific gravity. The-fish vere found to increace 100 5 in weight for every 1 cm increase ., i
- in length for fish in excess of 31 cm total lt:ngth.
J Absolute growth of Watts Bar smallmouth buffalo averagect 422 cm
'at the'end of the third growth year, 441 mm for the fourth, 453 mm for -
' the fifth,- 465 cm for the sixth,' hB7 mn for the
- seventh, 522 mm for. the 9
m.
~ , .)
- 93 eighth, and 609 tra for the ninth. Absolute growth rates were found to have _ increased with each~ succeeding . year for year classes nine through four probably as a result of increased food availability acco:panying
~1
_ increased fishin6 pressure. Calculated annual total len6th increments indicated this species characteristically had the largest increment during_the-second year of life. This fact was confirmed'by data from other study areas.and cay be the result of a change in food habits after the first year of life. Orowth compensation was evident during the
, fourth and fifth years of life.
Smalh::outh buffalo scales were found to have a mineral residue content of 46.05 per cent by weight. Calcium was the most abundant s element amountirig to 0.142 :::;/g fresh weight with at least twentykthree other elements present in lesser quantities. The strontium-calcium ratio.vas fou .d to be 0 394 x 10 -3 in scales. smallmouth buffalo scales vere found to :entein rtiicnuc' ides of ruthenium,'cesius, rirconiur, zinc, and cobsit. The Watts Bar smallrouth buffalo population was concluded to be of minor inportance as an accurs.tlator of radionuclides. Only 0.08 per cent of the Watts Bar population in radiometric surveys shoved accu =ala-tions of artificially produced radionuclides Samples from areas closer to the source of contamination showed greater concentirations. Approx *- mately 6 per cent of the Clinch River sta11 mouth buffalo had mea'sti$able accun11ations of radionuclides and White Od: Creek fish had Tl per cent.
/
Autoradiosraphic examinctions of smr.11=outh buffalo scales re-
~
vcaled that radionuclides were accuculated in patterns of concentric circ 3cs. These patterns ucra foutd to' bd cor.sistent in all the to:rs.
. '.e -
94 . ccales from any individual and were associated Vith growth in a con-taminated araa. A new technique was proposed by which scale autoradio-graphy could be used in conjunction with a c'onventional capture-recapture population estimate to divide a fish population within a contaminated area into the sedentary and' mobile segments if such existed. Scale autoradiography and conventional tagging methods vere used to study the :::ovements of Watts Bar smallmouth buffalo. Conventional methods revealed these fish traveled O to 4 0 miles during time lapses ' ranging from 38 to 577 days. Evidence was prescr.ted that the presence , of a tag on the animal's bcdy is detrimental, resulting in a loss of le'ngthand/orweight. This fact supported the opinions of n:any investigators that ta55ed animals suffer physiologicci and behavioral - difficulties imposed by the presence of the tag. Autoradiogra+; hic examinations of smallmouth buffalo scales re-vealed concidercbly ic. ore *.nfora tion on movements than conventienti tagging methods. The =ovements of individuals batveen noncontaninited , areas and White Oak Creek, the only area of considerable contamination, .
-- were determined, as well as the age and size of,the fish at the time it
(- - entered or left White Oak Creck. S=a11rmuth buffalo vere concluded to be relatively sedentary for two years after hatching, then to have moved upstream into the tributary areas. The majority of the moves occurred during the late vinter or early sprin6, but no m,2ss t:ovements or mi-grations verc recorded on Vatts Bar. Growth was not affected by resi-dence in contaminated areas. Inboratory crporimnts chewed that fich seclec could be tagged. vith cesium.3 34 for autor:.diogrcphic identi.'ic'ation of the teC5ed indi-- vidual. However,machlargerconcentrEtionsofthecesium-134 occurred . h
e , . _,
- - 95 ,
-in the soft tiscues than in the scales and bony tissues leading to the conclusion that this radionuclide van not suitable as a ccale tag.
Selection of a suitable radionuclide for scale tagging and methods of application vore discussed. o BIBLIOGRAPHY Allee, W. C., A. E. Emerson, O. Park, T. Park,'and K. P. Schmidt. 1949 Principles of Animal Ecciocy. W. B. Saunders, Philadelphia. -837 p. Bertin, L. 1958. Ecailles et sclerificatiens dermiques. Traite de iC Editeurs, Paris. Zoolo61 c. Vol.' XIII. First Part. Masson et C i p. 433-504. Biduell, K. W. E., and E. E. Foreman. 1957 Distribution of strontium-90 in pond veed and fish. Nature 4596: 1195-1196. ,, Black, E. C. 1957 Alterations in the blood level of lactic acid in
~
certain salmonoid fishes following muscalar activity. I. Kamloops troat, Salmo gr.irdncri.- J. Fish. Res. Ed. Canada 14: 117-134. E:rorghs, H., W. A. Chiptan, and T. R. Rice . 1957 Laboratcry expcri-r;c:.ts en the upta'-:e, accr.:-' ult. tion, end loss of radionuclidu by marine organism . The Effects of Atomic Radiation on Oceanography and Fisheries. Publ. No. 551. Nat. Acad. Sci., Nat. Res. Council, Washington, D. C. 137 p. Carlander, K. D. 1956. Appraisal of methods of fish population study. Part 1. Fish growth rate studies: Techniques and role in surveys and management. Trans. Elst N. Amer. Wildl. Conf., Wildf. Mgmt. Inst. Washington, D.~C. p. 262-274. Creaser, C. )?. 1926. The structure and growth of the scales of fishes in relation to the interpretation of their life-history, with special reference to the sunfish, Eupomotis gibbosus. U. of,Mich., Mas. of Zool., liisc. Publ. No.17.~73 p. . Danil'chenko, O. P. 1958. Penetration of radioactive strontium-90 fro 2 the water into the body of th: fish. (In Russian). M., Rybnoo Khociaistvo No. 2. p. 28-32. - Davis, J. J., and R.'F. Foctor. 1953. Bioaccumulation of radioinctopes - through aquatic food chsins. Ecoloc:[39: 530-535 DcRache, S. E. 1963 Sloved cro::th of lake trout following tagging. Trans. Amer. Fish. Soc. 92: 185-186. 4
. -; 9s .
Eschmeyer, R. W., R. H. Stroud, and A. II. Jones. 1944. Studies of the fish population of the shoal area of a T7A ccinstream itservoir. J. Tenn. Acad. Sci. 19: 70-122. , Frey, D. G., and H. Pedre.ine. 1938. _ Growth of 'the buffalo in Wisconsin - lakes and streens. Trans. Wisc. Acad. Sci., Arts, and Lett. 31: 513-525 J. L. 1955 Movemcat of stream'fishes in Missouri. Trans. Funk,5er.' A Fish. Soc. 85: 39-57. '~ Gerking, S. D. 1953 Evidence for the concepts of home range and territory in stream fishes. Ecolog3 34: 346-365 Hall, G. E. 1951. _ Preimpoundment fish populaticas of the Wister Reservoir area in the Potcan River basin, Oklahoma. Trans. N. Amer. Wild 1. Conf.16: 266-283 .
'Hile, R. O. 1936. AEe and growth'of the cisco, Leucichthys-artedi- -
(LeSucur), .in tne ickes of the ' northeaster:r-highlands, Visconsin. Bull. U. S. Bur. Fish. 4S(19): 211-317 _, 1941. Age and growth of the rock bass, A=bloplites rupestris (Raf.), in Hebish Lake, Wisconsin. 'Trans. Wisc. Acad.-Sci., Arts, , , . and Lett. 33: 189-337 . Hooper, F. F., H. A. Podoliah, and S. F. Sniessho. 1961. Use of radio-isotopcs in byS1obiolory and fish culture. Trans. !.ner. Fich. Soc. 90: 49-57 Jones, R. F. 19do. The cecumulation of nitros J ' rathenian b/ fine particles and tarine organis=s. Limno. and Oceanog. 5: 312-325 ,
.Kondrat'ev, V. P. 1962. Use of radioactive isotopes in co=nercial ..
fishing. (In Russian). Rybnoe Khos. 5 62-64. Referat. Zhur.,
- Biol., 1962. no. 6110. .
Krumhols, L. A., E. D. Goldber6, and H. Boroughs. 1957 Ecological factors involved in the uptche, accumulation, and loss of radio-nuclides by aquatic organisms. Ch. 7 The Effects of Atomic Radi-ation on Oceanography and Fisheri,es. Publ. No. 551. .Nat. Acad. Sci., Nat. Res. Council, Washington, D. C. p. 69-79. - Larir: ore, R. W. 1952. Ecme pools and-homing behavior of smallmouth I~~
. black bass in' Jordan Creck. Ill. Hat. Hist. Sury., Biol. Notes, -
No. 28. 12 p. Lea, E. 1910. on the_ methods used in the herring investications. Conf. Inter.' pour l'Explor. de le Mer. Pub. Circon., No. 53: 7-144. Lee,-P. K., and S~. I. Auerb ch. 1960. Determi ntion e.nd evaluation of the radiction field ato ce ".." nite Cak Ld.c bd. 0:nL-2755 (uncia:si-fied AltC report). 63 p. . e 9
. 9 97 Lotka, A. J. 1925 Eleccuts of Physical Biology. Villiers and Uilkins, Baltir.: ore . h60 p. Martin, D., and E. D. Goldberg. .1962. Uptake and assinilation of radio-strontiu:n by. pacific r.achcrcl. Occanographic studies during opcra-tion "Uigvam." Linno. and Oceaneg. '((Suppl.): 76 81. Miller, L. P., and'P. Bryan. 1940. Fich nacration in bced.ater arcas _. on Enceler Reservoir. J.,.Tenn..Acad. Sci'. 23: 236-242. Morton, R. J., Editor. 1961. Statuc Rept. no.1 on Clinch River Si;udy. ORHL-3119 (uncleanified AEC report). p. 3C-11. Helcon, D. J., and H. A. Griffith. 3962. Stronti s in white crappic (it.noxir, annularis) flesh and bone. OTFL-3347 (tmelaisifica AEC report). p.-67 O&.ns, E. P. 1959 Fundamentals of Ecology. Second Edition. W. B. Saunders Co., Philadelphia and. London. 546 p. Ophel, I. L. 1962. The fate of radiost,rontiu::: in a freshvater comunit; . CRER-1122. Atomic Energy of Cane.da Ltd. 1642. Pendleton, R. C. 1956. Uses of rcarking antrals in ecological studies: icbaling suirals with radioisotopes. Ecoloct 37: 635-639 Prosser, C . L., W. Pervince., J. Arnold', G. Svihic, e.nd P. C. Tcghins. 19h5 Jre'anaW;1:n e.ud '.irtribution cf radi: :tive :r:r. irc., be ra .-2R '.hnr en, fic.;ior nJ. :ture, ard 30.110
- f n Eclifish. .GE C ..
103 (.a.cle scifici 1.IC report ). p. 1-hi. Ricker, U. E. 19E2. Creel census, popult. tion e:tirates, and rate of . cxploitation of Gero fish in Shoe Lake, Indie.nc. Invest. of Ind. Lakes and Screams 2(12): 215-253 ,
- . 195fl. Handbook of Computations for Biological Statistics of Fich Populations. Bull. No.119 Fish. Res. Bd. of Canads.. 300 P.
Robcck, G . G . , C . Eenders en, and R .' C . Palange . 1954. water quality
~
studies on the Columbie. River. Root. A. Taft. Sanit. Engr. Centr. Publ. 29h p. Rouncerell, G. A. , and U. H. Everh2rt. 3953 Fichery Science, Its Methons and Applications. ' John Wiley and Sonc, Inc., Ecv Yoik. , hh4 p. Sauvov, M. M. J 19'(, Rudicactivo conta'.:inction of fish,in vatcrs con-tainird sironilur. Tcv.1.. - Voco . Konf. Zud. Radiol. Vopr . , Gig. Ibzi <tr. p. 60 '(3 EJC-t r. 37h0. SS : ~.J. /.y a A c"nt.h 90 U OM.ll n.: .- : t..'. f; 12 in
., 3 9Sr . .
Re d rect 1.v.he . J. S . f.ced. Sci. 29: 3-9
O
.. 98 ,
Scott, D. C. 19h9 A study of a strcen populat'lon of roch bass, Ambloplites rupactric. Invest. of Ind. Iakc; and Strecus 3(3): 16()-234. Seynour, A. H. 3953. The use of radioisotopcc as a ing for fish. Proc. Gulf and Caribbean Fish. Inst., loth Ann. Session. p. 110-124. Thompson, D. II. 1933 The migration of Illinois fishoc. Ill. Hat. Hist. Sury., Biol. Notes, no. 1. 25 p. Thompson, U. 1953. Investigation of the ficheries resourccc -of Grand Lake, Oklahom?.. Okla. Game and Fich Dept., Fish It: t. Rept.10:
, 1-46. '
Van Ooston, J. 1957 The skin and scales. Vol. I. The Phyciology of Fishes, .Acadenic Press Inc., Fublishers, Hev York. p. 207-24h. . Kalker, M. C., and P. T. Frank. 1952. The prepacation of buffalo. Procr. Fich Cult. Ih(3): 129-130. Weiss, G. 1950. For Fishermen OnJy. Mo. Conservation Co. n. , Jeffercon City, Mo. h8 p. Woodbury, A. M. 1956. Uses of rarking animals in ecological studies: - Introduction. Ecology 37: 6GS. e e 6 s O
...a
-o
[ .' '
;~
- a 99 (c .
b
- I~~ .
~
OR1;L-3530 9 e - UC-48 - Biology (24th ed.) end 1:cdicine ( TID-4500 II?TFIJ:AL DISTRIEUTIOH
- 1. Biology Library 154-203..D. J. !!c1 con
, 2-4. Central Ucccarch Libre.ry 204. J . S. Olcon "
, 5. Recetor Divicion Library 205. F. L. Parker 6-7. ORUL - Y-12 Technical Litrnry 20G. B. C. Patten 3 Docinent~ Reference Section 207. A. F. Shir;n
. . 8-42. ' Laboratory kccordo Departnent 208.,11.-J. Skinner -
- 43. ' Laboratory R: cords, OFJ!L R.C. 239. E. G. Struxncca -
- 44-93. S. I.,-Auerbach 210. J. A. S.tartout ,
211. H. D. Ualler_
- 94. D. A.'Crossley, Jr.
95.-P. B.-Dunc.cy 212. 'A.~ !!. Ucinberg
- 95. W. F. Ferguson . 223. J. P. Witherspoon . -
- 97. 1?iles R. Kevern 214. M. Withc:cp .
- 93. W. H. Jordan 215. Jack Zasler
- 99. T. S. Kreco 210. J. C. Frye-(consultant) 100. R. H. ' Lafferty, Jr. 217. M. F. Fair (consultant)
'.; 101. C. E. Lnrcon 218. J. B. Hurch (consultant) 102-151. R. E. Mortin 219. R. L. Platoman-(consultant)
. 152. E. F. !<*cuhinich 220. E. P. Oduu (conse.ltant).
153. K. Z. 14 organ , 221. H. O. Wychoff (consultent) FJTEM'.l.L l'ISIMIFJTIGH 222. Re.ccc.rch sn3 Develess.ent Divisica, AEC, 033 i 223. Jehn U. ',I:lfe, Divi ica af F,iology enf I;ciicira , U21.V, Ur. shin;.4n . 224. Crir.ndo Pt.r?., Decrtscnt cf Eiclu., licrt:r.tcstern Unitersity, Evanston, Ill. 225. J. A. Liebeman, Division of Reactor Developsent, USAEC, 4. , L*ashington . _ 226. Vincent Schultz, Enviro 2r. ental Sciences Brcnch,- Division of riology and Medicine, USA 20, Washington 227. C. S. Shoup, Biolet;;7 Eranch, US!CC, C30 228. Ralph Ovemen,. ORIES, Ock Ridge 229. Glenn Gentry,- Chief, Fish Manescnent Division, Tennessee Game and Fish Co::ciccion, Cordell Hull Building, Eachv111c
- i. 230. C. E. Ruhr, Research e.nd Develop ant, Tennescee Gene and Fich Cc4 mission, Cordell Hull Buildini;, Nashville 231. H. -M. Michols, Fich !:e.nngenent Division, Tennesoce Gr.c and -
- Fish Comraission, Cordell Hull Building,1:achv111c 232. C. J.' Chance, Chief, Fish end Gn.mo Branch, Tennessee Valley Authority, Morric, Tenn.
233. G. E. Fall, Fich c.nl G:nc Eranch, Ti.~/., Morris, Tenn. 234. Enrold Lotendrer.ac, Jchr.nic 's Fish Co., Forrect Avenu ,
. Kr.cy.ville, Tenn.
235. Etterd Clcy:ch, Bettny Urrnrtracnt, University of Tcnnecrec I 4- +
^
s . s
..,. * . . . , 4 *.- 100 <
23L Theodore Davin, AEC, ORO 23','. D. C. Scott, Zoolot;y Department, University of Georgia, Athens, Georgia 238. K. D. Carlender, Department .of Zeolog and Ente:2 ology, Iowa State Uaiversity, A:es, Iora 239. J. T. Tc.nner, Univercity of Tercessee, Depart:nent of Zoology and Entenoloc . 240-753. Given distribution as sho.rn in TID-4500 (24th ed.) under Biology taid Medicino category 754. J. C. H7 cll, Zoology Department, University of Tennessee e e a e e e e G S
.' @ ~ - '~ Dkkf TENNESSEE VALL5Y AUTHORITY mugsg jy g
$* ~hh Norris, Tennessee 37828 REFERENCE 2-40 ANN VE ASAAY OF AED ALE IN PAATNEASHlA January 17, 197+1 t
Dr. Frank Valiulis Environ = ental Systems Department Westinghouse : P. O. Box 355
- Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania 15230
Dear Frank:
h i F.nelosed are some on-site fish data. We also have Watts l Bar and Melton Hill rotenone data if you need them, although l they are not vorked up as yet. Hope you can use this. 1 t Sincerely,
.M Job A. Holbrook, Biologist -
Fisheries and Vaterfowl Resources Division of Forestry, Fisheries, ' ani Wildlife Development Enclosure I I I i l i e f b
- _ _ - - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ ___ _ _ J
) ., -
g Den D. Jaco, Supervisor, Fisheries Besources Management Section, FOR B, Norris Tag L. Sheddan, Wlag4mt, Fisheries and Waterfowl Besources Branch, FOR IAB, Norris Jeauary 11,1974
! T7A FISE POPHATIC5 3GIICRING - UFSR UDGSTEATION P3DJECT Obs.ce,.
The objective of this study was to obtain data on the fish population between f*14n A River Mile 15 and 18. This area, w A tely five miles below Malta Eill Dam, Reans County, Tennessee, will eventually be the site for a Liquid Metal Fast Breeder Emactor Demonstration Project. Backs:round The U FSR site is not a typical lake habitat, but is actually a river I with ficw ev,m 1 by the operstien of TVA's Helten Eill Dem. No } known fisheries data had been gathered on these specific three e41== (CIlN 15-1S) of coolwater rinr. Ock Ridge National Iabcratories cWN ses data during a fish-t=-#g project in 1961 (Herten, Cooperative fish 1961) between Clinch Eiver ! tile 0 a=d 23.0. population inventeries of *a'atts Bar vare done by "VA ami the Taccessee Came and Fish Can=ission in 1964 and 1973 (T7A,1964 and 1973). l . Proced2re Three stations (Ishle 1) with diverse characteristics were ss= pled in j i Febr;.ary, in April May, and again in Aug.:st 1973 (Table 2). At each j statien on each data the ma-la included both daylight ami nightti=e i' electrefishing by boat ani two gill nets set overnight. One gill not i ~ was it" scuare mesh x 8' x 100', si=e 139 nylen thread, the other 3" a7 are mesh x B' x 150' size 139 nylon thread. Nets vers tied to f t the river bent ani set perpendicular and anchered on the bottaa. l - C=e sill not was set .yy.vhtely 100 yards upstream frca the electrefishing site and the other aboct 200 ;7ards. }. I
' Z1ectrefishing was frcs an 18 foot =1"=4= johnbeat wn==vered by -
a 6 h.p. cutboard eng* ,*. Electric power was furnished by a 230 - l l volt alternating current generator throc6h a silieme rectmer i which converted to pulsating direet cu.. t. Output volta 6e was
- nain64-ed at 1.5 a:ses. Current was disper:ed through the water l j i
G ww-, , - - - - -w-,---+ -% ,w _ +.----,.,,m,., ..e---.. _._.-,.#-.,_..ww_.-.,...-,.--,--+--------v.,, - - - - - - _ . - - - . - - ----+v- - - - - -
l-
.~.
1
. ae Ben D. Jaco ~
Ja:n.ary 11,1% , T7A FISH POWIATION MONITORING - DGBR DDO5STBCICE PB0 JECT fNan a ficating =1t=4== grid-the positin electrad=r cuspended - fram a 2k-foot fiberglass bocus. Ziegative electades, one en each r side of the positive, consisted of 3A-foot fiberglass kw== through which is sountad a vertical row of whip an+manaa,12 inema apart, jurojecting into the water in a "ecumb like" ocafiguration. One negative boema is mounted straight absad saa the other at 45 to the right. nectmfishing was generally vithin lo feet of the bent. when possible, fish were counted and identified without removing t'am from the water. Fish nw's, 4 inches were classified as minnows or ide=tified to species. Netted fish were zzaasured (total langth), - veighed, and dw to the water. Sy nectrofishing eaa 75 percent of the total asople of 1,628 fish, c111 nettina produced the resminder. Ferage fish numbers ,
^ ^ ted the sa=ples with 74.4 W M.. About half of these were adult E4% stad and half were 4 inch icng thra*ANa: Bough fish acecc=ted for 18.7 peroe=t and game fish 6.9 perennt (Tahla 3).
cc=parison with other saeples is not valid rince different habitats were sampled and == 147 :nethods were not censistent. The 1964 and 1973 pcpclatica inventeries were deee in a lake shoreline habitat using 5-parcent -,thitiable rotences. . : i Peroe=tages of gone, rough, and forage fram 1973 Wn are shown in Table 4. Iengths sai weights are ava41aM= for each netted fish taken in 1973 statice 3 was the '
- s>st productiw ces, both by l
electref4*4ng and netting. The April-May Wa data was most productive for netted fish. It also produced the greatest nu: ber of game fish. Feb2.:ary elset:o. fishing produced the largest number of fish, pr=M"antly stad. I I.itersture cited Merton, R. J. 1961. OE:!L 3199 Stat,2s F W Iro. 1 on clinch l River Study. . Fish Inventory Data, 'Jatts Bar Reservoir. 1964. T7A, F1-h and - W41314"e 3 ranch. 13 pp.
- e
-v--, ,-t-e- ,,c w,,.,- .,.,-,-,--r, --v. ...e,-.#- ,-.,...,me--,_ -
,. - - - - - - - . - _ - . . , . .- r w- -,m _#. - -- - - - *,-
l
- 6. ,
,% 1 3
Ben D. Jaco January 11,17Tf4 T7A FISE POPE \ TIC:t }ONITOREIG - I2E3R DE1033TRATIClf PTECT Fish Iz:ventory Data, Watts Bar Beserwir. 1 773. T7A, Fish and Wildlife Branch. 13 PP. TLS:DW Attacb=ents: Tables 1 - 4 O a e e g O
. . 1
- n. j t !
l TABLE 1 s PERCEiTAGE OF GAME, ROUGH, AND FORAGE FISl! FROM CLEC1 RIVER SA1:PLES
$ Of Nu=bers Methe:1 Cc==ents Gare Rough Foraae Date Between miles 0-23 39 6 49.h 11.0 1961 Hoop nets Re enene In 1.'atts Bar Res. 34 9 8.2 56 9 1964 1973 Gill nets &
electro-fishing Between miles 15-18 69 18 7 74.4
~
R5tenone U In Watts Bar Res. 22.2 52 73.6 1973
+
*,e e I
r - e-..
-1 .__ _
.~
-. .t ;
i u TABLE 2 FISH POPUIATION MONITORING STATIONS ' I2 FBR DDIONSTP.ATION PROJECT Station 1 RiSht bank. . 4 From CRM 15 7 downstream to white mark. Shallow bank. Station 2 Left bank.
- From CE416.5 (approx.) at barbed wire fench upstream to east bank of Caney Creek.
Steep bank. Station 3 Right bank. From CE4 17 9 downstrean to rock ledge with painted white square. Medium depth bank. Y Left and right banks facing downstream. 4 e e t
-o e
v o ws
^ *e soo+
+
TABLE 3 Numbers and Percentages of Fish St.mpled at DIFBR Demonstration Project Site 1973
,- Rough Forage Game 8 25 88 7 19 33o x 10 21 396 65 814
$ 25 2
2.85 7 2% 90% 12 68 51 16 55 13 x
- E Sh 83 n
,1 1 82 206 c 75 22.65 56.7% 20 7%
o 19 118 4 6 n8 1 9 % g ifa 322 5 3h a_ 1.4% 94% 89 2% Re::ults of f.u 'itree Sa. ples Game Rour-h Fora.-e 6 9% , 18.7% 7%.49
( ). y -
' STATION 1 April 30; May 1-9, 1973 August 9-10, 1973 February 1-2, 1973 Electro- -
Electro-
' Electro.
Gill Net Data Fishing Gill Net Data Fishing Gill Net Data Fishing No. Wt. (Gmc) No. No. Wt. (Gms) No. No. Wh. (Gms) No. Walleye _ 1 2,525 6 15 ,162 5 7 '1,525 1 j sauger 1 650 2 600 3 ghite bass 17 10 19,720 2 Carp , 3,050 3 3,875 Quillback 3 1-River carpsucker 1 1,550 2 800 1 Golden redhorse 1 350 1
,' Black redhorse 1 600 1 2,050 Silver rednorse 1 21 35,550 1 Smallmouth buffalo 2 7,320 . Black buffalo 800 43 1 186 5-(
910 76 5 I Gizzard shad 5 l . .. 251 115 ,910 3 1,138 12 Skipjack herring 1 650 l 1 164 1 1 - 150 l - Drum
; Channel catfish
- 3 60 Minnows 7 O
. . + . . .
TABLE 4 . STATION 2 ~ Anril 30; May 1-9, 1973 August 9-10, 1973 February 1-2, 1973 Electro-Electro- Electro- , Gill Het Data Fishing Gill Net Data Fishing Gill Net Data Fishing No. No, Mo. Wt. (Gns) No. No. Wt. (Oms) No. Wt. (Cms) lo 8,125 1 1,025-Saucer 4 3,700 ' ~ 5 1,675 1 White bass ,1 375 3 2 Bluegin , 2- 3,600 2,800 9 5 7,700 carp 1 " 7,725 : 2- 2,450 7 . quillback . 7,850 2 3,300 River carpsucker 4 1 500 , Golden redhorse , 1 2,200 .- , Silver redhorse 1,350 27 42,925 Sna11 mouth buffalo 1 1 1s850 '. Black buffalo 83 70 1 200 9 Gizzard shad 4 525 Mooneye 1 250 5,800 l' 458 Skip, jack herring 1 1,125 9 1 138 Dnim , 3 Longnose gar 1 340 Channel catfish y 3 Dr.erald shiner ' 35 Minnows 256 i j . i t
~ '
TADI2 - 4 it STATION 3 April 30; May 1-9, 1923 _ August 9-10, 1973 February 1-2, 1973 -Electro-I'1cetro-Electro-Gill IIct Data Fiching Gill Net De.ta Fishing Gill Het Data Fishing Un._ Ho. Ut. ( m s) No. No. Ut. (Crs) - No . Ho. Wt. (Gms) . Walleye 1 3,200 6 3,575 1 16 No. Wt. sauger ' 2 750 38 13,130 White bass , 1 . , Largemouth bass 2 2,340 *1
- 193 .
Carp 1- 3,150 9 14 4,620 , Quillback *
'l 1,690 }
River carpsucker 1 1 425 2 1. 300 Colden redhorse Black redhorse 1 775 4 7,i30 4 1 1,360 Silver redhorse 8,625 '43 65,610 Smal1xouth btiffalo -5 HoEcucker 1 350
- 7 84 875 95 2 370 Gizzard shna 5 28 17,120 4 1,575 2 Skipjack herring 1 ,
600 2 2 Minnows 296 f g i e
- y
. g L g
g ----o -e ; c ;. - ; ,- - - n-a :q ^ ~ - - - - - - - - - - - - ~
. . , . - -.._._........,.A..........,. .a : . . .
.s.....r..
e .. . . . . l
.ecics Lccati- _ g y y6 /dh. /hq 0, q Eats _,, , 1 l'I 7 3 ,,
T1".e Noth d. /h *[$.' , Teteratures: Air Vater-1" 2" 3" 4" 5" 6'
.m. vs. so. us. m. u. .
f =: - y .s. .: . .:. . ,. . , 21.. p- --- lua 0'
$T,..fi: ,v [ .,;y.
/ ,$ ~y, ~
/le.T.
t '- . i
/, I, -U . r_ .
g
- 7. 3 . 5 ".fi2r<rt) - -
orW n Ih= D J? <.7 ' M'Si::-) D o ?> c
! ,+ e s, , i. .
O.. ' p.,..,,.<., . . . ,. ., ,. , . e s .
. 11" 12" 8" 9" 10" l 7" l l f
i i ! i j j i
~
t f I l / n P .; I I .= , l l l l l~* t ' .' ..e*
.lf *n y
_ __ { *
- 4 ' . . I, l j . -f i b ,
'. [s ' l
..,4. a
,= _._,/.-_',._g p
< y". o l.,, m .,f *:jcg-_
. g* f
~, '/
e l
, p
/
- -}
[_1 . l / 6 ..,' f'_ hT O. *. !., .N .' .O / ., l. l l /! f g(* I /* ',"A.a.. *l
.*3.,h=. s** I .ga 9
'3n g ( \' l gg w- 4f s j.
,-l:;7.:
.>\
.----r'.
- -;l 8'.+. .7 [ ,,p 5
O l .* F # Il l I, y P! t !',- L.. ~7 h . I. rI ! l =. n i,:.~ .Q , ..,1
; s a .l.
s
,_ . i ,. ..-j.- ,,- ,
/ ,~._ i . g .. . z .
- , .,, . (( - .. - . .
s__ w*.. . Is
. gs . ' . .',~A. ,~O l< C .:- l )f>
is-- . : I (~>- % ;w',;: !
, _m - .,.s
.. nwe ( _ -
t ) = b2 bh k i .
, -. r- , <
l .V l -l ,l._I,.r.-.'3 ..t .o. '. - -) - . -
',>]
_ .' s
- i. .
{ i e I. _ . . , . . _ - _ _l s* l F s/
] 0 m W
, x : .>.L 4 :. a cy .._ .
i!- _ - .:L-_
-- I i i
- I .l .L
.! #e , L,.'[I.,t.?,ll .u,.rO 3 .
i, 3 /. h 1,
/ l, l ,
.1
..%,-..~,
z....
.,.s'_ .l ._
.t._.._._.___..
.,...__,...I_ . . k" ',? ! 'l, l
kl.(_' M. , l I ' l l
. . a l '. -> i
- h'. ; r ' .l'. .< .:.. . . . . ,.. :.
I l t s t
*' l t
l ! .
. .). . . ;.l.
si
. !.,i A w/c, i .1, - 7. .S ...
' - O . '-. , , .
o
n
~ _
TIT.3 L'r#J;lJIc:: D;e;,. y;;_ y r4 ~ e
. Spe:1es M.:e.icn.]l[--d '? N [ A l /<
l 5?'e ??$ M /?73 Time D* h i p t Water tj N e.]ie 9 ; $n, T!C A) at h)h Tc::;ersturen Air. 3 1 j 2 u 3 . 3 6
- u. I us. be. us. u. ut. m. ve. u. vs. n. u:.
l 56 2.. ' l , ' n 'E'. ! % ) M Sh ,. O.
~
h-Q' l@ ,btha.rtv) /h((L
!? $
^
U T et] }l $.n .- FEr,Uf:u' A:t il .' 8h-d 95 3' is ^! , 4 '-hifeil) )9h<~b'. e -i (b' irks &)bde I *'. ', 3
't - '
l
,i
'! l_. 'h, 3 NJ. /. erd -
/ i' ? ' . , _.
6" 9" 10" 11" 1E" 7" l l l ! 1 I l l
--,b-
/ly?0 l ~, ,k {z ., _ n / G', ? k??':) ,,
,/l l i! 'l / -)[- [+P3 er. b /.3 b /' .~. l m, i 1w,,ir"p.;g.4 w (., 4 c. q: 18-tI l .r. ~T (1_: 3; i ,_,h. l
'll.')l'
_x l ik. \ ?.. i. ~l5,h ,DIZhf l '3 ? T T l l C -.' $ 'I ~2.3 .I 3 /?;t'<di)!
- r M O ') i l D C. h .l . 'l . /.;...f.,,I)l f
1 ', ,
/ /, l 'A d,' ,D 'n.r f _;' l .'
l n ,,, ,.' o!. <~l - , i l
, i -
i
- i. . . C. .' l * - .
9, tii.. . c-f::2 ?>t.p' .. l
!n /
- 1 l l :fr ie
. 6.' .>a., r: -)
t i, i
- r. vi, f'-
,. l n l 2:~ /0,l'l (k;i::)) n"./ &c 5" l~ C" t
p' 7o .mi2 v . w. ,~ix z.. _ , :a . _ _ __ 1 -e r
+-
I t i
\
j-I, I _ _ _ _ . .. _ . L-. g ._ _ _
! I l I I i
. I. .
. _____ _I _ ....__i;____..._. _,
-m I I 1 .
l l ..l. . . - .J .. . ! . ! I .;
._ _I ..
!. f .
I
W
- r. .. .. -a . . . _ _ ..
., F*F.'.s' 70?*".a!!C." 2AT!. - III'" 721 l Species _ _ _ _
It.:s'.Lon , g/ hta hal 9 , / i p T Tmh f6 Air. Water L)we e- C+> uc ! ' h' . ; r2tures: 1: 2- l wy ..
. y s.
!!n . Ut. No. Vt. I.*c . Vt. !*o. b*t . Vt. No. Vt.
_!*c ._.-
. b% . .!! .?.. .
2 4. ^ .(M md ~3 R.DO ,
<.in. >LG
.0,,
~
i4.4 'N. ud 5 5~ o l
//
- z; , A ' (4TD:id p. 3 fo 7- .
Il 03. t1 * (4 ??m') 30 '? fa ~ i 'I /9 N 'li.5m.) ti /WDn
, n n.3 '(% ,.n ll D D .d ..
- l. -- l l
-. 7" 8 9 10' 11" 12"
.. - f, .
l I.
- l. .i ~y n _r (A,'
, w a .* */'. .
ic n, t.
~: e .
5
/0. *
- Pi.'.')
. 1 ]. hD,,
~
- ('S.T. 9,//,. O f, ,e 1,
l :. . , e
. oo
- -.._. ' .4,. .,n. .6
__ l * .cd i u, s (aL 4,. s. t.. ,
~
l '< l l '. . l ($ ?ll. ')
.:..k?.
l l (a. .t , . . q -
*. l .
ci l i, ,, ~c.g L.,.,
. 6,. .y .
.g l _
w rITyGl, -# 7l' i r <- l l 1r s . /.i /fr 8: .'. .,..; .
. ~ , .-
L .'~, Y * /!! f h . . ^=. N .} -- d /d ;m.h
; 7 f7
*$ c
(*% -. .. ~. _...1's. $.z
/ *.' _ . -
q M ,'- 0 (( . / .*?// t' , da c. _-
.,\ v. 3. - ..
,e _ r_
.~._ilp'-%,2,.;>__ .i_ i_- A, . -l i .l -; .. _.g. Lo,,.h
~ n. , be -'l
< ~ l ;f ic:l f. v.u.. , - ,
r
' $ /f.* ! ,,
_...'.'. ~J < s
, * . . . , ,/ l , ~~ ug k h.yu !
g b, . , as f t.' i _ . -
\ ..
l l1. C ! yf-.-4....n,i - -- i Y n . l--.
't ]0. '[ b_'b") 8:n,_. j[D s,--.
. - . e ... -
e m. _-
.me - e-..
.~ . - . ._
t.l I . i ._n --
W
- - ._ s w me.4
.. , , . , - . - - _ _ ~ _ . - .- . -
J 6.... e
=
6 5
. . . . . . . . J., . . . h.
t l 8 i F / ,)e3 4 i ($&ba.d, . - i c'l, b' . . .1 .C'/ q .
* .ar C.
w-)~,est a
; ,swv. t .
a ii %. e-Os /, * * ,'?. 1 p..,-)Je?"I-r 50 )g 01-4. G I a
$1' .a." s
*
- f b $4 Y
[ .fQ .,:.
** 4 -
wa I
\ f :.,:, / :. >J
\. : .. =., .. 2 :
m t . en .* -
- e 2bC l .' '/ C d' .* 't ~m .;.:t : .s ~
l
.~ s rs.<...'.s ...
\ . .* ,/.-~,s- ..
e -* , o t j ,f .' e L, '- e p se .. . * * * * ~ ~
*.e* ,,, ' .-' , , %
, * .e *.
<, '. f...
,=.,.j" D.*a.
w.- o. . s'
. ~
* / r' -. w. . . _
i f .i '. . . , .'.. . . .; ., h I i i \
/:e '. <
/
l , f .f :s,+.~
) y.,.* s3
, ' ,ejs_-
i ,
?
'.., -. -- jn p*.
) oua u g
4
; ; ; - /.*' E' i
e *.*2
.M.**";
I .r tr -
/ v .J J t .
) l.w 4
.h ;l o *,$
4 ee
\
O
$r/ * -
/ .r. /a
' r :, . .
w f, f el' Y, r. , /w; ; g + ss * '~ l r.. l4 . = ' .'.,~'~
-s l
-i '/? /. *V*
,
- 4m ..
- .f //.f ut-
' u.
-o e.
weP., e d eJWe#O' - f/ s
, i d,~*,*+
e eom l
..I</
~ '
/ 'a'.5 s t T ! !. , *
' l. ". .C a v-s lr , ,, e
a
- - . . . . g. .- .~ _ _ _ _ _ ,,
g.
- 5) + e a
i.
. t I %
? .? ,7 ,.h
- s w
l ea
$. /
*.', .,?.., /
k,p..
? ! .**'
j,. - f *e s.
* ,, rf f -e
.. . /, /' ../ / /** a t >
. < f .* m?
l/ r. . s,. .Y t / * *?' ' y/ e . ee s..,.. e.
- s. ./ ,
. . . , .s*-
5
.a
.Ie e *
. ,ll,t o ey--
w p)**
./,s s
/
, *Ej .)wr* f }
qe t
- i .4 / *-
4
, - e."- .f sY*./2 9
4 s m'
' '-~ , . , . s, a .-
9 8e& v'Ls . s?., . a , - r, e
~ # , #'"
*~s. / ,g .=.=V a
43 O f
?'
- gf.se '=* O l
d p.
"
- 4
- p * .f.e . w
. '6 Il *=="** w 4 - .#
s'* r (* , , .. %
* * . * -* .,s's g*, e as e
- s. O s'
,i .
e 4% 1 .$ y*-o r 7.+ w w 's
. . g . ..*-
0
***L*
i-.
=
e ed
/**
4
* . s .o
. . . /s .a
*r . < w ,. w I
e' a g4
- D W**$ Ge W
... - fJ;
/ '
06 O,
. ,Cs 'J.
y.
*, Q {#
.* .* e.,
#e v .a.e'l I
a ssw, '
# O-4*
9
.' 4 l: 2
- . . ./> : -
k l . , * .., . t 9 4^*
# e h *-
b
- s
* * ,. /
se f . O $ 9 4
~ .
my .
< . . .-- ~ . * . w.
b I t a
". s -
i
- .;.- , /,-
. 7e ,
e ,')p* ':-
/
lu1. : .- r
.i.. ..,... , . .. .. v. . .
1 *
? 4-. s 4*~.
- I O-w == ..
' %. w r
.s R9 y J .: s* *
\ o-/ a r /
e.f*
$ s o
# *ol s.
V ," .
%P **= =*
.. , . .ss#
. . *. . O
+m
,e .
.-g *. f s.
T-
* ,- s .
*
- Qw =*
l. e e 9t# %
'e d
. b, e
e W w. l M l W t . W e
- e
- O
. _* e f %
e e <$*4
. . .y
- , /
O e. t t h 6
@m O ne 6WD $$h m e@*w.
- I
t - . . _ . . .
- 7. . .
_I e 4 ' , - .' . . k p
- g &.
f
- RI /Q
\ . C - o a tal'll . m
- :
- e-e .a, w C., c) ~ *//J
%e
~
l' ., e s} ob fe oe * ~ . * ' /g g t ,- ' '.*' l'l. ' IU!. 9
\' -
/ #> , r -
/'. <r- %.e.
.!.-0 .m ' /., ,s #J i _e,, .
v C. .'- f
! , . . ,.jw j
> ' l- ((/ SSO
/* . .a/.
wew g s, e
* ,* a '
p' s/ " S' a. :
'. ..' s / m'
< v -,
i 1
,, 2. . *
. **./
4 ws
-=m h
N e m" 4f% . "
.* e.."
*e * *
\ .
# = 4 e
- wed y
.L j
.e.r . ..e., .,
1 ; e: ,? t
,.*. .. ,. o.'".
a n. l 7 *o
.}s ..
%J a #
g *,g e
- h '/ .o
~ - g, i s ~o- on e d m)
- l f' 'Tg , ,e ! . ' p' j 'L -.
9 A
. (*' 'w e L' f / :.' s x }? eL ,..
*.C Ow .s 'm
/d :Po
/ .
. -r w .iO
'o~ , . - ,
s,.-e e nv g 4 s, %
.r
# #, ^%
*[ fI e sh -
a' ' . t% ~ o
%ph#
a y CC+
- ' ,. .f-s
#.$^' #5n"1 e .; ./ t,?
h I,
*e
. I--
4 k
t * ' - - - - - - - - - - - - -
~
i t.
. m. ,.
.l R ~> . v>
I i l * * / :-/ t
/
,:.. I /n4 o/ /***r.';s' i ; 3-/ - f S
',. . ., . i r ,./.
,,, u ,J s ,' c i . . . ,
v.) . , o e., r, h_.W,. /'. ,.- c 0 1.:. . . / t
... .-.~ 2f5a i <4
- ./ , <" ,
e l
\ '
~
' * -? I /DD I ,' ~. / i'4: 9
.. -J
. ,f tf =*e C .
- t. ** ./ s.
s 4
, ' ,3 3 l G.
*p
./;.=C .,.
r .. e , . , ,
?. -
- o. l %$ d v .,
- m
,# . . / ro. o. .~ m*
. * , , *" $h .o.
,. . ..,,.) ,w
~
,a ,s M
/* e.
I e 'g v
.i e<. ..
,'. , M9* Z
;. .* L w
*- ' ,,* A
._ g % .l& w d
*. ' ' . l .*a $
p9* h
%ee w.J
/ wN,, *s* $
* / / s
* / *JU o - . /
J*' ss, Js e 1 ~. p 6 .*. .*,
,4 .,.,.,.
9
, ' 7
[
, , .E -I e + p ' f sep3 r4 f y ~! t '
/ a- .
- W,
~ l4 C:
., r- -
/=?,..-,
g WF S i f. ,: -
- < .- - /J.
. ; , s. , , _
f* t p .g ;;
?f ,_. .-
; e #'
1
- r3, _ ,s /
- ie
% 'a . # g
. c
, , , ~') /..e" N, * , -'
(, ,-
.==*
l l. t t.
3 ..-_ _.;
. ~ l.
s t ; p Se(%e a.
/ a,v2
. -/
.~ ). , n. . F ..=.
- i. d"de f
/,'.:,,- Z'l j
- t. 't.: 9 : < t: , 6 . :' ,' ,.cfsc) l 45l a . ! . G.-5 a l&ae l, ,_.
i ..
- s. ..
.s o.-,,
~t yer . : , n. , : .: ,
J 'l' *. ; ,2 /~;-
<*.ff'
/ *d-OC, i
i-I. Nj .,i.
. /yoO n
i { r 1 e t t
~.
j . I
e e , s - - - - -- -- - -- - - - - . - - ,-- - - - - - - - - - - - , g
* - Dj. . !
/
9
*/,
'I. .,e ,
i s n.
/o /s ** G* j.s
, r,{
f, / t} l' Q o } "k *l . V O' ff ~.. a ** t .)
,...i *I -
w' /V 9
); 9. . l C
;;, '.. W. . -
[. .t. . , . .
~ . // -
se ".* . j.y -e
,o
/[f C i
.i c, : .
l -
*m c. . bA ..
Mt'
,io*! %
9
* / .* * .-
a a. 4
/s e ,
/ -
.O... $. ..
l - _) I l < ;. *
!..-^ .
/ -
#' ie ~
, .p
/~ ,
< G o
,/ ,. e. w g
- c, . ./.s.en ;)
f,O# " s
< - /; ..
.: ,a . i 9
- w
?
l,' O.
, .,, , .'./'",,. .
/ -
g
*p * / e- , M e
n*
*Y *
. m 9
d g _. , s e
G I. b e I
- 4 Y. & '--
ll
.,..<~
/ r.:, -
; i, . , , . . . ..
e. C-/ -,;.i
/
. ??
yin l-
.T' lf' ' V* - t s
a. w : ,<!,.
,<.o ;.- /2.10
& '. ' & 2f30 O
l
, .- *. /.WP /y ~#s*
i ' / g.: s
, s. . -
f s. e.Js ;
,* "? ?Qffs.
g o . , . . . . eaa s 1 1
; .- ?
/e~C., -
t I' ' 1 .. h: :' g N . e". I r* d s _
- $ o g
/.#; 7 <g f
ll
.l% a *
-. /25 '
. /w
. . ., ./
i . 5-
*s F 4
1
. .- .' - s l .
e..' : ,
! h' . ' .*
s.-.. / Us I _ i I, et t. b I L l s l l l l . i l t 1 1 t
_, L . - - - _ _. _ , - .- L m , , a r e
+ .e -one.e e .um . e mammum s bsp og ** ese m e*- *= w==*=h#* h M g 58 0 e' "e m .e e o e gb e .,4 *.
g t 6 t 6 I' . . N I 1 <' i* ., e d a f y, -
- s - a *
- m. 1
/ , J
,s .
, / '
~. .
- I tb
- i.- ~/ E
/ J e
e j . < l/ . . ($ 4'j7 . V //..'le ./
. - s ',G c/ o.,* s,a/ l'
..g..
, .* y w.r , , , . , e $' , ,
\ * *
- ., . . / $ s*f .
l' , .
% ee
, e , ,, ** &
* * *,- w ye , ,
4
= = . ,g *-s g6 a a*
* .4 f
I .6 a e .n
. ,y , : f ... .*
i er e
./ ~ .~
f -, ' , .
.*. h Ob "4 I n
,y * .f y o
f..P .s n
- 6. y*.
e. p.
%. .TO ,
t e * *
- . . 4 - .
1 : ,
, a-g } './
t
." o e
* *O eo e
t e o . l s- '.,. f J ~~
}
f
; -.S . . e i u z- .
- s. ,e ==#
%~ 4 ""
ln e,dv -
* , /
mJ C
-vs .
I /
* * =
( , ammm8 M N ~. l l . , I , ' t w y
.=
l . t i t ~m;
.i .. #
,; :- e' i
e f *
.' a Cl-
{ 3 v' + g s-p g i g Ms as n.-l .A I a
} E w.)
1 l
. . ~. .a L. W I ,
t
/8 *
- o, ** a eL s , -
I f } *
*.j '
[,.. ;o * ~ ! I , i
- e*
4 9 j t ') I i t i ( .- . - - - -_ _ _
- a
+4 e 9
mimm . Fe e
-e -aw'e. e++ = .m
,6=-w"
- ee e es --e.--=..
8 e ** G 9
- ed g
I e* % .J ,a Y k 5O
/ J 4
. .l s- , I f*.
7-
*' f a r: .~
, o -
.s ,
;. .,. - , =
o
, J o. e%-
v .#
+
.I
/ . .J;m.a -
- i.,
t I t ,~ *
~~
..,N e--
/
C,*2
. ,j 7 1- -*). } ' .n ; * / .ss
. l 46 s. *. .
! s,-
h
*t - *e e %0 q s e
. ~ , . *-
e en as D er , elP Y' e pn e. OW
) we .
, ,~
e t g 1, . . .
. .v i ~~ ,
- s- *3
_. y e
'S =e , ' . .
4 I i - . g ~ , I a %p # n, 4 esd*
, ..e O 9
- fa &
' a
# e, ,a .
a .*
, . % c ..
o 1 - . . . -:-
* . . I l
~.' . .r,
- .i 1 ,9 .' . .w
, -~
$ s.'. ./
m q
,s ,. , . - - -
o Ge a ga Oa - 'g/e e
..,+ g' )= 6* . so
- r
.4. ,** <.,
D,D e $
. .. c. - ,a ,. .
/# s s.
. :( ,
-e,* *f. /.. *y'8/ -+:)
*e,.
e ,p *- */ o
/ e Q-W - .,
.p *) *9*
e g
-o y e
\ ..
.i g
I - - , e
+.
e
, . - - . -,, , . .,eee,- e en e , =,f
* **w
- fe -
-
- g e
a e e m e 6 I 9 0
/* iso j/ QA .
- d i
t ; . :. , f.,1. J./..
- t. . *:. .:- t .. -.e l- ,%-*
i : u.
. . >. !s, ' ,a .
- O e d%
*= m f*
d
/ a .3, a *
- s'e s /
gg m l
-. e. . p. .w I
.m .,-
P *r ', e
, e u O
%.% g * ,
e,9 'o
-d% e 4
- w. O I . - ,
< i _
I 1 e e. Y*
- s l
al 9
- 4. e e i
. e e
e . y "e !- - e 8 s l
. 9p f,"* ~#
a o
- l a..... .
een 5 h w , , e. .%
,%= e.*
Y f
/
l l l t i 1 f
-o- ~
,, _.. *. .. .-. - 9 a i ,
l 0 0
e g. t, , , , . .. ,
,9,
.... 4 I -
\
f 6.vrWK 7-/o - 72: f !$ /! ; J/ *' ' ll1/l /?p.'Qff ,*,' .? ( lljf d e' 5 kt h'cP') \
) ,
D
.l i$,**w pf:
Ei.'
- 4 /y ,ER f ,
i - - g [. i 1 . 09 0 l
# $ e.e . p ,
&, o..
.- ,. , / ,,,, ./ /a c - . Is e
(
, I 't e*r /
l ,)-- l :..
- e. c 1-w e e v
- Ii7 so sin . r'4 so 1
l
- r .., ,, .; a
. . f <?.. . . . . , /
- 16. J,.' t '
e'? S 10! /
- s.- -.
a t ,,s . - r i.z ,v.,? a f i I l r I I I l l 1 l I 1 e h I , e l I f e. l l.
g.._ m_ ...,
, _ . . ,......c
.m._
.. - L
; i
. 1 I .
l
. I /
j'n, /~i
- R 2-10-7.3 i
i t C*
- N- t C f.f f l?! l-1
! i 3am/'s.[ t. G.N, .l, L-l. % M' :-
' s
. 0n r P e
/ *f o
- 3M- /
l* i 1 il f ** *J-1 1;: (lI g:
,o l
,'.2/k.t.~r*nI:
. /?D .517 s o
/ /
/-v iv . !, bj .
e - r* * ~;* *. y 0J $ N'..' 5.afi ,r, p, l .
- s. / ./
i
.vavy 8.i '
}-
- C r..
/
v
/*
v;r .pr,,* s.. j
- i.
} 0. U.G *!
$ ** 3 ?$l l E
.h g I
w G k, t .*. ' ' " / O .5 I N *." - l t I I s !
//
c d,,u*r _ UX - fl/ e.n ,4a. :<% .n i r; et_ ;,6,,',,, t,
. / ,
., u -' w j-:!,r:a nc.t. g. ,
iu - y,e i:. , , . , i . .: i. v tbr. <. ek %: s ~l v o. r ..a cG .
'J i
9 1 e i I i, t s I e 1 : 6 5 - . , ._
o , . ;. . ,y
. _. , ; f .
_3..,,, _ e' . . .. l i i I:i P M K D'- /0 - 7 3 J-ln t,/- m _a- y7 [/. m < c -l , J\
))'O I.'N L' , . 3 L un b e,u.f
/& /.nwL.-
C ==i
.2. 9' 1
'T .' 10 5 l} %. go, 3
t .- ,- 1 O,(i.. . J& c ?L
/s;'s}. 31/- do/ -4 5/D ,
- m. 6 /
- d ikvtr i - i o r'J - 14 ISO .-.
- /.
L'Avj5 /T ! .2 # 3 / i 6 f l I t 6 i . I T 0
! 4 i
A l ! i l l l ', i I 4 I. I I i, -
w H a , ;l.. 7. I Wa AdA^~
% we- REFERENCE 2-42
% .bw 9.7.'2., 4 / T Page 1 of 3 Pages
- a. -
g TENNESSEE WILDLIFE RESOURCES CCMMISSION PROCLAMATION ENDANGERED OR THREATENED SPECIES Pursuant to the authority granted by Tennessee Code Annotated, Sections 51-905 and 51-907, the Tennessee Wildlife Resources Commission
-does hereby declare the following species to be endangered or threatened species subject to the regulations as herein provided. Said regulations shall become effective sixty days from this date.
SECTION I. ENDANGERED OR THREATENED SPECIES MOLLUSCS ENDANGERED Birdving pearly mussel Conradilla caelate Dromedary pearly messel Dromus dronas Yellow-blassom pearly cussel 3)ioblasm (-Dysnomia) f;orentinc florentina Green-blossom pearly mussel Epioblasma (-Dysnomial torulosa gubernacultri Tuberculed-blossom pearly mussel I)ioblasma (-Dysnomic) torulosa torulosa
, Turgid-blossom pearly mussel EpiobIcsma (-Dysnonia) curgidula Tan riffle shell pearly mussel Epioblasma (-Dysnomia) calkeri \ Fine-rayed pigtoe pearly mussel Fusconcia cuneolus Shiny pigtoa pearly mussel Fuseonaia edpariana Pink mucket pearly mussel Empsilis croiculata orbicuZata White warty-back pearly cussel Plethohasis cicatricosus Orange-footed pi=pleback PZechobasis coopericnus Rough pigtoe pearly mussel Pleurobema plen:ct Cumberland monkeyface pearly Quadrula intermedic mussel Appalachian monkeyface pearly QuadruZa sparsa mussel Pale lilliput pearly mussel To=oZcama (-Carunculina) cylindrelZc Painted snake coiled forest snail Anguispira picec FISH ENDANGERED Lake Sturgeon Acipenser fuluescens Ohio River Muskellunge Esox masquinongy chioensis (in Morgan, Cumberland, .
Fentress & Scott Counties) Barren's Topminnow Fundulus sp. Icf. F. albolineatus) Spotfin Chub Rybopsis monache Yellowfin Madtom Noturus flavipinnis Snail Darter Pereina tanast
- . Proc. No. 75-15*
*Sectton I amended by Proc. No. 77-4 dated M:y 13, 1977, Proc. No. 78-14 dated Sept. 22, :978; and, Proc. No. 78-20 deted Dec. 8, :979.
. r - - , - - - . - , . -,m- -
e.-- - , - , . . . . , - .-~ .
- m. , _e-.. , ,
s v . . 7:33 2 cf 3 Pcges SECTION I. (Continued) .. l 1 FISH (Continued) C.
< THREATENED Silverjaw Minnow Fricymba bucatta Nybopsis cahni Slender Chab Blue Sucker Cycleptus elongatus Pigmy nadton Roturus sp. (cf. R. hilderbrandi)
( Preck.lebelly Madtom K. sectitus Blackuster Datter Etheostom boschungi Coldwater Darter E. ditrem . Trispot Darter F..trisella Duskytail Darter F. (Catonotus) sp. Coppercheek Darter F. sp. (cf. F. meuZatwn) Longhead Darter Percina marocephaZa . Amber Darter P. (Imostom) sp. Reticulate Longperch P. sp. (cf. P. capmdss) AMPHIBIANS THREATENED Tennessee Cave Salar.ander Cyrinophilus paIIeucus REPTILES
, THREATENED Northern Pine Snake Pituophis m. melanoleucus Western Pigmy Rattlesnake Sistrurus miliarius streckeri BIRPS ENDANGERED Mississippi Kite Ictinea nr*ssissippiensis Golden Eagle Aquila chrysaetos Bald Eagle Jalicestte Zeucocephalus Pandion haliaetus Osprey -
Peregrine falcon Falco peregrinus Red-cockaded Woodpecker Picoides borealis Raven Corvus corc: Bachman*s Sparrou Aim phiZa aestivalis bachm nii THREATENED Sharp-shinned Hauk Accipiter striatus Cooper's Hawk A. cooperi Marsh Eauk Circus cyaneus htuisonius Bewick's Wren Thyromnes be:Jickii Grasshopper Sparrow Ammodmr:us savannarwn Black-Crowned Night Heron Nycticom: nyctieom: Proc. No. 75-15*
*Section I a:-ended bu Proc. No. 77-4 dated Mm 13 1977 ~ Proc. 78 dated Slpt. ,22,1$78; anyo, broc.14No. 78-20
; dated Dcc. 8. 1978.
9
. ~
~
' ' Page 3 cf 3 Pcges 5_
SECIION I. (Continued) . MAMMAI.S - ENDANGERED .
- Estiz ccncolor cougar
. Eastern Cougar .. ,
. Indiana Myotis
~ '
M,/otis sodalia , Cray Myotis - Nyotis grisescens
. THREATENED ,, ,
Eiser Otter Lutra canadensis . SECTION II. REGULATIONS Except as provided for in Tennessee Code Annotated, Section 51-906 (d) and (e), it chall be unlawful fdr any person to take, harass, or destroy wildlife listed as threatened or endangered or otherwise to violate terms of Sectica 51-905 (c) or to destroy knowingly the habitat of such species without due consideration of alternatives for the welfare of the species listed in (1) of this prociar.ation, or (2) the United States list of Endangered fauna. Date: June 12, 1975 4 i l l l Proc. No. 75-15*
'Section I amended by Proc. No. 77-4 I L. dated May 13, 1977, Proc. No. 78-14
<ed September 22, 1978,- and, Proc. No. 78-20 dated Dec. 8,1978.
4 m "e,-we, w- w yy w + --w-- ur i y-y y, + - . , w - r.. -- - -r p., .- --- - - ---
% m REFERENCE 2-43~ ~$ '3 f,)-),g,gg ~
TENNESSEE VALLEY ' AUTHORITY
%TT,1(Fn:yvyT**ft l y) g.,c. GQ Q NomalS. TENNESSEE 37838 ' #'
e , /0 3/ fo li!
. October 28, 1980 ENERGY I!/J'Aw i ASSOC!ATIS, INC.
WATER RESOURCES Dr. Donald Wagner Energy Impact Associates P.O. Box 1899 ' Pittsburgh, PA 15230
Dear Dr. Wagner:
Enclosed is the photocopy of the field data sheet you requested to document
~
the capture of a blue sucker during Kingston Steam Plant 316a studies. Any information you need should be on the field sheet. . If I may be of further assistance, please contact me at (615) 632-6450. Sincerely, sd A George E. Peck Biologist, Eastern Area Field Operations Division of Water Resources m Enclosure i
#- M Catogryf uni
~
# 7 C-200 Resource Eie i
An Ecual Opportunity Employer
, .han, g.
~
_ , ceuw Qlfy.'.s//gi(,...-.__. tver and Mile Sta on or Cove 551Lh,_ c Ce. r Type. M .* -u Av bwebh8 Pro. ject Titic S/ T' ' et , Ec.tzratomati.or h L\ \ L ._G'.%%.:*=_.' -- 1A 11. _34_ ___4 S_ ___56. 622 i ._7_. __8._ . L _9 / -- .10 faeNumber ataUctSat0ll7f/$T* TLwc //?fJ ///O l0$$ !hk&l$ N lbO5" V ate Net Pulled 37/ff g79[ff Time l [/ 33 i /- b /// O /'/If]/68d 8fG / di/b/WrM b apth at shallowendo[ net (M) { /d / C l3. 0 / , d l/ . d l /. O epth at deep end of net (M) 3.f 3. d Y.d ,Nd /, 6 /6. d [ ne t intdr~fcrence. check ap s oiate net numhpf_gqd_q.v.1ain in._tocanent._icseinn $a_hach_af_f h Common Name ' l Code ll l t ! NyT.he r o f f i sh._ta.ucht I _ /n
- f. u % .s \ \// () ll/. f) t/A. 9 V3.5I//, C $!.8 ! 1 \
,/ car # I l I_ L_ _ . . _. - .
O Y $ 3 !I 106003 lI M I ! cipjack herring izzard shad
~'
106007'l [ / / I4 I3 ! l l nra$dfin shad 106008 ,l / l '
/ l l l
/
arp 111012 l / A '- s .si . . _ ,, l l l - [ _ ( M u s Son /n=t Ci I h I d' 3
\
\ \
.1 ~f '
~
~
- l. I JM se t alvW G//ird be- m l+ 0 1_
Lver carpsucker 112001 l ' i I_ l l ! _ tj.1_1ba ck 1120.02_ Lahfin carpsuck,er, 112004 hogsucker I i_ l na11 mouth buffalo 112030 __ ._ I igmouth_.lmdalo 112.Q31 __ (N).'O' //redhorse / ___ I . , _- l _ .. lue catfish 113002 l N
- I __
nannel catfish 113.009 l l O - lathead catfish 113022 l l __ I I h 5.(!Old bullhead l l ,/ , I l 1 b.:;t ha 's
- 17?002._ ./ ! - -
122006_._ tripc4_J;nsA 123017 i / _. luegill
.argemouth bass 123027 i ( ) f_
1kt.q_cragule _121Q.29 "J[ ' j._//A/ 7 7'b [AI
\
l-- L-I l i I . t__ aur,c r .1240.9 LJ' l
' l / 'Y
' l l I-
- - - - - - ~
3I1070. _ _ . . ,-
> .. NW a-~'--- - 3- 3 PIK'If5 <0HFEREHCE MEMORANDUM C260-134-80 g s0-) E % fc 7 CATE Oc tobe r_i_5,_1980,,
X OUTGOING c 'o. - c.o. - INCOMING ~ Fred IIcitman ., m Lake'Eufalla Fishery Management Unit __._...... gg y- '"'* REFERENCE 2-44 , , , , G. A. Valfulis L. 't. 'Sininons W. A. Beimborn 01ue.$.4ther in WA.t.ti_.Bar RPtprvoir TWE I?OO P.M. MCT: COST C-260 cnAncE _ an. cr cci4r catwet Fred confirmed that he had collected a blue sucker in Watts Bar Reservoir. The fish was discarded, but he has photographs of it. I asked about the location of the catch. Fred was not sure, but said it was on the Tennessee River arm downstream of Fort Loudon Dam, not on the Clinch River. He will check his notes and call back later this week with more precise information. d 1
. __,. ... . .... . _ . , = .____ _ __. ._
in. Resource _ Analyr.is _D. J. Hanner /
/(.In,w g,7, ,,, 17 5
<, . . . . . g a
C260-136-80 , . LErtl0f4h" CONFERENCE MEMORAHDUM
.- s-EATE_1_0/15/_8. 0 f O ourcoiHo c.o.
~
c.o. INCOMING . , , , Fred Heitman or ut _ Lake Eufalla Fisheryy,,Ma_n,agement Unit 918/689-5959 , , , or wc ,, , n , G. A. Valiulis , _, L. L. Simons W. A. Beimborn Time uccT. Blue iucker COST __
,' C260 CHA.?CE t
I All OF CCHF ERENCE Fred was calling back with more details of his blue sucker collection. , The fish was collected on April 23, 1977 at Tennessee River Mile 591.9. This is at a lighted navigation marker just upstream of the boat ramp at Loudon, Tenn. He thinks the bottom is in transition from rock to mud there. - A 31/4" tramel net was set overnight (1415 to 0555 hrs). The fish was 805 m long 'and weighed 5 lb. 4 oz. He referred to p.19 and p. 79 of his thesis (being sent by Mike Van Den Avyle). Fred also said this work was presented at the Southeastern Conference in 1978 - he's sending a reprint.
~
..:-....-...=..==....-.:.-m-
&yy,=,
t, o t. * * *as
>t ri. Resn,urtc Ana]y. sis _ _..D._J.. Lnc.e .. , E xt. no.17 r,
. l
. .y-.. . . . - -
- - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ - - _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ = = , . - - -
f *- , REFERENCE 2-45
~
PhilipVd Smith . O r m ]p '7'- --' T' n 7 1-' d L 1. LJ i - l l
' i < O T-
;i
. .L. . . a . . J .J . J . . . . .k..L.3 P
O ..
~
Publishedfor the lIlinois State Natural flisteny Sunrey by'the
~
UNIVEllSITY O.F ll.I.INOIS l'RESS . g Unbann Chicago Lennian
- l
. pk,
' l, '
t, , _ _ . . _ _ _ . - - . . - , _ __n -
~~ ~
~ . ,i I48 Tbhrs ofIllinois
- 6. Scales small and closely crowded. inure than 55 in lateral line; gmund color dusky: lips O. caitirely gupillose . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Cutentom u3 Scales large, not closely crowded, fe,ver tha'n 50 in later:d line; grouint color silvery or bronzy; lips plicate or lx >t h plicate and papillose . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . M<amtoma l
- 7. Body terete; donal fin slightly falcate: lxxty willi inany distinct longitudinal mws of.stuall .
brown dots, each dot being a spot at the scale base; lateral-line scales 43 or more I
.......................................................................Minstrewn I Bod; , lab. sided; dorsal fin convex: body pattern not consisting oflongitudinal rows ui'small f brown dots;-lateral line scales, fewer than 43 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Enmyzon 4
Cycleptus Rafinesque This bizarre genus contains only one species, which is restricted to rivers of the central and southern United States. [ Elue sucker u Cycleptus clongatus (Lesueur) ( h
- f* . ) 3 h
.@ RE.
m m. .,m n&. .q@ x,g. .w. .a. . . n .,.,s,.m..s.,m... - e a' i . y k ,,. m ,
$u Q t D.W AM * $ q.t-g N:4s -
ob'k - l Colostomus clongntus Lesueur 18176:103 (type-lo. trernely falcare dorsal fin: the lower lobe ofits can. t cality: Ohio River). dal fin is bla(L. So bizarre are the pn>[uirtions that s
~
Cycleptus el,mgntus: Nelson 187ti:50 (reconled froin neither adult nor young can be confused with any j Illinois);jos dan 1878:Gl; Foibes 1881:81; I;irge other sucker.*lhe species attaiin a length of alxnit ' 1903:12; Foibes & Richantsuit 11103:1i5-66; 81)0 nun (35 inches). g O'Donnell !!)35:-178; Sinith !!Hi5:8.
- Variation.-No studies of geographic variasiim j Diagnosis.--The hine sucker is an elongate and have larn. published and no subsixties have been
- I terete fish unngue in the Caimionndae because of desci-ilnl.~l'ht sc"xinific sunne of diis fish has kt n s its small head (the lecgth inntained live or more m.n Lably stA*. ;
times in the standant length) and long r;nalat pc. Ecology. the hine surLer is a large river spe- j duinle (grt atly enceding length of adgn essed anal rics un>st often if nnut in dtrp tillies aint fass h fm). It has a blue.bl.a k or das L gray storsum.- darkly pigmented lim. a sinnewhat guler venter. 50 rhutes over nwLy or gravelly in>tsom in bl.no h anil April, wiien the sinric s is probably sixnniing.11 is f i or more lateralline seahs. and a long and ex. a strongly migratory fish that naasionally as ciuls J I I
. w . _ _ - ,u-c e - m m -_ .a._--.--
2 = - -
. . . % ma ,- ,
. . . ... .- g Seders 149 I t
O' - ITJ, ,3 f 1 occurs in the Mississippi River at least as fa'r nonh ft 7.,' fr- I
~ % @, ; ,a fl.N ,.
b /N as Rock Island County Imt is generally mxinumon. It is probably nuire ammum in the los turbid I [ .l ', g' d
.'t l
i k' Walush aiul Oliin riven than available erninis in- l I
'. . f f-
?
[ ,
'D dicate but, according to long-time nmmictrial fish '
ermen. much less common imw 'than'fornwrly, f
/ ..;
~
,WN. How generally it occurs is dillicult in assess because ' g }
. .q"d* A -
.. , . , , of its habit of occasionally asceixling ' great dis- f
. ; ytt tances into medium-sized rivers. . )
1 a
@-?~
~. - ), q is
,; y) -$'< -
t p I J j L
.Qe ?s.c g..: .A v 4 yg 7 - . Iv-
)'
- e. y.'
. t-ictiobus ~Rafinesque -.
\
'o y[." M' MM,..h P. Y '-
< f. M This genus, restricted to Mexico. Central America, i U
'. ' " .k. -,%
and the Mississippi River valley of the central i
~' [ W ; W, 3
' c...
i.' United States, cimtains five runenity reongnized ,
'/'Q).-N./ .- - e , . . .
%' species, three of which eurur in Illinois. Juveniles 3 '
)k are similar to ca'c h other and to the young of the quillback a xt are difficult to distinguish.
- 4. p -
}.
'Jh .c'--
<6 1- '
KEY TO SPECIES ! t r: O Ai ' S, b 6 l' 4Q I 1. Mouth large. tenninal, and extirmely oblique: [ tip of upper lip al=mi on level with lower 5 M( T[.h *. margin of eye; lips faintly siriate .. ...... ... l
, M '
Q, . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . cyprinellua 9 vy. . Mouth small. somewhat subienninal, and rmt !
~
p p4i extremely obliegie: tip of uptwr lip well below ( r - level of lower margiu of eye: lips ihicker arul [ f fnore st riatt' . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
- 2. Mouth small, aln'uisi horironial, decidnlly in- -
. ferior; bixty deep anil stab 4idal in the adult.
1)istribution of the blue susLer in !!!inois. . its greatest depth rimiaiird less than there l times in statulant length; luck in fnmt of dorsal fin hi);hly an hed. thin.and Lected; eye j . large, its dianwier containnt fewer than two j iributary streams fier considerable distances and times in stumt length: lmiletal aint occipital I then is not recognierd by the small. riser fishennin - region not appretiably swollen . . . . bubalus who rasch them. Many such discoveries are nr- , Mouth large, slightly oblique, almost tenninal: . Iwnint to authorities, but the qwrimens rarely lxxly this L. suit deep and nos stah-side:I in the {* reach a museinn nellection. Almost nothing is adult; luck in finnt ofilorsal fin not highly Luown almnit the firiling .imi repnulurtive lubits arched, ihin. azul Lecleil: c3r snull. Its diam. , l eter containeel two or nunr tinws in simut. ,! I
- of the species,amt no one publication suminarie.ing '
l the available infiermatinn ,r.ni he citeil. length: guricial occipital region swollen . . . .
.............e........~.........'.... si5grr !
Distribution.-The blue sut Ler has been declin. , j. nig m alniiulann. tier inany yean; its derimation A q -
}
('".H.nigable
.ha heen tiven.attaihutnlthe eleteisoration in the of water romtnn quality. tion of dams on .
euewise rattln s of adnlis in quwning rum, aint . .g . ~' 8In' p.ulually dn reasing depiln of river a hanswls ,
~
l
'In" ugh s.unt amI site a holing.Tlw hiue socker s2 . -
l
~ ~ . - - . . .
,- , , = - _ _ __ , . ,
REFERENCE 2-46 g . - t The Fishes of Missouri by E .; - William L. Pflieger !
. . 5
- -x
-+.
m- we-- u = - s n. w ,.
- ~.
4, ..
& .~' f.2 $.' gW,e.*A. ,,. l~ ?.::Me_w e - ;
, e.?
{, ?
'~
_ '3. Ose . W&& . [. \
. Mark Sullivan
- Editor Lynne Taylor . Artist
~~ '
. ., _L -- I y ,
Published. by l Missouri Department of Conservation
- 1975 *-
I t
. . . s - no. a me mo ~m*-***^~*r 'm ~~ ~
* ~*"** ** '^*'~ *
- -- - -- ^^ ^
,, .. a
=h N g
SUCKERS
~~
declined in abundance since 1900. I This sucker inhabits the deep, swifi channels of I Blue Sucker large rivers over a b >ttom orsand, gravel, or rock. Cg/catus clongatus (Lesueurl It is to'erant of high turbidity if there is sufficient current to prevent deposition ofsilt Construction y - of dams, with the attendant decrease in current
, ,-)7 ,.0_Y-
~ h.M.%h) . 3, ~
velocity that permits siltation, has been unfavora-H '
, ble to the blue sucker.
_, , a , F r- - c-{p.. ; . +.
) t
' e , A .F.,3f [ , HABITS AND LIFE HISTOPY W q~ f9;
~~~ 38,
, ;/,n
-s
). 'NM, .6 -' i .
' The habits of this distinctive sucker are not well known. The streamlined body and sickle-shaped N U ^*
! fins are adaptions for maintaining a position in
,P - - -
swift currents. The blue sucker probably feeds on
. ]# ), "
- O P' r
- t ~ .
insect larvae and other small invertebrates taken from the bottom. It is a highly mobile fish. For-
# [.Q,.',.
W~ i merly there were important spring runs and ig 't 3 g ';.
. s lesser fall runs of the blue sucker in the upper N e i
/ Mississippi River? Adults in breeding condition
! ~ ;* -
have been taken in Current River as early as Feb-
- g ..' f, t ""#
%, fr, D'
.e 1J .'W'r ' ruary and March, but spawning is said to occur in '
i " ' ' May and June at this latitude? A larval blue
'd h ~~ sucker was collected from the Missouri River, Boone County, in mid-June. In Lake Texoma, Other local names: Missouri sucker,' Slender- Oklahoma, two-year-old Ssh were about 15 inches headed sucker, Blackhorse, Gourdseed sucker, standard length.
Schooner IMPORTANCE DESCRIPTION The blue sucker is said to be the best food fish Illustration: Page 1*19, 2a. of all the suckers and was formerly of some com-Characters: A slender, dark-colored sucker with rnercial importance along the Nissouri and Mis-
, I
. a small head and a long, sickle-shaped dorsal fin. 815Sippi rivers. It is still taken m small numbers by Eyes small and closer to rear margin of gill cover e mmercial 6sh,ermen, most often by drifling than to tip ofsnout. Mouth small, horizontal, and trammel nets with the current.
distinctly overhung by snout. Lips covered by nu- ,
;. 3 merous wart-like papillae. Lateral line complete. Bigmouth Buffalo' -
containing 55 to 58 scales. Body depth going about ,
/criobus cyprine//us (valenciennes) 4 to 5 times mto standard length. Doisal fin with 28 to 33 rays.
Life colors: Back and sides blue. black or dark Other local names: Gourdhead, Redmouth buffalo, Common buffalo olive with brassy reflections; belly white. Fins dusky or black. Breeding males are very dark and , DESCRIPTION have small tubercles ever most of head, body, and fins. Illustration: Page 180,4a. Size: According to commercial fishermen, blue Characters: A dark-colored sucker with a deep, , suckers weighing up to 20 pounds were formerly rather thick body and a long, sickle-shaped dorsal fin. Eyes small and closer to tip of snout than to { common in the Missouri River. Most specimens i taken in recent years were 16 to 24 inches long rear margin of gill cover. Lower fins with much and weighed 1H to 3 pounds. dusky pigment. Subopercle (bone at lower back Scientific name: Cyrleptus reported by its au. mamin orgill cover) broadest at middle,its outer - thor to mean "small round mouth"; elongatus, margm gently rounded. Lateral Ime, complete, j
" elongate." containing 32 to 40 scales. Dorsal fin with 23 to 32 '
rays. 5 DISTRIBUTION AND HABITAT Similar to smallmouth and black buffaloes but ; with a large, oblique mouth, and thinner, less i The blue sucker is rare but widespreal in the strongly grooved (striate) lips. Front of upper lip 1 Missouri ard Mississippi rivers and the lower sec- about on a level with lowe'r margin ofeye. Length tions of their larger tributaries. It seems to have of upper jaw much greater than diameter of eye.
- . w...-...-...-.-.._.-. .- ... . ..---.-.- -.... . - - -- - -
~
g ->/
~r
*I \* .
gg g,7 7 - TRIP REPORT . C260-56-80
@ REFERENCE 2 . . .
Trip to: clinch River. Tenn. Date: 8 @ 20/80
Subject:
annatic n connaissance and Data Acquisition C:ntract or Negotiation Name and Number: C-260 Tasks 2, 3 and 4
.PIrsons -Present and Company: ,,
D. J. Wagner
. Vince Fayne, CRBR Program O'fice G. A..Yaliulis Donley Hill, TVA -
t .1. Simons Edward Scott, TVA D. W. Myers _ Thomas Swor, TVA Ken Yates, CR8R Program Office Distribut : W. . Beimborn D. W. Myers G. A. Valiulis A. Huggins - L. L. Simons SUWARY: Tuesday, 8/19 0900-1400: DdW, GAV, LLS and Ken Yates met Don Hill and Ed S:ott of TVA at launch area on C'linch River. Ran a series of bathymetric profiles near incations of intake, discharge and barge unloading facility - re-sults appear generally similar to 1974-75. Obtained ponar grab samples
, of bottom, which were described qualitatively in a field book, at Sta-tions 0.3, 0.5 and 0.7 on Transects 1-5, plus Station 0.1 at unloading i area. Noted several species of macrophytes growing in limited but dense stands in shallow water.
1400-1600: DJW and DWM discussed Tasks 2 and 3 with Vince Fayne. Vince l supplied Tenn. Laws and attendant regulations on air and water pollution, l regulations on hazardous wastes and solid wastes. Also a file memo he i wrote 4/8/80, which will be updated by the end of this month. Finally, he supplied a copy of his working draft of Table 12.0-1. It was made l clear that we would also be working on an update of Ta'ble 12.0-1, not a l permit compliance plan. l In discussion Vince noted the following concerns: Air - new federal requirements for State regulations - FR, Aug. 7 Water - new Tenn. water quality criteria; new Army Corps regula- - tions; revised Steam Electric Effluent Gui'delines due to be proposed at any time l Authorized Signaturc:_ n J. Wagner de dNdd v M Date:_higutt 27. 10f.0
o - y , i
~
0 - .{ - C260-56-80 r Donald J. Wagner !i ,
- August 22, 1980 ;- . Page 2 i
Solid / Hazardous Wastes - a s'anitary landfill is o ~ otentiality j 1 - check the nature of the .te lagoon - ,
- ) - -
contents may require ev stion according ' ii to hazardous waste rule. Vinc'e also noted that the water quality criteria are i -luded in Sec-
~
- 1
! tion 14 as an appendix, but air quality criteria are : .
- ) LLS, GAV, DWM returned to Pittsburgh.
.p
, Wednesday, 8/20 1
DJW met with TVA personnel rit Norris, othined the followig i aformation: t 1. Water quality reports and data hew Melton Hill % prepared
; by Eric Mulkey d 2. Confirmation cfit'nusually great wcrophyte growtk Mis summer. .
Causes uncerta m but may be die. to prolonged dry, Lot spell,
, with warmer waf-u temperatures .-J 1ess turbidity 14an usual -
Leon Bates; Muscle Shoals lab (wlar Joe Cooney, ;/383-4631). Annual report wiiC be sent for ie7 9, and for 1%o wken available (early 1981). t%t. problem is ceneral in easterr Teln. this year.
- ) Noted that Najt s Minor and Potavegeton pucillus are comon near site.
.j ~ j 3. Ed Scott (Fielc. serations, 615 4-9800, X 2155 applied: Watts Bar roten ng survey dat 1949 to presen {
! Report on evide 3 of sauger sp ing near propc. dis-
!i. charge (RM15-17 This report . pared the sect of the -
! . river from R.M. i-17 with the .a of the lock ~ 1s at '
E Melton Hill Dam -? j The area near ti submerged isl d produced the catest .i number of ripe I sh, but the si ificance of thi- area re-lative to other laces in the C .nch River or Wa .s Bar i Reservoir is obs .ure due to the iimited data collucted. The Ij report does sugg :st thac the ta. lwater of Melton 11111 Dam is not used for spawning. [
- ' Another reference of much interest is: Fletcher, J. W. ,1977.
.j. ' Assessment of adult and larval fish populations of the Lower Clinch River below Melton Hill Dam. M.S. Thesis Tennessee
+
Technological University, Cookesville, Tennessee. 99 pp. Ed Scott will be sending a copy. 1> e h
~
1 .
,: - ...~...n.a--=r-m----.. . -- - % - . .. .
. _- T
C260-56-80
~
Donald J. Wagner
. . _ , August 22, 1980 2- Page 2 i 4. Tom Swor (Fisheries and Aquatic Ecology)h
[ Will forward a report on 1975-77 monitoring progradi. Also
. referred to: McLean, et. al., report'.on threadfin shad and cold stress (NUREG/CR-1044, ORNL/NUREG/TM-340). .
For Corbicula problem and chlorination information, contact: .. Edward A. Kopatz. Jr..' Office of Power,' Div of Fossil and l Hydro Power,: Ext..-2465 in Chattanooga, or L. B. I edy, Plant Sup,_ intendent at Kingston, 615/376-6135. returned to I sburgh. t e e 4 e S e . l . 5 D ee j _.
=
- e
'i s
. . ~ ....- . . _ _ . _ . . .. ... ._. . . _ _ _ . _ . . _ _ _ _ . . -
.( REFERENCE 2-48 'EI'llONE' CONFERENCE MEMORANDUM C260-50-80 Su tia 2. 7 2 &E3 '
DATE_ A_uaust C 980 INCOMING X OUTGolNG : C.o. 'c.o. . . mR, Dr. Jim Loar er vue ORNL, Env_ironmental Sciences Division 615/574-7323 era. er enc
,,,,3, G. A. Valiulis W. A. Beimborn L. 'L. Simons TIME 1/;nn JECT: Oak Ridge _ Aquatic Data COST g C-260/2,4 CHARGE IAn. OF CONFEREHcE Talked to Jim re: aquatic info. on Clinch River and vicinity. Studies he knows of are:
- 1. 1973: TVA did some limited adult fish sampling, from R.M.10 to Melton dam
- 2. '74 '75: CRBR surveys
- 3. '75 '76: surveys v. similar in scope to item 2, but extended from R.M.12 to 15, plus Grassy Creek and Bear Creek. Info. was used to prepare an ER for Exxon Nuclear, Inc., he thinks mainly by people at Tennessee Tech.
Contact:
Dr. Parley Winger at T.T.
- 4. April '77-March '78: 3 sites on Clinch River and 3 on Poplar Creek - ORNL
- 5. Feb-Sept. '78: Ichthyoplankton sampling at 6 sites in river, 3 in creek, on a weekly basis - ORNL Items 4 and 5 were combined, plus a review of earlier studies on biology, hy-drology and water cuality, in a report Jim prepared that is currently being revicwed internally. He expects it will be published this fall. He didn't want to sent the data minus the interpretation / conclusions. Will send me a copy of the report as soon as he can, sometime this fall.
These studies fomed the basis of an EA for "K-25", which is mothballed at the printers.
- 6. March '79-May '80: another study, like 4-5, but more frequent collections, from R.M.19-22, plus Whi tcoak Crcck. In preparation, to review in Sept.
This will form the basis foi an EIS that DOE will preparc on 0RNL. , ,
. . , . = _ . . - - - ~ _ - .
. . . . . - - _ . _ = . - - - . .a. ,
J. Wagner C'll W~j st.w__-_ tet. Resource Analysin D_,. e xt. no.F> pi. .iu. )
~.
. .e I C260-50-80 Donald J. Wagner August 18, 1980 Page 2 TVA data is, to his knowledge older: 316a, b on Bull Run power plant (Melton Hill Res.) and on Kingston Steam Plant (Watts Bar Res.); both are early-mid '70's. .
~
TVA (Bob Wallus at Norris) is apparently doing some work on sauger spawning Habits, but Jim is not too familiar with it. There is also a major study on threadfin shad recoveries in Watts Bar after cold kills. This is related to TVA's Kingston plant, but is overseen by Rich McLean (ORNL: 615/574-7383). It covered the period 1976-79. Also McGee (?) looked at the effect of threadfin populations on sauger. Sediment sampling (cores) done in 1977-78, mainly to examine radionuclides.
- Talk to Tom Oates ORNL,. at 615/574-6669.
Re: char.ges near site since 1975: Tenn. Wildlife Resources Agency now s.tocks striped bass (see also Chuck Coutant at ORNL) In this study (report on items 4 & 5, above), he noted an apparent
. increase in yellow bass.
Otherwise, there was too much variation between sampling techniques, etc., to say much., Jim recommends looking at patterns of operation at Watts Bar and Melton Hill dams, plus available water quality data. He suspects that if these are not very different, neither will biota. See also, ORNL publications (from Information section) Annual Monitoring Reports Environmental Sciences Division Annual Progress Reports Health-Physics Divisions, last several Annual Progress Reports ! .I thanked Jim profusely for this wealth'of information, said I hoped to talk to him again in the future.
-l i.
1 1 l
-- - - - . - - . _ . _ ,___:M.
., - ~- - .. . , - _ _ - - ,_ . , _ . - ..
(;. . . .; f ', g.;' A N A LY S I S S Y S T EM Y. A- ], & //'/ ' S T A i I 3 I I C A L V.J .s p r' Tilt At. rpjMHERS AHO af IfiH T (MG) PLR HLC1ARE TH .1AITS HAR , RE st 0 V ltlR, HV Sl7t CLASS - __INTERMFDIATE _ ___ HARVESTABLE-lh ft W HilMHtd 81F S A t 'iPLES _YHt dt; i1f YEAR __ i'lH A H E R WE l(iH I N tJMilh R bE l(iH T HIIMi ll P WEIGHT __ TOTAL NUMHFH ___iUIT WEl 465/9.23 55.01 60.00 10.74 95.38 14.14 46684.62 79.89 1949 I 65 174.07 20.75 500.00 63.47 6130.86 96.85 195o 1 5'456.79 12 57 3145.6A 56.69 5969.14 79.88 14%I I 2646.91 13 176.54 9.62 495.06 75.45 3265.43 99.31
/659.Ph I4.M9 211.11 8.98 116.53 06 212.89 195%
1957 1 2 14042.22 1 7.011 696.50 19.28 4l'4.34 14153 10650 75 174,M8 9984.53 59.a7 270.90 11.84 496.27 103.96 195H 1 17.46 211.94 12.46 355.97 105 07 5068 134 99 1959 0500./5 161,.25 24345 66 62 209 . 51 1960 1 21676.7H 52.01 304.12 16.27 41 r4. 71 6107.08 205.51 20 3 5199.16 11.75 39M.64 19.53 5045.68 174.23 19nd 29.72 ti S 4 . 88 6 3 0. I fl 1237.452 2A6.64 15329.t6 346.54 1975 10 1.4 2 in . M 7 S.05 574.21 24.64 1812.00 317.50 3559,43 346.19 1975 6 1875.2/ 345.27 224.M9 d4875 258,33 19/6 8 42/2.65 in.ls tio 9 25.29 189.75 10172 54 44 226.69 19/7 8 88t19.50 22.01 445 62 67 14.93 M77.27 3d470.S2 62 197a 2 P509.91 S.55 621.08 14.25 539.53 42.60 207 36 49 1999.34 14.22 469.18 16.38 910.2H 176,.89 .5378,80 17 1979 2 11.2% 906.65 44.06 4'128.26 449.88 16616.19 198$0 4 10H81.417 19.05 552.42 21.68 1010.73 210.52 9527.49 511 251 23 A l l. YiAHS 71 7964.53 D l l I m" m A M m e
1 / M4M4P4 M C@N@MCO O N - E & l> l@ M N C II lC 4 == M -- 0 lC-NNCNC C e I .-> e e e Sc leeoeeo e leaeeeeo C C @ t- lCCC-CC N lCOMPC CC M - lM 54 4 N IW 5 l lE ls ls lu
.J e l l {
> l l 3 C l i N
>2 {N#NWC I C C 1207NCN@ MN l4444 C lW M Br W 4 4.@.4..4 .
l3@@C 3.... C. 4 t= l 4. .N.. 3 N #.m. . l... C R C 4 C C ==- @ l- = N C -. 3 N @ R E =a - C C II = IM N ev c i= 1 =-MN - I N z Iz i -. I le - c 4 i le 4 4 e I a a 1 l l l= e i i W is D M .C C l NN @ IN N Q
& I e M te 3:
10 I l 1l1
- 4
= l I 1--.m. I I I . 1 8II e. .
w- I C C C C M 10 @ U I i - Jw l I 2 II I l
- < l i
> t t e m I I I W L i i I
>x l = c e r l cc w tc c 1
-.s M 1
E
=~
<r l r e p -
ll.l.l. . l l ll.
- C me 181 4
. t.l l
lm l1 m f
< ; I - r - 4 g C
l lC @ M lO l I 12 I I w
- t e I
W C < Z 3 2
- < 7444 N C Trx C - C C c
-O4 N tL C N
- II C *O4= 2 O.
le ll....t N. II...t.1 tiill . . l CC=C I C-~ C 2 i = C w *~ - l ==
% p- a I l
< <= 1 1 1 i
~@ ~ l i uu C 1 I .I x l l
.c ? l 4 I- I I i 1 C C az i Ne-c e l cNe N - I 4 I O4 4 M l C C Z*
wr 4W
-r 22 l N MO l l .r. . . I i C-Nm N
. l l-=-
l
. .#.l.1
= N
. l l 113 e
c 1
- I 4
- -: l - - N 1 N
=> t ( t l=
M2 I i l 1 t
.a 1 i I An I I w I f I
- 4. x l- Iac~~e ~ le m e e ir - 4 -
C l- M C C me II S C == C C C p.... l==ccc 3 M C
. iC.l31.t.
1 lo C C =* O C C
. l .-- .
1u C e 0 AW t i Im e m x *s 1 I i
I I i w I I I O I f f O
- e i i I W e le w & N treet N M C2 INemte N r e r~ l*stn 7 .
2~ 2: 841NMn I.....I f. tr. 1 8 8- . lr~. 1
=
. l....
fr-~= 4 ? L 05 tverz - l- N re N
>- 0 l + -- % i - !?
la 1 1 IN - o T
$_ E 4 4 4 : ~3 :
T T W I CT W 4 J2 Y
<C O f
d- AI C 3 :A. C 3 2 If4 ? 0 4 2 *t O = MM =* O270 C ! W = caw 2 ~2 2 4 61== 2% f010 C == C 2 11 J eJ A .a. - J <L - J J b Z 0:11 < CI ~~<1 < I L 4 4 d W * - c < ~ ksGW = TJ : *= C
*=
O
~
^ <= O22 O wt == = I MI M I J 2 ". g y ,_ y, y .- - J e > 0Oyg - -
=c? C4 2 7 % .* 222 40 %W E a 2 ": WWFf a <=40 1 J
" WOR =y ; J11CO2M C NCLw O <
-022%< O z-2--ca O NO2= C 2
~ J 0 == 2 ==
IJCckJ T CETZZIT 2 32 J 3 % 0 OUOOVA 0 COJE O A
.. -_2______: - _ _ _ _ _ _
- 11) Are NtJH H E R Af10 of IGitT (KG) OF 1 SAHPLES IN nATTS Halt Rt FISH SERVIllR, PER lit1950C T AHE IN .
Yt)tilJG OF YLAR _ ,I ll T E R M E D I A T F __ __HARVFSTAHLF SP0 (: 11 S Nil 1H E R htIGHT rHar1HE R utIGHT utJMfiLH HLIGHT ____ NUMHER 10TAL_____T WEIGH _____ ____ __ ___ _ _ -___ _ _ GAME 0.0H 1.23 0.18 93 0.57 WHlit ItASS 23.46 0.30 1.23 1.38 25,54 76 2.91
- stiin GILT . 56.02 1.53 18.52 246.91 0.54 LHNntAu Sin 4F i SH 2 tin.91 0 . S is _ _ _
2.d 7 0.34 45.68 0.93 29.o3 0.21 13 O.3H SPH11 E li HASS L APf;f MHit TH HASS 64.20 0.45 37 5t' 1.65 3 1.03 104.94 3,11 35.4% 3 04 70 0.12 2 70 47 0.31 39.51 0.49 will i t CHAPPif 0.06 6.17 0.03 HLArn Cli APP I E 6.17 0.03 _ _ 2.47 0.86 2.47 0.86 S Allt.t R , GHilllP Tili AL 405.70 1.60 113.58 3.73 30.86 4.12 548.15 9.45 __ ____ _R u t J G H __ ____ _ 8 ShlPJALn HEHRING __1.23 __ _ _______ 0.02 ___7.41 3 70 0.44
- 1. 57 8.64 4.93 12 6435 0.46 6.30 CAHP _ _
31 04 14.27 11 : 6.16 15 20.43 Sit At LMullTH HilF t ALO _ 1 . 23 0.22 48 23 0.22 SPOfiED SilCKER _ 2.47 0.15 1.23 0.11 2.47 0.83 1 17 1.08 IlfoIDE N11F it o RE DHnRSE 1.23 0.70 61 23 0.70 Cit Af'NE i C A IF I SH _ l 0.02 FLATHl.40 CATFISH 1.23 0.02 3.70 0.53 13 23 58 1.13 iHLSHHAlfft DRUM _ _ 9.88 0.60 4.94 0.19 60.49 17.01 27.16 13.15 92.59 30.35 GHiluP lilt Al __ ___ _ _ _ _ - ___ F0 RAGE _ _ _ __,_ _ _ _ __ _ __ 441.48 46.20 441.98 46.20 G1/7ARD SHA0 _ 4979.01 10.78 THREADFIU Sl4AD 4979.01 10.78 69.14 0.07 HlxCD K llu ll *11NHOWS , 69.14 0.07 _ 504M.15 10.H5 0.00 0.00 441.98 46.20 5440.12 57.05 GHullP IllT AL 5456.19 12.63 174.07 20.75 500.00 63.47 6130.86 96.H5 F i rJ AL illi AL
MF Ars NIJMHF R AtJD tilIGH T (KG) 0F i SArdPLES IN WATTS HAR RE FISH SE RVIUR,PER HECTARE 1951 Ir1 . _YOllNG OF YFAR _ __IrlifHitLDIATF_ __HARVESTAllLf' _ __ TOTAL SPECltS 4 tinit F R utlGHT NilMItF R HEIGHT fitJMHER NEIGHT HtWHER utlGHI __ ___ . ____ _ _ ____ GAME _ _ - _ _ - _- SS.56 437 WHilE ttASS 2/./2 0.11 13.Sh 1.27 19.75 3.12 9 7.41 0.05 2.4/ 0.04 0.08 nARoni1H 33H./7 0.H7 6n.20 1.36 30.H6 2.25 435 88 33 4.47 itLllt G il t. 4.94 0.02 1 lirJGt AR SuHFiSH 4.94 0.02 _ 22.22 0.61 SPolTLo ilASS 14.81 0.lo 7 0.45 62 4.88 LARGtMOHIH HASS 2%.95 0.24 27 41 16 1.89 9.88 2.75 227 96 1.21 tv eil l E CHAPPlf 211.11 0.61 13.58 0.18 2.47 0.31 16 06 0.01 23 3 . 70 ItLACK r.R A 6'P i f 2.47 1 0.05 _ 1.23 0.64 30.86 01,57 sat 6ER 28.40 0.73 1. 23 0.20 GRilliP l0TAL 655.56 2.90 130.H6 S.45 64.20 9.13 850.62 17.48 _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _R0IIGH _ __ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - - SK I P.l A C H H F liR I NG 6.17 0.09 11.11 0.66 4.94 l'.44 22.22 2.19 CARP _ _ l 0.58 1 23 0.58 SM ALLHOlll H HilFFALO
.5.70 1.46 13 23 58 7.25 1 7 ,. 2 8 8
0 91 71 1.23 0.91 1.23 HLACK litsFF ALO _ I.23 0.05 1.23 0.05 SPOTif0 SilC K E R _ 1.23 0.72 1.23 0.72 GOLDE81 RFnHORSE 1 0.39 1 0.39 IlLUE C A IF ISH 3.70 0.35 3 23 70 2.18 7 23 41 2.53 CHAHHFL C A TF ISH 2.47 2.47 0.34 1 0.44 6.17 0.78 FLAlHLAD CATFISH T 12 23 3% 2,08 114.81 4.21 FRtSHAATER t> RUM 77.7H 0.76 24.69 1.37 81.65 0.90 '15.66 4.17 40.74 15.99 174.07 21.06
- G40llP TOTAL
__ _ _ _F(lRAGE____ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ 2%.% 1.40 50.62 6.91 506 M.32 GIZZARD SHAD 1333 17 8.05 THRLADFIH SHAD 1333.33 8.05 _ 2990.12 24.66 2990 33 12 24 66 MI MF D SHAD 1.23 I 1.23 I tl4]Dt fl11F IF D SHINER _ 23 i IIHLLHE AD h l 4 NOPl 1.25 I _ 1 23 T H40HK SILVIRSIDF 1.23 i _ 1 0.31 Mixto x 0411) M i ru10 4 S 311.11 0.31 311.11 Gulit P T ill Al. 1903.70 9.77 0,00 0.00 3040.74 31.58 4944.44 41.34 2646.91 13.57 176.S0 9.62 3145.6A 56.69 5969.14 79.88 FINAL IOIAL
ELAN 9AOMBE R AND WIIGHT (KG) Rf i)F SEF1SH PFR HECiAHL IN 1 SAMPLES IN NATIS HAR RV illH, 1955 . SPECitS .,,Y O H H G flF YFAR__ _INTERMF.DIATF__ ___H AR VE S T AllLE- __ TUTAL______. tu lu et t.R WEIGHi NilHHt R HLIGHT NUHHLR NEIGHT NUMBER NEIGHT __ __ -- - - _ _ ______GANf _____-------------73 19.15 0.39 1.23 0.0H 1.23 0.26 22.22 utlIIF HASS WQHpithlIH 2.47 i 1.2T 0.02 3 70 0 0 03 llL UF G I L I. 249,5M 0.61 101.25 2.29 35.33 2.62 383 . 95 5 . 52 Ll1NGt AH SuuFISH 2.47 0.07 - 2.47 0.07 SP Al. s.litil TH HASS _ _ l.23 0.17 1.23 0.17 SPilill D liASS l '8 . H I 0.16 35 0.39 2 . t4 7 0.34 29.63 0 5 M9 L ARGL hilH IH llASS 11.11 0 11 l'.%1 2.41 35 3.34 62.96 86' wHITL' CHAPPIE 2.47 I s93 70 0.04 12 1. 25 0.26 7.41 30 tiLACK CRAPP[L 2. d4 7 0.01 _ 1.2% 0.28 3.70 0 0 28 SAUGLH 1.23 0.05 2 . 44 7 0.22 1.25 0.34 4.94 0.60 GHiluP total 304.70 1.35 164.20 5.52 54.42 7.60 522.22 14.45
. ._ ____ _ ____ ___-- -__- _ R () U G H __ w-____,
44,94 0.43 45 45 SKIPJACn PLHRING 7 e41 0.03 l.23 0.58 12,23 1 0 0 58 CARP _ _ _ 1.25 l.2T 0.14 0.35 2 47 0.49 linlistilT IF IED C ARPSilCKtHS _ 25.93 35 25.93 18.35 SM AL L t90H I H UHF F All) 181. 28 4 1.41 IINIDFHlirito HEDHtl4SE 1.23 0.03 1.23 0.11 2.47 CHANNEL CAIFISH H.64 0.63 4.94 7.65 13 94 8.23 FLATHFAD CATFISH 6.17 0.04 1.25 0.04 _ 7 58 41 0.08 F RE SHr. A llk DRHM 19,75 0.32 29.63 2.12 13.58 2.38 62.96 4.81 GRiluP IOTAL 34.57 0.41 46.91 3.46 ~ 49.38 30.59 130.86 34.46
--__ ___ _ _F I) R A G E _ _
GizzAsp wan i.23 0.02 _ an5.iv 36.99 286 17 _0: 1692 42 9.86 1686.42 9.61 6.17 0.25 59 TitHEADFlW SHAD 633.33 3.52-H I Jil ls K HulD fl[4bilWS 635.35 3.52 _ _ GRiitle IDT AL 2320.99 I5.15 0.00 0.00 291.36 37.25 2612.35 50.39 F i t:AL IllT AL 2659.26 14.89 211.11 M.98 595.06 75.43 3265.43 99.31 l.
PL Ars NilHHt:R AND WEIGHT (hG) OF FISH PEH1957 HECIAHf i ts 2 SAtlPLES IN MATTS HAR RFSt4v!HR, , SPI C I t.3 _y0UNG HF Y E sa R _ __ l fl i t H Mt D I A T F _., ___HARVESTAHLt__ fetidHtR WLIGHI hipihl R WLIGHI ritif tHE R WLIGHT _____ NtJMHt RTOTAL H _U GHT__ ________________ _______ ___ __G A m f. _________ _____________________ HHITE esASS /2.56 u.32 1.10 0.09 0 . t4 5 0.27 24.49 0.68 WAHHHH}H 3 8 . fi 7 0.15 H.95 0.20 0.41 0.03 48.21 0.38 HFl'HHEAST SHNFISH 3.15 0.02 0.68 0.02 5.42 0.32 7.26 0.36 HI Ill G II i 0.94 5.76 SI1./4 10.30 85.49 6.I8 2015.68 20.25 S M AI. t h util u h A S S 1422.nl 03 8 0.73 1. 7 tl 0.67 13.19 0.91 SPlir it D tinSS 94.79 u.56 0 35 60 12 1.39 4 0.64 94.03 2.59 L ARGLMIIU T H lt A SS 26.07 0.23 St.18 1.67 15 12 19 5.38 90.44 7.28 wl:1 T L C9APPIE H.30 0.03 10.4% 0.17 3.16 0.44 22.41 0.64 S Alli.E H _ 1,73 0.27 5.3% 1.60 7.13 1.88 G4titip IHIAL 1577.60 S.12 629.2H 14.34 115.76 15.53 2322.85 34.99 RilllGH _ ___ __ . _ _ _- _____ ShlPJALK HF HH l:JG 2.34 0.05 19.52 1.36 1.92 0.69 25.78 2.09 MOHrit y t 0 <i l 0.01 2.07 0.45 2.48 0.47 CARP _ _ _ 6.33 5.63 6.33 5.63 lifellif HT IF IE D C APPSilCKERS 0.41 0.02 0.41 0.02 NiiRTHf HIJ HilG SilCF F R _ 0.41 0.12 0.41 0.12 Sid Al I. HOll T H HilFF ALO 31.50 35.61 31.50 35.61 lit. AC A IIHFF AL O _ 4. ft 3 3.74 0.83 3.74 HiACn WLOHORSt 0.83 0.46 0.8T 0.46 Cil ANNE L CA1 FISH 3.15 0.02 0.41 0.04 6.31 1.48 9.M7 1.54 Fl. A T HE Afi C A T F ISH 2.8H 01 _ l.10 0.91 3.98 0.92 FRESHdAIER DHUM 116.47 01 27 45.22 3.08 114.39 22.13 276.08 26.48 GHilllP IOIAL 125.67 1.39 67.22 4.93 165.61 70.76 356,50 77.08 _. _ __ _ ___ __ _ ___ FORAGt _ _ _ 30.22 _ _ _ _ _141__ _ _ _ 30 _ T3 G172ARD SHAD 7.00 0.11 134.27 TitHL ADF l N SilAD 107H2.H9 65 90 0.68 0.02 10783 28 57 65 92 I Hill.i.llE Als M i hoita 0,6H I O.68 0 T LOGPL PCit 0.68 T . 547 68 48 4.56 M1FFD R. LlH I D M I NrJOrJ S 54 7. d48 4.56 _ _ GHOUP Illi AL 11338.741 70.58 0.00 0.00 134.96 30.24 11473.70 100.82 FINAL fili AL 13042.22 77.08 696.50 19.28 414.3a 116.53 14153.06 212.89
HEAN tJunHER AND Wt II;Hi (KG) tlF FISH PrH HECTAHE IN l SAMPLES IN WATTS HAR HISERvluR, 1958 , Sl8tCILS _Y Hi s 4 G HF YFAH__ _ [fiffRHF.DIA(F__ _ _HARVESTAHLF_ Hil'tHER WLIGHT NtJf4H L R TUTAL.,U_GHT H HuuhtH WEIGHI HisMULW t: LIGHT ______ _______ _ _ - ___ _GAHL WHIIF liASS 47.01 0.72 _ _ _ _ 47.01 0.72 57.84 0.07 1,49 0.04 2.99 0.25 37.31 'O 36 rt A HrsHH 10 HL tilb il.L 8151.34 1.09 91.79 2.00 S8.21 4.63 581. 3 t4 7.71 SMal I t'udiH HASS ?.99 0.03 /.99 0.17 0 75 0.10 6 0.31 SPfliit h HASS 3.73 0.04 11.19 0.26 5 . 22 1 16 20 72 15 1.46 L ARGf t1HHIH HASS 10.45 0.11 18.66 0.3S 15.67 S.80
. 4 44 6.76 nHlit CRAPPit 105.97 0.35 16,66 0.53 2.99 0.34 127 78 61 1.01 SAur,tR 3.73 0.16 0.75 0.12 10.45 4.17 14.93 44.45 GHOttP THIAL 63H.06 2.56 145.52 3.76 96.27 16.46 879.85 22.78
_____ __________-________ HOUGH ____ __ 3.98 85.07 530 0.H2 1.46 SKIPJACK H L h k ir4G 63.43 0.49 14.18 CAkP _ _ h.72 6.16 6.72 6.16 SM At l MlHliH L$UF F 410 0.75 0.29 13.43 14.94 10 15.23 GflLDEN HF f1He f 93t _ 2.24 1.01 142 24 1.01 21.64 CilAhNLL CAIFISH 7.46 0.02 2.99 0.19 19 44.46 4.67 FLATHEAD C AIF ISH 16.42 0.06 1.49 0.12 110 75 0.87 18 66 1.06 iHESHafAILH HHH4 257.46 1.41 105.97 6.65 167.41 33,83 5 3 1 ,. 3 4 41.89 GROUP THIAL 3 t:4.7H 1.99 125.37 8.08 209.70 65.26 679.85 75.33 _FOHAGL____ GI//ARii SHA0 191,uq 0.70 _ _ 90.30 22.25 281 84462 54 22 34 53.55 IHHFADFlH SHAH 8 4 esd . 6 9 55.SS _ _ 347 69 01 0.27 MIxfu & I N i i$ olfluons 5 t:7.01 0.27 _ _ _ GHHI)P IOIAL
- 9000.15 54.52 0.00 0.00 90.30 22.25 9091.04 76.76 F i r:AL ThiAL 9983.S8 59.07 270.90 11.84 396.27 103.96 10650.75 174.88 i
t
t1E AN utJMt3t R A tJ D WflGHT (hG) OF FISH P( H1959 HICTARF l ta 1 S Af4Pt.F S IN CA1TS HAR NFSERVIOR, , _ IfaTE Riit DI A1 E ___H A H V E S T AllL E_ SPFC It S YalilNG OF YEAW_ HelmiE R nElGHI Ha li4 H E H ieEIGHT oll"HE R WEIGH 1 ____ NUMHERTlliAL _ _T WEIGH GAMF~ 26.HI o.2H 0.15 0.2 7~~~ 27.61 035 hh]IF t* ASS 32.09 0.09 4.4M 0.0H 1.49 0.20 38.06 0.37 n A R i<ill:1H 540. 50 0.67 64.18 2.01 74.b3 S.68 479.10 8.36 lit tif G i t t 2.99 0.81 10.45 1 SM At t ritetaiH HASS 2.99 0.05 a.43 0.29 26.87 0 13 59 SPH1TIP HASS 17.16 0.18 9 0.41 - 58.81 5.49 L Aut.E Hilulu H ASS 5.22 0.06 25 70 37 2.16 ti . 21 3.28 33 3.38 19.40 t.03 14.93 2.34 34 nielit C9APPIt. 11.94 1.79 3 At Gt P _ 10.45 1.47 1,49 0.32 424 t 3 1.31 138.06 7.45 104.48 12.90 667.16 21.66 (5HlHIP IOTAL ___ _ ___ __ __ _ __ _ _____ _ R i l l l G H _ _ _ _ _ _ 0.75 0.01 tlNinENTIFifD GAH 0,75 0.01 2,.06 26.87 3.75 SP IPJ ACK bl RW i tlG 7.46 0.16 10.45 1.54 8.96 4.26 4.48 4.26 _ 4.48 CARP NORTHfRH HOG SHChER _ 0.75 0.28 0.75 0 42 28 3r* At t_Ittiti T H Hilt F Al.tl _ 36.57 42.51 36.57 51 0.75 0,13 5.75 11 48 2.24 Gill fit il et t D HilR S E 1.44 11 1.49 2 0 28 4 99 0.39 Hl.lif CATFISH _ 4.4H 0 0 38 0.75 0.35 2 72 0.73 C H A'JNFl. CATFISH 1.49- 0.01 l.49 0.82 6 4 48 0.83 FLATHIAD CATFISH 2.99 0.01 49.25 9.10 156.72 12.40 FRLSHnAlfw Dlutsi 50.7S 0.43 56.72 2.86 63.43 0.62 73.88 5.01 107.46 61.77 244.78 67.40 GROOP TOTAL F0RAGF __ _,,_ _ __.,,,, _
% 97 0.76 144.03 30.40 200.00 31.17 GilZARD SHAD 3626.87 14.49 THREADFIN SHAD . 3626.847 14.49 329.85 0.27 Mixt D K Hrlin MINT 10HS 329.85 0.27 . _ _
GROHP I D I Al. 4012.69 15.53 0.00 0.00 144.03 30.40 4156.72 45.93 4500,75 17.46 211.94 12.46 455.97 105.07 S068.66 134.99 FINAL IHIAL
ML Af1 NilMHF R A f4D .1L I GH T (KG)RESFRVIOR, OF FISH PER HLCTARf I rl 3 SAMPLES IN WATTS t1 A R 1960 . _ YOUNG lif YEAR _ __IHILPMFDIATE . HARVFSTADLE S P F. C I f S NilHHER NElGHI huldHER til.IGHT uuMHtR WEIGHT ___T riuMBER 01 AL_ET5iiT n ______ _ __ __ _ _ _ ___ _ _ GAMF _ _ . - - - _ _ __ -___ ___ __ 9.56 0.22 H.11 0.07 1.45 0.15 WHi1E BASS 17.01 0.06 5.23 0.15 1.20 0.08 23.44 0.29 H ARuilit T H 1.37 2 0.09 Rt DHRF ASI SHNFISH 0 . 88 6 I u.46 0.01 0.09 385 28 78 5.63 lit.itt G il l 285.17 0.53 54.46 1.46 4 5. Pl 3.64 2.42 0.05 2.42 0.05 IUNGLAR SHHFISH 2.65 0.01 0.50 0.05 0.75 0.13 3.90 0.19 Std A t L ulin i H HASS 32.54 0.16 5 0.28 2.28 0.32 38.77 0.75 Spill l E D HASS 50, 50 0.19 7 94 0.71 6.91 2.54 44.30 3 0 45 LARGENHUTH HASS WHilt CHAPPIE 59.18 0.18 - 2 09 42 0.14 3.38 0.50 64.98 0 82 05 HIArt (.R APl'I t 0.50 0.05 0.50 2.28 0.03 1.45 0.23 0.75 0.17 4.47 0.43 SAliGtw 437.91 1.22 79.41 3.23 63.07 7.53 580.39 11.98 GRlHJP IOIAL HOL1GH - . _ _ _ _ - - - 4.17 0.43 l.00 0.15 5 l t) 1.08 SKIPJACK HE RR ll4G _ 3H.42 35.30 38.42 35.30 CARP . 0.4A 0.18 0 0.18 NORINEHN H 0(. SilC K E R _ 0.25 0.10 47.24 Sh.53 47 48 58.63 SM Al LMilHT H huF F At 0 0.73 0.24 0 49 73 0.24 SHOR THE AD Rt DHORSE 0.97 1.56 0.97 1.56 RIVER REDHOPSF 0.97 0.17 0.98 0.47 1 0.64 GOLDEN WEnHURSF 0.05 2,12 0.14 5.94 1,39 9 95 75 1.56 CHANNFL C AIF ISH 3.69 0.03 0.25 C.14 0.73 0.16 FLATHEAD CATFISH 0.48 43.27 FRESHWATER D Rilti 33.50 0.32 219.H9 12.46 167.06 30.50 420.45
%7.19 0.35 224.70 13.04 263.24 129.25 525.14 142.63 GROHP IHIAL FORAGE __ ___ _
0.21 Mii.42 24.46 __-__--__2 119 4 . 6 6 Gl//ARD SbAD 31.55 23045 96 94 30.04 THRF ADF IfJ SHAD 23045.94 30 04 _ 0.48 LO(;PE RI H 0.4H I 73.71 i 0.19 Mixin W. H r. I O .wlNhnas 75.71 0.19 _ _ 23151.63 30.44 0.00 0.00 88.42 24.46 23240.09~ 54.89 GRIHIP IH1AL 23626.7H 32.01 304.12 16.27 414.73 161.23 24345.62 209.51 FINAL TOT Al e
t4E AN laudHFR A t:0 WEIGHT (KG) OF FISH PER HECTARF I f! 20 SAAPI.ES IN WATTS BAR RiSERVihR, 1964 SPFCILS _YOHNG OF YFAR _ __ I N T F Rt'E fil A I E ___HARVESTAHLF HilMitf R nLIGH1 Hilt 4H E H WLIGHT NtJMilE R WLIGHT _ __ TOTALw NtiMHER rT GH T __ _-- __ __- - -_ __ ~__GAMh --- -------------- WHill NASS 25.14 0. l ea 3 . S 44 0. 51 3.9H 0.87 33 32 1.33 WARHouiH T6.24 0.08 14.3H 0.32 2.93 0.25 53 . 55 0.65 HEDhREAST SuoFISH 2.H9 I 2.H3 0.07 2.57 0.21 H.10 0.29 Dl ut Gil l 1601.84 1 22 119.HH 2.90 49.34 4.29 1777.06 8.41 LONGLAN StJHFISH 0.51 I 1.23 0.03 _ _ l . 7 ti 0.04 Rf DE AR Siltq F I S H 0.06 1 0.07 0.01 0.13 0.02 SM AL LutiH1 H HASS 9.95 0.09 6.90 0.SH 49 0.54 19 1.?! SPOTTED HASS 25.45 0.11 . S.47 0.47 21 5H 0.24 32 32 50 0.82 LARGEMOUTH I4 ASS 66.39 0 li t 15.53 1.59 S 70 1,67 85.62 3.47 WHITF CHAPPIF 42.30 0 07 II.4H 0.52 2.62 0.51' 56.40 1.09 HLACK CHAPPil 0. 52 I 0.27 0.02 0.27 0.05 0.H6 0.07 SAtlGER 12.9'1 0.37 / 65 0,68 0.60 0.18 21.19 1.22 GRhuP IOIAL 1830.o0 2.50 187.23 7.28 71.95 K.83 2089.78 18.62 __ _ ___ __ _ _ ----__ _ R0tlGH _ ~ LilflGrJilSI GAR 0.S4 0 03 _ --- 0.12 }5 0 0.66 0'.58 SHORirJilSE GAR 16 I 0.16 i SKIPJALK HERRING 0 u.90 0.01 1.21 0.23 2.95 0.75 5,,06 0.99 MilONL Yl 0.12 0.01 0.29 0.03 _ _ 0 . 18 1 0.04 CARP 7.00 0.60 0.H6 0 . 2 48 19.04 20.01 26.90 20.85 uuIDENTIFIED CARPSilCKERS _ 0 0.05 0.09 0.05 RIVER CANPSi1CKER 0.79 0.01 0.16 0.04 2 09 29 3.40 3.25 3.45 NORTHERtl POG SilChf R 0.05 56 0 36 0 SM All "Istl T H tillF F ALO 0.17 0.03 0.S2 1 0.38 S0.85 64.89 52 . 51 65 05 30 H I GMilll T H HLIFFALO _ _ 5.18 3.55 3.18 T.55 HLACK htlF F ALO , _ 0.06 0.16 0.06 0.16 SPOTTED SucklR , 0.05 1 0.11 0.02 23 0.10 39 0.12 SHORTHEAD Rt DH619SE 0.06 0.01 0.21 0.04 0 0 26 05 0 53 0 HLACK RFOHORSF _ 0.25 0 25 0 0 25 0 0 10 GOLDtN RFDHORSF 0,t1 T 2,31 0.39 4.I1 2.05 6.53- 2 25 45 IJNIDEaTIFIED CATFISH _ 0.14 0.01 _ 0.14 0.01 HtuE CATFISH _ 0 . 34: 0.02 0.07 0.01 0 . 84 1 0.03 Y E ll II A Hilli Hf A0 0.05 I 0.05 T CH AtJtJF L CAIFISH 5 H4 0.05 14.52 0.62 8.34 2.86 70 3.56-FLATHFAO CAIFISH 0 0.01 0.62 0.13 1.21 1.11 262 23 1.25 FRESHWAftR DWilH 35 40 90 0.20 18H 75 10.02 90.90 115.44 315.55 25.66 GR0llP IOIAL 50.09 0.96 211. es t 12.25 183.93 115.03 445.43 128.24 i t ,
~
r*E Ata Nair4ttER AhD utIGHT (KG) OF 20 S A MPL t' S I ts H A T T 3 14 A R Rt FISH PFR HL C fAliF t ri St HVillR, 1964 .
~
SPIClfS YOlif*G 11F Y E A ft ,It4T i k H E D I A T F _ _ ___HARVfSTAHLf_ i titiriH L R nLIGHT 84tiMill R liflGHT 88 tim ut R HtIGHT __ TOTALWLI huMitER __ 6III __ __ _ _ - __F0 HAG [ ______ 50.48 50.57 10 117 66
- Gil/AHD Sis An
~
67.Sb 0.21
/502 71 0.10 2542 . 56 6.92 T HHf. Ant l u Sit Ali 2559.HS h . ti d -
196.77 0 65 HlkFl* SHan 196.77 0 65 TO I tirJ i nt ta l iI I L 11 SHlhER 0.30 I . _ EtitNALD SHINTP 4./0 I O.20 i WHI It T A II. SHI'f t R 0.57 T 0 57 T SPilit th SHl'86 R 0.21 T _ 0 21 0 7 tlLisr4TutBSF MINNOW 10.h2 0.02 10.62 0.02 l 1.31 0 04 l 0 04 FA1HfAD M l l4 fi .P-4 Uralut fliit IEI) PADTOM 0.09 I 0.M1 09 I LilGPt RCH I./0 T _ . 1.20 T HRillen SILVtHSinf 0./H T 0.7M T e Mixth n UN ln t.tli4 FLOWS 499.10 0.55 499.10 0.55 ! GRIHip iill AL 3319.07 8.29 0.00 0.00 252. ft 1 50.37 3571.87 58.65 F livat lofAL 5199.76 11.75 39M.64 19.53 50M.68 174.23 6107.08 205.51 4
=,
k
10 SA 1PLfS IN C: A T I S fi AR tdF A11 NttlAt L R AND itlGHT (KG)RiSt.RVIOH, ' llF F ISit PLR HffiAkf IN 1973 , _ylillNG elf YEAR __ _INTIRMEDIATF _ __ el4RVFSTAHLE_ _____ HUMHERTOTAL __M wtI St>f C Its Nile 9t E R 61fiGHI 4 tit.HF R ret i G H T oil'* H F it HE1GHT ___GAHL _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _____ 46.94__________2.05 7.0S 1.13 56 0.29___ ____ ____5 6 5 0.63 2.50 0.06 Wiel iF hASS 352. 00 0.0% 0.50 0 03 . 0,04 Y t t.l.ilt. HASS I 0.I4 I 0.27 0.04 0.54
. Hilf K HASS 0.I4 39.70 0.82 6.09 0.S0 85.22 1,54 naRMutilH 39.44 0.22 78.57 2.91 41.37 3 12 RthHPFAST SIIWFISH 4.92 0.01 7.89 0.19 2/3.29 16.12 2272.38 32 . 70 12.51 s
HtiF G I LI. 1542.56 4.01 50h.71 1.02 0.07 b.18 0.18
?.00 0.02 3.16 0.09 2.57 0.28 3.77 0.11 f.HNGEAR St olF I SH 1.19 0.04 1.01 83.61 1.93 pt.nF AR Silut ISH 67.20 0.42 s2.69 0.50 3.73 0 0.01 Sit A L.L Mt tu i u HASS 0.1% 0.01 SPO11Flo HASS _ _
11.43 0.99 1.78 4.24 87 15 94 5.65 L A RGLf-lHill H HASS 68.74 0 42 0.40 i 9.40 I _ _ _ 1.59 80.35 1.81 UHIntNIIf IF D CH APPlf 66.59 0 07 3.96 0.15 10.30 wit l i f CHAPelt I 0 P0 0.01 2.06 0.34 2.40 0.36 hlACK Cli APP I t 0.14 0.01 1.03 0.14 1.43 0.33 2.65 0 48 I SAllGtR 0./0 0.46 0.46 I - _ NALLEYL 50.23 5.51 595.?7 16.16 P94.15 28.56 2717.38 GROUP TOI Al 1827.96 ___ _ ROUGH ___ _ _ _ 1.00 _ __ _ _ _ - _ 2.71 1.12 1.17 0.04 0.29 0.08 1.25 0.11 SPOTTED GAk 0.07 0.14 0.04 17.66 SKIPJACK HERRING 17.52 _ _ 0 0.01 NOHr4E Y E 0.39 0.01 l.6% 0.53 31.53 51.62 33 39 18 52.16 CARP _ _ 14 0.07 14 0.07 river C allP SilC K E R _ 0 55 0.66 0 0 55 0.66 HH1TC SilChf P _ I 0.?7 0 0.06 0.41 0.06 NDil I Hf R14 HilG SilCKLR U 14 0.03 I.12 0.24 18.69 36.92 20.67 37.18 S f> A L L f10ll I H HilFF At si u . e4 7 3.86 7.09 3.86 7.09 h t Guiltil H 4tlF F Alli * . 0.57 2.00 0.57 2.00 HIACA HUF F Atil . 19 0.11 0 19 11 SPHiltD SitC Af R 0 4 26 1.97 S.55 0
?. 09 HLACn kl.phuRSF 14 I 1.16 0.12 4.01 3.18 5.03 3.25 GOL Dt 84 P f leHilk SE 0 0 57 0.02 0. 59 0.04 10.14 3.18 84.3H 5.83 Chat NF L C A IF I SH 29.92 0.51 44.32 ?.34
- 2. I r4 1.15 6.89 I.36 Flatitt AM raIFISH 2.66 0.03 1.90 0.19 95.31 18.18 424.66 29.74 120.99 1.10 P0H.51 10.47 FRESHwA1Lk likeln 142.85 1.60 259,19 14.02 173.?9 127.23 606.84 GROllP THIAL 174. 6
- eE Ara tJilMht R AND bF.IGHT (KG) RfSFRVIOR,IIF F ISH PI W HfCTARE Ill 10 S AHl'LE S IN WATTS HAQ 1073 .
_YlillHG llF YEAR _ __ I II I i R M F D I A T F __ _ _HARVFSTAHLF 314 r I E S ratiteHt R NEIGHT ut MHt.H ufTGHT taut:HER wt !EIIT _ _ T0TAL NElGHT NUMHER _ _ _ _ - - - _ _ _ _ _ _ FORAGE __ __ 0.75 761.46 130.57 1085.15- 32 GI//AHD Sti All 323.69 16.02 M.92 0.27 600h.34 131 16 29 THWE ADF II: SHA0 5997.43 0 30 218.49 0 30 Mitt D Snap PtH 49 I 0.67 I S I W JF Reill E R 0.67 _ 0.61 T S i t.v t R C u tilt 0.61 T 0 13 T { GOLDEN SH i tJi k 0.13 i _ 107 52 0.09 F ML R atti SHINER 52 0.09 . 71 0.?! S T F t L Cell.ilR 107
- 71. 54 0.21 873 54 89 0.,81 HListslut1Si til fule lW 873.H9 0.N1 -
5.83 0 02 F A tlet 41) MilitJO v 5.83 0 02 I 0 I GHF 6 rJSIDE II ARIEH 0.14 . . 53 14 61 0.66 LfiGPtH :le 53.61 0.6h _ H 01 11w:1 15 SILVERSipE H . Sit 0.01 3.74 3572 58 44 0 3.74 Miyto R u010 *119 illWS t 3572.44 It234.Sc. 22.62 0.00 0.00 770.38 130'.84 12004.94 153.46 GRotie 1:s f AI. 13236.37 29.72 854.46 30.18 1237.H2 286.64 15329.16 346.54 FINAL ins t AI. l 6
i4 E A J f40MHFH At4D v.L I G H T (MG)ItOF FISH h SAMPLES IN NATTS HAN L SE u v lPLH HFCTARE I rl fly , 1975 - SPFCIIS YDali4G OF VfAR luf t krit DI A T F_ ___HARVESTAHLF_ _ Ntitutt H WE.IGHI m e AilF R *l' I Git i 'stiMill R NEIGHT' NtsHHEN _ TOTAL H _EI_GHT
- _ _ - __ GAHL - - - - - - - _ _
0.63_- - 0.08 12.4h 0.53 NHITL ll A S S 3.15 0.02 5.h4 0.23 0.35 0.03 0.33 0 03 YLtLib l' ASS 0.31 I STRIPIp HASS u.31 I 1.H9 0. 51 2 0.06 H Y U H il) Sullt A SIRIPF HAS 0.0h 22.52 I _ S.H3 0.31 127 2057 0.91 n A Ri'llu l H 99.22 0.22 0.38 1.46 60.61 RIt)HREASi SilhF I SH 5%.%h 0.0S H.%0 0.I7 16.56 1 . 6 85 HLtlFGILL 730.43 1.23 222.30 4.52 18u.28 12.66 1137.01 18.22
~
1.OISGt Ak SilufISH 4.07 0 92 - S . 0 'i 0.13 4.15 0.2% 13.26 0.39 H E D F. A R Stir.F I SH _ l.28 0.07 1.23 0.07 H Y ll4 ] O SIINF I SH I.26 1 0.63 0.01 1.89 0.01 SM All MtillIH HASS 25.29 0.06 i.90 0.10 0.63 0.64 25.82 0.80 S pilt T F D inASS 51.11 0.15 0.41 0.01 58.12 14 L ARGlatitlIH l' ASS 99.35 0.27 33.23 2.17 13.hl 4.92 146.19 0 7 36 aHITE CHAPPIE 9.19 0 01 th.s3 0.42 5.S3 0.57 31.91 1.00 llLACn CHAPPIE 0.33 I 1.69 0.04 1.28 S.16 3.80 0.20 S A tlGE R 1.94 0.09 H.12 0.83 0.31 0.06 10.37 0.98 Gili tup ill! AL 1073.30 2.17 325.24 H.84 234.09 21.17 1633.14 32.18
~~ ~~" ~~~~~~
L0NGNOSt GAR ~'2 I9 0IIii ~~~~~_~~ 0.81 10.29 07II3 0.97 SKIPJAEK HiNHlHG 2.79 0.05 6.H6 0.64 0.13 0.43 0.08 H00rJt i 0.45 0.08 _ CARP 8H.20 17 88.20 17 NORTHFHfJ HilG SilCKER l.06 0.03 0.43 1340 26 1.48 1340 30 SrtALLuuuTH llOFF ALO 21.15 36.41 15 36.41 SPitTIE0 SUCMER 2.97 0.14 7.26 0.59 11.49 7.74 21 73 8.47 SHilR16tt AD RtInitIHSE 0, 51 0.0t _ 21 31 0.01 HLcCK Rf DHelRSE 0.H3 0.03 0 41 0.06 2.H7 2,92 11 0 11 4 2.21 Gut or ed HEph0RSE ..50 0.19 2.S4. 0.34 11.46 6 18.51 7.45 HLACK HilLLHL AH 0 0.01 _ 0.31 0.01 Yellow #1111.1 HC AD 1.22 I 2 31 8% 0.09 4.07 0.09 CHAtNEL-CAIFISH 4 4.5H 0.2% 6.H6 2.66 11.44- 2.90 FLATHEAl* CATFISH 1.S/ I 0.9H 0.15 1.57 0.90 3.93 1.05 FRLSHidAIE4 ORain 9.15 0.1S 222.75 12.44 126.51 16.81 358.41 29.39 GRutlP IhTAL 26.60 0.62 248.47 14.80 270.98 20H.11 546.55 223.53
.~ - . - . - . . _.. . . . -- . - _ .
4 idL Af4 Nit 4Hf R Ahp .tL I GH T (KG) OF FISH PEH HFCTAHL IN 6 SAMPLES IN CATTS HAR HESCuv10Hr l975 . SPf- c i t s _.YllHNG 11F YFAP__ __] N T F R eit D I A T F ___.HAHVfshAHLE Nu"HLR wE1GH1 14uMHLR nLIGHT NuMHf.R wLIUIIT ___ _10TAL_ NUHttE R et UEUT _ _______ . _ FtiRAGL ___ ___ GI//ARD SHAD 1$95 0.03 504.96 85.40 518.89- 85 42 T HEL Anf lia SH AI) 205.52 0 46 _ _ 101.97 2.82 307.49 3 29 I 0 . d41 SIHraf MUI.L F H 0 . ta l _ _ 0 0.06 Gnl Olft SH{NFU 0.65 0.06 42 85 0.09 42.11 0.09 5 17 0.03 i ' IIM I DE N SulttER EMERALD I I F Illi SHIHLH %.77 0.03 17 77 0.05 S it.VF R SHI rlF W 17.21 0.05 21 21 0.06 4 HLACKIAll SH illE R 21.65 0.06 16 65 19 0.04 ,
- Sit t LCHl.HR 16.19 0.04 124.67 0.22 tiraint olIF It 0 td l N Nild IPts.67 0.22 Mt.63 0.15 HLlini'!OSE rd i fidi t s 31.n3 0.15 _ _
33.16 11
. FAIHFAD .41 tJ HO" 35 to 0.II 150.49 0 0 22 Hillt,Ht An N I N'J'la 150.49 0 22 0
. MOSi3til TilF I SH n ts t I 53 43 T 0.72 LOGet ui H 45 0.72 % 5 45 26 0.01 HH110K SIL vt RSint 555 26 0.01 ._ 772.82 2.26 0.00 0.00 606.93 88.22 1379.75 90.48 l GWollP IOIAL 1873.22 S.05 574.21 '23.64 1112.00 317.50 3559.43 346,t9 FINAL TuiAL 4 1 e J
P L A T.: Nil'4HE R A440 AF IGtti (MG) DF FISH PER HffiARE If4 6 SAMPLES IN WATTS HAR - RI S F R V I O89 1976 SPE C IF S _YHilHG OF YfAR_ It4TE RME DI ATF _ ___HARVLSTABLE - _ Nisuut u WEIGHT IJt HHLR n F l (.H T tillMHER WEIGHT __ _ TOTAL.Ef_GHT NUMBER H _______ ______ _____________GAHL ___________- - - -____ _ WHi rF ltASS 7.47 0.14 9.02 0.54 1.30 0.2? 18.29 0.90 Ytt Liln HASS 1.31 0.05 3.3% 0.2S 0.54 0.06 5.?! 0.35 I)HIDEHIIF ILD SilHF [SH 4.95 i _ _ 4 i 43 93 0.36 w ARNistil H 10.05 0.02 26.39 0.41 6.58 02 0.80 til lutHL A S I S ufiF I S H 1%1.33 0.27 63.41 1.44 15.07 1 249 2.97 Hi tit GILL 80?.S7 1.69 450.4tl 7.28 170.33 12 26 70 1423 81 38 21.67 t ilNf>E AR StHIF I SH 3.57 0.02 9.19 0.16 4.74 0.23 81 0 41 klufAR SisqFISH l.29 0.03 2.51 0.24 163 82 0 . 27 21.07 0.24 SP1 All,9t tu l H HASS 16.41 0.07 3.0/ 0.19 1.64 0.S1 SPlll it D itASS 16.49 0.05 0.?5 0.01 _ _ 16.74 0.06
- 1. ARGLtululu H ASS 195.53 0 58 29.33 1.78 14.75 7.58 234.65 9.73 wit 1 TE C R A6* Pit 0.57 I 1.n2 0.05 1.11 0.15 5.30 0.20 hLACA CdAPPlt _ 0.28 0.02 0.49 0.04 0.77 0.06 Y t L l H *. PFRCH
_ _ _ 0.30 0.03 0.30 0.03 S Aul;f R 0.26 i 1.81 0.24 S.06 l'.24 7.18 1,47 Grot)P INTAL 1210.29 2.70 619.54 12.38 224.44 24.35 2054.27 39.43 _ _ _ _ _ - - __ ___ __ _ __ ___- _H O l l G H - _ _ _ _ _ __---- _ _ CHL S IHili 1AdPREY 0.23 T 0.23 i 0.06 LHNG40SF GAR 2.66 0.01 0.53 0.05 _ _ 3,19 SKIPJACK HFHRING _ S.3/ 0.54 0.98 0.18 6.30 0 0.72 MOOfst Yt 0.46 0.09 _ 0.09 CARP 0.25 i _ _ 42.80 82.12 43 46 04 82.12 RIVFR C ARPSilC K E R ?? 0.02 _ _ 0.27 0.02 WHITE SterktR _ 0 0 51 0.05 _ 0.51 0.05 Ni1R T Hf RIJ hilG SijC K E R 2.40 0.10 P.69 0.33 1.09 0.22 6.38 0 Ste A L LHHU I H BtJFFALO 6.28 12.27 6.28 12 65 llLACK I4HFF ALO _ 1.25 3.34 1.25 3 27 34 SPOTitD SOCKFR 2.34 0.09 2.91 0.24 9.61 5.82 86 6.15 SHilWTHEAD RE0 HORSE 0.78 0.05 0.28 0.09 14 0 57 0.12 illACK leFDHURSE 0.25 0.01 0.25 0.02 2.65 1 42 3 1.45 GHLDEN REbHiRSt 0 55 06 0.90 1o.10 8,.96 35 14 10.T9 3.'94 I 8.?H 0.TS 0,t0 1 10 0.11 i YELLOW OllLLHF AH 0.,1 0 0.01 0.01 0,6027 0.01 Hwliwid Ht:L L Ht' AD _ _ 0.?7 _ CHAN4fL CAIFISH 37 I 7.6M 0.44 10.73 S 62 77 6.07 183 01 FLATHtAH CAltISH 0 0 95 I 1.02 0.08 1,04 0.57 0 FRESH.ATER D R ti'4 21.61 0.51 159.34 8.10 96.84 19.20 277.80 27 66 61 Gl< lit iP in l Al. 40.33 1.06 190.07 10.91 190.63 139.93 421.04 151.89
MEAN r406.Ht R AHO Nt it.HI (MG)'OF H SAMPLES IN WATTS BAR HL FISH SL H VPER illR , HfCIAHF 1976 I fJ ., YOOf4G flF VEAR__ _i til f RMI ()i A iF _ __ HARVESTAHLF- TOTAL __ St'tC1l'S titlNbER (! LIGHT lillMH E W HEIGHT fdUMHEN WEIGHT HHHitF R wtIGHT
- __ FORAGL _____ _ U.62 127 57.64 GI // ARD SH All 3.01 0.01 3b4. 43 Titpr Ant tre SHAp 1251.16 4.51 105.49 2.97 1355 50 25 7.48 HyHRip SHAD 0.27 0.01 n.27 0.01 IHilDLu1 IF IF O SHlfiFR 8.67 0.01 . M.67 0.01 SitVER DHun 1.14 0.04 1.14 0.04 I 09 0.05 1 0.03 GHL Pt ol SHlfJF R 32 0947 0.13 F F'F R AL D SH i tiF R 32.47 13 SPO1 Fill S H l u F. R HH.n4 0 0 24 , _ MM.64 0.24 S i t F LCOI.09 25.82 0.10 25.82 0.10 18 HHL L HF. A D l'INNHn 496.16 496 0 74 0}79 HOSollI I HF I SH 0.14 0}79 57 . 25 0 51 L OGPF.R C H 57.25 0.51 0 I HANDED S CliL P i rJ 0.27 I 10 2759 0.02 HHflHK S]LVtHSIDE 10.59 0 02 14.34 I i MIXED K tulip ti l'lHiln S 14,54 _ .
GHIHiP 1861 AL 1972.02 6.40 0.00 0.00 '128.20 60.61 2400.22 67.01 F lhAt lilt AL 3222.65 10.1% 804.62 23.29 845.27 224.89 4875.54 258.33 S l
taE AN tJaluftf R AND nFIGHT (KG) OF FISH PER HiCIARE I rj 8 SAHPLES IN W A T T S !! AR RF SERVIstR, 1971 . Spirlf3 YlillNG OF YEAR __ _1 t: TERME ()lATF _ _ _H A R VE S T AllLE _ reli4H E R hF lGis i Ntar ilt E R HtlGHT a nvilE R WEIGHT ____ fiUMH ETOTAL R w_ETEiiT ____._______.___ _____ GAME _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ wti l l t hASS 54.52 0.14 6.97 0.53 16 0.86 47.66 1 0 53 Y t tl H.. stASS 68.31 0.28 5.14 0.40 61 70 0.23 75.15 91 n.40 0.01 _ 0.40 0.01 S T R I PEin H A S'1 ilulpthT IE lt o SuhF ISH 28.39 0.02 _ 28.39 0.02
$8.99 0.04 13.06 0.19 3.53 0.28 35.58 0.51 wapitalslitt R t iisiR L A S T SituFISH 21.46 0.07 15.62 0.21 7.12 0.59 50.20 0.87 194.79 76 5.98 1616.98 74 Hi til GILi 1329.83 2.65 3.13 921 79 0.08 73.02 110 58 I ONI.t Ak SuhflSH e4H.18 0 11 - 23.05 0.58 I 0.52 0.01 _ l.16 01 RtOF AR SHNFISH 0 . 6 44 22.07 0.06 3. % 0.16 0.76 0.08 26.18 0 0 29 SH Al L t'llH T H HASS 4.47 0.01 Spill T E H HASS 4.47 0.01 _
268.02 11.90
- 1. A RI.t r* Hili t e HASS 201.31 0.60 42.95 2.66 21.73 8.65 0.71 CHAPPit 11.09 0 02 4.74 0.05 4.29 0.64 20.13 W H I T F.
HLAfst LPAPPit 0.23 I 0.46 1 0.47 0.07 1.17 0.08 YElLOo Pi RCH 1.54 1 0.23 7 49 0.10 6.26 0.11 SAHGER - 0.98 0.12 4 .52
's 2.03 5.51 2.15 a;RuuP lot Al. 1797.07 4.01 311.HH 7.84 151.33 19.58 2260.27 31.43
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ RnuGH _______ _ _ _ _ __ _ __ 0.02 CHL S THill 1AuPREY 1.04 0.02 1.04 SPfli TED GAR 0.24 I . 0.24 i LetNGnnSE (;AR 1.31 0.01 0.S6 1.22 1.87 1.23 1.07 0.01 1 0.01 SHUR I NilSF I; A R 35.12 0 16 I.21 0.07 87 0.32 37 07 40 0.55 SKIPJACn itEPHING I 0 52 0 0 1.51 0.20 MHouEYL 0.47 0.52 0.06 16.99 33 14 12 99 33.12 C a l< P 0.33 I 0.36 0.03 1.24 1.29 16 92 1 32 c RIVER CARPSHCKFR 0.33 1 33 I IJHitLHACK C ARPSilCKElf . i 0.21 0.52 0.17 0 72 2 0.39 NORTHElth HUG SilCKER 2.20 19 19 9.46 9.46 Sit Al Lf110lT H IHIFFALO _ 5 0 24 1 5 0 24 1.04 HIGMotilH PUF F Alla _ 0 04 84 5.09 0,91 SPOITED SitChi R 1.97 0 02 0.52 0.05 2.h0 0.36 4 0.36 I I S11VLR R E lu TON S F. 0.46 0.01 . ,,, 0.46 0.01 131 VI R RF 11He iR S E 00 4 2.02 GULDEN kFDHHRSF 0.75 0.03 1.24 CH At4NEl. C A IF l SH H.14 0.06 17.16. 1.08 16.78 2 27 42 00 09 8.41 FL A THt An C A TF [SH 2.49 0.01 0.25 0.01 0.76 7 20 0 3 0.22 FRESH =ATEN liklin 63.75 0.39 111.05 5.57 65.91 10.87 238 47 70 16.83 GlillHP flei Al 116.97 0.70 133.27 7.09 114.46 67.95 364.70 75.74
- c. - ~ . __. ._
etE Ald t4UFilf R AND WEIGHT (C3 G ) 11F FISH PFH HECTARE IN 14 SAMPLES IN MATTS (4AR RF SERVl(IR, 1977 ., SPFCILS _YllllNG OF YEAH __ __TNTERPEDIATE_ ___HARVESTAHLE _ __ ut s tilli' R wt!GHT HiirittR uf liiH1 NtlHHER W E lliH T NUNHERTOTAL a _ETGT ____________ _ _______ __ _FI) RAGE _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __ i;I/ / Aku SH Alt Sn7e>.ul 14.21 _ 609.92 102.18 t>285.93 116.45 TitPI ADF id SHAD 241.52 1.42 0.S2 0.02 242.04 1.43 l.04 0.03 1.04 0 03 it Y lip l D SHAD 0.75 _ 0 I S T OMf 84til LL R S il. VE R C HllH 2.14 i i 2 75 14 T ilNIDF HilF IE0 SHINER 1.04 i 1 04 i 30.9M 0.05 30 98 0 05 F 94t H al D SH i tJ E R CilHrillN Sit i n L R u.$2 I
. 0 52 I 36 T WH1IfIAll SH i r4F R 0.36 i 0
0 52 T SILVFR beilutR U.52 i 124.H3 0.27 Spit T F IN SHlutR 124.H3 0.2T _ 2.29 0.01 S I E t I.C OLitR 2.29 0.01 _ 769.64 0 90 (!!JL1 HL A n l'I rlNilu 7 6 9. f) 4 0.90 I 0 i OR APetif SPili Il D SilflF I SH 0.52 w 55 52 0.32 L ui;P E 5< C e* %.9H 0.32 28 ,89 9A 0.04 liRtH14 Sil.VF.kSIDE 2 6. ti9 0.04 GRIluP IOIAL 6955.47 17.29 0.52 0.00 611.49 102.23 7547.47 119.52 F Ile A L IO i al. HH49,50 22.01 445.67 14.93 H77.27 189.75 10172.44 226.69 4 1
HEAN Ntli4 tit H AND nEIGHT (PG) ljF FISH PEH HFCTARE IN 2 S A'4PLE S IN tATTS 6AR Rf SF RV filR, 1978 - . SPFCliS YfillHG Of YEAR _ iflTE Hitt DI AIF _ HARVESTAliLE - ___ TOTAL litjMHf H WEIGH 1 NilH H F. P WFIGH1 HilMHl.R HEIGHT NUNHER WEIGHT
- --____ - - - - __ __ GAME _ - - _ - - - - - -
383.HM 0 44 383.88 0.us WHIIt HASS 0,6H 34.70 t w ARN(pr T H I.2S I 22.50 0.34 1 as . 9 5 143.71 3 02 12 NFDilHfAST SillJF I SH 1.12 0.01 11M.84 2,01 25.15 1.11 74 67M.49 1.52 322.16 S.22 62.76 0.00 1063.41 fil.UF G li 1. 5,75 0.12 16.42 1.40 t7 10 1 53 HF DF AR Silt F I Set 1.25 i _ 201 25 I lifil del 41 I F I Els HASS _ 0.79 3.75 1.01 14 2.20 SM Al. LvHilIH HASS 247.54 0.40 17.84 269 2S 0.14 SPH11 t' D hASS 116.2S 0.14 . 2.97 0.45 116 184 35 1.42 172.16 (1.29 9.22 0.69 L ANGE NeluiH HASS 24.57 0.02 1.2% 0.02 25.82 0.04 Will i t CRAPPIF 19.57 0.77 168.79 1.09 YLLLiln PEhCH 149.22 0.32 GHlillP Total 1776.34 3.15 495.56 9.20 139.S' 9.42 2411.47 21.74 _Hild G H - - _- I.25 0.01 1.25 0.01 Ll 884GNilSt' GAR 1.25 3.20 1.25 3.20 CANP _ 2.%0 0.07 2.50 0.07 NHH1HF HN Hffb SUCNER 2 0,07 Gill DL f a HEliHORSI 2.50 0.07 _ _ 57 50 11 4.38 CHAtWI1 C A TF ISti 24.22 - 0.11 23.19 1.21 9.70 3.06 1.45 F L A T itr ') CAIFISH 15.00 0.06 10.00 0.67 2.50 0.70 27.50 F HF SH.; A I E R DRilP 12.54 0.45 92.33 3.15 39.57 12.44 164.44 16.05 GHiluP er AL 78.02 0.80 125.52 5.03 53.02 19.40 256.55 25.24 i FllR AGE 55.79 0.02 146.94 13.78 73 11~79 Gil/AkD SHAD 5.00 0.02 2005 00 0.02 E tll' R At O SHlufR . _ 39.57 0.17 SPIIIF I N SH IIJF R 19.57 0.17 _ _ 499.09 1.16 FillLl Hf AD M I N f H lr4 499.09 1.16 23.02 0.20 LilGPERI:H 28.02 0.20 _ 30.09 0.03 HRilllK SILVLRSIDE 30.09 0.03 _ GHiltlP IHIAL 65% 56 1.60 0.00 0.00 146.94 13.78 802.50 15.38 FINAL 10iAL 2509.91 5.55 621.0A 14.23 339.S3 42.60 3470.52 62.36
Hf Att (J H'IllE R Afl0 WLIGHT (KG) flF 2 S At1Pl.E S IN HATTS HAR HF flSH SE R PER V i(IH HLCTAHF
, 1979 IN .
_YOllf4G OF YEAR __ _ tf3TtHMF01A1F__ ___HARVFSTAHLt _ __ __10TAL_ SPF C it S nt:lGHT fit #MHE R HEIGHT NUMHER WEIGHT NIH1Hf H WLIGHI N titaR E R ___ _____ ___ _ _- _______ 0.69 _ _GAML 0.08 0,89 0.08 wHill itASS . 67.74 1.01 S.75 57 1,79 0.30 75.27 1.68 YtLtin HASS 44,16 0.25 15.61 0 0 15 a 0.66 00 1.26 W AHtuluiH 2H 22 0.38 12. 31 '8 3 1.03 68 95 1.73 HEDHHEASI Stat F ISH 431 26 0.52 0.01 141 2H 0.02 74 2 56 0.03 GHLI N SUNFISH 548.15 2.70 292.72 6.H9 178.94 15.17 1019.80 24.76 IILlit G i t t S.24 0.04 14.H4 0.50 2.17 0.14 22.25 0.68 LilNGtAH SUNFISH 2.68 0.05 1.28 0.11 4.85 16 Hf Ot AP Sill F ISti 0.89 0.01 0.H9 0.02 1.2H 0.25 3.07 0 0 28 SHal LfillH T H HASS 0.H9 0.01 14.33 4.98 67.35 S.73
- t. AliGE "t H e l H HASS 43.54 0.12 9.49 0.63 0.51 13.78 0.91 11.10 0.40 2.6H wHlit C H r. u P i t 2.6H 0.12 _ 2.68 0 0 72 12 lit AC A CWAPPit _
2.Sb 0.05 13.85 0.67 16.39 Vfl.Line PlHCh 0.H9 0.08 6.02 2.39 6.91 2.47 SAHLtH _ 4.47 375.60 9.94 245.06 26.21 1378.85 40.61 GHiluP T h i Al. 760.19 _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ HOUGH _ __ 17 0 t6 SKIPJArk HFRHING I/ 0.16 20 89 0.04 f1tsuut Y t 2 0 89 0.04 18.06 34.02 18.06 34.02 1.79 CARP _ _ 0.12 Ollj t LH ACK CARPSUCnFR 1.79 0.12 1.28 0.49 4 N D R I HE Hil HOG SUCKER 3.46 0.53 tS.7438 1 29 0277 St' At L"lHiiH HUFFAto 15.38 29.77 2.6H 0.08 3.07 0.52 6.25 2.51 12 . 00 3.12 SPHillb btf(. h F H 0.89 0.09 9.32 4.79 10.21 4.88 lit At:n H t.0 H HH % _ 4.46 3.43 S.36 3.49 GliListe.' HFDitHPSE 0.69 0.06 . 0.89 0.01 Y E ll tic- niitt HF au 0.89 0.01 . 14.33 11.11 16.51 11.22 CH AfINFL CATFISH + _ 2.17 0.12 1.28 0.32 FLAlHFAu CAlFISH l.2H 0.32 _ 0.69 0.02 79.65 4.66 54.44 11.30 134.98 15.98 F Ht SHw A 1F H pHun 7.14 0.29 93.59 6.44 125.53 97.42 224.27 104.15 GHOHP TOTAL _______ _ __.___.__ _ _ ____ FORAGE _ ____ _ __ 46 _ 9 _.04 GI/7AHD SHAD 749.91 S.95 _ 433.SS 53.11 12HH.97 2.38 THHFAnrIN SHAD 153.HS 2.24 _ S.15 0.14 158 1 79 0.01 E r.$ F H A L D ShlNER 1.79 0.01 14.61 0.07 SPOff10 Shit FH 14.61 0.07 _ 261.45 0.70 Htllt itC AD l/ I f f tLiln /61.45 0.70 43.89 0.51 LilGPFHCH 45.H9 0.51 _ 6.52 0.01 HHOOK SILVtHSIDE 6.52 0.01 0.00 0.00 543.68 53.26 1775.69 62.72 GHiluP 101AL 1232.01 9.46 1999.34 14.22 469.18 16.38 910.28 176.89 3378.80 207.49 F l'I AL IHI AL
PE A r4 NUMHLR AllD WEIGHT (KG) DF FISH PER HECTARE IN 4 SAMPLES IN t:: A T T S H A R RESERVIOR, 1980 .. SPtritS YIHahG OF YEAR _ _ I ta i t im F D I A T E _ _ _HARVtSTABLF _ taurHER <.EIGHI riuuhtu 61f 1 G H T 4 tPd H Eli WEIGHT ___ F4UMHER _ TOTALW EI_GHT _ ___ _ _ _____ _ _ _______ GAME _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ HHIIE HASS O.91 l 0 i yt Lt On HASS 145.36 5 . 9 t> 14.12 0.H8 157 91 48 4.85 LIN i nth i l F I E D StsNF I SH 546.48 0.34 _ 546.98 0.34 W ARtHHlIH ?? 29 0.08 14.97 0.36 3.58 0.26 40.84 0.69 RF0HRFASI SO4 FISH 21.H0 0.0H 6 0.20 ti 0.82 36.86 1 11 HL llF Gil L 2 21 1. ti d /.29 255 41 6.78 132 66 92 9.69 2580.68 18 . 76 Lot > GEAR SONFISH 90.63 0.30 9 93 47 0.31 1.09 0.07 101.19 0.68 REDFAR SUNF ISH 4.01 0.07 3.44 0.60 7.45 0 67 (He l DE rl T I F I L O isASS 0.58 I 0.58 I SN Al lt*HH I H ilASS 25.7H 0.10 4.33 0.23 1.19 0.19 31.30 0.52 Svill iF O HASS 2H.57 0.06 1 0.04 0 0.08 30.17 0c18
- 1. ARGtotIH I H HASS 190.96 0.55 7 09 0.80 5 51 31 2.28 18 5 MHIIE CRAPPIF 11. tio 0.01 2H2. 91 to 13.06 3 . 53 0.55 204 73 13 63 42 HL ACn CWAPPit 1.75 0.13 t.60 0.19 297 35 0.31 Vf Lt.tla l'EHCH 2.79 I . 4.97 0. 32 3 76 0.33 SAilGER 1.54 0.23 1.75 0.36 7 3 29 0.59 GkOUP IHTAL '3298.35 7.80 583.87 2'5.09 168.55 15.20 4050.77 46.09
_ __ _ _R0 UGH til41DErlilf IE D G AR 0 in 1 _ 30 F SPUTIFD GAR 1.24 0.0t 0 1.24 0.01 L tHJGNOSF GAR 1.09 0 04 _ 1 0.04 SKIPJACK HERRING I.M2 I 0 0.12 2 09 33 0 12 97,88 CARP _ _ _ _ 43 51 51 97.88 43.51 . NORTHtRil HfH; SUCKER _ _ 2.99 1.52 2.99 1.52 Sta Al.1 einu i n HuFFALO _ 7.47 17.20 7.47 17.20 SPhiith SUCKER 7.77 4,27 7 4.27 HL A(;K PF.DHORSF 0.66 0.11 5.11 3.12 5 77 76 3.23 GOLDfu uFnHURSE 0.66 0.01 6.71 4.39 7.37 4.41 C 61 A N N F L CalfISH 6.87 0 04 30.52 1.H6 4ti.13 15.99 85.52 16.99 FLAIHFAn CAIFISH 0.58 I 1,77 0.23 1.H0 0.79 4.15 1.02 " F Rt SH'g A f t R Dih m 1S.04 0.25 2t19.83 18.77 102.06 22.75 406.93 41.77 GHOUP TOTAL 27.60 0.35 322.78 20.97 226.06 167.13 576.45 188.45 a ____ _ _ ____ _ _ __ _ ___ FORAGF _ _ _ __ _ G1214RD SHAD 21.43 0.04 4394.SA 266.54 4416.01 _ 7 66.57 1HREADFIN SHAD 6 t1 9 2 . 1 1 8.25 39.07 1.01 6931.78 9.26 STO'JEusHLFR 1.97 0.01 1.97 0.01 EHEHALD Sh i t4F W S.Pd 0.01 _ 5.22 0.01 SPOTFlu S 6* l 4 E k 14. 77 0.04 _ 14.77 0.04 HLuhTNHSE ni Jt'Ha 61.22 0 . 0 t1 61.22 0.08 HutLHiAn ultiNon 513.19 0 38 _ 19 0.38 MHSoulinFISh o. to I 518 0 30 T t.OGPFRCH Tn.91 0.27 34,91 0.27 H RI H m Sit.vt9S10E 5.19 0.01 _ 5.19 0.01 group inl4L 7555.92 9.0% 0.00 0.00 4433.65 267.55 11989.57 276.63
4 S At4PLE S IN WATTS HAR 1 M F. A.J 'J UMH E R Atl0 nEIGHT (KG) 0F FISH PFR HECIARF IN ' $4 t S E R V illH , 1960 , t i a i .SPE C i f S _Yilul4G Of YEAR _ _IfdiERblDIATF__ ___HARVESTAHLE _T i t THEIGH A L_____T
- i. tal s'dilE 14 WElGHT HilMhtR DEIGHT fit f ullE R HEIST hUMBER i
, F IlJ AL 101AL 10881.H7 17.23 906.65 44.06 4826.26 449.88 16616.79 511.17 I i e i-l i 4 4 l i' i .I 1 4 s l. l , i 1 k 1 I 4 1 i i 1 1 1
1 HEAH lilPHE R AND ulJGHT (KG) HF ilSH PI R Al HECfAHL IN 71 S A 4PLES IN WATTS HAR R L S t.H V O I R -- L YFARS . SPECIFS _YHilfH; ilF YEAH _ _INTtRNIDIAff__ __ H4HVfSTABLE NupptH wf 1 Glii (4i: uitR utIGHT pHMitf R wf!GHT ___IIE NUM ME TUT RTOTAL __ ___ ________ _ ____ ____ _GAMF WHITE HASS 41./5 0.17 4.57 0.35 5.41 0.60 39 1.11 Yt Lt On HASS 1H.I1 0 29 2.01 0 tc 0.30 0.04 20043 t4 0 47 i SIRIPtH HAss 0.07 I' _ 0.07 I I 0.03 19 T HYHRIO nHIIF x STRIPE BAS 0.16 i _ 0.01 0 0 08 0.01 RetrK HASS 0.02 T 0.02 i 0.04 34 0.02 tJta l DF k'110 I t.D SurlF I Sie 34.57 0.02 _ 0.30 55 57 0.76 WARMHUlH 32.M2 0.10 1M 36 4.18 55 5/57 1 31 Rt lHiRE A S T St1N F I SH 27.40 0.06 17 51 0 0 33 10.24 0.92 GRF El4 SilHF I SH 0.04 i 0 93 i . 0.07 I I4L UE G il.1 1202.97 1.92 249 04 44 5.35 112.21 30 1564.62 15.56 8 0 07 L LONGEAH Sil.4F I SH 15.51 0.05 5.96 0.13 1.30 22.77 0.25 RfDtAR SliuriSH 0.10 1 0.80 0 02 1.47 0.15 2.36 0 17 HylsH10 SuoF1SH 0.11 I 0.05 I , _ 0.16 I utJ.' ut Ni t F i t h HASS 0.07 i _ 0.07 T SH AL LMtlH T H I4 ASS 21,/8 0.12 5.76 0.33 1.91 0.47 34 0.93 SP01TIIt HASS 23.34 0.09 3.61 0.21 0.83 0.13 27 95 77 0 LAkGE90HIH llASS 102.21 0 38 21.35 1.51 10.38 4.09 133 . 94 5 44 {98 d LlulhF NT IF It O CHAPPIE 0.96 I _ _ 0.06 WHITE CHAPPIF 32.77 0 06 44 1.00 4.11 0.62 60.32 1 0.13 68 HLACn CWAPPIE 0.36 I 23 0 52 0 02 0.73 11 1.62 VLtLO1 PERCH 4.53 0.01 10 I 1.76 0 07 6.39 0.08 S Atltit R 4.43 0 13 05 74 0.38 2.16 0 70 0 10.35 1 21 W All t Yr 0.07 I _ _ _ _ 0.07 I
- GRutJP illi AL 1558./6 3.41 357.67 10.12 155.04 16.58 2070.96 30.11 CHESINDI LAMP $tY
~~~ ~ ~ ~ ~
(IT T 0.14 Y~ uHinent iF it o i; AR - 0.02 i _ _ _ _ 0.02 7 SPOf f t 0 GAR 0.26 0.01 0.04 0.01 0.18 0.14 0.48 0.16 4 L.ONGraust GAH 0.90 0 02 0.06 0.01 0.10 0.24 1.06 0.26 h SHHRIrliSF i;AR 0.16 I _ _ _ 0.16 i UNIDENTIFICD GAR 4.01 i _ 0.01 T 0.81 d SKIPJ408 HENRING M.31 0 05 3.01 0.31 1.63 0.46 12.95 9 taullrit y E 0.15 I 31 0.05 0.06 0.02 0.52 0.06 1 CARP 2.00 0 17 0 0 59 0.18 29.15 45.70 31.74 46.05 tirJ I D E tJ T I F I E D CARPSilCKERS 0.01 I 0.02 1 0.04 0.02 0.07 0.02 t, kIVER CARPS 11CKER O.26 U.12 0.02 0.H0 1.11 1 1 13 4-Oll!!.LH AC K CARPSUCKER 0.09 I i _ 0 18 09 I
*e H I T E SilCKFH 0.Un 0.01 08 0.09 0.13 0.10 rJO R T H [ Hil IH l(; SilC K E R 0.45 0.02 0.77 0.09 0 0 50 0.19 1,72 0.30 OrlI D Ers i IF It O HilF F ALO 0.30 H.11 0 0.02 0.35 0 SM All .MI'lH 1 H HUFF Atti 0,17 0.01 1.1R 0.37 25 04 1M 3r.54 26.53 35 13 93 Hit.noyiH H UF F A lti i.47 11 1 2.11 tlLACM HilFFALO 0.28 2 0 82 0 47 0.82 5 28 SPflT TLD SilCa t R 0.84 0 03 1.13 0 11 3.05 1.76 03 1.89 tir41DE41 t F it 0 REOHORSE 4.07 I 0.03 I 0.07 0.03 0.18 0 04 SILvt H HLDHHRSE 0.04 i 0.04 I SluikIlit AD it E DHilR S E 0.04 1 11 . 0 9 0.02 0.14 0.03 0.27 0.05 Rivt H Rt utiHHSi 0.05 I _ 0.04 0.07 0.09 0.07
71 SAMPLES IN CJAT TS B AR f1EAN NiloillE H Af4D wt'!GHT ( KHESLHveJIR ii ) flF FISH PER -- HFCIAHL AL8 vfANSI f4 Y Olll4 G 11F YEAR _ iHil.RHLDI A it __ HAHVESTAHLE_ t4 UMBER TOT AL_EIGtti W SPtCllS b.EIGHT F4 HM B t li L1t' I G t t i eduf464 L ei WLIGHT fillPS H lit 0.03 1.78 1.01 2.19 1.05 itLACK Hi nitilllSE 0.12 T 0.29 1.H8 0,26 5.53 3.26 9.12 5.61 Gfil f)EfJ f/ E lHil)R S b 1.72 0.09 0.04 T HtJinEfJT IF IEn C A T F ISH _ 0.04 I 0.06 0.01 18 0 02 ULilf CAIF1SH O.1/ 0.01 0 03 0 I 05 i HLACK llui.L Hf AD 0 27 0 01 0.08 0.01 0.56 0 02 YEtt alw it'ItLeil'AD 0.21 1 0 I 0 03 I nunwie itHLI.64F An ,, 0.03
- 0. tt a 11.50 4.50 35 59 5.45 Cit A N tJ F L C AIF ISH 7.69 0.07 16.40 1.25 0.76 4.3M 0 Ft.QiHLAll C AIF ISit 1.95 0.01 1 . 1 14 0.14 8.97 M9.99 16.25 306.58 25 9t65 F RE Setu A T E R DRtlH 49.85 0.42 166.74 194.69 11.56 174.14 114.17 443.23 126.64 GltilllP Tlli AL 75 '40 0.91 1
_ FORAGE _ _ _ _ _ 2005.14 81.47 ' 2.76 615.49 78.71 Gj7/ARl) SHAD 13 t19. 65 24.M1 0.71 3721.44 10.60 TitRF ADF 1ra SilA D 3696.64 9.90 42.11 0.35 12 tt . 31 0.57 HIxED SHan 86.20 0.22 0.15 0.01 0.15 0.01 ItyHRID SHAD . 0.06 I 0.06 I IIR At4GF Spill it ti SH:4 FISH 1158.19 1.82 ; t l H f )t t D A UflI D eilfi'viinS 1158.19 1. tid . 0.06 0.00 682.55 79.77 7013.29 94.47 l i (.R(luP luiAL 6330.68 14.71 552.42 1010.75 210.52 9527.49 251.23 FINAL if)T AL 7964.33 19.03 21.68 I L l l
I . NN t44 xx xx 00000000 44 00000000 4333353133 RRRRRRRRRRR FFFFFFFFFFF" 0000000000 444 0000000000 435 05333355 RRRRRRRRRRRR FFFFFFFFFFF, NtaN IJt4 X4 XX NNNN eJrs xt XX 00 00 4444 00 00 35 33 RR HH FF XX XX 00 00 44 44 00 00 33 RR RR FF NN f4 N iaN . RR RR FF Nrs NN loj Xx XX 00 00 44 44 00 00 53 IJ N FIN N r> XXXX 00 00 44 44 0 t1 00 3335 RRRRRRRRRRRR FFFFFFF r4 N 84 N tv N XXXX 00 00 44 44 00 00 3333 RRRRRRRRRRR FFFFFFF NN NN XX (< 00 00 44444444444 00 00 33 RR RR FF N PI FF NI.NfJ XX XX 00 00 444444444444 00 00 il RR RR NN 00 00 35 33 RR RR FF t.4 N t' t# N xX XX 00 00 44 NN XX XX 0000000000 44 0000000000 335535353533 RR RR FF Nrs FF NN N ** XX 00000000 44 00000000 3555333533 RR RR END iND FND E fl0 EllD END F NXO403FF .1810 t:DPJ H ER S425 FND f fl0 EisD END N (JXO405kF .lilD flutnit u S 4 2 3 FND f (10 END E 'lD END END END E fJ D FND LND LND END END E rJD S S.J Ol l. Y E fjD S SJOLLY EfJD END l tJD EfJD END . LND F fl0 E tJD F'JD EfJD END END FND FND FfJD END FND E"D LND END FND F rJ D END f fJD L tJ D FND END F r4 D END FNb Oc, OR I G i ti RMIO2RD1 E PJ D LND FND E tJD F tJD E PID END FND L IJ D END OT DRIGlu RMIO2RDI - E t4 D END END END END FND E rJD END END FND FND F tJD END END END END EIJD E rJD S STARI DATE 18 AllG 80.231 filO END F f:D FND END E'JD END S SIARI ilmt 16.40.57 - END END END END FND F tJD ENu f f40 FND END EllD LND S STOP DATL 16 ANG 80.231 FND S SIUP IlnE 16.56.00 E'ID t rlD FND F ish END END FND FND F f40 LND ElsD 4 XED lime 00.15.02 . END END END f ilD L f4D END X END END END E t40 END END FHD LHD F ilD FND E tJD END L fl0 LND FND EllD F TID FND P' PRINTER H o t$ END END LI E TID 1[HF 10.50.15 FrJD F Nir FND FND J Efl0 ENI* END f if D LND END END F4D F f40 FND FND FND S2 CAWDS RFAD F f'D END END END END END O C ARDS PlJfJEHED FUD E f1D END F f4D END END 9,e % LINES PRINTED FND F r!D f fl0 LND END LND E r4D tND FND E rs0 END END FND LND END END F t4D END EllD t rJ D fND F f 40 thD END F fl0 END FND E t:D END END E r4D END f fjD Ff:D END END F 'th I flO FND E i.D FND END LND t rlh i rJD Ef D F r4D FND S S.lH L L Y oneente. .aene.e* m.***8 .....e.2eseannenesee.. ***ee....me*****en.... e**e***.A.*****.a ... n.e.ene ......e
$$4944eteA*e A**m** 4*944444444444494e244444442644e949Atete*AAA994* ARA *eteettekteA4994AAAeAnthetete**Af9A29228
$49AAteeteettee4444e49teeattegetteeettettetAAAAe44.*e*9999999 tAAAAAAAA*tette49m4*A***AWAAW9ethWW999&AtttAR$99
oseeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeceocoooooooooooooooooooooooooooco, eeeeeeeeeeeemme*e coceeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeceoooooooooooooconococcoooooooocco osoooneeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee***meenensaameene*****emasoneneeeee******e*************emenee**eeeeeeeeeeee*emeesomene eseemmeeaseweeeseene*****ene**********e***eme******e*************emmeseene**eeeeeeeeeeeme**eeeeeeeeeeeeeeemme-eeeeee**me************me***ememeseseen***meeneme***mene*ensammeseemane*senese**memaeneemm-s=meeeeeeeeeeeeeem, fari xx XX 00000000 a st 00000000 3555333333 RRRRRRRRRRR FFFFFFFFFFF. IJia FFFFFFFFFFFt 333353353333 RRRRRRRRRRRR 1 tJilff Nil 4X XX 0000000000 ti tJ ti 0000000000 xX XX 00 00 4444 00 00 53 33 RR RR FF IJ t a t. N P!ri RR FF N8J Nfl to' XX Xx 00 00 44 sl et 00 00 35 RR XX 00 00 4 d4 ti ts 00 00 33 RR RR FF NN NfJ Nie XX FFFFFFF 3333 XXXX 00 00 4 's ti '4 00 00 R R HH elRR R RRRR NN tilJ f1N FFFFFFF tJ N let) f> l t XXXX 00 00 44 ta s4 00 00 3333 RRRRRRRRRRR XX 00 00 4 4 4 4 4 4 t: 4 si t4 4 00 00 33 RR RR FF Nia e'll el's XX RR FF rat F.N N ia XX XX 00 00 4444444444444 00 00 33 RR NNiJ XX XX 00 00 44 00 00 35 33 RR RR FF NN 0000000000 335333333333 RR RR FF NN FP4 Xx XX 0000000000 44 FF NN is X) Xx 00000000 14 4 00000000 3553333333 RR RR END END N, NX0403RF .IDD tillMDER 5423 FND END END E lJ D END END FND END END N> NXO40 5RF Jutt NUPDER 5423 E rJD E TID f TID END filD END END FilD EllD Et3D FND END END S' SJulLY END Et 0 FND FND END END S ., SJ ul.L v EllD END END F f4D END END FND END END END END END F PID E tJD END E FJ D END END END END END END END FND fND END END END END END 00 flRIGIN RMIO2RD1 END Ef4D END F f!D END END 08 DRIGIN RMT02RDI EtJD E rJD END EfJD FND END E RID E rJD FND EllD END END END END END FND END SI START DAIL IH At8G 80.231 f rJD IND E t3D END E tJD E fJD END St START TINF 16.40.57 - F fl0 FND END END END END END END END E ilD END END S. STOP DAff 18 AtJG N.231 FND END END END SI SIUP TINF 16.56.00 END END FNU END END E rlD END FND END LND END END X' XfD lir4C 40.15.02 Ef4D thu E TID f rJD E tJD END END END E tJD E red END Eten END ErJ D FND END END F tJD END P I-PRiffit R n08 END F' EOD END E TID END FND tUD IlhE 10.50.1% END f 'JD END END E t1D END END FND E PlO END END END END F lJD f rid FiJD END END FND 52 CAHDS READ F ilD END E fl0 FND E tJD END 0 CARDS PilNCHED F rJD E tJD 4,6% LINES POINIFD F fJD END FND F tsD END Ef!D F r!D E IJD END FND f ilD END END LND END END FND iND FND END END END END iND f tJD FND END END ( tid f tJ D FND END F PJ D END END E00 END fND FND END F'tp FND END E t> D END END F SJul.LY
- f IJN IJll XA XX Wu WW AAAAAAAAAA TTTTTTTTTTTT HitHHHHHHHHR AAAAAAAAAA RRRRRRRRRRR fJ t4 f4 Nu XX XX wn WW AAAAAAAAAAAA TTTTTTTTTITT HHHHHHl1HHHHR AAAAAAtAAAAA HRRRRRRRRRRn NN xX XX b .. WW AA AA TT Hil HH AA AA RR RR Nf4Nf 3 e uh AA AA TT HH HH AA AA RR RU fJf/ NN O rJ XX XX AA AA RR V NN Nfi NO XX XX ww WW AA AA TT 84H H 5)
N re N14 NN XXXX ww hu AAAAAAAAAAAA TT tiH HilllliH Hi1H H AAAAAAAAAAAA RRRRRRRRRRkn Nh IJ N NN X(XX 4 nh rin AAAAAAAAAAAA TT tlHilH H H H R HilH AAAAAAAAAAAA RRRRRRRRRRR NH N u fJr* XX XX w% ur. 6 rH1 AA AA TT HH H Fl AA AA HR HR NN N N ij f.' XX XX NW W 6v tn WW AA AA TT HH llH AA AA HR RR rJ f 4 N 'J D XX XX Wow whWW AA AA TT HH HH AA AA RR RR tlN M XX XX Wa ri h n id AA AA TT H HilHilflH H H HHH AA AA RR HH rJN t' XX XX nW hw AA AA 1i HilH H H HHH H H H AA AA RR R6 NXNATHAR JOH tillMRF R 812? START START START START START START W NXnATHAR JHH NUvHER 8122 START SIART START START START START hi START START START STARI START START IMCDutillllGH START START START START START START Tr; IMC00000GH SIART S T A53 T START START START START, T" START START START START START START START START START START START START STARI SIApi START START START START START START START START START START ORIGIH Hr4To/RD1 START START START START START START On ORIGIta RrdiodRot START START START START START START Ok START START START START START START START STAkT START START START START START DATE 19 AUG 80.232 STAHi START START START START START S. START ilNE 10.!4.48 START START START START START START ST START START START START START START STOP DATE 19 AUG HO.232 START START START START START START S-STUR II6L 10.1/.50 START START START START START START S. START START START START START START X E fJ IINE 00.03.0? START START START SIART START START XI STARI START START START START START START STARI START START START START PRINTER 808 START START START START START START P I-START ilkF 10.50.29 START START START START START START Si START START START START START START START START START STARI START START
/6 CARDS READ START START START STARI START START 0 CARDS PUNCHED START START START STARI START START 982 L l 4F.S PR INT E D START START START STAWT START START START START START STARI START START STARI START 'i T A R T START START START SIART START START START START START SIART START START ST4RI START START START START START START START START SIART START START START START START TMCDilhlHIGH SIART START START START START START T t' eeeee***eeneme****e***me***esemenemmeemme*emeneeeneesene...eeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeme*****eeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeene
$$ecGenee**eeto4*eeeeeeeeeeeemneeementeeeeeeeeeeeeeseememeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee**eeeeemeteeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee**eme teeeeemsseenes**ese**eneesteteneeneeeeee**eneseemeteesseteeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee*****eeeeeeee*eseeaweet.
[/ 'b
h -.
- """"*a-~"~
C260-139-80 - LLPyONF.?ONFERENCEEEMORANDUM
~
Snc.He 2. '). Q 2,4m//3' October 20, 1980 oAvr ,
~
INCOMING h OUTGOING C.0-4.o.
~ ~
o ne. Andgrs Myhr . , , Tennessee Wildlife Resources Agency - - - '
.615/484-95/T o me. **
-REFERENCE 2-50 12, G. A. Valiulis L.' L.' Simons ,
9 W. A. Beimborn uEcT Fish.in Watte Rar Rotarvnfr Tanar nonn COST
.a C-260 -
CnAnct i AH. CF CONF ERENCE , Mr. Myhr 1 the state biologist in charge of Watts Bar Reservoir. I. Striped Bass Anders confirmed that the Clinch River is a cool water refuge for large (8+ pounds, 3+ years) striped bass. He said 24*C seems to be the trigger temperature, making them seek cooler water. He said the fis h stay in the river from about mid July through October. The breeder site is near a big holding area, extending from Caney Creek downstream to the bluffs by the power line. He is concerned for two reasons: the Tennessee River used to be used as a refuge also, but since the closing of Tellico Dam, the water temperature has raised from about 19-20*C to 26'C; now all the larger fish go to the Clinch River. Secondly, he read that Koppers has proposed a gasification plant upstream of the breeder on the Oak Ridge Reservation. He fears the effects of this even more than the breeder. Miscellany - o Smaller fish (< 8 lbs., up to 3 yrs. old) are not as sensitive to warm water, stay in the main reservoir. . o Stocking began in 1972; in 1975, increased rate to current 200,000/ year (2-inch fish). They are trying to establish a density of 5 fish / acre. He confirnad thre is no natural re-production. . o Closest regular stocking point is Kingston Steam Plant. , o Their first tournament this yo:r attracted 17.cntrics and resulted in 19 stripers caught. Inttrest in stripers is building. - -
...=:=.n--,----
- 6. J. Wagner [4 (d nM 175 wet. .Resuum Analysb
. . . ... o .t e x,, ua,
.-- - - - --, ~n e>.m m_ . . .-.
=-, , w sm.e ,r. n.a = _m . . .- - . - m-e- v---c
~ < , s e y e we,ee ,,- ~. . e .. - .
e ero ,oree m eo- -cme ~ ~ * - -- g e ew-.* 4 e - me w , es -s,v*~3 __
Il >* ' o C260-139-80
- D. J. Wagner October 20, 1930 Page 2 o Besides Mike van Den Avyle and Chuck Coutant, contact Terry Cheek, Mike's grad student at Tennessee Tech who has been working on this for 2 yrs. He will have current ye;r's infor-mation. .
II. Creel surveys were begun in 1976. Printout of data on number of trips, fish sought, catch rates, etc. is available. Contact Hudson Nichols, Chief of Fisheries, Nashville, 615/741-1575. This info plus TVA's rotenone data show fishing pressure and success relative to standing stock. III. Sauger Anders knew of poten'tial sauger spawning near site. I asked about local interest in sauger. He said sauger is one of the most sought-after fish in the reservoir, from data in Item II above. Most fishing occurs in dam tailwaters. , 1 e e e k A e e e me mme
.u REFERENCE 2-51 if9CdE HFERENCE MEMORANDUM C260-154-80 b 2 7* 2 # h / a g October 23, 1980 aCOMING @ OUTGOtNG c.o. s.o. -
,,, Dr. C. C. Coutant *e we Oak Ridge _Na h nal la.bqrjtignj_es__ __ _ ,__. 615/574-73SS g er wa
,u, G. A. Valiulis L. t.. Simons _
'A A n a i-hn en tCT: <*e4 ped has! fa Cifach F4ver N :. .
COST C260 CMARCE 4L CF CONF ERENCE - Dr. Coutant had the following information on striped bass: They do prefer cool water. All large stripers are in Clinch except a few in a hole in the Tennessee where groundwater (approx.16*C) provides a refuge from ambient (26*C). In Clinch' River, they are throughout, but concentrate in areas such as those described by Terry Cheek (see C260-151-80): several spots along Jones Island, a few fish above Grubb Islands; greatest concentrations are adjacent to site frc'.: lower end of Grubb Islands down to about S.R. 58 bridge. Fish are mainly on outside of bends, near forested, steep banks - perhaps snags provide at-tractive cover. - Dr. Coutant mentioned concern about quarry area close to Grubb Island, but in-dicated no apprehension over barge unloading area. , Dr. Coutant discussed data from Clinch River and elsewhere on temperature re-lations of striped bass: o There is a shift in temperature preference with age - small fish (3-4") prefer 26-28'C
~
8-10" fish prefer 24-25'C 10 lb+ fish in Cherokee Reservoir located in 18-20*C water o In Watts Bar, big fish appear to preter 20 + 2*C, avoid temper-atures above 24-25*C. The entire river thus is thermally ac-ceptable. - o No hard data on upper lethal temp., but fish observed in Cherokee died quickly when exposed to 25"C +. - y, Resource Analysis O. J. Waqnce [f//d.,W e n. m 175 p . .. . . . . i) s
)
4
?e ,-
- k-i L "
C260-154-80 D. J. Wagner October 23, 1980 Page 2
. c
. . , +
!; The Watts Bar data set is small (% 20 fish?), but is substantiated by other I' observations: shocking near tagged fish often results in capture.of other, , untagged fish as well, while shocking in areas.where no tagged fish.are l present produces no large striped bass at all.
- l. . .
l In sum, Dr. Coutant is not very concerned about thermal discharge. Rather, he ' thinks the chemical discharge is worth " raising as an issue",since the. fish may be exposed to low levels of metals that could produce chronic. effects. This
- type of th.'ng has. been postulated to occur in Cherokee Reservoir, where the l concentrations of cadmium and-zinc are. elevated in the thermal refuges. -
i Dr. Coutant thinks the whole business is resolv'able, perhaps by at most moving , .]. the discharge 'to a more downstream location. [ I' I also asked Dr. Coutant about avoidance of surface waters. Again, there is -no- [. hard data, but the fish are> rarely collected from the surface two meters. He ha ven seen them avoid the surface when the preferred., temperature was available 1- only
- the surface. Also, " breaks" (where stripers push prey species to surface
- l. . when they splash around) occur at dawn and ' dusk, when light levels are low.
- l Or. Coutant finished by pointing outLthat the state is encouraging striped bass fishing, and anglers are beginning to discover the Clinch in the summer. He feels early resolution of potential problems will, be the best course of action I
for all concerned. 4 t l 1 . t v.? 6 [, .
* - ~
j I- - i e .
. I i . . .
,- ,.,_-,,-, ,.--.-..,. -. .. - -,- .-..~ ~ .m . - ,_. _ . . . , _ - _ . - , , . - , _ - - - - , _ , . , .-- -
r ,_
-y o
~ _ , ~ . . _ -
ga,t n;;) s._,. ."~= ~ ~
- . HE.CONFEREHCE MEMORANDUM -
C260-151-80 . ',
.f ,
N k.7.2,Mrgl(7
~
cut _0.c_t.o_bg.r,_2.1., 1. 98.0,,
- f. .
- , INCOMING O ourcoinc. - - " -
- c : '^ ' " " = ' ' ' -
~ ~
Terry Cheek w ,w l Tennessee Technological University _,,,, _ ,,,,, i
, . . .C hw *
. ca.
s . .
. w im i, s 53, Gm A._Valiul h
____L L_.Sjitmp_ns- - W. A. Beimborn
. vecT: Striped Bass in Watts Bar Reservoir '
vast _3:00 om
~
~
4 con ', C260 ' ' cuamot j An.cr cowratuct ,
- Terry was returning my call. He is a graduate student under Mike van Den Avyle and Chuck Coutant, studying movement of large (10.lb+) striped bass. A summary of his results (based on a relatively small number of tagged fish): ..
o In the spring, fish respond to wanning of main reservoir &nd make spawning runs up the Tennessee (Paint Rock Bluff to Ft. Loudon Dam) and Clinch Rivers. They do not re In fact, at this time (through early July) produce ,~ cool Clinch successfully. River ten- - peratures may just confuse them.- After this run, the fish may
, return to the reservoir or. stay in the rivers. .
o In f;111 (mid-August - end of. October) the still wanning reservoir (hottest in late September) forces large fish into cooler areas - i the Clinch and a few spring areas of the Tennessee. Terry says that at first the two rivers are about equally used, but.as, [ tenperatures in the Tennessee continue to climb, more fish move - to the Clinch. By September, he feels ~n~ e arly all the'1arge stripers in Watts Bar are in the Clinch River. , ' o Best areas are where structure is 'available near the main channel, e.g., the submerged bar near : nile'16, or the Grubb Islands. The area from Caney Creek'(mile 17) to approximatel outside of the curve (away from the CRDT.P site)yismile a favorite15, on the area. Terry said they consistently electroshock 5-10 large fish ! there in hot period, and fish are all-'in excellent condition l , (not emaciated as fish in reservoirs with no cool refunes typi-cally ar ' the bar, 'M has tracked fish all over the river th re - over
..e inside of the curve, etc. : but they have only shocked than on the outside. - >
o There is a lot of variation between individua.ls.,,, , . e R so ie 0. J. Wi.gner b ^- q ,, , p. cn.no.170
. ...). .
. _/
O . W asp. ---- - - - ^- - - - _ - - - ** * . '9M FM . --- ~~ e#*'*P WPM W*". . . " - - . ..
. .: -.. r* .. : ,7 : - - ~ -. , .. .' ::: T
"':#-~ ~v '' !:T - :T q .~~ .~m~m*** - m ' ;. .: a , . . , , . - - , . - - - - , . - .
7 ,
- s. ? , ,
C260-151-80
. D. J. Wagner
. October 21, 1500 Page 2 I~ asked Terry about light avoidance. !!c said he knew of no specific informa-tion, other than that surface fishing is most productive in early norning and late evening. -
Terry expressed concern about any, thermal discharge in the Clinch River, feel-ing it would decrease the condition of the fish. He also expressed strong concern about the proposed Koppers gasification plant to be located below Gallaher Bridge (Andcrs Nyhr said this plant would be upstream of CR!iPTPT:- he saw a newspaper report which said the plant would process 200,000 tons of coal per day. O e 4 9 s O s 9 9 O O m- - _ _. _ _ , - - -~ - ,. _ , -- -
-WM
~ '
(EPHONE CONFEREHCE MEMORANDUM C260-131-80
. 7
^
*b CATE October 13d980 ,,
INCOMING @ OUTGOING c.c. c.o. Dr. Michael van Den Avyle, , , , , , Coop ~c'rative Fisherics'Research Unit, Assistant Leader
- lennessdi Tedi-"UnivdrsityT61F/528-309" - -
. ma, orsus _ ,,,n. g,_.A._Ya 14 "14
__ L.' t .' si=cas W. A.' Beimborn ucct Blue sucker, striped bass in Watts Bar Reservoir - TME Co$T _g C-260 CHARGE f AIL CF CONFERENCE I was first interested in infomation on the blue sucker. Mike was Fred Heit: an's advisor at the end, but not beginning. Heitman's thesis was on effect of con-mercial fishing on striped bass in Watts Bar. He (Mike) had no direct knowledge of the sucker. Heitman is currently at the Lake Eufalla Fishery Management Unit, Rt. 4, Box 168, Eufalla, Oklahoma 74432; phone: 918/689-5954. Mike is involved with research on striped bass in Watts Bar and passed on the following. In his opinion, the Clinch River is, extremely impcrtant to the striped bass of Watts Bar Reservoir during the summer (and to a lesser extent in winter). This is because oxygenated cool water near their preferred temperature (20-25'C, although he says Coutant suggests a more precise 22.5'C) is available. He , thinks the entire river up to Melton Hill Dam is used as a refuge, but described the area irmiediately downstream of Caney Creek, outside (south) of the submerged bar with milfoil as the real " Honey Hole." This area has consistently produced stripers in heat of the sumer, ranging /from 5-30 lbs. 1 l Mike said he thought tenperatures above 25'C were less preferred by these fish, j but he felt 1*C or so would have little effect en the population as long as the temperature was not lethal. He further indicated that no natural reproduction occurs in Watts Bar; the pecu-l lation is due to Tennessee's stocking program. He said stocking began in 1971 l and greatly increased in 1976. Considering that 1.t takes about 6 years for a i fish to grow to 8-9 lbs (anything else he calls a small striper), he thinks the reservoir is right on the verge of having a tremendous resource. He agreed , that Anders Nyhr (Tenn. Wild. Res. Agency) is the guy to talk to about stocking and sportfishing. Mike also indicated the importance of talking with Chuck Coutant of ORNL about temperature and stripers in general and those near ORNL in particular. g 4pp g****_,4** * *
,e -
l
- m. n.csource_.%alysu __ n- a
_ WUg e;d, W.n w e n. o._u r
-f l
t
, r. ,
C260-131-80
, D. J. Wagner October 13, 1980 ~
Page 2 On the side, Mike's impression was that milfoil near Caney Creek did not ap-pear worse this year, was perhaps less developed than in 1979. Also on the side, he said someone had called hidi about 3 weeks ago and mis-represented himself as a DOE employee, when in fact he was a consultant to ORNL. Such misrepresentation had angered Mike, although he pointed out he had no ax to grind with anyone. I had very precisely indicated my position, affiliation ~ and interest, so we had no problem on this point. Mike will send a copy of Heitman's thesis, copies of some papers he wrote, and some references, but said he was going to be out the rest of the week. O g e e y O S e 9 em 9 O _ _._ ___ _ wa= . -,- . - - ,
. . . . . . - . . . .. . - . 4 ,
't Ak REFERENCE 2-54 3x 2. 7),9 up 6'. /, g, h TENNESSEE VAU.EY AUTHORITY NonniS. TENNESSEE 378sE 22 August 1980 Donald J. Wagner Energy Impact Associates P.O. Box 1899 Pittsburgh, PA 15230
Dear Don,
Here is a copy of Fletcher's thesis " Assessment of Adult Fish Populations in the Iower Clinch River Below Melton Hill Dam". He included an e=phasis on the life history of sauger in the study area. The last I heard, he is employed at Resource Consultants, in Nashville, Tennessee, phone (615) 373-5040. I am convinced that sauger spawn in the Clinch River in the vicinity of the proposed breeder site, but additional data should be gathere'd. I have proposed to the TVA Fisheries and Aquatic Ecology Branch that a further study be conducted during the spring of 1081, but I have not yet gotten a response. I will send copies of the Kingston Steam Plant impingement and larval fish reports shortly, as well as rotenone infor=ation from Clinch River mile 4 9 Regards, Ed Scott-Tennessee Valley Authority Division of Water Resources Eastern Area Field Operations Norris, Tennessee 37828 Keep Freedom in Your Future With U.S. Savings Bonds
's :.. l /c0 ASSESSMENT OF ADULT AND LARVAL FISH POPULATIONS OF THE LOWER CLINCH RIVER SELOW HELTON HILL DAM 4 A Thesis Presented to the Faculty of the Graduate School Tennessee Technological University by John W. Fletcher In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree MASTER OF SCIENCE Biology [ December 1977 4 4 4 / 4..-. ..- . . . . _.- m..-.- - __ -
--,---,me ,-----w~~-p --
- , r,-----,.- _
- - - .. 7,.--m m -, , , . . , + . . , , ,,.v, - , . . . , , . . - - , - -..,_,,,,,--.-,e,..- -- . .-.,-:,. - - , -- .ee-
g . , a 4 CEitTIFICATE OF APPROVAL Of THESIS ASSESSMENT OF ADULT AND LARVAL FISH POPULATIONS OF THE LOWER CLINCH RIVER , BELOW MELTON HILL DAM l by John W. Fletcher Graduate Advisory Cc.trnittee: Chairman date Member date Member date Approved for the Faculty: Dean, Graduate School Date II k
w
)
AN ABSTRACT OF A THESIS ASSESSMENT OF ADULT AND LARVAL FISH POPULATIONS OF THE LOWER CLINCH RIVER BELOW MELTON HILL DAM John W. Fletcher Master of Science in Biology in order to meet the Increasing needs for the storage and Inc., has reprocessing of nuclear fuel, the Exxon Nuclear Company, taken steps toward the construction and operation of the Nuclear Fuel Recovery and Recycling Center, which is to be located on the ERDA reservation in Roane County, Tennessee. In an effort to determine whether or not the proposed facility will meet the national environ-mental goals, federal law requires a detailed environmental assessment of the project. The purpose of the one year study described herein was to provide baseline information concerning the fish populations in the immediate area of the proposed facility. Four lines of investigation were emphasized: To provide an accurate determination of the species composition and abundance of fishes in the Clinch River, kilometers 19.3 to 24.1; to generate life history data, including age and growth analysis, length-weight relationships, fecundity, food habits, and spawning season, for Stizostedion canadense (Smith) which represented the second greatest species biomass taken; to produce basic units of Information concerning the Clinch River larval fish population; and to provide species composition and abundance data on the portions of Grassy and Bear Creeks likely to be affected.
. .b ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS Sincere appreciation is expressed to Dr. Eric L. Morgan for his support and guidance throughout this study. Gratitude is also extended to Dr. B. L. Ridley and Dr. C. B. Coburn for their advice and suggestions . In the completion of this study. This research was made possible by a grant from the Exxon Nuclear Corporation to the Biology Department of Tennessee Technological Univer-sity. . Thanks are due'to the Biology Department and the Tennessee Cooperative Fisheries Research Unit, both of Tennessee Technological University, for the use of facilities and equipment. Thanks and appreciation are extended to the following people who have been instrumental in the completion of this study: Bob Martin, i Eddie Scott, Ken Eagleson, Jeff Sinks, Art Bogan, David Duggan, Debbie McLain, Randall Morton, Bruce Bauer, Boris Kondratieff, Larry Liden, Donna Livingston, Sue Eagleson, John V. S. Foster, Ill, Rick Davies, Craig Harvey, Mike Reynolds, Belinda Stovall, and Neal Robison. The author wishes to thank his family for their support and
~
encouragement. Finally, very deep and special gratitude is expressed to Vechere J M. Vaughn for her help with larval fish and her understanding and encouragement. III l
. 6 TABLE OF CONTENTS Page LIST OF TABLES. .. .. .................. .... v LIST OF FIGURES . .... ............... ..... vi Chapter
- 1. INTRODUCTION .. . ... ....... .......... I
- 2. DESCRIPTION OF STUDY AREA . . ............... 5 CLINCH RIVER , .... .... ............. 5 GRASSY CREEK . ............ ......... 10 BEAR CREEK . . .... .......... ....... 10 3 METHODS AND MATERIALS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14 CLINCH RIVER ADULT FISH ................ 14 SAUGER LIFE HISTORY DATA . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15 Col'CH N RIVER LARVAL FISH . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18 FISHES OF GRASSY AND BEAR CREEKS . . . . . . . . . . . . 19 l 4. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION .... .............. 20 l
CLINCH RIVER ADULT FISH ................ 20 S AU G E R L I FE H I STO RY DATA . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 38 l l CLINCH RIVER LARVAL FISH . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55 FISHES OF GRASSY AND BEAR CREEKS . . . . . . . . . . . . 60 5
SUMMARY
AND CONCLUSIONS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 63 LITERATURE CITED . .. .... ....... ........... 66 APPENDIX A . ... ................ ........ 71 APPENDIX B . . . . . . . . ........... ......... 87 l l Iv
'i
~ '
ll f 11
- 1 LIST OF TABLES !I
'\
Table Page
- 1. A List of the Fishes Collected in the Clinch River below Helton Hill Dam, Hay, 1975, through April, 1976 . . . . 21
- 2. Check List of Species Collected in the Clinch River in the i Vicinity of the Study Area . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24 3 Results of Fish Collections from the Clinch River below Helton Hill Dam (1975-1976) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29
- 4. Number of Fishes Per Hour Collected from the Clinch River below Helton Hill Dam by Electrofishing (1975-1976) . . 33 5 Number of Fishes Per Net Night Collected from the Cilnch River below Helton Hill Dam with Gill Nets (1975-1976) . 35
- 6. Calculated Growth of Saugers from Various Waters . . . . . 42 7 Calculated Weight of Total Length Groups of Saugers from Va r i ou s Wa t e r s . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
48
- 8. Food' Items of Sauger Collected from the Clinch River below Helton Hill Dam, June, 1975, to April, 1976 . . . . . . 50 9 Fecundity Estimates of Eight Sauger Collected from the Clinch River below Helton Hill Dam in March,1976 . . . 51
- 10. A List of Larval Fishes Collected in the Clinch P.iver below Helton Hill Dam, May through September, 1975 . . . . . . 56 l
- 11. Larval Fish Found in the Clinch River below Helton Hill Dam, May through September, 1975 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 57
- 12. A List of the Fishes Collected in Grassy Creek, October,1975, through April, 1976. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 61 13 A List of the Fishes Collected in Bear Creek, September,1975, through April, 1976 .. ................ 62 l
V I
1 . 6 j l 1 l LIST OF FIGURES I 1 Figure Page
- 1. Map of Cilnch River below Melton Hill Dam . ........ 6
- 2. Map of Clinch River Sample Stations . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 3 Map of Grassy Creek :,ec eple Stations . . . . . . ...... 11
- 4. Map of Bear Creek Sample Stations . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13 5 Sauger, Stizostedion canadense (Smith) .......... 40
- 6. Graphical Representation of Length-Weight Relationships of Combined Sexes for the Clinch River Sauger ..... 46 7 Catch Distribution of Larval Fish Collections in the Clinch River below Melton Hill Dam, May through September, 1975 58 vi
?- . - ,- ~ . . . . - ,,,, , , __
. b l
Chapter 1 INTRODUCTION in order to meet the increasing needs for the storage and repro-cessing of nuclear fuel, the Exxon Nuclear Company, Inc., has taken stepr toward the construction and operation of the Nuclear Fuel Recovery and Recycling Center (NFRRC), which is to be located on the Oak Ridge Reservation of the U.S. Energy Research and Development Administration (ERDA) in Roane County, Tennessee. The Intended design for the facility will allow for the yearly storage of up to 7000 metric tons of irradiated fuels and recovery of approximately 2100 metric tons of uranium and plutonium from spent light-water power reactor fuel. A two-stage construction format has been proposed which will permit the Interim storage of irradiated fuels to begin by 1980-82. This will be followed by the implementation of the fuel reprocessing center in 1984-86 (E. :oa Nuclear Co. ,1976). The decay of short-lived radioactive materials kept in the fuel storage component of the facility will significantly reduce the rate of sel f-hea ting. The long-lived radionuclides uranium and plutonium, are to be recovered and purified from the irradiated fuel by the reprocessing center for later use. The remaining radioactive materials will be pro-I cessed in a manner which will allow for their disposition by the Federal Government. As late as 1975, the concept of using plutonium upon l recovery from the Irradiated fuel in a dioxide state in conjunction ! with uranium oxide as a nuclear fuel was invisioned. The uranium will I
. _ - , ,,- . - - - - - - - , , - - - _ - _ , , _ , - ,m ,.- - , - - - - , , , , - . -
. a :,
2 be converted to a hexaflouride for transportation to an enrichment plant I where concentration of fissile uranium 235 to nuclear fuel occurs, or , the uranium in an oxide form could be combined with plutonium dioxide I (Exxon Nuclear Co.,1976). Presently, there are no nuclear fuel reprocessing centers opera-ting within the United States. The Allied General Nuclear Services (AGNS) Barnwell Nuclear Fuel Plant (BNFP) is inactive pending regulatory decisions involving plutonium use. Other than the BNFP, the NFRRC is the only other full scale nuclear reprocessing facility believed to be taking measures toward operational status. By the year 2000 A.D., five fuel recycling plants with capacities of approximately 1500 metric tons each will be needed to utilize the estimated amounts of spent nuclear fuel. Pressing demands for storage capacity for spent fuel have arisen due to delays in implementation of nuclear reprocessing facilities. Nuclear utilities are currently teeting the shortage, but the questions of future storage problems rem (:.n unresolved (Exxon Nuclear Co.,1976). Once removed from the reactor, nuclear fuels with their interim radioactivity and resultant heat content require conscientious treatment in storage procedures. Currently the nuclear industries st re spent fuels in water shielded tanks within the reactor facilities. Under proposed plans, spent nuclear fuels, after a period of stabilization for i several months, are to be transported to a fuel reprocessing center. Since there are no large scale operative reprocessing plants, increased capacities of present storage facilities and construction of new ones have become necessary to care for fuel now being discharged. Presently there are approximately 5000 metric tons of spent nuclear fuel in storage i from nuclear utilities with a predicted storage need of about 14,000
-3
. n 3 metrit. tons by 1983 (Exxon Nuclear Co. ,1976). The extent of military generated nuclear wastes are not known, but their impact should not be overlooked. Before a facility such as the NFRRC may receive a permit for construction or license for operation, the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) is required to examine the possible environmental Impacts to ascertain if the construction and operation of the facility will meet the requirements of the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (Public Law 91-190, 83 Stat. 852). In an effort to determine whether or not the proposed facilities will meet the national environmental goals of the
' law, the NRC requires a detailed environmental assessment of the project (Exxon Nuclear Co., 1976).
The purpose of the one year study described herein was to provide baseline information concerning the fish populations in the immediate area of the proposed NFRRC facility. Several other segments of the aquatic ecology section of the Exxon Nuclear environmental report were concurrently researched at Tennessee Technological University: peri-phyton, phytoplankton, zooplankton, and benthic macroinvertebrates. The fishery component emphasized the development of the following four basic lines of investigation:
- 1. To provide an accurate determination of the species compost-tion in the Clinch River, miles 12-15 (km 19 3-24.1), their overall and seasonal abundance; and to supplement previous collections made in the general vicinity of the NFRRC site. Prior fishery surveys in Watts 8ar and Helton Hill reservoirs have been reported by Tebo (1965), TVA (1965), Fitz (1968), Project Management Corporation (1975), Sheddan (1976) and Heitman (personal communication,1977).
I
- 4
- 2. To generate life history data on Stizostedion canadense (Smith) which represented the second greatest species biomass taken and was the second most abundant game fish.
3 To produce basic units of information concerning the larval fish populations in the study area of the Clinch River. Additional larval fish population studies in the vicinity of the NFRRC site have been conducted by the Tennessee Valley Authority (TVA) in the Clinch River, miles 15-18 (km 24.1-29.0), (TVA,1976a), in Helton Hill Reservoir near the Bull Run Steam Plant (TVA,1976b), and in Watts Bar Reservoir in the vicinity of the Mngston Steam Plant (TVA,1976c).
- 4. To provide species composition and abundance data on the portions of Grassy and Bear Creeks likely to be affected. The present study is the first intensive qualitative and quantitative fishery research conducted on these creeks.
The preconstruction baseline Information drawn from the above areas of investigation should furnish a useful reference for monitoring or assessing important changes in the status of the fish populations within the proposed area. l L
. , ~.
Chapter 2 DESCRIPTION OF STUDY AREA Three principal bodies of water, which will be affected by the construction and operation of the NFRRC, comprised the study area. The Clinch River will be subject to plant discharge and will furnish the source of Intake water. Grassy Creek will serve as the site where the NFRRC will be constructed; additionally, intake and discharge pipes will follow in close proximity to the creek. Bear Creek will be affected primarily by siltation resulting from the construction of a railroad spur to the facility (Exxon Nuclear Co.,1976). The drainage relation-ships of Grassy and Bear Creeks to the Clinch River appear in Figure I. Data concerning the temperature, flow, and pH of the Clinch River and Grassy and Bear Creeks over the sample period are presented in Appendix A. CLINCH RIVER The Clinch River, a river of moderate hardness, originates in Tanewell Co., Virginia, and flows southwesterly for 350 miles (km 560) to its confluence with the Tennessee River at mile 568 (km 908). Approximately one half of th4 Clinch River drainage is forested. Five sampling stations were located in the Clinch River miles (CRM 12-IS) (km 19.3-24.1). The Cilnch River in this portion of its drainage, although technically a part of Watts Bar Reservoir, is a riverine, and not the typical lacustrine habitat. The flow of the Clinch River in the, 5 1
.,e- -
- + - -- - - - - - ~ ,,
6 l 4 i 3 I i i s 2 ( / 6 Y l l l ,
/
f '
/Y y I M
l'. Clinch River - Watts Bar Reservoir
- 2. Poplar Creek
- 3. East Fork Poplar Creek 4 Oak Ridge /
' 5. Bear Creek
- 6. Grassy Creek
- 7. Whiteoak Lake
- 8. Pelton Hill Dam M
0 1 2 3 Scale in Miles I mile = 1.6 kilometers Figure 1. Map of Clinch River below Melton Hill Dam ---,,-,---,-r , , , - - . . , , , , - - - , - - - ,e-- ,,.e.--
. o 7
sample area is co#. trolled by water fluctuations of Watts Bar and Helton Hill Reservoirs. Watts Bar Reservoir in Meigs, Rhea, Roane, Anderson, Loudon, and Morgan Counties was completed in 1942. Watts Bar Dam is located at Tennessee River mile 530 (km 853) which is approximately 61 km down-stream from the mouth of the Clinch River. The 117 km long reservoir has an area of 15,628 ha at normal full pool (225.9 m above mean sea level) with a minimum pool area of 13,320 ha at 224.0 m elevation (Hoss,1967). Helton Hill Dam located at CRM 23 (km 37) was closed in 1963 The reservoir in Roane, Loudon, Anderson and Knox Counties has an area of 2,316 ha and an elevation of 242.3 m above mean sea level. Normal reservoir fluctuations are about 1.5 m. The backwaters of Melton Hill extend 71 km to CRM 80, 21 km below Norris Dam (Fitz,1965). Presently there are several existing factors influencing the water quality of the Clinch River in the vicinity of the sampling area. The TVA reservoirs, Norris, Helton Hill, and Watts Bar, have contributed to an alteration of the habitat, species composition, and the relative abundance of fishes in the lower portion of the Clinch River. Bull Ru;. Steam Plant operates at CRM 47.5 (km 76.4). Whittaak Lake which receives discharges from the Oak Ridge National Laboratory drains into the Clinch River at CRM 20.8 (km 13.5). Poplar Creek enters the Clinch i l River at CRM 12 (km 19 3). This creek is subject to discharges from the Y-12 plant, the Oak Ridge sewage treatment plant, and the Oak Ridge Gaseous Diffusion Plant (ORGDP). Additionally, the Kingston Steam Plant at CRM 2.7 (km 4.3) withdraws water from the Emory River and discharges it into the Clinch River. Four of the five sampling stations (Figure 2), CRM 12,14.4,
.-- - y _ _ _ . m, -,m - ._ _ _ _._ -
i 8 0 1
, Scale in hiles 1 mile = 1.6 kilometers 1
e 2 ny TN i sr 1 5
) 8 e .
6 l
)
- 1. Poplar Creek
, 2. Clinch River Mile 12.0 3.- Gallahers Bridge
- 4. Clinch River Mile 14.4
- 5. Grassy Creek Embayment N
- 6. Clinch River Mile 15.0 e Sample stations Figure 2. Map of Clinch River Sample Stations
I 9 15 east bank, and CRM 15 west bank (km 19.3, 23.2, and 24.1), were located in the mainstream, with the fifth site being found in the Grassy Creek embayment of the Clinch River. The current of the river was generally swiftest at CRM 15 and slowed as it approached CRM 12. The substrate, for the most part, consisted of sand and silt with smaller areas of shale. Deciduous shrubs and trees were the primary bank cover. Fallen trees, especially at CRM 15 east and west banks, also provided excellent fish cover. During the winter drawdown, bank cover was sparse at CRM 12 and CRM 15 east bank with large exposed areas of sand and silt. Cover, though to a lesser extent, continued to be available at CRM 14.4 and CRM 15 west bar.. In the winter months. The river width varied from approximately 140 m in the summer to 80 m in the winter. The average depth was about 6 m. Presence of large aboriginal shell middens in the study area indicated a basically different habitat, probably one of cleaner, faster roving water with gravel substrate, than the one now found there. The Grassy Creek embayment of the Clinch River at CRM 14.6 was typical of several large, shallow embayments of creeks within the study area. Environmental stresses were limited to discharges from the U.S. Nuclear Fuel Fabrication Pirat, currently the only facility operating in the Oak Ridge Industrial Park (Exxon Nuclear Co., 1976). Depending upon the activities of Melton Hill and Watts Bar Dams, water flowed i into or exited from the embayment through a small concrete channel. The substrate of the embayment consisted primarily of mud, clay, and slit with some areas of gravel. Bank cover of deciduous shrubs and trees was generally abundant during the summer when the embayment was 0.70 km long, but was very limited following winter drawdown which
^
. , a D
'l 10 reduced the area of the embayment by 1/2 to 2/3 and resulted in areas
- of exposed mud flats. The average water depth ranged from approximately 2 m to 5 m.
GRASSY CREEK J Grassy Creek, a small springfed stream of moderate hardness that flows southwesterly for 3.3 km into Grassy Creek embayment, has been classed as one of the few uncontaminated streams in the vicinity of the study area. The creek's drainage area of 492 ha consisted largely of deciduous forest and some grassland areas (Exxon Nuclear Co.,1976). I Two stations, Grassy Creek miles 1.0 and 2.2 (km 1.6 and 3 5), ; (Figure 3) were sampled during the study period. Grassy Creek 1.0 was , located in a heavily wooded section with a steep ridge on the east side. I A series of pools and riffles with substrates of primarily gravel with lesser amounts of sand, rock, and mud occurred at this site. Stream width varied f rom about 2.3 m to 4.5 m and depth ranged from approxi- t mately 6 cm to 140 cm. Grassy Creek 2.2, surrounded by old field and a sparse forest, had considerably less flow than mile 1.0. The substrate , was made up of gravel for the most part with a few areas of bedrock, . sand, and mud. Stream width ranged from approximately 0.5 m to 1.5 m, i and depth varied f rom around 5 cm to 60 cm. l \ BEAR CREEK Bear Creek, larger than Gras,sy Creek and with a slightly higher I water hardness, flows northwestward to its confluence with the East Fork j i' of Poplar Creek. Bear Creek is 12.1 km in length and has a drainage i area of 1,917 ha. At its upper end, Bear Creek is subject to waste
. . ~. .
11 : l 1 0 1 Scale in Miles I mile = 1.6 kilometers 2 3
%W O
4 W
- l. Clinch River
- 2. Grassy Creek embayment 3 Grassy Creek mile 1.0
- 4. Grassy Creek mile 2.2 l
l Figure 3. Map of Grassy Creek sample stations i 1 5
- , .- , . . - - - , - , _ . - , - . . ,_ . - . , . - _ , . . . _- , - . . . - , . - . . . . . - . ~.,
I l 12 discharges and acid settling pond seepage from the Y-12 plant and the Rust Engineering Company, making this portion of the stream virtually devold of aquatic life (Exxon Nuclear Co.,1976). By the time Bear Creek reaches the NFRRC sampling area, the aquatic life is both varied and abundant; however, this portion of the creek is still periodically subject to heavy loads of silt from reforestation and road construction projects. Three sites on Bear Creek, miles 0.5,1.2, and 3.0 (km 0.8,1.9. and 4.8% were sampled during the study period (Figure 4). Pools and riffles present at each site had substrates composed of slit, sand, gravel, and bedrock. Silt was the predominant substrate at Bear Creek mile (BCM) 3.0, but some graveled areas were present. This silt accumulation may have been due in part to a small gauging impoundment located immediately above BCM 3.0. Gravel, sand and Isolated regions of bedrock were ,the principal substrates at BCM 1.2 and 0.5. The bank cover, as well as much of the drainage area of Bear Creek, was made up of a mixed deciduous and evergreen forest. Stream widths varied from approximately 3 m to 9 m and depth from about 5 cm to 170 cm. nr - - -v--- , -somm , ~ e- - --- -e-. u m, -
4 ,a ji ( - 1 3 [ f
~ /
2 V 1 3 i 4 J 0 i Scale in Miles I mile = I.6 kilometers 5 I
- l. East Fork Poplar Creek /
- 2. Bear Creek Mile 0.5 a 3 Bear Creek Mlle 1.2 U
- 4. Bear Creek Mile 3.0 5 Bear Creek Road
- a Sample Stations g Figure 4. Map of Bear Creek Sample Stations -
- Chapter 3 ;
l METHODS AND MATERIALS As stated in Chapter 1, four principal lines of investigation, Clinch River adult fish, sauger life history data, Clinch River larval fish, and fish populations in Grassy and Bear Creeks were emphasized in this study. A number of methods and materials were used to achieve the specified research goals. A conscientious attempt was made to standard-Ize collection procedures and efforts; but in a few instances, variations due to weather conditions and equipment availability did occur. Tables 11-15 in Appendix A contain records of sample date, method, and effort. The study period extended from May, 1975,to AprII, 1976. Common and scientific names of the fish collected are in accord with those approved by the American Fisheries Society (American Fisheries Society, Committee on Names of Fishes,1970). Fishes that were not released are currently housed in the reference collections of Tennessee Technological University, Environmental Biology Research Center of Tennessee Technological University, and the University of Tennessee. CLINCH RIVER ADULT FISH I . l The results of fisheries research are influenced by several factors: the type of gear used, the habitats sampled, the efficiency in capturing different species and sizes present, and the distribution of fish within the habitat which may vary diurnally and seasonally (Tebo,1965). Adult fish were collected monthly in the Clinch River by 14
15 gill netting and electrofishing. Two methods of collection were employed to determine more accurately species composition and relative abundance (Tebo,1965; Garton and Harkin,1970; Powell et al.,1971). Multifilament experimental gill nets, 45.7 m long and 1.8 m deep, were anchored to the shore, small mesh first, and fished along the bottom. Each net was composed of six 7.6 m long panels of 19, 25, 38, The nets were set perpendicular to 44, 51, and 76 mm bar-measure mesh. the shore at each station shortly af ter dark and pulled approximately 12 hours later. Shoreline electrofishing was conducted at each station the night following the gill net sets for a measured period of time, usually 30 minutes per station. A probe shocking boat equipped with flood lights In this design described by Stubbs (1965) was employed in the study. the boat serves as the negative while the positive probe with a normal The power source was a Homelite 180 cycle of f switch was hand held. generator operated at 220 volts A.C. The following data were obtained from each sample: (1) Identi-fication of species, (2) enumeration of each species, (3) Individual lengths and weights of all fish with two exceptions, Dorosoma sp. and small cyprinids, (4) fish t' aass by species, and (5) scales from each game fish. Weight was measured to the nearest gram (g) and total length to the nearest millimeter (mm). Identifications were made based on characters found in Etnier (1973), Eddy (1969), and Hubbs and Lagler (1958). SAUGER LIFE HISTORY DATA A total of 278 sauger were collected from the Clinch River by
16 gill netting (98%) and electrof f shing (2%). Two hundred and fif ty-five of the sauger were taken in the regular monthly sampiing program while
, the remaining 23 were collected by gill net sets of 3 to 12 hours ~
duration which were not in the sampling schedule. Shortly after capture, total length and total weight were measured. Scales for age and growth analysf'; were removed from the left side of the fish below the lateral line near the tip of the pectoral fin. In addition to the length and weight, sex and stomach contents were also recorded on the scale envelopes. Impressions of five to six scales from each fish were made on cellulose acetate strips (Butler and Smith,1953) by a carver laboratory press operated at 15,000-17,000 psi and 80 degrees centigrade (c) for the age and growth study. Distances from the focus of the scale to each annular ring and to the scale margin were measured on an Eberback scale projector at 48x. This information was used in a computer program based on a formula described in Lagler (1956) to calculate total length at each annulus by the direct proportion method: Ln=a+jn(Lc-a) where: Ln = length of the fish at the time of annulus formation, n Sn = measurement from scale focus to anterior margin of the scale Lc = length of the fish at capture a = Intercept value that will give the best straight line relationship. The a value was determined by a SPSS computer program which plotted the scale radius (x) against the total length of the fish (y). F~ v __
,q,,, ,w-g ,4 ; v C,ede .
A . J *#
e
.. *- l
~
17 The y intercept represented the correctional factor a. The length-weight relationships for 127 males, 81 females, and 278 total sauger were derived from the formula (Lagler,1956): Log W = Log a + n log L. Where: W = weight in grams L = length in miliiss.<rs a = a constant n = a constant. Tts sauger were placed in 10 mm class size's and mean length and weight for each class were calculated. A regression line was then fitted for the different size groups by the method of the least squares of the logarithms of the mean lengths and weights (Hassler,1957). The resulting equations are useful in calculating either the length or the weight when one of the measurements are known. Additionally, the regression coefficient, n, may be used as a measure of condition or plumpness of a fish with change ir length (Mense,1976). Food habits were found by field dissection of the stomachs of 189 sauger collected from June, 1975, to April, 1976. Quantitative deter-minations were made by counting the fish and fish fragments removed from the sauger stomachs and reporting them in a numerical form. Sand and pebbles, probably taken incidentally in feeding, were not recorded (Priegel,1969). Sex and state of maturity were determined for 208 sauger also collected from June,1975, to April, 1976. In mature adults the testes were a whitish gray color, and the ovaries had a yellowish cast with readily visible ova. Fecundity estimates were made on 8 mature females captured in l t I i .--
~, e-
'3 -- n .,;_ . - , . - . - , . . _ - _ .
18 Ma rch, 1976. The ovaries were removed shortly after capture and preserved in 20% formalin. The egg production measurements were made by the dry weight method. The ovaries were stripped of fatty tissues and weighed on a Sartorius balance. A trasverse section from an ovary was taken and weighed; and the number of eggs, determined by actual count, were ther, used in a direct proportion to calculate the total number of eggs in both ovaries (Scott, 1976). CLINCH RIVER LARVAL FISH Larval fish were collected twice a month from May until September, 1975, with a 0.5 m x 1.8 m, 1000. mesh plankton net which was towed at night from a fixed point near the bow of the boat for 5-minute intervals. Tows were taken at 0 m along the shore and at 0 m and 5 m depth at 25% of the river width at CRM 12, 14.4, 15 east bank, and CRM 15 west bank. Larval fish were sampled in Grassy Creek embaynent by two O m, mid-channel tows., i The larval fish were preserved in a 5% to 10% formalin solution depending upon the mass of plankton in the sample. Water temperatures were recorded in C for each sample taken at 0 m. The following data were obtained from each sample: (1) identifi- ! cation to the lowest possible taxon level using polarized stereo-1 l microscopy, (2) enumeration of each level, (3) individual lengths of all fish, and (4) biomass of each level. Identifications were made based on characters and descriptions found in Fish (1932), Hough (1975). Hansuati and Hardy (1967), May and Gasaway (1967), Meyer (1970), Norden l (undated), and Siefert (1969).
;r - .- a, n,_ , -- ,- -. - - - J. - - --- - -=- m---w -n-
19 FISHES OF GRASSY AND BEAR CREEKS The stream surveys on Grassy and Bear Creeks were conducted by seining and backpack electrofishing. A Smith-Root battery rowered backpack shocker and two seines, one 3 m x 3 m mesh and the other 1.8 m x 6 mm mesh, were employed in the study. Fish were preserved in 10% formalin for transport back to the laboratory. Identifications were made based on characters found in Etnier (1973), Eddy (1969), and Hubbs and Lagler (1958). The following data were obtained from each sample: (1) Identification of species, (2) enumeration of each species, (3) individual lengths, and (4) biomass by species. 9 9 1 l l 1 i c- , , . , , , ; . n s a .- m - - . < - - - - - - - - -
Chapter 4 RESULTS AND DISCUSSION CLINCH RIVER ADULT FISH A total of 50 species and two hybrids, white bass x striped bass and sauger x walleye, from 14 families have been collected at CRM 12-15 in the course of this study (Table 1). The results of ten fishery surveys within the region of the Clinch River impounded by Watts Bar and Melton Hill Dams are suararized in Table 2. Seventy-six species from 16 families were taken in the collection (1960-1977) which ranged from a low of 24 to a high of 50 species. Seventeen species were found in nine or more of the studies while 25 species were collected in two surveys or less.
~
Table 3 presents the number, weight (kg), size range (mm), and mean length of the fish taken in the present study. The community was dominated by 21 species of rough fish (42%); 16 species of game fish l ! (32%); and 13 species of forage fish (26%). The bulk of the catch (70% of the. total number and 72% of the total weight) was comprised of six species: gizzard shad, threadfin shad, carp, skipjack herring, blue-1 I gill, and sauger. Threadfin shad were the most numerous at 39% of the total number of fish; carp, at 20%, had the greatest total weight. 81uegill were the most abundant game fish at 10% of the total number; sauger i.ontributed the highest percentage of game fish weight at 19% of the total weight. Generally, it appears that forage fish dominated the 20 l I l
~
~~
! _ T ': 7' - -_, . - . - . . . _ . - . . . . . - , _ - .-. .
s' 21 Table 1. A List of the Fishes Collected in the Clinch River below Melton Hill Dam, May, 1975, through April, 1976 Common Name Scientific Name Family - Polyodontidae Paddlefish Polyodon spathula (Walbaum) Family - Lepisosteldae Spotted gar Lepisosteus oculatus (Winchell) Longnose gar Lepisosteus osseus (Linnaeus) Family - Clupeldae Skipjack herring Alosa chrysochloris (Rafinesque) Gizzard shad Dorosoma ceoedianum (LeSueur) Threadfin shad Dorosoma petenense (Gunther) Family - Hlodontidae Mooneye Hiodon tergisus LeSueur Family - Cyprinidae Carp Cyprinus carpio Linnaeus Silver chub
- Hybopsis storeriana (Kirtland)
Golden shiner Notemigonus crysoleucas (Mitchill) Emerald shiner Notropis atherinoides Rafinesque Spotfin shiner Notropis soilooterus (Cope) Bluntnose minnow Pimephales notatus (Rafinesque) Bullhead minnow Pimephales vigliax (Baird and G!rard) Family - Catostomidae River carpsucker Carplodes carpio (Rafinesque) quillback carpsucker Carpiodes cyprinus (LeSueur) White sucker Catostomus commersoni (Lacepede) Northern hog sucker hypentelium nigricans (LeSueur) Smallmouth buffalo Ictiobus bubalus (Rafinesque) Bigmouth buffalo actiobus cyprinellus (Valenciennes) Black buf falo Ictiobus niger (Rafinesque) Spotted sucker Minytrema melancos (Rafinesque) Silver redhorse Moxostoma anisurum (Rafinesque) i River redhorse Moxostoma carinatum (Cope) i Black redhorse Moxostoma duauesnei (LeSueur) Golden redhorse Moxostoma erythrurum (Rafinesque) i l
-m _ ,
l I 22 i Table 1. (Continued) Common Name Scientific Hane Family - Ictaluridae Channel catfish ictalurus punctatus (Rafinesque) Flathead catfish Pylodictis olivaris (Rafinesque) Family - Poecillidae Mosquitofish Gambusia affinis (Baird and Girard) Family - Percichthyldae White bass Morone chrysops (Ra finesque) Yellow bass Morone mississippiensis (Jordon and Eigenmann) Striped bass Morone saxatills (Walbaum) - Family - Atherinidae Brook silverside Labidesthes sicculus (Cope) Family - Centrarchidae Rock bass Ambloplites rupestris (Rafinesque) Redbreast sunfish Lepomis auritus (Linnaeus) Warmouth Lepomis gulosus (Cuvier) Bluegill Lepomis macrochirus Rafinesque Longear sunfish Lepomis megalotis (Rafinesque) Redear sunfish Lepomis microlophus (Gunther) Smallmouth bass Micropterus dolomieui Lacepede Spotted bass Micropterus punctulatus (Rafinesque) Largemouth bass Micropterus salmoides (Lacepede) White crappie Pomoxis annularis Rafinesque i Black crappie Pomoxis nigromaculatus (LeSueur) Family - Percidae Tennessee snubnose darter Etheostoma simoterum (Cope) Logperch Percina caprodes (Ra finesque) Sauger Stizostedion canadense (Smith) Walleye Stizostedion vitreum vitreum (Mitchill) Family - Sclaenidae Freshwater drum Aplodinotus grunniens Rafinesque
23 Table 1. (Continued) i Comon Name Scientific Name s Family - Cottidae Banded scu' pin Cottus carolinae (Gill) O 4 1 O e e
- 7m e-- _
1 .
)
Table 2. Check List of Species Collected in the Clinch River in the Vicinity of the Study Area
, Species 1960 3
1960-622 19633 1965 4 1968 5 1968 6 1975 7 1976 8 jg779 y977 10 o Came Rock bass x x x x x x x ; Redbreast sunfish x x x x x x Warmouth x x x x x x Bluegill x x x x x x x x x x Dollar sunfish x Longear sunfish x x x x x x x Redear sunfish x x x x x ~[x x Smallmouth bass x x x x x x x Spotted bass x x x x x x x x x Largemouth bass x x x x x x x x x d White crapple x x x x x x x x x 1 Black crapple x x x x x White bass x x x x x x x x x i Yellow bass x x x Striped bass x x i Yellow perch x Sauger x x x x x x x x x x j Walleye x x x x x x x j Rainbow trout x x - Forage Brook silverside x x x x Glzzard shad x x x x x x x x x x Threadfin shad x x x x x x x x x Banded sculpin x x x x 1 Stoneroller x x x %
l i . Table 2. (Continued) I 6 7 2 5 8 39779 3977 10 N Species 1960 1960-62 19633 1965 1968 1968 1975 1976 Forage (Cor:tinued) Bigeye chub x Silver chub x x x River chub x Golden shiner .t x x Rosefin shiner x ' Emerald shiner x x x x x x Warpaint shiner x
, Conrnon shiner x x x Whitetail shiner x x x Spotfin shiner x x x x x
, Steelcolor shiner x Bluntnose minnow , x x x x Fathead minnow x x x x DulIhead minnow x x Blacknose dace x Blackspotted Lopminnow x l Tadpole madtom x
- Nosquito fish x x Greenside darter x x Blueside darter x Johnny darter x Tennessee snubnose darter x Logperch x x x x x x x x -
Rough River carpsucker x x x x x x w m
I Table 2. (Cont li.eed) I 10 6 7 8 9 2 3 5 1975 1976 3977 3977 3 1963 1965 1968 1968 species 1960 1960-62 Rough (Continued) x x x x x x Quillback carpsucker x x Highfin carpsucker x x x x
- l. x White sucker x Blue sucker x x x x x x x x x Northern hog sucker x x x .x x x x x x Smallmouth buffalo x x x x x x x x x l
Bigmouth buffalo x x x x x x Black buffalo x x x x Spotted sucker x x x Silver redhorse x x x x x River redhorse x x x x x x x x x x x x Black redhorse x x x x x x x x Golden redhorse x x x Shorthead redhorse x x x x x x x x x x Skipjack herring x x Goldfish x x x. x x x x x x x Carp x x x x x x x x Mooneye x Blue catfish x x x x Yellow bullhead x Brown bullhead x x x x x x x x x x Channel catfish x x x x x x x x x Flathead catfish x Spotted gar x x x x x x x Longnose gar x Shortnose gar x x , e Paddlefish
d e l Table 2. (Continued) i 3 2 6 I0 Species 1960 1960-62 1963 3 1965 19685 1968 1975 1976 1977 9 1977 Rough (Continued) o j Freshwater drum x x x x x x x x x x l) Total No. of Species 76 27 26 31 41 47 48 30 43 50 24 c, I I f Hoop net samples in vicinity of White Oak Creek collected July 6 through September 21, 1960, and April 12 through July 13, 1961, by biologists of TVA, Tennessee Department of Game and Fish (Tebo,1965). i 2 Rotenone, hoop net and gill net samples from vicinity of mile 4.9 (km 7.8) collected during 1960, 1961, and 1962 by TVA biologists (Tebo, 1965). 3 Rotenone and electric shocker samples collected July 30, 31, and August I,1973, in vicinity of Gallahers Bridge, CRM 14.5 (km 23.2), by Water Pollution Surveillance System Stations (WPSS) personnel and TVA biologists (Tebo,1965). N Watts Bar Reservoir 1964 fish Inventory; fish were collected by rotenone (TVA, 1965). S Preimpoundment survey of Helton Hill Reservoir; fish were collected by gill nets and rotenone from November, 1960, to June 1962 (Fitz, 1968). 6 Postimpoundment survey of Helton Hill Reservoir; fish were collected by gill nets, bottom trawls, bag setning, and rotenone from November,1963, to October,1964 (Fitz,1968). Gill .iet and electrof f shing samples (CRM 15-18) collected from March through September, 1974 (Project Management Corp., 1975). . O
i 1 j .' Table 2. (Continued) 8 Watts Bar Reservoir 1973 fish Inventory; fish were collected by rotenone (Sheddan,1976). 9 Present study, gill net and electrof f shing samples (CRM 12-15) collected from May, 1975, through April, 1976. 10 Tramel and gill net samples from Watts Bar Reservoir, 1976-1977 (Heitman, personal comunication, r s I a 4 0 I i OD l ,
i 4 e j f, Table 3 Results of Fish Collections from the Clinch River below Helton Hill Dam (1975-1976) 1 Size Mean Total % Total Total % Total i Weight (Kg) Weight Range (m) Length (m) Species Number Number Game l 105.6 0.96 .0.11 37-197 0.59 f4 i Rock bass Redbreast sunfish 31 11 0.21 0.76 0.18 0.09 0.02 47-208 44-157 134.4 108.0 Warmouth 4 0.08 '86.0 l 13.12 1.48 29-222 Bluegli1 519 9.90 - 140.0 l I 0.02 0.07 0.01 i Longear sunfish 0.04 113-210 151.6 0.10 0.39 l' Redear sunfish Smallmouth bass 5 4 0.08 0.07 0.01 71-130 110.8 111.4 j 2.62 0 30 60-510 Spotted bass 47 0.90 222.8 62 1.18 16.74 1.89 75-565 i Largemouth bass 0 53 51-302 156.6 White crapple 1.34 4.73 l- Black crapple 70 8 0.15 0.60 0.07 1.65 65-257 123-376 167 1 262.1 54 1.03 14.66 ! Whlte bass 0.30 130-245 199 2 24 0.46 2.70 448.3 I Yellow bass 14.09 1.59 290-551 Striped bass 7 0.13 l ) Striped bass x , 0.01 - 209.0 0.13 white bass 1 0.02 397 0 j 4.86 171.05 19.31 214-535 Sauger 255 565.0 j 0.02 1.06 0.12 - Walleye 1 2.88 0.33 - 625.0 4 I Walleye x sauger 1 0.02 i Forage 0.14 0.02 33-84 66.9 Brook silverside 110 2.10 -
- 389 7.42 66.9) 7 55
- i . Gizzard shad 4.83 -
Threadfin shad 2050 39.10 42.77 79.8 . 0.08 0.01 56-88 w Banded sculpin 8 0.15
4 . i - i f Table 3 (Continued) i l Total % Total Total % Total Size Mean Species Number Number Weight (Kg) Weight- Range (mm) Length (mm) l I Forage (Continued) y
- Silver chub 31 0.59 0.44 0.05 65-154 113.7
- Golden shiner 4 0.08 0.01 -
34-79 55.8 } Emerald shiner 386 7.36 2.56 0.29 40.121 97.0 i Spotfin shiner 29 0.55 0.05 0.01 32-86 55.6 l Bluntnose minnow- 68 1.30 0.13 0.01 19-78 56.2 i Bullhead minnow 329 6.28 0.66' O 07 31-78 55.7 ) Tennessee snubnose j darter 1 0.02 0.00 - - 52.0 l 3 cogperch 15 0.29 0.18 0.02 70-148 109.5
- Mosquitoffsh** 2 0.04 0.00 -
22-24 23.0 j t } j Rough i' l River carpsucker 5 0.10 7.54 0.85 430-555 485.8 . Quillback carpsucker 29 0.55 27.08 3.06 264-482- 406.5 l White sucker 1 0.02 0.45 0.05 - 322.0 j Hog sucker ? 0.04 0.47 0.05 232-311 271.5 Smallmouth buffalo 20 0.38 37.85 4.27 281-686 466.5 Bigmouth buffalo 1 0.02 1.50 0.17 - 450.0 ) Black buffalo 4 0.08 6.02 0.68 449-503 480.5 j Spotted sucker 5 0.10 1.26 0.14 186-329 277.2
- . Silver redborse 9 0.17 10.56 1.19 100-573 '39.4 4j River redhorse 6 0.11 3.6% 0.41 304-405 373.7 Black redhorse 5 0.10 2.74 0.31 350-398 386.0 ,
i Golden redhorse 48 0.92 28.36 3.20 101-435 359.1 i Skipjack herring 269 5.13 159.82 18.04 130-498 369.4 I I5 4 4 a 5
r . 1 1 Table 3. (Continued) 1 .
; Total % Total Total % Total Size Mean Species Number Number Veight (Kg) Weight Range (mm) Length (mm) h Rough (Continued)
Carp 186 3.55 177.54 20.04 150-619 394.5 Mirror carp 4 0.08 2.66 0.30 150-476 341.5 Mooneye 27 0.51 6.79 0.77 265-311 287.0 Channel catfish 32 0.61 22.26 2.51 283-604 400.7 Flathead catfish I 0.02 0.52 0.06 - 365.0 Spotted gar 16 0.31 14.93 1.69 459-859 589.8
. Longnose gar 7 0.13 5.85 0.66 446-905 669.7 Paddlefish 1 0.02 2.54 0.29 -
935.0 Freshwater drum 38 0.72 4.89 0.55 154-350 231.4 3 Total % Total Total % Total Total No. % Total No. Value Number Number Weight (Kg) Weight of Species of Species Rough 716 13.66 525.27 59.28 21 42.00 came 1105 21.08 246.81 27.86 16 32.00
, Forage 3422 65.27 113.93 12.86 13 26.00 j 5243 886.01 3Ri
- Lengths were not recorded for Gizzard shad and Threadfin shad
** Collected December, 1975, with dip net at CRM 12 id
32 community in terms of numbers (65%) while rough fish contributed the j greatest percentage of the fish biomass (59%). The results of the 1964 (TVA,1965) and the 1973 (Sheddan, 1976) i Watts Bar Reservoir fish inventories are similar to those found by the present research. The relative abundances of the species in the three collections are as follows: 1964 - rough, 46%; game, 29%; and forage,24%; 1973 - rough, 37%; game. 35%; and forage, 28%; and 1975 rough, 42%; game. 32%; and forage, 26%. Each of the studies found that threadfin shad were the most abundant fish and that bluegill were the most numerous 9ame fish found in the collections. The three surveys also found that forage fish dominated the total number of fishes taken (57% to 73% of the total number) and that rough fish represented the greatest percentage of fish biomass with values ranging from 44% to 62% of the total weight. Two methods of population estimation were used to measure the relative abundance of the fishes within the study area. Table 3 in the text and Tab 1'es 1-5 in Appendix A measure the abundance in terms of relative density and fish biomass. The second method, catch per unit effort presented in Tables 4 and 5, serves as an index for determining the
. abundance or density of a species on the basis of collection efficiency (Jeste r, 1971) . As mentioned in Chapter 3, a number of factors concern-Ing habitat and gear selectivity may affect tiie results of fisheries research and should he considered in the interpretation of data.
A total of 25 hours of electrofishing and 131 net nights (I net night = 1 net set overnight for approximately 12 hours) were fished in the Clinch River. Of the 50 species collected, 38 were found in gill nets and 36 were collected by electrofishing. Fifty-seven percent of the total number of fish were taken by electrofishing while gill netting NFNa mry #MF ' _________,___,_,______"gM_ _- -
q, 1 Table 4 Number of Fishes Per Hour Collected from the Clinch River below Melton Hill Dam by Electrofishing (1975-1976) .c .s CRM 12 CRM 14.4 Grassy Crk. 0.4 CRM 15 (Ecst) CRM 15 (West) All Locations j Species Hours 5 5.5 5 5 4.5 25 'l ( Game Rock bass 0.60 2.55 0.20 1.00 1.56 1.20 Redbreast sunfish - 1.27 0.20 - 0.22 0.36 Varmouth - 0.18 0.60 - - 0.16 Bluegill 12.40 17.64 46.20 8.40 10.22 19.12
) Lor. gear sunfish -
0.18 - - - 0.04 Redear sunfish
~
0.80 - - 0.16 Smallmouth bass - - - 0.80 - 0.16
-J Spotted bass 0.20 2.18 5.20 0.80 0.67 1.84 Largemouth bass 2.00 3.45 3.00 1.80 1.56 2.40 I
White crappie 0.40 1.27 8.00 0.20 0.67 2.12 Black crapple 0.20 - 1.00 - - 0.24 White bass 0.80 0.18 0.20 - 0.44 0.32
; Yellow bass 0.20 0.55 - - -
0.16 Sauger 0.20 0.18 0.60 - 0.22 0.24 Fo rage Brook silverside - 2.36 17.20 1.20 1.11 4.40 Gizzard shad 3.00 14.91 12.60 3.80 2.00 7.52
, Threadfin shad 7.40 23.82 59.20 7.80 104.67 38.96 Banded sculpin 0.80 0.36 -
0.40 - 0.32 J Silver chub I.60 - - 1.60 3.11 1.20
) Golden shiner 0.40 -
0.40 - - 0.16
] Emerald shiner 8.00 10.73 8.80 13.60 38.89 15.44 Spotfin shiner 0.20 0.36 3.80 0.60 0.89 1.16 tg I
i1 1 l6 h Table 4. (Continued) 4 i CRM 12 CRM 14.4 Grassy Crk. 0.4 CRM 15 (East) CRM 15 (West) All Locations i Species Hours 5 5.5 . 5 5 4.5 25 Forage (Continued)
' Bluntnose minnow 5.00 0.91 6.20 1.00 0.44 2.72 Bullhead minnow 24.00 2.55 21.40 12.00 6.22 13.16 Tennessee snubnose darter - - - - 0.22 0.04 Logperch -
0.73 1.00 0.20 0.22 0.44 j Rough t Quillback carpsucker - 0.36 - - 0.22 ' 0.12 0.20 - - O.04 Hog sucker - - l Smallmouth buffalo - 0.18 - - 0.22 0.08
; Spotted sucker 0.20 0.18 0.20 0.20 - 0.16 0.40 - - 0.08
! Silver redhorse - -
0.08 Black redhorse - - - - 0.44 j 0.28 Golden redhorse - 0.55 0.60 - 0.22 0.18 0.60 - 0.24 l Skipjack herring 0.40 - 0.60 4.18 11.20 5.20 1.56 4.60 Carp 0.08 i Hirror carp - 0.18 - 0.20 - 0.40 - 0.22 0.64 Freshwater drum - 2.36 209.40 61.40 176.21 120.44 TOTALS 68.80 94.53
- 3$
i l 4 9
1 . ,. ~ f Table 5. Number of Fishes Per Net Night Collected from the Clinch River below Melton HIII Dam with Gill Hets (1975-1976) s CRM 12 CRM 14.4 Grassy Crk. 0.4 CRM 15 (East) CRM 15 (West) All Locations Species Net Nights 33 33 11 ,a 33 21 131 Game Rock bass - - - Redbreast sunfish 0.05 0.01 0.03 0.03 - - - 0.02 Bluegill 0.24 0.18 0.18 l- 0.30 0.71 0.31 Redear sunfish - 0.03 - - Spotted bass - - 0.01 Largemouth bass 0.05 0.01 0.03 0.03 - - - 0.02 - Wh,te crapple - 0.09 0.82 0.12 Black crapple 0.05 0.13 0.03 0.09 - - 0.02 White bass 0.52 0.52 0.09 0.27 0.10
.i Yellow bass 0.35 0.12 0.I2 0.18 0.15 0.24 0.15 Striped bass 0.06 0.09 -
0.03 Striped bass x 0.05 0.05 white bass - - - 0.03 - 0.01 Sauger 1.73 2.09 0.18 2.67 1.57 1.90 Valleye 0.03 - - - - 0.01 ii Walleye x sauger - 0.03 - - - 0.01 1, Forage Gizzard shad 1.73 1.85 2.82 1.45 Threadfin shad 0.19 1.53 1.15 13.97 2.91 10.61 9.29 8.21 Silver chub - - - 0.03 - 0.01 Logperch - - 0.06 2 0.10 0.03 N i
- s
. . ~ . _- _. - .-_ - - .. . . . . =.
i 4 l Table 5 (Continued) 4 i i CRM 12 CRM 14.4 Grassy Crk. 0.4 CRM 15 (East) CRM 15 (West) All Locations Species Net Nights 31 33 11 33 21 131 i Rough 1 River carpsucker 0.06 0.06 - - 0.05 0.04 0.20 j Quillback carpsucker 0.12 0.30 - 0.36 - White sucker - 0.03 - - - 0.01 l 0.01
- Hog sucker - - -
0.03 - 0.09 0.09 0.03 0.14 0.14 ! Smallmouth buffalo 0.30 - - 0.01 l 81gmouth' buffalo 0.0i .
' Black buffalo 0.03 0.03 -
0.03 0.05 0.03 ] Spotted sucker - - 0.01 0.03 - - 1 Silver redhorse - 0.09 - 0.06 0.I0 0.05 River redborse 0.03 - - 0.15 - 0.05 0.03 0.06 - 0.02 i Black redborse - - 0.48 0.30 0.27 0.27 0.14 0.31
- Golden redhorse -
2.01 Skipjack herring 1.97 2.58. 0.18 2.55 1.29 Carp 0.91 0.85 0.45 0.18 0.10 0.54 0.03
- - 0.02 Mirror carp 0.03 -
0.42 0.27 - 0.12 - 0.21 Mooneye - Channel catfish 0.52 0.18 0.18 0.15 0.10 0.24 0.03 - 0.01 Flathead catfish - - - 0.12 Spotted gar 0.03 - 1.27 0.03 - Longnose gar 9.15 - 0.18 - - 0.05
- - 0.01 Paddlefish 0.03 - -
0.17 Freshwater drum 0.12 0.09 0.64 0.21 0.05 TOTALS 10.90 23.99 10.53 19.98 14.42 17.05 } i i
37 accounted for 43% of the total. The overall abundance expressed in terms of density and biomass are presented in Table 3 while these measures of abundance are shown in Table 1-5 in Appendix A as a function of sampilng station and season of collection. Higher totals of game and rough fish were taken in the fall quarter, but the greater biomasses of the.se two groups were found in the spring collections. The highest number of forage fish was found during the winter quarter, and forage fish biomass was greatest in the fall quarter. The catch per unit effort results of electroff shing and gill netting are summarized in Tables 4 and 5 respectively. The collections in the Clinch River averaged 120 fish per hour electrofishing and 17 fish per net night. Threadfin shad, bluegill, emerald shiner, and bullhead minnow were taken in the greatest numbers per hour of electro-fishing. In take per net night effort, threadfin shad, skipjack herring, sauger, and gizzard shad were the most numerous fishes collected. Specimens of largemouth bass, gizzard shad, and carp at CRM 14.5 (Tebo,1965); white crapple, freshwater drum, white bass, channel catfish and bluegill at CRM 10 (km 16) (D. Nelson,1969); and Corbicula, CRM 12-15 (Eagleson, personal comunication, 1977) have been analyzed j- for redionuclides. Tebo (1965) reported that largemouth bass and carp had counts only slightly above background radioactivity while gizzard shad levels were considerably higher with the presence of Cs 3 , Rul06 , Rh 106 , g,60, and K 0 Indicated. Concentrations of Cs I37 were reported by D. Nelson (1969) to range from 0.344 mg/g fresh weight in bluegill to 1.60 mg/g fresh weight in white bass. D. Nelson also found that the average concentration of CsI37 in fish tissues can be predicted from the
" " ' ' " " ' " ' ~
_. 1 '_^ . . _ . . _ I. _m._ ~T'T _ . _
l 38 average concentration of CsI37 in waters subject to ;hronic releases of this radionuclide. After a one year period of exposure, Eagleson (personal communication, 1977) found that for Corbicula, both hard and sof t parts, radiation levels of Co60 and Cs 137 were at background; additionally, measurements made on Corbicula native to the site returned similar results. The total production of fish in 1964 (TVA, 1965) in the Clinch River arm of Watts Bar Reservoir was slightly higher (216 kg/ha) than that of the lowur portion of the reservoir (213 kg/ha). In the 1973 Watts Bar fish inventory (Sheddan,1976) found that the standing crop of the Clinch River portion of Watts Bar had increased to 237 kg/ha , while that of the reservoir had risen to 313 kg/ha. The average standing crop of Watts Bar Reservoir was lower than that of Fort Loudon Reservoir (363 kg/ha), located upstream on the Tennessee River; but was higher than the standing crop value of 221 kg/ha at the downstream reservoir, Chickamauga (Sheddan, 1976). The 1972 commercial fish harvest was low within a 10 mile (16 km) radius of the NFRRC site amounting to approximately 1% of the total catch from Watts Bar Reservoir of 106,786 pounds (48,539 kg) which was composed of 56% buffalo, 22% catfish, 12% paddlefish, 9% carp, and 1% drum. This return represented a considerable decrease in the commercial I harvest since 1962 when 200,603 pounds (91,183 kg) of buffalo (80%), carp (12%), and carpsucker (8%) were taken (Exxon Nuclear Co.,1976). [ SAUGER LIFE HISTORY DATA N The sauger, Stizos tedion canadense (Smith), is a member of the Perch family, Percidae (Class .Osteichthyes; Order Perciformes). Over 1
.1
}
39 100 species found in North America and northern Europe belong to the perch family which is composed of three subfamIIIes and eight, genera. The subfamily Etheostominae (darters) restricted to North America, consists of three genera, Anunocrypta, Percina, and Etheostoma. Four genera, Perca, Acerina, Aspro, and Percarina, belong to the subfamily Percinae which is represented in North America by a single species, Perca flavescens, the yellow perch. The subfamily of the pike perches, l.uciopercinae, contains five species belonging to the single genus Stizostedion. Two of the five are found in North America (sauger, Stizostedion canadense, and walleye, S_. vitreum) wi th the remaining three restricted to northern Europe (Collette, 1963). The sauger from the present NFRRC preconstruction study ranged in length from 214 m to 535 mm and weight from 78 g to 1860 g. Morphologically the sauger has an elongate and cylindrical body form (Figure 5). The posterior margin of the preopercle is strongly serrate, and the canine teeth which are present on both Jaws are well developed. Sauger are probably most frequently confused with walleye. Etnier (1973) lists the following characteristics for the identification of the two species: scf t dorsal rays, sauger' 17-20, walleye 19-22; sauger dorsal fin spotted with discrete black, halfmoon, blotches, and lacking a l concentration of pigment at the posterior base; in walleye the dorsal fin is dusky or mottled with a predominant black spot at the posterior base; cheeks are fully scaled in sauger but partially naked in walleye; the lower lobe of the caudal fin is mottled in sauger, but in walleye a creamy white area is present; in sauger the base of the pectoral fin is black, but is usually not strongly pigmented in walleye; and the pyloric cacae count of sauger is 5-6 while that of walleye is 3-4. l l t
40 Cheeks Closely Scaled Halfmoon Spots 17 to 20 Rays
// ..
_ _&k . . _.
!{,!*h. ,
0 ' 3 *, " .. 6 ;..;.*/ .V f '- 3
\; .
11 to 12 Rays Figure 5. Sauger, stizostedion canadense (Smith) [ l l ( 1 l l i -~
41 In Canada, sauger are found in the St. Lawrence and Champlait river systems (Scott and Crossman,1973). Sauger distribution in the United States is to the south from the Great Lakes region, west of the Appalachians, to the Tennessee River in Alabama, to the Red River in Texas, to eastern Kansas, Nebraska, Wyoming, southwestern Iowa and Montana (Hubbs and Lagler,1958) . Preferred sauger habitat is tha* of a large slow-flowing silty rivers and large lakes (Scott and Crossman, 1973; Hubbs and Lagler, 1958). Age and growth determinations were made on 47 sauger collected in March, 1976, from the Clinch River. The a value was calculated to be 68 mm. Priegel (1969) reported annulus formation to occur in mid-May for sauger in Lake Vinnebago, Wisconsin. Hassi. r (1957) stated that . sauger from Norris Reservoir, Tennessee, completed annulus formation during mid-spring. Exact time of annulus formation was not determined for the Clinch River sauger in the present study. The greatest growth l rate was exhibited in the first year of life with a declining rate l l thereafter. Table 6 compares the calculated growth rate of the Clinch River sauger with age and growth results reported from various bodies l i of water. Growth rate
- In the Clinch River arm of Vatts Bar Reservoir were: higher than those of the main body of Watts Bar Reservoir (TVA, 1965; Sheddan,1976); similar to those of Nelton Hill Reservoir (Fitz, l
l 1965); slower than the growth rates of Cherokee and Douglas Reservoir in Tennessee (Stroud,1949 as cited by Priegel,1969); and faster than l l those reported for Lake Erie (Deason, 1933 as cited by Priegel, 1969), Lake of the Woods, Minnesota (Cartander,1950 as cited by Priegel,1969), j and Lake Wir 1ebago, Minnesota (Priegel,1969). Initial growth in the l Clinch River arm of Watts Bar Reservoir was better, but by age class 3 l 1 l l r-m-- re- - w- - .ye e,-- - y, , . ,.w. ,y -,-,m ,og,. , -
1
.1 s
Table 6. Calculated Growth of Saugers from Various Vaters I Average Total Length (mm) at End of Year No. of Study Area Fish 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9' 10
- Clinch River, CRM 12-15
; Tenn. (Present study) 47 238 338 382 418 445 . .J Vatts Bar Reservoir, Tenn. (TVA,1965) 24 209 300 367 417 Watts Bar Reservoir, Tenn. (Sheddan, 1976) 5 221 Helton Hill Reservoir, Tenn. Preimpoundment P
(Fitz, 1968) 15 223 313 384 441 Helton Hill Reservoir, Tenn. Postimpoundment (Fitz, 1968) 8 228 336 368 a Norris Reservoir, Tenn. (Hass l e r , 1957) 3393 212 336 396 438 473 498 518 i
'i Cherokee Reservoir, Tenn.* (Stroud, 1949) 64 235 374 441 Douglas Reservoir, Tenn.* (Stroud, 1949) 39 250 396 E
Table 6. (Continued) Average Total Length (mm) at End of Year No. of Study Area Fish 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 v Lake Winnebago, Vis. 784 ** 125 241 305 333 355 376 388 401 (Priegel,1969) 9579 125 251 307 335 358 378 391 401 l Garrison Reservoir, 96 v" 122 216 292 358 447 l N. D. (Carufel,1963) 222 9 127 223 317 399 467 587 I I Lewis and Clark Lake, S. D. (W. Nelson, 1969) Ill2 188 324 404 466 514 560 596 625 l Lewis and Clark Lake, S. D.* (Vanicek, 1964) 479 160 312 413 520 533 Lake Erle* (Deason, 1933) 905 99 200 264 310 345 401 Lake of the Woods, Minn.* (Carlander, 1950) 883 167 195 264 317 348 360 383 398 424 399
*As cited by Priegel, 1969 C
l I
44 9rowth was greater in Norris Reservoir, Tennessee (Hassler,1957). In ages I through 4, growth rates were faster in the Clinch River than in Garrison Reservoir, North Dakota, but were slower at age class 5 (Ca ru fe l , 1963) . The growth rates in Lewis and Clark Lake, South Dakota, for age classes I and 2 were lower than those in the Clinch River, but were greater in classes 3 through 5 (vanicek,1964, as reported by Priegel, 1969; W. Nelson, 1969). Priegel (1969) stated that an earlier spawning season, longer growing season, and abundant food supply were the factors most likely responsible for the rapid growth rates in Tennessee storage reservoirs. Hassler (1957) concluded that the slower growth rates in northern waters were associated with increased longevity. Of the 278 sauger collected in the present study, 10 females surpassed 3 pounds (1362 g) in weight. The largest male taken weighed 2.7 pounds (1220 g) while the largest sauger found in the study, a female, weighed 4.1 pounds (1860 g). The largest sauger taken by Hassler (1957) in Norris Reservoir, Tennessee, was a 4.1 pound (1873 g) female; the largest male weighed 3 pounds (1362 g). Only ten fish (9 l females and I male) of the 5,500 sauger examined by Hassler (1957) weighed 3 or more pounds. Hassler (1957) attributed the larger size reached by females to a longer life span and a more rapid rate of growth. l Priegel (1969) examined 1,824 sauger in Lake Winnebago.. Wisconsin, of which only one, a 2.1 pound female, surpassed 2 pounds (908 g); the l largest male taken by Priegel weighed 1.4 pounds (636 g). W. Helson 1 (1969) reported that the maximum weight of sauger from Lewis and Clark Lake, South Dakota, to be 5.6 pounds (2.550 g). Carufel (1963) recorded a 6.7 pound (3042 g) sauger in Garrison Reservoir, North Dakota, and stated that the largest sauger taken from the reservoir weighed 8.2 c- - -- -
, ,_c , _ . , . , . , . _ _ _ , , . .
45 pounds (3723 g) . The world record sauger (8.3 pounds, 3774 g) was taken from the Missouri River in Nebraska in 1961 (Schaf fer,1962, as cited by Priegel,1969). Etnier (1973) and Priegel (1969) stated that some of the larger sauger records could possibly be those of sauger x walleye hybrids. In the current study, one sauger x walleye hybrid (625 m in length and 6.3 pounds, 2880 g in weight) was identified based on characters described by Stroud (1948). Equations from the length-weight relationship are useful' in calculating either the length or the weight when one of the measurements is known. In the present study, equations were derived for 278 total fish, 127 males, and 81 females. The male sauger ranged in length from 304 m to 497 m and in weight from 230 g to 1220 g; female sauger varied from 287 m to 535 m in length and 180 g to 1860 g in weight. . The formula of the length-weight relationship of the combined sexes was computed to be: Log V = -6.249 + 3.479 log L. Where: W = weight in grams L = total length in millimeters. l For male sauger the equation is: Log W = -5.277 + 3.102 tog L. f For female sauger the equation is: Log W = -7.001 + 3.767 log L. Using the above equations, a sauger of unknown sex at 450 mm I would weigh 958 g; a male of that length, 898 g; and a female, 985 g. A graphical illustration of the formula for the combined sexes appears in Figure 6. Mense (1976) stated that the regression coefficient may be used i I
~ ~
_~ - * > - 3 ; v _'_ ~
~ '
, - - .wr- -r- - -
,?
46 2000 - 1800 - 1600-1400 -
^
~
m 1200 - E* y '1000 800 - 600 - 400 200 - 0^ 100 200 300 400 500 600 Length (mm) Figure 6. Graphical Representation of Length-Weight Relationships of Combined Sexes for the Clinch River Sauger
' ' "" y- - - - - . , . - , , . .
47 as a measure of condition with change in length. A value of 3 (weight i varies with the cube of the length) would indicate that the form of the fish remained the same over the length range sampled. If the value should be below 3, a decrease in plumpness with change in length is shown; if the value is greater than 3, an increase in weight with
~
increased length is Indicated. The weight of sauger in the present study increased faster than the cube of the length. A comparison of calculated fish weights at a given length from the Cilnch River (present study), Norris Reservoir, Tennessee (Hassler, 1957); Lake of the Woods, Minnesota (Carlander,1950); and Lewis and Clark Lake, South Dakota (W. Nelson,1969) is presented in Table 7 In the lower length ranges, fish from the Clinch River were lighter than those from Lake of the Woods and Lewis and Clark Lake and heavier than the fish from Norris Reservoir. Sauger from the Clinch River, 300 mm in length or greater, were heavier than those from the other bodies of water. Larval sauger began feeding before completion of yolk-sac absorption primarily on Cyclops at an average length of 9.5 mm with larger sauger utilizing Daphnia and Diaptomus in Lewis and Clark Lake, South Dakota (Nelson, 1968). Priegel (1969) found that sauger,12 mm-75 mm, fed on Daphnia, Cyclops, Leptodora, and Diaptomus in Lake Wir-aebago, Wisconsin. As the sauger increased in size, chironomid larvae and pupae along with Baetis and Hexagenia nymphs became important food items in Lewis and Clark Lake (Nelson,1968); young sauger in Lake Winnebago also utilized chironomid larvae (Prlegel,1969). Adult sauger are primarily piscivorous but also feed on invertebrates, in the present study only 30% of the 189 sauger stomachs c _
48 Table 7 Calculated Veight of Total Length Groups of Saugers from Various Vaters Calculated Weights (g) Lewis Total Length Norris Lake of andClgrk Clincg 2 the Woods 3 Lake (nun) River Reservoir 1 50 7 100 25 150 65 62 200 57 52 127 123 250 124 til 208 219 216 300 234 400 347 355 349 350 544 533 528 400 636 802 761 450 958 1,142 1,055 500 ' 1,383 1,559 1,413 550 1,858 600' 2,381 650 I Present study 2 Hassler, 1957 . 3Carlander,1950, as cited by W. Nelson,1969 W. Nelson, 1969 +
~ '
39 1 l examined contained food items (Table 8). Among the organisms which could be Identified, threadfin shad was the predominant food item. Dorosoma sp., tog perch, and a mayfly nalad also contributed to the diet of the 7 Clinen River sauger. Dendy (1945) reported that gizzard shad were important forage fishes for sauger in Norris Reservoir, Tennessee; troutperch and freshwater drum were the predominant forage fishes of sauger in Lake Winnebago, ' Wisconsin (Priegel,1969); and in Lewis and Clark Lake, South Dakota, emerald shiners and gizzard shad were the most important forage fishes (Nelson,1968). Fecundity estimates made on eight sauger collected in March, 1976, from the Clinch River are presented in Table 9 The average number of eggs produced by the sauger, which ranged in length from 340 . m to 531 mm and in weight from 408 g to 1860 g, was 69,625 eggs (27,300/454 g). Fecundity ranged from 22,000 eggs for a 304 m, 408 g sauger to 117,000 eggs for a 459 mm,1390 g fish. Hansler (1958) calculated the average fecundity for 14 sauger in Norr:s Reservoir, Tennessee, to be 41,139 (29,053/454 g) In fish 286 mm to 482 m in length and 182 g to 1271 g in weight. The estimates varied from a Icw .- of 9,360 eggs for a 297 m, 286 g fish to a high of 96,277 in a 482 m, 1271 g sauger. The average egg production for 50 sauger (328 m 'o 625 f mm, and 272 g to 2043 g) from Garrison Reservoir, North Dakota, was 43,197 (26,260/454 g) with a low of 10,488 eggs in a 327 m sauger and high of 152,110 eggs in a 546 m fish (Carufel, 1963). W. Nelson (1969) examined sauger in Lewis and Clark Lake, South Dakota, which ranged in length from 374 m to 627 m and in weight from 440 g to 2550 g. Nelson found an average of 29,624 eggs /454 g in the sample which had a low estimate of 19,130 eggs and a high of 209,920 eggs. The average
. . . - .c = ... .. ~ , -~ - - -
~-
,l
.i 3
} p i
~
/
- r. ,
'l io Table 8. Food items of'Sauger Collected from the Clinch River below Melton Hill Dani, June,1975, to April, 1976 f
- .1 ti
, 'i No. % .No. . t of with Friod Threadfin Unident. Unident. Log Mayfly Fish items Shad Shad Fish Perch Halad
- 'l Month Food I i June 1 100 1 I (100)*
July 0 Aug. 1 0 i Sept. 2 50 I l-(100)
- Oct. 0 Nov. 3 33 2 2 (100)
Dec. 28 46 20 6 (30) 14 (70)
. Jan. 11 100 36 9 (25) II (31) 16 (44)
{ i Feb. 32 50 24 7 (29) 1 (04) 16 (67)
- i March 65 28 26 5 (19) 20 (77) 1 (04)
- i j
April 46 13 8 2 (25) 5 (62) 1 (13) A TOTAL 189 30 118 32 (27) 12 (10) 71 (60) 2 (02) 1 (01)
- Actual numbers of food items listed under heading with percentage of abundance in parenthesis y
. 51 Tabie 9 Fecundity Estimates of Eight Sauger Collected from the Clinch River below Melton Hill Dam in March, 1976
_ Egg Eggs / Pound (454 g) [5 Length (mm) Weight (g) Production of Weight 340 408 22,000 24,500 391 620 36,000 26,400 422 830 41,000 22,400 459 1,390 117,000 38,200 465 1,240 91,000 33,300 484 1,190 83,000 31,700 524 1,780 101,000 25,800 531 1,060 66,000 16,100 , 3-.
.z N_'
9
'a E
7 $ a e 4 ' ' w
52 number of eggs per ovary for 192 sauger, 256 mm to 371 mm in length, in Lake Winnebago, Wisconsir, was 15,871 eggs (Priegel,1969) . Fecundity estimates for the Clinch River sauger were lower than those found by W. Nelson and Hassler but higher than those reported by Carufe! and Priegel. Hassler (1958) found that both sexes were mature by age two in Norris Reservoir, Tennessee. Studies by Priegel (1969) 1. i.ake Winnebago, Wisconsin, and by W. Nelson (1969) in Lewis and Clark Lake, South Dakota, also found that males matured at age two but that the maturation of females did not occur until ages four and three respectively. Sauger are random spawners and do not build nests or cive parental care to the young. In the gill net sample of April 17, 1976, 52 sauger (14 females, 33 males, and 9 immatures) were taken. Of the 14 females collected, 8 were gravid and 2 were spent; milt was easily ____ extracted from males take.n on this date. A number of males were found 9 fclustered in the nets around two of the gravid females indicating capture
/during the act of spawning![As stated in Chapter 2, the substrate of the Clinch River miles 12 to 15 consists largely of sand, silt, and lesser areas of shale. Water temperatures recorded from the Clinch River in.
April varied from 14.0 C at mile 15 west to 14.8 C at mile 12, and averaged 14.5 C. IA V' Haslbauer and Manges (1947) found both spent and mature sauger l In spring collections in Norris Reservoir, Tennessee; however, extensive l upstream movement of sauger appeared to Indicate that spawning occurred In the running waters of the Clinch and Powell Rivers at the head of the reservoir. The 1945-46 spawning season in Norris Reservoir lasted several weeks to a nonth. In 1943, Cady (1945) reportad that many l l 1 - - - . . ._ . _ _ _ . .
53 sauger had not spawned as late as mid-March in Norris Reservoir. l Eschmeyer and Smith (1943) found no evidence of sauger spawning below 1 Norris Reservoir dam, when water temperatures were below 10 C. Large late winter and early spring spawning runs often concentrate sauger in the tallwaters of Tennessee reservoirs, where the sauger utilize rip-- , rap areas for spawning substrates (Etnier,1973). Nelson (1968) found that sauger in Lewis and Clark Lake, South Dakota, migrate up the Missouri River to spawn in the tallwaters of Fort Randall Dam, in Garrison Reservoir, North Dakota, sauger spawn in both the reservoir and Garrison Dam tallwaters (Carufel, 1963). Priegel (1969) reported that most sauger in Lake Winnebago, Wisconsin, spawn on an 8-mile (12.8 km) stretch of shoreline on the northern side of the lake over a sub-a strate of sand and fine gravel. In Canada, sauger spawn over gravel to rubble substrates in large turbid rivers and lakes (Scott and Crossman, - 1973). Males reach the spawning grounds first and are followed by the females which leave the area shortly after spawning (Scott and Crossman, 1973; Nelson, 1968). One or more smaller males usually attend a female in spawning activities which occur at night (Scott and Crossman, 1973). In Lewis and Clark Lake, sauger began spawning toward the end of I April when the water temperature was 5.6 C to 6.1 C and lasted for two l Weeks (Nelson, 1968). Sauger spawned from early May to late June in Carrison Reservoir when water temperatures varied from 3.9 C to 11.6 C ' (Carufel,1963). Spawning occurred in Lake Winnebago over a 2-week period in late April and early May at temperatures of 6.1 C to 11.1 C (Priegel,1969). Scott and Crossman (1973) reported that Canadian sauger
- l. - -
54 spawn in late May and early June (water temperatures of 3.9 C to 6.1 C). Lab studies by Smith and Koenst (1975) found that 9 C to 15 C was the optimum temperature range for sauger egg fertilization. Sauger eggs which range in size from 1.44 mm to 1.86 mm are initially adhesive, but af ter water hardening become nonadhesive and semibouyant (Priegel,1969; Scott and Crossman,1973); however, Nelson (1968) found that sauger eggs in Lewis and Clark Lake remained strongly adhesive even after water hardening. Scott and Crossman (1973) reported incubation periods of 25 to 29 days at 4.5 C to 12.8 C. Nelson (1968) found that sauger eggs hatch in 21 days at 8.4 C. Priegel (1969) stated sauger eggs incubate in 13 to 15 days at 10.5 C in a hatchery. Optimum incubation temperatures for sauger eggs were found by Smith and Koenst (1975) to range from 12 C to .15 C; at 12 C the - sauger hatch began in 12 days and was concluded on the twenty-first day, and at 15 C incubation was completed in 9-13 days. Larval sauger hatch at 4.5 m to 6.2 mm in length. Yolk-sac l j absorption is completed in 7 to 9 days (Scott and Crossman, 1973). I l Smith and Koenst (1975) found that survival of hatched fry is best at 9 C to 21 C until the yolk-sac is absorbed; thereafter, until the Juvenile stage is reached, 21 C is the preferred temperature. Four studies on larval fish in the C1 Inch River miles 1-51 (km 1.6-81.6) conducted from 1974 to 1976 yielded only six Stizostedion sp. larvae. Project Management Corp. (1975) collected one Stizostedien sp. at CRM 15-18 on March 28,1974; TVA (1976b) tock two larvae near Bullrun Steam Plant in 1975, one on April 30 and the other on May 14; TVA (1976c) found two larvae near the Kingston Steam Plant in 1975, the first on April 9 and the second on April 23. One post larval
= .. _- - ..- - --
55 Stizostedion sp., 8.8 mm in length was taken on April 9,1976, at CRM 12 in supplementary tows of the present study (water temperature 15 ;). Nelson (1968) captured a number of larval sauger from the Missouri River and Lewis and Clark Lake. The larvae averaged 6.38 mm in length; larvae captured in the reservoir usually exceeded 8.5 mm. the smallest being 7.79 mm. It is probable that the spawning period extends from mid-March until early May for the Clinch River sauger; and that the headwaters of - Watts Bar, Melton Hill, and Norris Reservoirs are utilized by sauger for spawning sites. CLINCH RIVER LARVAL FISH A total of 135 larval tows were made from May,1975, through September, 1975 Fifty-eight percent of the tows contained larval fish. Nine genera and five species from six families were collected (Table 10). The dates of earliest and latest collection of each taxon, as well as numbers, weights, and lengths of the larval fith are presented in Table 11. Thc catch distribution of the 2,328 larval fish is shown in Figure 7 Clupeidae were the dominant larval fish 1t 90% of the total number and 76% of the total weight; white crapple at 9% of the total number and 18% of the total weight was the se.cond most abundant larval fish. In addition to the present research, three larval fish studies were conducted by TVA in the vicinity of the NFRRC site in 1975 Eight families of larval fish were : epresented in the samples from Melton Hill (TVA,1976b), five families Lt CRM 15-18 (TVA,1976a), six families at CRM 12-15 in the present (NFRRC) preconstruction study, and nine xj
i 1 56
- Table 10. A List of Larval Fishes Collected in the Clinch River below
. Melton Hill Dam, May through September,1975 Common Name Scientific Name Family - Clupeldae Shad Clupeldae
! Family - Cyprinidae Carp Cyprinus carpio Linnaeus Shiner Notropis sp. Bluntnose minnow Pimephales notatus (Rafinesque) Family - Catostomidae i Redhorse Moxostoma sp. Family - Ictaluridae Channel catfish letalurus punctatus (Rafinesque) Family - Atherinidae Brook silversides Labidesthes sicculus (Cope) Family - Centrarchidae d . Sunfish Lepcmis sp. Black bass Micropterus sp. White crappie Pomoxis annularis Rafinesque h e
---v%,- .,-v.-3-- -,,.,e- -, ,..m, ...-..p,.-- , , . , , , ,,w,-%,. -..,,..pr,...e-,-,--,,..~----,.,,F..-..-, y.. , v. --r%,-.v.,.. 7-+-, , . e,. e._,, e~,n se ee.
I 1 Table 11. Larval Fish Found in the Clinch River below Helton Hill Dam, May through September, 1975* [ 1 Date of Collection (Month / Day) Mean Length Taxa Earliest Latest No. % No. Wt. % Wt. Length Range U Clupeldae 5-17 8-29 2,089 89.73 4.5382 75.94 8.84 4.5-22.0 Cyprinus carpio 8-29 8-29 2 0.09 0.0111 0.19 10.25 8.5-12.0 I Notropis sp. 5-30 5-30 3 0.13 0.0051 0.09 6.66 6.0-7.0
, Pimephales notatus 7-10 7-10 I o.04 0.0505 0.85 16.00 -
1 Moxostoma sp. 5-30 5-30 2 0.09 0.0017 0.03 6.50 - a letalurus punctatus 7-10 7-10 1 0.04 0.0357 0.60 13.00 - Labidesthes sleculus 8-29 8-29 1 0.04 0.0653 1.09 23.50 -
; Lepomis sp. 5-30 8-12 16 0.69 0.1336 2.24 10.91 5.0-13.0 Micropterus sp. 6-15 6-15 1 0.04 0.0878 1.47 20.00 -
h Pomoxis annularis 5-30 7-25 212 9.11 1.0468 17.52 7.44 4.0-16.0 T,TiH 5.9758 i
, *Veights expressed in grams; lengths expressed in mm i<
1 10 1 4 s
( -i
- 1 i .
I iJ 1> !i i 1142 -
,, . 6 6,
- 550 -
1 450 - I 350 - 4 1 i i 250 - a i i i 150 - 1 a i 50 - i* I ' i i i i 1 5-1 5-17 5-30 6-15 6-28 7-10 7-25 8-12 8-29 9-12 Dates 19 20 20 20 20 20 21 22 22 Temp. C
^
Figure 7. Catch Distribution of Larval Fish Collections in the Clinch River below Helton Hill Dam, , May through September, 1975 m o e
59 , families from near the Kingston Steam Plant (TVA,1976c). Clupeldae was the dominant family of larval fish found by these studies with density values ranging from 77% near the Bull Run Steam Plant in the upper reaches of Helton Hill Reservoir (TVA,1976b) to 92% in the Kingston Steam Plant area of Watts Bar Reservoir (TVA,1976c). Larval fish taken during the 1975 season appeared at peak densities in Helton Hill, May 29 (TVA,1976b); the present research (NFRRC), CRM 12-15, May 30; and in the Kingston Steam Plant area, June 4 (TVA,1976c). One of the principal concerns of larval fish research is that of hydraulic entrainment. The NFRRC water intake structure to be built at CRM 14.4 is not expected to adversely affect the fisheries of the study area as a result of larval fish entrainment. The degree of entrainment is proportional to the volume of water withdrawn and the concentration of the larvae within this volume. The normal operational withdraw of water from the Clinch River will be approximately 5 9 m /3 minute which amounts to about 0.07% of the annual average flow of the Clinch River at 8,600 m3 / minute (Exxon Nuclear Co., 1976). Utilizing push, vertical, and yoyo larval tows, TVA (1976a) found that the average,1975, larval 3 fish concentration at CRM 16 was 427.21/1000m . Assuming uniform distribution of the larval fish in the water column, entrainment would equal the volume of water withdrawn from the Clinch River, 0.07%. Larval fish that are entrained would be subject to 100% mortality due to the stresses of filtration, thermal and pressure changes, abrasion, blocides, and corrosion Inhibitors they would encounter (Exxon Nuclear Co.,1976).
/
y*%-ew-.gy,r- -. p *:vt-$^- w yeg, e 4m*v 9'C+"P Ft M" **M'OEN'"-*
o . 60 FISHES OF GRASSY AND BEAR CREEKS The NFRRC study of Grassy and Bear Creeks in 1975 was_the first Intensive study conducted on these creeks. Cumulative lists of the fish" found in Grassy and Bear Creeks are presented in Tables 12 and 13 respectively. Information cencerning the numbers and relative abundance of the fish collected from Grassy and Bear Creeks may be found in Te.les-6 through 10 in Appendix A. Fif teen species from six families were found in Grassy Creek. The blueglil was the most abundant game fish in Grassy Creek; the bluntnose minnow was the dominant forage fish; and the white sucker was the most abundant rough fish. Seventeen species from six families were collected in Bear Creek. Among the eight cyprinids found in Bear Creek, one is an undescribed subspecies of Phoxinus oreas, the mountain redbelly dace (Starnes, personal canmunication,1977). According to Etnier (1973), this fish has a limited distribution within the state of Tennessee. The dominant game fish in Bear Creek was the rock bass; the common shiner was the most abundant forage fish; and the white sucker was the dominant rough fish. In assessing changes which may occur in the fish populations of these two creeks, the appearance or abundance of the members of the Cyprinidae, Percidae, and Cottidae families should ' a monitored. 1
. - . * ._ , --e + ,gy - g-+ve.m e ew ye= - ---e-* * - -g--nw- -e+r<py.e e-*-Pr- **ww*uw =qrw f--79 m"*"T- -'="'S -'Y-'e-""*" " * ' * ""--
61 Table 12. A List of the Fishes Collected in Grassy Creek October, 1975, through AprII, 1976 , Comon Name Scientific Name Family - CyprIntdae Stoneroller Campostoma anomalum (Rafinesque) Comon shiner Notropis cornutus (Mitchill) Spotfin shiner Notropis spilopterus (Cope) Bluntnose minnow Pimephales notatus (Rafinesque) Blacknose dace Rhinichthys atratulas (Hermann) Creek chub Semotilus atromaculatus (Hitchill) Family - Catostomidae White sucker Catostomus commersoni (Lacepede)
,/ Family - letaluridae Yellow bullhead Ictalurus natalls (LeSueur) /^
Family - Centrarchidae Redbreast sunfish Lepomis auritus (Linnaeus) Bluegil: Lepomis macrochirus Rafinesque Longear su.if tsh Lepomis megalotis (Rafinesque) Spotted bass Micropterus punctulatus (Rafinesque) Family - Percidae Tennessee snubnose darter Etheostoma simoterum (Ccpe) Logperch Percina caprodes (Rafinesque) Family - Cottidae Banded sculpin Cottus carolinae (Gill) l
-~
w -=, ,h -
,w 'V- ,v - - , g
,y, -
.-- ,y --
_C-'-- .,=>wm- ,,-g-v w - ,
~E'~* * ~ - < - - - , , _ . - , . ._. . , . , , , . _ _
.h 62 Table 13 A 1.ist of the Fishes Collected in Bear Creek September,1975, through April, 1976 Common Name Scientific Fame Family - Cyprinidae Stoneroller Can.postoma anomalum (Rafinesque)
Rosefin shiner Notropis_ ardens (Cope) Emerald shiner Notropis atherinoides Rafinesque Connon shiner Notropis cornutus (Mitchill)
- Bluntnose minnow Pimephales notatus (Rafinesque)
Redbelly dace Phoxinus creas sp. Blacknose dace Rhinichthys atratulas (Hermann) Creek chub Semotilus atromaculatus (Mitchill) Family - Catostomidae Catostomus commersoni (Lacepede) White sucker f Northern hog sucker Hypentellum nigricans (LeSueur) l Golden redhorse Moxostrom erythrurum (Rafinesque) family - Poeciltidae Mosquitofish Gambusia affinis (Baird and Girard) Family - Centrarchidae Rock bass Ambloplites rupestris (Rafinesque) . Bluegill Lepomis macrochi rus Rafinesque Family - Percidae Stripetail darter Etheostoma kennicotti '(Putnam) Tennessee snubnose darter Etheostoma simoterum (Cope) Family - Cottidae Canded sculpin Cottus carolinae (Gill) l . a1 --- - -
a l . . Chapter 5
$UMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS 9
- 1. Fifty species of fish and two hybrids from 14 families were collected from the Clinch River, mile 12-15.
- 2. The comunity was dominated by 21 species of rough (42%);
16 species of game fish (32%); and 13 species of forage fish (26%). 3 The bulk of the catch was comprised of six species: gizzard shad, threadfin shad, carp, skipjack herring, bluegill, and sauger. 4 Generally, it appears that forage fish dominated the community in terms of numbers while rough fish contributed the greatest percentage of biomass. 5 Threadfin so.o were the most numerous of the total number of fish; carp accounted for the greatest total weight; and bluegill were the most abundant game fish.
- 6. Sauger was the second most abundant game fish, and represented the second highest percentage of the total biomass taken.
- 7. Sauger in the present study ranged in length from 214 mm to 535 mm and in weight from 18 g to 1860 g.
- 8. Growth rates of sauger in the Clinch River were faster than those found in northern waters; generally, similar to growth rates in the Tennessee Valley; and initially faster but slower by age classes 3-5 than those of western sauger.
9 The largest sauger, a female, weighed 4.1 pounds (1860 g); 63
- m. _ - - - . _ - - , . . y -- .;, _
64 the largest male weighed 2.7 Pounds (1220 g).
- 10. The length-weight relationships of 278 sauger (combined sexes) yielded the equation:
Log W = -6.249 + 3.479 log L. The weight of sauger in the present study .ncreased faster than the cube of the length.
- 11. Threadfin shad was the dominant food item of Clinch River sauger. Dorosoma sp., logperch, and a mayfly also contributed to the diet.
- 12. Fecundity estimates were made on eight sauger. An average of 69,625 eggs per fish and ^27,300 eggs per 454 g of fish weight was found. , ,
- 13. Eight gravid and two . spent sauger females were taken in collections made on April 17,1976 (water temperature averaged 14.5 C).
- Milt was easily extracted from males collected on this date. A number of males was found clustered in the nets around two of the gravid females indicating capture during the act of spawning.
- 14. One postlarval Stizostedion sp., 8.8 mm in length, was taken l
l l on April 9,1976, at CRM 12.0 in the supplementary tows of the present l study (water temperature, 15 C).
- 15. It is probable that the spawning period extends from mid-March until early May for the Clinch River sauger; and that the headwaters of Watts Bar, Melton Hill, and Norris Reservoirs are utilized by,sauger for spawning sites.
- 16. Nine genera of larva,1 fish from six families were taken in collections from May through September, 1975.
- 17. Clupeldae were the dominant larvae at 90% of the total number.
~ ..m
65
- 18. Peak larval fish densities occurred on May 30, 1975, when 1172 fish were taken.
19 The NFRRC water intake structure to be built at CRM 14.4 is not expected to adversely affect the fisheries of the study area as a result of larval fish entrainment. An entrainment value of 0.07% was arrived at based on the average NFRRC withdrawal and average annual flow of the Clinch River.
- 20. Fif teen species f rom six families were found in Grassy Creek.
The bluntnose minnow was the dominant species.
- 21. Seventeen species from six families were collected in Bear Creek. The common shiner was the most abundant species. Among the cyprinids found, one is an undescribed subspecies of Phoxinus oreas,
{
) the mountain redbelly dace.(Starnes, personal communication, 1977).
- 22. The appearance or' abundance of members of the Cyprinidae, Percidae, and Cottidae families should be monitored in assessing any changes whic'h may occur in the fish populations of these creeks.
i, G-o ~ # " *-+ -- r .w.. . . -.- , , , , , , , , , , , . _ . _ ,
h l I LITERATURE CITED 9 66 l l
m 67 American Fisheries Society, Committee on Names of Fishes. 1970. A list of common and scientific names of f!shes from the United States and Canada. 3rd ed. Spec. Publ. No. 6. Am. Fish. Soc. Washington, D. C. 150 pp. Butler, R. L. and L. L. Smith, Jr. 1953 A methed for cellulose acetate impressions of fish scales with a measurement of its reliability. Prog. Fish Cult. 15(4): 175-178. Cady, E. R. 1945 Fish distribution, Norris Reservoir, Tennessee,1943
- 1. Depth distribution of fish in Norris Reservoir. Tenn. Acad. Sci.
20(1): 103-114. Carufel, L. H. 1963. Life history of sauger in Garrison Reservoir. J. Wildl. Manage. 27(3): 450-456. Collette, B. B. 1963 The subfamilies, tribes, and genera of the Percidae (Teleostei). Copeia 1963(4): 615-623 Dendy, J. S. 1945 Fish distribution, Norris Reservoir, Tennessee,- 1943 II. Depth distribution of fish in relation to environmental factors, Norris Reservoir. Tenn. Acad. Sci. 20(1): 114-135 Eddy, S. 1969 How to know the freshwater fishes. 2nd ed. Wm. C. Brown Co., Dubuque, Iowa. 286 pp. Eschmeyer, R. W. and C. G. Smith. 1943. Fish spawning below Norris Dam. Tenn. Acad. Sci. 18(1): 4-5. Etnier, D. A. 1973. Keys to the fishes of Tennessee. Knoxville. Unpubl. mimeo. 65 pp. Exxon Nuclear Co. 1976. Nuclear Fuel Recovery and Recycling Center environmental report. Docket 50-564. Fish, M. P. 1932. Contributions to the early life histories of sixty-two species of fishes from Lake Erl'e and its tributary waters. Bull. U. S. Bur. Sports Fish. 47: 293-398. Fitz, R. B. 1968. Fish habitat and population changes resulting from the impoundment of Clinch River by Helton Hill Dam. Tenn. Acad. Sci. 43(1): 32-38. Carton, R. R. and R. D. Harxins. 1970. Guidelines: biological surveys at proposed heat discharge sites. Environmental Protection Agency. Corvallis, Oregon. 99 pp. Haslbauer, O. F. and D. E. Manges. 1947. Sauger movement in Norris Reservoir, Tennessee. Tenn. Acad. Sci. 22(l): 57-61. Hassler, W. W. 1957. Age and growth of the sauger, Stizostedion canadense canadense (Smith), in Norris Reservoir, Tennessee. Tenn. Acad. Sci. 32(l): 55-76. ~ .-
1 68 '!
. 1958. The fecundity, sex ratio, and maturity of the sauger, Stirostedion canadense canadense (Smith), in Norris Reservoir, Tennessee. Tenn. Acad. Sci. 33(1): 32-38.
Houge, J. 1975 Preliminary key to the larval fishes in the Tennessee River reservoir system. TVA-Forestry, Fisheries and Wildlife i Development, Muscle Shoals, Alabama. Unpubl. mimeo. 22 pp. Hobbs, C. L. and K. F. Lagier. 1958. Fishes of the Great Lakes region. Cranbrook Inst. of Sci, Bull . No. 26. 213 pp. Jester, D. B. 1971. Effects of commercial fishing, species introduction, and drawdown control on fish populations in Elephant Butte Reservoir, New Mexico. Reservoir Fisheries and Limnology. Am. Fish. Soc. Publ. No. 8. Washington, D. C. 265-287 pp. Lagler, K. F. 1956. Freshwater fishery biology. 2nd ed. Wm. C. Brown Co., Dubuque, Iowa. 421 pp. Mansueti, A. J. and J. D. Hardy, Jr. 1967 Development of fishes of the Chesapeake Bay region, Part I. Port City Press, Baltimore, Maryland. 202 pp. May, E. B. and C. R. Gasaway. 1967. A preliminary key to the identifi-cation of larval fishes of Oklahoma, with particular reference to Canton Reservoir, including a selected bibliography. Oklahoma Fish. Res. Lab. Bull. 5: 1-33 Mense, J. B. 1976. Growth and length-weight relationships of twenty-one reservoir fishes in Oklahoma. Oklahoma Fish. Res. Lab. Contrib. No. 188. 155 pp. Meyer, F. A. 1970. Development of some larval centrarchids. Prog. Fish Cult. 32: 130-136. Moss, D. D. 1967. Handbook of Tennessee reservoirs. Complied by D. D. Moss, Biology Dept., Tennessee Technological Univ., Cookeville. 144 pp. Helsen, D. J. 1969 Cesium, cesium-137, and potassium concentrations l In the white crappie and other Clinch River fish. Symposium on Radioecology, Ann Arbor, Michigan. 240-247 pp. Nelson, W. R. 1968. Reproduction and early life history of sauger,
. Stizostedion canadense canadense, in Lewis and Clark Lake. Trans.
Am. Fish Soc. 97(2): 158-166.
. 1969 Biological characteristics of the sauger population in Lewis and Clark Lake. Bur, of Sport Fish. and Wildl . Tech. Paper 21: 1-11.
Norden, C. R. Undated. A key to larval fishes from Lake Erie. Unpubl. mimco. 4 pp. m .-- .n. .- . , . . . . - -- ~ . ~ .,. - . . . - . . _ . - -
o . 69 l i l Powel l , T. G. , D. C. Bowden, and H. K. Hagen. 1971. Evaluation of five types of fishing gear in Boyd Reservoir, Colorado. Reservoir Washington. Fisheries and Limnology. Am. Fish. Soc. Publ. No. 8. D. C. 313-320 pp. Priegel, G. R. 1969 The Lake Winnebago sauger - age, growth, j reproduction, food habits and early life history. Wisconsin Dept. of Natural Resources. Tech. Bull. No. 43 63 pp. Project Management Corp. 1975 i C1.nch River Breeder Reactor environ-mental report. Docket 50-537 Scott, E. M. 1976. Dynamics of the Center Hill walleye populations. M. S. Thesis. Tennessee Technological Univ. 86 pp. Scott, W. B. and E. J. Crossman. 1973 Freshwater fishes of Canada. Fisheries Research Board of Canada, Ottawa, Canada. 966 pp. Sheddan, T. L. 1976. Fish inventory data, Watts Bar Reservoir,1973 TVA - Division of Forestry, Fisherles, and Wildlife Development, Norris, Tennessee. 16 pp. Siefert, R. E. 1969 Characteristics for the separation of white and black crappie larvae. Trans. Am. Fish. Soc. 98(2): 326-328. Smi th, L. L. , Jr. and W. M. Koens t. 1975 Temperature effects on esjs and fry of percold fishes. Environmental Protection Agency. Corvallis, Oregon. 91 pp. Stroud, R. H. 1948. Notes on growth of laybrids between the sauger and walleye (Stizostedion canadense x Stizostedion vitreum) in Norris Reservoi r, Tennessee. Copeia 1948(4): 297-298. Stubbs, J. M. 1965 Electrofishing using the boat as a negative. Proc. S. E. Assoc. Game and Fish Comm. 19: 203-244. Tebo, L. B., Jr. 1965 Fish population sampling studies at water pollution surveillance system stations on the Ohio, Teanessee, Clinch and Cemberland Rivers. Public Health Service Water Pollution Surveillance System Applications and Development Report No. 15, Cincinnati, Ohio. 79 pp. Tennessee Valley Authority, Fish and W81d11fe Branch, and Tennessee Game and Fish Commission. 1965 Fish inventory data, Watts Bar Reservoir, 1964. 13 pp. Tennessee Valley Authority. 1976a. Clinch River Breeder Reactor, fish larval sampling 1975 Unpubl. mimeo. 16 pp.
. 1976b. Estimates of entrainment of fish eggs and larvae by Bull Run Steam Plant, 1975, and assessment of the impact on the fish populations of Melton Hill Reservoir. Unpubl. mimeo. 29 pp.
= a x_ ___.w.__
l 70 1976c. Estimates of entrainment of fish eggs and farvae by Kingston Steam Plant, 1975, and assessment of the impact on the fish populations of Watts Bar Reservoir. Unpubl. mimeo. 37 pp. 1 I e .I
~
"~ ~~ ~' ~
-' ' ' , a -.7" , _ ,, ,_,
*[_,"
- y .
- ~ .- .. -..
a }. i j APPENDIX A i. 9 t ? 3-1 , 71 ) a, W N = d D
* ._ s -
m , a_ .se "rrene. .
.wr-c= ,. e . v n=1,9 -- e
72 Table le Number, Weights and Relative Abundance of Fish Collected at CRM 12o0 in 1975 and 1976
- - - - , . . . . . .._.e_. . . . . . . .. - - - . . .
._ = - . . _ . . . . . ._..e..... ...__ e- -.
95 *'"'****1 '*a* t6. ? 7.'e! ** T* 1.***f*H
. "."' *_** tan
** '*._a * *s., *h.!*' *-w '*: .**w*% % '2' - * * * - *- *- *- ** * '%
te?'. ame.t as e a e.vs se e.es a e.e9 9 e.es e 44*et #6 4 L a.se n9e e.se on e.se o a.se ses e.st e4 as.n we n.e4 e 4.as se o.34 s 4.s s en e.se
- s.w es me a e.38 e o.e4 a.=,s se me e s.se ne s.e3 a s.M Ivo e.es s s.4e 33s e.se mese seeee a e.no Me e.se : e.e9 ene e.ee
- e. as e o.es
.et.eem 6escae 4e e s.ee seis s.e4 : a . 9. ie e.n e s.3: siss s.m e s.no asse s.vs a e es we s.se sens-e e.eet s a.as saa e.sa a e.9e an e.ss a s.se a se o.as a s.ss a st e. ro seeee-a mene a n.m t** s.n e nesee 9 e.se 384 9 S.44 4 8.93 Met 6.et o 2.29 M85 s.M as 89.e4 teen M.M L$ 33.4e tales 30.33 ema teye 3 3 . 33 asas 3.73 M
emme le 89. te 3899 e.Ft 3e 89 48 Ste t 6.75 79 e. 99 eeM 9.43 If G. 9 9 #301 4.64 4 1.18 946 3.M edeseed.e 9'weedf on.e le 8 8.79 acG3 3.e4 Se II.el atos 3.e4 39 9.30 37% 0.34 33 35.97 ee8 4.33 & 4.83 Ste G.et heanse etelete 8 e.Pt M e.4% 8 6.49 ao e to solees shah e 3.31 es e.49 8 e.at SG 6.as I 9.00 4 6.et estese eMeev 8 8. te 3 0.08 emese64 obtees 38 f.95 lie e.39 e 4. 7% SL e. le le G.36 SS 3.80 esse f ee ekteee t e.3s e e.Gl enameemme seemse 3 8.16 e. == $9 e.44 Se G se 4 4.19 65 e.ee settenee sea e 3e 3e.9e et e.39 M 30. B4 99 e.33 e6 33.se 79 e.se 5-E . Pte=e e eeume tee 9 e.Se IMs S.tl
, teet tee t easeos tee t I. 39 ese 5.64 3 1.M lief 3.te 8 e.JG 488 6.95 an, se e.e 3 6.e 5 S te e. 33 emette.at n fesse e 3.98 esas 42.ef 4 8.13 SJIS 58.37 8 8.69 Stee 68.e3 ee gee.sa e.f f ete 8 B. lf 59 9 9.9e seast teetene 3 s.9e GMG 9.99 Gemseed t=4+e 8 e.95* ese e.39 heueo e.se.e B 0,38 ses 8.2e ti.te e ee te tes if 94 99 Inee 19 9e 3 B.34 Base 3.M t e tt e39 3. es stoelet heretag e e . 8# M4 9.e9 10 1.ee Beet 9.07 39 4 44 4974 S t. n 9 9.44 49ee 85.03 *1 De se Bes te e' It Eee t 3 84.94 te et M. sh Bf it.6' plaef M.64 e 4.63 Sues f.44 I o.ee 988 4.ep 3 8.ee este 9 pt , I 3.39 efe 0.48 ete emosyeme,e eep 3. 99 seg e.lg a 3 # 44 sets S. M $ 3, ee s tel F.te Eheemen ees stem a e. I t 1st f.e3 8 9. 3e snee f.no 3 3.65 533e to es e 4.47 M39 34.39 Seeeeed +e, 8 8.39 384d 3.9a hemsseee ses 8 5.94 late 4.83 8 e.98 19ee 9.00 5 8. te ete 6.st 4 e.e3 9 38 8.84 co'estat e sh -
3 e.3e Mes 9.08 Frees.eees demo n 4.39 34 8 e.89 5 8.9e ese 4.se teletese emens emee 6e mates, f%Je IP.e. 8971 96e M St t resen. M.D*. emne, e9.394 Besees. ansee lse it. wee.eee se seef.e C'.'t 12.0, 3999.ste el.det eussee. 74.386 eme, e.P74 feeece. esteelse ehnu.senne em 6esesee teJe 87. 4.1991 36e 46.494 easgn. 33.99e teme. 35.004 seeago. le ## wee es. *me w. ges . ee. e.a. . we . eue , es , one se est . en e se , eue , es. esa . ee . _ _ te. , ame@ 99 98.4e 36969 T4.99 em 49.06 99934 99.99 et to.te 34766 44.e4 Se it.lt tense 79.39 33 36.49 to994 46.94 Gee la $4.49 SS11 14.39 to $ 3. 73 p age 9.94 De t re* 89.36 46 98.96 31932 67.99 36 - 30.e4 33.'e 9 3e *e l rees,e L4 se.se one is.es sees;M.ss sees as.a3 ese M. 9.% **e an.n er sa.a u.94 e.ss as is.es use s.ee i TT Tess Eiid Ei tem e33 r.restiiT- BE u sr i mimos e e ween es. v. ee..e ..Tee .t e.. t vees es. e _p,,,n seeyg*.ee 9.wei n , e ti et e.. .,eee es.
,ee eee m.; ee e aet me. .e es os. en,ee se ,ee e_.e,s.
=,,...e .c en-ies ege,eee e e ee se see_
*= s* as os.it e ts.es se et.3e e es.ss a st.as e== s av.te o so.es 9 as.es e Is.as s st.n
**e9e a ss.e4 s ar.es e : .no e es.se o .no
' ** ease es, ee 4 es see . er e e .e,eoes.e se ,.e.e esee.
. . . . kemam m 1- - s --
e e 73 e Table 2e Number, Weights and Relative Abundance of Fish Collected at CRM 14e4 in 1975 and 1976
* " t*:'**. St.=f:2.*n ti' t e1***-* m== s ee='s not,LL
* * - *"*. _*e .:lfd; .:=% ".*._ .'* ? -'*- *. -**. *- ** *. w' . *
- a. w.
*T*.
eens e e e.te ses e.s9 s i.es see en a e.as se e.** e-eeew.e o.aees. e s.s e we s.es a o.se se e.e. see -see a e.a s an e.ee si. ests la e.ee ses s.es se e se sea t.sr se e.st too s.ve to s.sa ses e.et ae= ,. -en
- a e.Se os e.as are-e e.eien a e.es sie e.
e,w e+e seee e s.es see e.as e e.es m e.n a e.tv en e se a.ee e.en e.ee a s.es tse s. n6 s e. se w e.as s s.ss nes e. m o s.ee stee a. a s mese etesese 3 a.ra att e.ee 3 n.n as e.se e.se ass e. se
- eie.e eucee. s e. se no e.ee maae mees a s.es Ses e4e a e . e+ sus e o s.se ties e.et s e.se ses n.es e a.sa est t. se 9 esses tees a S. n us e.n as s s.34 nie e.Se a s.es ese e.ss seeeeee neue a e.sa one s.et a e.sv enw S.et sensee a 4.J 6 test Lea 3 4.73 Il he Lee 9 8.14 etel 60.1e It 8.38 sleet 30.94 M St.se Steel 28.10 Seesee B selleye 4 e.e6 Isee 6.lP D*ff euee $tteeeeeds a 3.90 = . 6 3.51 e e.e3 e e.ar te e.e4 08eemed shee #1 ft. %R 9639 84.99 to 29. 13 goes sp.eg og 33.g3 gee s 33.es 39 e.gg 3:ee 3.44 m w,se gegg 4.ao theeefete shee S 7.M 44e 8.44 S 4. 55 ett 0.99 99 st.96 s9af 6.99 ete 64. Es Stet B8.33 95 de.se 9tse 3.14 eeseene esotete 2 e.14 Il e et ilpmovese entase 3 8.97 e e.es sa 4.48 49 e.at se s.39 see e.af Pt 9 e3 899 0.89 essef te sol.se & S.M e e et & S. Is e e.et ele =te ee seanes 5 e.es . e a e.Se a e a e.st e e en ee48 heel seemse $ $.8% 4 e 9 8.13 to e.Ge 8 e.fT 4 e et 3 8.&S es e.18 4 e.Se la e.e4 M
essee eer,essere a e.M see. 3.n i e.se one e.u ginstBhase very=setse 5 e.a s M37 6.es t e. 96 t#et GI.68 3 4.48 Met 4.99 4 e.19 tee 0.9e e=see eenee t 4.89 ese e.90 emet'emaet emitete B 3.M este sm 8 c.33 time 3.no 08e-t t.ef fete 8 e.sf bene 4.39 esmeted emetoe . E e.M lte 0.74 estee, eestimeen 8 8.38 1.*.9 4 4.88 1800 4.39 ete4 ee shoose 3 eM Be 64 t.s B b4 em eeswees % 9 ee 8980 e. 3 9 5 3.99 tote 4.05 8 8.88 31 st 4.98 B e.If 9499 S.39 5 e. te 999 4.e4 saappant asettag # 83 ee 4:09 38.10 8 3.99 tot I.se 3 9. be 6498 84.99 M f.49 eese 89.99 It la.es 99t ti 99 e9 Corp 89 36.96 9ese St.el BB 16.2% leset 33.33 9 3.te SPla SS.M 7 L.le T9ee LAtt S B . 93 hate e. t 3 stree, eere a a.es see e se a e.as see e. n 9 3. tt 780 B . ft e 3.25 nett 3.49 thement eetfleh $, 8.44 siet e.e6 $ l.18 199e 3. 7% . $ e.3e 435 e.ef - feeeeeeeee eene 88 4.e6 tFat 3.23 5 S.98 639 e.at hatee toe eh.mes.we le humbipe, fee 14.e. s97%+1&o ll stt esse % le.4et game. 43.wt $erees. tele *ese ab st' esse sq meMhe, q"*4 l $.4. s999*9ee Shlfe eeees. PeJte gate. $9.e*% eeeeee. se6enese aeme-sease 54 frestee. Cefe 14.4. 89P%*sSg $9.49% reseh. Js.eeee.es. 25.eet coseen. I l l g gag seveemeee-m===*ev swe=e-eeeeeeer esee.neest
,aes . .se. . 49. . e w se .e.. .. .. es .. a. . =. == =. *-e.
eseeh 9e Se.9 5 #s 'ed it et to le et 79 tee 8 9.#9 13 84.14 asset es. s e te 4.71 ase2S es 97 St 19ame **.m Game e e.e9 avat e. 33 se pges to. st ee 8a.64 ee s 19.48 *a ll.e9 too: t 39 99 *e as.ee 1 ee stets ee se in.se saw me.at en, po. s.e one is.ee **e u. se ases as.ae e o n.se ee . it.as s ie w.se bene si e e.ee esee,e n n Tese+ tas e..e nabi DT nasi H3 462 kee m e sea . .i.ee so. e swee ee. 9. ee. 9 Seen me. seees so. t es.es ee. Son et . a ween me.
=e acocee, e* ar. ees se seers,raeg,f,g-e**e -e e* e* *e ' tee _L**.
9.see nep pe se set ** e n. ._oWy,* ' e'=eh a go,ge ge 33.ae t 33.33 e 38,ge 3 33.30 l *a== 3 as.ss se se.ee to is.ee o ee.ee e it. se as.te e n.u s vs.es n o. is N== a se.se e \ *
. m-e Se0O # e esee8W'e le ehg GWee septe8eed $e M8WW.
- - . -- .a,, ;. T 7. p .-'.m ,
as - s. ; ' ' . . ' ' + g, v n - -- 7, , - w _,7 ,
74 i l Table 3 Number, Veights and Relative Abundance of Fish Collected at Grassy Creek Embayment in 1975 and 1976 u -r .:. . ~+~.~.--.
. -.~ n:.
s..- x .-~r.'
-~...-.,.:.~.~... n.. ..~ . w.m.= v -. - ~ ~. ~ -- . . ~ .
e- .
. ..n n ..u
. n ..
. .n .n .
. . . . . . . . in ... . . i ,. .n ... .. u . ui ..
n ... n..... i.o n . n.. u. .,.
.. u. . . ..u = ..
.m........
.. . . n.e. iu.
i u . n..
. ..n .. .... . in . ..
, .... u.n u
....., n .. . o n ...
.n-. . , .
.n ..
..... . .. u ..,.
. o. o . .. o ee~s
. .. ... ... . .n
.u .
n .. ..n . . . . . u. . ..n ....n. n .. n a. m .,.., i
....n u..n
. ..a .e. ..n n. n.u no .... nu n.... n. .+
... . ..n . .. ..n ..- . .,
. . . . . . ... . . in. . .u .. . . .
- n. .
n - u .3
.e .
.... . . . . . . .. . n. >
.. n u ....n nn w. n .. .
mes
. . . . . ..o n. ...
. ..n n, .
.. n. .n. i.n . ..n . ..
.n. . . .
. . n ..n M
ll 5.1 3 133 9. 3 3s 3 t.eh.
. . s.. . .
. M. H. .
.t s.
ty if
.L. fl
. .39 se. M.esM
... 3 . . s.
.s I .29 ii.8 . .. 11. 8. 93 i .a 4 3 .S.%. 8 F. _
P. 9 3.a.3
.u. T. ...
.at .e. .am i. ee.e... (. .... i.8%.1.. . .m.. .. % f.e.g.,
e.g . u.6 . .g..ef.g..., 3 p. J g e s., 79..HS l. . A. .e. .h . E . y C . . .. i.7.P.
. s., l#.7. . pl. 99fi g .. d.....B.g..
Bf
. it E . e. a. s. .n ...: s.es sa .
sm.e is.u. u.a nin. *.no v.e.w . n..s. u.m
.s.
n ie n
.n. Gn. s..m a.a Sm e n ...
in.ss an. u. so. si.sa _i*a a maa a.si.a.n. F
. n.n .us n
..n E.n is..s 1 =
- .si se 1s.=
- u.
in. s.t. a.. ..e w..a .w.... s
.e m.
a i.. se a
.a e
. . w..a .
wm
.e .e r .
.a..
e. wua e..
.c.....
a.e.. e .r ... e a s. . n. . e..s... .s..r.e n. sa e. r s a n.as is e a .s a v .as..n. s.v. s
. u.a.
l
.=,. .. . - - ~ .
l 1 I
l l l 75 Table 4. Number, Weights and Relative Abundance of Fish Collected at CRM 15.0 East in 1975 and 1976
.s :~r > s.~ ~:.... ~ *-:+ s.-r: n - .:*.n t
.. . - m .. w_s...-u.. .n. . .- . , _ . - ..v _ v
.r
.- i
.,.., ... ... ... i. .n
. . ,m . . .. n. ... . ... .... n .n n u. .. .. n. .
. n . .n
... n ...
- . ..n...
. . . .a . . , . . . . . .. . .. in .. . . . . . .
.. . . m.
n .. . . . . ..
..... . s. . . . . . . .. .a. m ... . m . . .m . . . .
.. m . .. .. . .. n .n .n . ..
. . n ...
. . - . . - . ... in . . .
n . iun . . . ... . ... nu u.n a n.. n = n.n = n. . aee
.n u. ... ... . ..n i ... . .
u . n . ... . un ..n ..
....n
- n. n.. n. n. . ....u.
.. u n. . . .n . .n .. n. .. u.= in
.. m. n..
i.. .. n
... . .. .. n n ... . . i. .n
.u . ... . ... u ..... ... n.w .. u n. .n
.u.
. ..a . .. m. ..n
....n. ..n. n. ...n.
n - ... .a n o.n ..
. .. n n es
..n.-- . . . . = = n. . ... n i . im . . . . . . . m. u . m. ..
. .i . n. m ..
. .n u .
. im .. n
.u.... . i.n .. ... t.. . . . -
. .i...=
. . in. ...
. . . . . i.n. . ..n .= ...
n m n. n
~.
.n..,.
i ...n .. n im , - u. u.n
.n .m.n.u ..a.
..n
.u n.
. u.n.
n. n.. i.n .. io n..
..~. . .
~, . n. . ..u im.
.i... n na .. n. . . .n ..n i .. n u. n n . .....-n i
..n u
.n
.. n i. . . . . . . . ... m ...
. .. .. - n . . im... ... . i n. m .
. . .. .. n.. .in... n. = m.
. . c= n.. . im... n. = . .. .m. - . .n... --..
.d. e. , e.. . . .*.m. .u.. . . . . . ut . .i . . .*
n u. n n.. n.. u.n a. .. u .... .n
- n. i. u m ..... .n. m.n. n.
n n.. ,. mm.n.
.. m ...u.n....n...n ..n
- . n n.. . n n .. n u.n um. u.= n.n .i. .n..n .u .an. ..n .i n m .n . ..n u . .n - ...
R m u w w m m m = .m.
.=... . ..i. . .. . . . . . . . . . . . .
.e .e .es , ,.,. e ...
.g.r... .e g. .._.
.. g. ...r.-... ew. . . . . ..#... .. .f.A W . ... i . .i. . ... . .
.** . ... s.....
ha 8 ... . .as . t. . . . . I '. * '$ . .M 5 MW _ $ .. M MMg
76 Table 5. Number, Weights and Relative Abundance of Fish Collected at CRM 15.0 West in 1975 and 1976 21 f== P.T.1 tr* * -N J, *:*2*1.rJ**.- t;"-*r*'t
. w. = = , . . . __ = _ . =_ .sg._w.. .e . m , _ =. . _ .s ._ m. . w. =. n t*5
% e e e.ee n e.u e.m a e.is a .. n s ee e.n 86 . e. wa.o e e.se is e se Si s. B B M te 4.e3 84 4.09 ee9 4. 8 le t i.la tea B. 37 etwe..est e e e i e.as as e se a e.se e e.es e-. a e.se sese s.w e e.n e.ee a n.ee tvse e.e4
==....r.,. . e. ,em e e e.es na e.to a e. se ase.s u e.w emis. a e.at inst a,ee a e.w su e.se s.e s 3 e et sie e.es a a.ee ses e. te see e e e en s.e s e ,.e s s.es asse v.so e 3.ts sese is.es as an..e i.aies
.se es.no P'l!"?.
e s e.as e.es : e. , a e.ee ease.een.e ai . s 3. Riee 3. s s e.95 iles 9.rs t 3.ee fe a.it Toe eet. em.e , les 48.33 e atta it..ee ett e4.13 se tt 88.18 st al te li te 8.es e.4 e ew 88 3.ee M3 e. 99 3 B.se se 6.04 ews.le e.s e 3 es.se - tte go.ee tage 3.u 13 3.43 93 e. se e s.es 31 e.ee er.ses. ees e & an .se a. 3 e.st 11 e.e4 es e 6 3 0.39 4 e.et D tle.ae w is 3.3s M e.it & L.33 19 4.99 9 e.e7 69 e se 9 e e e e es.t.e t 9.no 3 e.et t e.eet 3 e.49 es e.4s N e a e.se use s.p s e e.eee & S.n See 5.00
.a.is.6 e- g i.e r.i. a e.es ines so.no a e.st eve ts.se se e n eins t.a. 4 4.33 tHe 1.e4 eaa e m.coe 8 e.es se 8 88.33 e 3 e.as $ 390 a.n easse nee ees.e _ s
- e. 12 m e.e1 9 e. 31 iPee e.et se e.a.se n.een., e s. e,s, one e.u a e.no inte s.m se is.se swee as.n c.re a e.sv seie e.n s 4n enee si.no a e.n s aae s.n em. easia a e.n su n.n e.as ese i.es e a ec. s so.ee u see.as a e.as tan e.es e.e e = e e. . im.se. s es . ei se . es.m s e.a .e . i. .cs.e
, isis.e e . em se. es. .e. . .s so. . is.e n s.e .
e e . es e.-e ec.#...i.. cm. is.e . . im.ne. as.ee. .na.s.. .ss.m s . g.f. _...v.me _. .= . . =. =am. ._.=m. =.__...=_w,_as G=* a so.ee es ase.ee es w.n : n.es anee u e+ n i es av es.n 4 e - e - 4 s. u, a.v.i.se
.. . i, as en er te.no e ei.n r.eu.es ss. se ow.e. e me es.vt n oe es.w e.e n.as vn.aaa.es n
.. av.ie i,u e.w i es.se iT - - &J TeGi sai IITW ies Eini m_s em
. , . .ee .
en. _,f f.es w. ma. .a . en.: . .iee.a . .a e.. . .a .
.'*r-**** *r*. *'****. r.***. ***'*' 'L+e**.
ee a ss.se se so.ee s as. es e-- a ae.se
- e. .o=
e e m.n me.m e u.u a es se e m.ru v so.m s ss.se
' tass ou .re.a.e i. er . m.s. e se ,- e ed,e.
W"
_ -. .~
.h 8 Table 6. Number, Weights and Relative Abundance of Fish Collected at Grassy Creek 1.0 in 1975 and 1976 h
(;pril) (December and February) (October and Noves4)er) winter Quarter Sprira Quarter wt. g wt. Fall Quarter g po, we. g we, wo. t No. g wo. we. g we, wo. Mile 1.0 wo. C.\Mr 1.56 4 2.61 3.51 4 0.17 ReJtreast sunfish 1 9.15 1 0.65 1 0.15 2 4.45 11 17.19 14 1.19 23 51ueg111 5 3.23 149 22.82 1 2.32 Lor. gear sur. fish 2 3.57 12 19.61 1 0.65 9 1.38 4 6.25 30 SPctted bas. FCRA0E i 5 8.93 $? 9.67 2.61 3 1.e4 to 1.53 2 3.13 4 6 12.71 65 12.57 Sto.sroller 27.45 2 1.29 32 1.h4 3.39 1 1.56 42 3.57 2 00.a; shiner 5.23 2d 18.06 33 5.05 2 8 12.50 8
- Spotfin shtr.er 27.45 67 43.23 78 11.94 C.39 32 50.00 42 1 1.73 3 Blur.tnose . tanow 9 5.81 26 3.9A 6 10.71 64 12.15 blackncse J.ca 0.65 1 0.65 11 1.(s J.39 Oreek ci.ub 1 1.56 1 12 1.e4 2 3.57 2 3.13 2 1.31 10 6.45 114 22.f5 7. essee snubnose carter 1,29 14 2,14 9 16.07 2 145 24.35
!.* .rercr. QS 15.01 19 33.93 2 3.13 6 3.92 24 15.49 5; JJ c:J1p ar.
5.-.:M 1.29 200 30.63 Wtate sarkar 2 g 1,79 32 5.63 Yelicv bullheaJ
* '.%
- gt.t s e'a rst e .'1 tr. Ers:s
-a
%4 b
1 1 I I i
} Table 7. Number, Weights and Relative Abundance of Fish Collected at Grassy Creek 2.2 in 1975 and 1976 t \
t. (Octo W r and Novatrberl (December and February) IApr!!) la!! Ouarter Winter Quartar Spring Quarter
.21e 2.2 t: . % No. Yt. % Wt. Nrt . % No. Wt. % Wt. 78 0 L NO. Wt= % WI -
CVt 0 - 0 - 0 - 0 . 0 - 0 - t F05A ;t l Ela:i.osa dace 31 34.29 33 27.73 6 40.00 6 20.3C Craek chah 4 100.00 12 100.00 46 65.71 86 72.27 *, 63.00 24 83.03 RC **H t 0 - 0 - 0 - 0 - rs - 0 -
* ".'eig.ts ex;resse2 in g. us N
CC
v Table 8. Number, Weights and Relative Abundance of Fish Collected at Bear Creek 0.5 in 1975 and 1976 i ki
' (Octcber and November) (Decerber and February) (Apr:1) utt. tar Cuarter o 5,rsnq Ouarter rett Dearter g Wt. -I Mile 0.5 wo. g ?:o , vs. g Wt M1. g No. Wt. g Wt.
- W3. 4 No. Wt.
I c%rt tack bass 2 1.98 9 6.43 1 1.27 147 18.37 3 3.75 154 37.11 FCPACE I
,1 star.eroller 11 10.89 17 12.14 52 22.03 145 18.61 22 27.53 117 28.19 Pasefin thiner 2 1.98 4 2.06 12 5.08 15 1.93 i 'j trerald shaper 1 0.42 1 0.13 53.47 76 54.29 110 46.61 166 21.31 7 a.75 37 8.92 f Camraa shiner Slu.-: nose rier.aw 54 1 1.25 1 0.24 'N 2.97 3.57 19 8.05 34 4.36 21 25.25 55 13.25
[
+-
.51acknose da:e Creek chub 3
6 5.94 5 6 4.29 5 2.12 61 7.83 Pasquito issh 2 0.45 - I' 2.65 stripetail darter 2 1.98 4 2.86 10 4.24 14 1,80 9 11.25 11 16.83 5.93 8 1.03 11 13.75 9 2.17 i Tent.assee snubnose oarter 17 13 9.29 14 3.96 6 4.29 0.85 11 1.41 3 3.75 10 2.41
,' Bar.ded sculpin 4 2 'l RO ;H I White sucker 4 1.69 86 11,04 3 3.75 21 5.06 Northern hog sucker 2 0.85 91 11.68 h * 'Jelghts erpressed i= grar:
.p
%J LS I.
1 1 1 Number, Weights and Relative Abundance of Fish Collected at Bear Creek I.2 in 1975 and 1976
~
e
, Table 9 l
1 4 Decender ar.d l'ebruary) (April) 40c:clar ara November) sprinc Suartar Tell C;atte/ 'Ja..t..r 0 Ja r to r %..
~~~ Wt. % Wt. tio. sMo. Wt.
tX. Wt. % Et. No. 9 No. F.!*! 1.2 No.
==
1.35 3 1.04 279 47.77 Fo:% tass 1 C.6S 4 I . Tc;1.0c
.) 136 13.15 14 31.e2 157 !.4!
a,84 48 16.22 21 14. .* 2 5:.rers1:er 13 0.34 1 2.27 - - 13 12.24 17 5.74 4 2.72 2 F . ta.
- 1n sh.ner 62 42.13 102 17.47 4 9.09 16 :.55 74 50.34 139 46.96 Oc ,rer. shiner 1 0.(& 1 0.17 g Blar.tnose minnow 1 2.27 1 C.34 l itse nas sp. 55 9.42 10 22.13 31 1.12 21 14.19 25 8.45 23 15.65 i
812:=r. 24 dace 2,04 5 0.86 4 9.09 119 4.). creek chwh 5 3.40 46 15.54 3 3 2.04 5 0.86 5:ripetalt darter 2.91 4 9.09 3 3,11 12 8.16 10 3.38 24 16.33 17 Ta.-nessee snubnose derter 1,69 0.68 3 0.51 2 1.36 5 1 Ea.*ed sculpin i l PC'.CM 2 1.36 9 1.54 4 9.09 737 26.47
':i Zitte sucker t:srthern hcg sucker 1 0.68 2 0.58 61.51 .] 2 4.55 1700 Golden redhorse 1
- Veights expresse* *: gr6ms CD O
1
- O
Table 10. Number, Weight 5 and Relative Abundance of Fish Collected in Bear Creek 3.0 in 1975 and 1976 (Cctobes ar.2 Novoeber) (Decerber and February) l April) rat guarter Winter QJarter spring Quarter Mile 3.0 No. 4 No. We % We. :co. ~% No. Wt. 4 Wt. No. ~ s No. Wt % Ut. 4:A': Fs.k bass 5 4.85 573 65.24 stue9111 2 1.94 20 2.25 r FA r stor.eroller 16 15 *3 45 5.07 15 20.55 le 19.7% 11 47.e3 46 41.44 Fsesfin shiner 12 11.s5 21 2.37 26 35.62 25 27.e? 1 4.35 1 0.90
- r..:. shi er 16 15.53 33 3.72 14 19.18 le '49.70 7tenu.us sp. 2 1.94 4 0.45 1 1.37 3 3,30
. Elentnese air.now 1 0.97 2 0.23 Blacknose deca 9 8.74 15 1.69 5 -6.35 3 3.30 3 13.04 4 1.60 Creek chub 30 29.13 87 9.81 2 2.74 8 8.79 Strar.etail darter 1 0.97 1 0.11 Te J.essee snabe.ose darter .5 4.85 8 0.90 9 12.33 9 9.89 7 30.43 4 5.41 30714 White sucker 4 3.88 72 8.12 1 1.37 7 7.69 1 4.35 54 48.65
* ~4e!ghts expressed in g mes CO
82 Table 11. Date and Effort of Electrofishing Collections in the Clinch River, May. 1975, through April, 1976* Date Location and Effort 5-02-75 Grassy Creek embayment - 1F. 6-28-75 CRM 12, 14.4, and 15 east - 30 min./ station. (Day light) 8 30-75 CRM 12, 14.4, 15 east and west - 30 rain./ station. (Day light) 9-27-75 CRM 12,14.4,15 east and west, and Grassy Creek embayment - 30 min./ station. 11-1-75 As sampled on 9-27-75 11-16-75 CRM 12,15 cast and west and Grassy Creek embay-CRM 14.4 - I hr. (Day ment - 30 min./ station. light) 12-16-75 As sampled on 9-27-75 1-17-76 As sampled on 9-27-75 2-20-76 , As sampled on 9-27-75 3-17-76 As sampled on 9-27-75 4-9-76 As sampled on 9-27-75 cUnless otherwise indicated, collections were made at night. e
. =
83 Table 12. Date and' Effort of Gill Net Collections in the Clinch River, May, 1975, through April, 19,6 7 Date Location and Ef fort 5-02-75 CRM 12,14.4,15 east - 3 nets / station 6-28-75 As sampled on 5-02-75 7-26-75 As sampled on 5-02-75 1 8-30-75 As sampled on 5-02-75 9-27-75 CRM 12, 14.4, 15 east and west - 2 nets / station. Grassy Creek embayment - I net 10-31-75 CRM 12, 14.4, 15 east and west and Grassy Creek embayment - 2 nets / station 11-15-75 As sampled on 10-31-75 12-15-75 CRM 12, 14.4. 15 east and west - 3 nets / station 1-16-76 CRM 12, 14.4, 15 east and west and Grassy Creek embayment - 3 nets / station 2-13-76 . As sampled on 12-15-75 3-14-76 As sampled on 12-15-75 4-17-76 As sampled on 1-16-76
s O
, 84 Table 13 Date and Effort of Larval Fish Collections on the Clinch River May, 1975, through September, 1975 Date Location and Effort 5-01-75 CRM 12, 14.4, 15 east. Each station - tows taken - O m shore, O m and 2 m at 252 of river width 5-17-75 C RM 12, 14.4, 15 east and west. Each station -
tows taken - O m shore, O m and 5 m at 25%: ' of river width. Grassy Creek embayment - I tow taken - O m mid-channel 5-30-75 ~ CRM 12, 14.4, 15 east and west. Each station - tows taken - O m shore, O m and 5 m at 25% of river width. Grassy Creek embayment - 2 tows - O m mid-channel 6-15-75 As sampled on 5-30-75 6-28-75 As sampled on 5-30-75 7-10-75 As sampled on 5-30-75 7-25-75 CRM 12, 14.4, 15 east and west. Each station - tows taken - O m shore, O m and 5 m at 252 of river width 8-12-75 CRM 12, 14.4. Each station - tows taken - O m shore, O m and 5 m at 25% of river width. CRM 15 east and west bank - O m shore only. Grassy Creek embayment - 2 tows - O m mid-channel 8-29-75 As sampled on 5-30-75 9-12-75 As sampled on 5-30-75
85 Table 14 Date and Effort of Collection in Grassy Creek, October, 1975, through April,1976 Date Location and Effort 10-11-75 Grassy Creek I.0 and 2.2 - 30 min./ station seining 11-16-75 As sampled on 10-11-75 12-16-75 Grassy Creek 1.0 - 30 min. of electrofishing and seining. Grassy Creek 2.2 - 30 min. seini.g 2-14-76 Grassy Creek 1.0 and 2.2 - 30 min./ station electroffshing 4-18-76 As sampled on 2-14-76 e W 4 6 e ss'-
"-
- K g. , ,g, ..~ '-
p'.
-e % .7 ,8 i
==bF* A '
E**e,M*N*
*M* =
- e , e, 3- -
1
. + i l
1
-86 !
1 Table 15. Date and Effort of collections la Bear creek, September, ! 1975, through April. 1976 Date Location and Effort 9-27-75 Bear creek 3.0 - 30 min. setning 10-11-75 Bear creek 0.5 and 1.2 - 30 min./ station seining 11-16-75 Bear Creek 0.5, 1.2, and 3.0 - 30 min./ station setning 12-15-75 As sampled on 11-16-75 2-14-76 Bear Creek 0.5, 1.2, and 3.0 - 30 min./ station electrofishing 4-16-76 As sampled on 2-14-76 1 e 9
' ' , - + --g-... -
s -we ,7. g- a 7 , am NwN *' - aww -- i.m -. - - I ye y. -9 ,v**,9-www-- - , - - + ....7 ,,--9...----- mw--,_--v.--- - - - ..--,-g.g*p, y. w swg n,s c r 9 p--w . w ipy.,yrp., m.g+,m_myg -. 9epaw-ye,, er-,w-
4 4' I a 9 6 APPENDIX B 87
Table 1. Temperature (C) in the Clinch River, Grassy Creek. and Bear Creek f rom June 1975, to May. 1976* Clinch River Grassy Creek lear Creek Month 12.0 14.4 15.0E 15.0W . 1.0 2.2 0.5 2 3.0
.' ? - - - - -
23.0 22.0 22.0 20.0 Juiy 20.0 18.5 19.0 19.5 25.0 21.0 - 18.0 19.5 Aug. 19.5 20.0 20.0 20.0 25.0 22.5 23.0 23.0 19.0 Sept. 21.0 21.0 21.0 21.0 23.0 19.5 21.0 20.0 20.3 Oct. 19.1 19.0 18.9 18.9 18.8 18.5 17.3 17.1 17.2 Nov. 15.4 15 5 15.5 15.5 11.4 9.5 8.9 10.5 12.0 Dec. 10.5 11.0 10.9 10.7 10.5 11.5 11.0 11.I 11.2 Jan. 7.3 7.2 7.3 7. 3 ' 5.0 4.0 4.7 5.3 6.0 Feb. 8.2 6.5 8.2 8.0 12.5 12.6 '13.0 13.0 12.0 March 12.5 12.0 10.5 10.3 11.0 8.5 10.0 10.0 10.6 April 14.8 14.6 14.5 14.0 12.7 15.2 15.0 15.3 14.0 May 17.I 16.6 16.6 - 18.6 15.6 16.0 15.9 15.5 AVERAGE 15.0 14.9 14.8 14.5 15.8 15.1 14.7 15.1 14.8
- Civil Engineering Department, Tennessee Technological University, personai communication, 1977 i
1 ( Table 2. pH in the Clinch River, Grassy Creek, and' Bear Creek from July, 1975, to May, 1976* Clinch River Grassy Creek Bear Creek 14.4 15.0E 15.00 1.0 2.2 0.5 1.2 3.0 [ Month 12.0 1 v 7.1 7.4 7.8 - 7.8 7.3 July 7.2 7.1 7.0 7.0 6.8 6.8 7.1 7.9 7.3 7.4 Aug. 7.0 7.3 7.3 7.3 Sept. 7.1 7.1 7.I i.2 7.3 7.5 7.4 7.8 7.8 7.2 7.5 7.4 7.3 Oct. 7.9 7.9 7.7 7.5 7.8 7.9 7.9 8.0 8.1 7.8 L Nov. 7.8 7.8 8.3 8.4 Dec. 8.4 8.4 8.4 8.4 8.2 8.4 79 7.9 7.8 7.3 7.8 7.6 7.5 Jan. 7.8 7.9 7.9 Feb. 8.4 8.6 8.6 8.5 8.2 8.3 8.I 8.0 7.9 r 8.6 8.2 8.3 8.2 8.5 8.2 8.0 7.8
- March 8.6 8.2 8.0 7.9 April 8.2 8.1 8.1 8.0 8.4 8.3 8.4 8.4 8.2 8.0 7.9 7.7 May 8.5 8.4 -
u 7.8 7.8 8.0 7.8 7.8 7.6 AVERAGE 7.9 7.9 7.8
- Civil Engineering Department, Tennessee Technological University, personal communication, 1977 i .
l 4 w 1
.t
90 Table 3 Discharge (m /sec) of the Clinch River Grassy Creek, and
. Sear Creek from June. 1975, to May, 1976 ,
1 2 2 Grassy Creek Sear Creek Month Clinch River 202.64 0.02 0.I3 ; June
- 0.16 ,
July 201.21 J. Aug. 188.08 1 Sept. I36.36 0.06 0.48 Oct. 87.36 0.03 0.24 Nov. 87 50 0.05 0.39 Dec. I26.76 0.06 0.47 Jan. 180.85 0.02 0.20 Feb. 135.27 i 0.07 0.64 March 111.97 0.04 0.27 i April 118.97 0.02 0.12 May I I TVA Department of River Management, personal communication,1977 ! 2Randall Morton, personal communication, 1977 4 1 4 i t 9 l i' t
~
e ~ 1._ , Sac. 2 2.2 00 tac'd k~mo, : 5 REFERENCE 2-55 "r - 7 l , : .r $.1 73 g, Clinch River Sauger Study Introduction Sauger in the Tennessee River system instinctively migrate upstream out of the reservoirs each winter as the sptuning season approaches. Their migrations are impeded by TVA dams, except during lock cperations (Cobb 1960), and it follows that sauger would become concentrated in tailvater areas at this time. These concentrations have led to the assumption _that spawning occurs along the rip-rap shorelines of the tailrace during January and February. The " spawning" congregations have been sampled for various reasons in the past, but have yielded inconclusive evidence of spawning activity in the immediate vicinity of dams. The present study investigates the hypothesis that sauger do not utilize the tailwater areas for spawning purposes. Concentrating on the lower-Clinch River below Melton Hill Dam, this study is aimed at identifying areas in which sauger actually do spawn, classifying the spawning habitat in detail, and applying that knowledge to other areas of the Tennessee River system to determine additional areas of suitable sanger spa.ning habitat in efforts to minimize impacts upon this species by power plant construction or industrial development. A Methods ', Preliminary data were gathered during a seven-week period beginning March 29, 1979. Adult sau:er a were captured in gill nets (mostly 1-1/2", bar measuref co- in the Clinch River set between Gallaher Bridge (CRM 14.1) and the mouth of Caney Creek (CRM 17.0) and at the lock walls of Melton Hill (CRM 23.1). In the area from Gallaher Bridge to Cane'y Creek, the nets were
. yy
. .i. 2 set at dusk and pulled the next morning. At the dam, the nets were only fished approximately one hour shortly after dusk. In addition to sampling adults, attempts were made to collect sauger eggs by pumping the substrate at I
depths of one to six meters at the dam and the downstreau areas. Results of 1979 Study g At the outset of the study, it was hoped that spawning locations could be determined by clusters of spawning saugers captured in gill nets,.as + observed at CRM 14.7 by Fletcher (1977), and by fertilized sauger eggs collected from the river. Although no actual " clusters".of spawning saugers were collected, hundreds of males in spawning condition and several females, some flowing and some partially spent, were observed in an area six to eight miles below Mciton Hill Dam. On two occasions, flowing females were captured in close proximity (less than one foot apart in the gill net) to solitary mature males. According to Nelson (1968) and Scott and Crossman (1973) as few as one male sauger may accompany a spawning female. One egg from the cump a samples has been ide.ntified as a sauger egg; it was collected in the downstream area near CRM 14.7 where the substrate was composed of sand and silt. The study site above Gallaher Bridge was divided into four areas for f presentation of catch data (Tables 1-4): (1) CRM 14.1 to 14.9, (2) CRM 15.0 to 15.5, (3) CRM 15.6 to 16.0, and (4) CRM 16.1 to 17.0. A total of 550-sauger captured during this study and 38 collected by Oak' Ridge National Laboratory (ORNL) personnel is included in the following discussion. With regard to the possibility that sauger do not spawn innaediately below the dam, spawning instead six to eight miles downstream, the following 4 ___ ____________.__________.____-__.__.____m___.__m2__. _________m___.__ .__m_____-.________________.______.________._____.______m_____ ______ _ _
s . .
.i .'
- observations were made. Gill nets were first set near Gsilaher Bridge on the night of March 30 when surface water temperature was 50 F. Only 13 sauger were captured in three nets. Of these, 10 were males, and their milt was thick and slow-running, indicating that they had not commenecd spawning. Two of the three females appeared to be gravid due to their size and robustness, but dissection revealed large amounts of visceral fat and immature ovaries (i.e. , pinkish, transparent without developing ova) . The other female was
'f also immature. The next week (April 3) three nets were fished for approximately one hour below Melton Hill Dam when surface water temperature was 53 F. A total of 95 sauger was caught, nearly 32 fish / net-hour. Twenty-eight of these fish were males, and the milt again was thick. Since milt can usually be obtained from males with slight pressure during late winter and etrly spring, if no milt appeared when pressure was applied to the abdomen of the fish, that fish was presumed to be a female. Maturity of the ovaries could not be positively determined in most cases without sacrificing the fish. Of the 67 females captured, at least 7 were gravid. One female had already spawned and was very gaunt in appearance. Most of the fish were released in good condition, although some were retained for brood stock for propagation studies. On April 10, seven nets were set in the downstream area when surface water temperature was 53 F. A total of 180 sauger was caught. Most of these were males in running ripe spawning condition, i.e., milt freely flowing. There were also 22 gravid females, at least 1 of which was flowing (extruding eggs freely). The majority of the sauger caught on this date (53 and 61 in two nets) were captured in Areas 3 and 4 (Table 4) . The high catch / net-night suggested that a submerged island or sand bar of At aa 3 deserved special attention.
+ .
.i ' ' i 4 4
Efforts were concentrated at the downstream site for the next two weeks. Many mature males and occasional females in spawning condition were captured. The occurrence of flowing females was not. limited to any particular area, although the greatest number,foug were taken in Area 3. Therefore, if presence of flowing females is an indication, it appears that spawning is not localized in a small area. Nelson (1968) reported the major spawning ground of Missouri River sauger (above Lewis and Clark Reservoir) to be a four-mile stretch of river, six miles below Fort Randall Dam. Oc the night of May 2, three nets were set below Melton Hill Dam and fished for one hour in the same manner as on April 4. The surface water temperature was 62 F. A total of nine sauger was collected, and all were - dissected for sex and maturity information. All were found to be immature females. The large numbers of sauger present four weeks earlier had apparently left the area. On this same date five nets set overnight at the downstream areas collected 64 sauger, the majority of which were sexually ; l mature (41 flowing males, 2 flowing females, 8 gravid females, and 4 spent ~ l' females). The results of this night's effort lend credence to the hypothesis that the area immediately below the dam is not used for sauger spawning, but l i rather that spawning occurs six to eight miles downstrema. I In addition to TVA's netting on May 2, ORNL fished one experimental gill net at the lower end of Jones Island, CRM 19.7 on this date. Of the 38 sauger caught, 36 were mature males, and I was a female from which eggs would flow upon slight pressure to the abdomen. By the criteria previously discussed, e this area may also qualify as a sauger spawning locality. i l I l' i s
' .i 5 Discussion Regarding the length of the spawning season, this series of data shows a sauger spawning period of at least six weeks duration. The first spent female was captured on April 4, and gravid females were still present May 10, the last sampling date. These latter fish showed no indication of ovary resorption. Surface water temperatures during this period ranged!from 53 to 62 F. These temperatures are roughly 10 higher than those recorded in the literature for more northern areas (Nelson 1968, Priegel 1969. Graham and Penkal 1978). Eschmeyer and Smith (1943) found that sauger below Norris Dam failed to spawn and resorbed their ovaries at water temperatures below 50 F. Fletcher (1977) reported Clinch River sauger spawning at 58 F. Cool discharges from Norris Dam even after flowing through Melton Hill Reservoir may have prolonged the sauger spawning season in the particular study area.
Nelson (1968) and Priegel (1969) reported spawning seasons lasting only two weeks. Peak spawning activity, based on catch / net-night and the number of flowing females, in the downstream areas (Table 7) occurred from April 10 to April 25. The April 10 samples resulted in nearly 26 sauger captured per net-night. The vast majority were males, but 22 gravid females were captured. None of the females were spent, and only 1 of the 22 gravid females was recorded as flowing on this date. The predominance of males in spayning condition agrees with Nelson's observations (1968) in that they arrive at spawning grounds before the females. The catch per net-night dropped the following week, but five of the six gravid females collected were flowing and another had spawned. The catch rate increased slightly during the week of April 25, and 11 gravid females plus 2 spent females were captured. Samples taken after April 25 produced higher
[ , 6-ratios of spent to gravid females, and the catch rate declined to 4.33 sauger per net-night. During this three-week peak period, surface water temperatures increased from 53 to 58 F. Sex ratios strongly favored males over nature females during these weeks with males being at least .five times more abundant (Table 8). Immature females are intentionally omitted from sex ratios since their importance in assigning spawning characteristics is nil. Males were more i numerous than females'on all occasions except the April 3 sample below helton Hill Dam (Table 5). Predominance of males during the peak spawning period does not agree with available literature for northern populations, although ^ Fletcher (1977) found similar results on the date he reported 'spawning activity f in the Clinch. For sauger populations as a whole, females are more abundant
- (Priegel 1969, pp. 26-27) . - Hassler (1958) reported larger percentages of females than males in Norris Reservoir.
Few sauger were collected near the shore or in shallow water. Most of the fish were taken in the deeper half of the net with many at the end. Even the flowing females were taken in water 15-20 feet deep. If-flowing females indicate spawning, these observations are inconsistent with available literature which reports sauger spawning in 2'-4' depths (Nelson 1968, Graham , and Penkal 1978). Substrates do not seem to agree either, since the literature . t describes the spawning substrates as gravel and rubble. The fish in the present study were taken over sand and silt substrates. Concentrating on the data collected in the vicinity of Gallaher Bridge, alleged spawning fish (i.e., flowing females) were captured in all j four areas (Tables 1-4). Catch rates of sauger were highest at Area 3, near the submerged island. Although gravid females constituted higher proportions I of the catch in Areas 1, 2, and 4, half of the eight flowing females were captured in Area 3. The two flowing- females collected from Area 4 were taken i e -- - , . , , , . - , , - , - - - , . , , _ _ _ _ _ _ _
7 only 0.2 mile upstream of Area 3. While the low number of females limits the conclusions that may be drawn,-on the basis of flowing females as indicators of spawning activity, the area surrounding the submerged island in Area 3 appears to be a' major spawning area. The percentage of spent females increased progressively dcanstream, indicating their return to Watts Bar Reservoir-following spawning. Spawning activity was apparently not localized since high yielding locations one week were not so the next. The large numbers of males captured is probably not representative of their abundance because yearlings males (i.e. , fish complet Lng one year's growth) were not vulnerable to the 1-1/2" nets used in this study. However, most of the sauger sampled by an experimental net by ORNL on May 2 were yearling, mature males. Suggesticas for Further Study Thet$meframeforadditionalstudyduringthe1980spawningseason spans approximately two months beginning in mid-March. Necessary equipment-includes ultrasonic transmitters, receiving apparatus, shocker boat, tracking boat, pumping boat, gill nets, larval fish drif t nets, and a sled-type attachment for the bottom pump intake (Manz 1964) . The transmitters are available from Smith-Root, Inc., and the receiver and hydrophone may possibly be borrowed from the biothermal unit 4t Browns Ferry. The drift net frames and pump attachment will have to be fabricated. The other materials are maintained at the kalnut Orchard.
- During mid-March prespawning sauger are abundant below Melton Hill Dam. Plans are to capture several fish for tagging purposes at this time.
Ten transmitters (five for males, five for gravid females) will be attached externally using a harness similar to that described by Carr and Chaney (1976).
. . j 1
8 Other sauger would receive a pelvic fin clip before being released. Each transmitter has a different pulse rate, allowing the ability to monitor. the movements of individual fish. Fin-clipped fish would show gross movement from the dam site. Recalling that the 1979 data showed that nature sauger vacated the area immediately below the dam while concentrations of mature fish occurred six to eight miles downstream, tracking the telemetered sauger released at the dam should reveal significant information about their spawning locations and , activity. It is believed that tagged males will illustrate nightly movements onto the spawning grounds while occupying deeper stretches during the day. According to Nelson (1968) few sauger were captured on the spawning grounds
^
during the~ day, but their numbers peaked rapidly during the first two hours of darkness. Occasionally males will be recaptured in the areas inhabited nt night to determine if they are accompanied by a school of sauger and, more importantly, if flowing females are present. If the fish are in shallow water (less than four feet) at night, electrofishing would be the best sampling method because groups of spawning fish could be collected as described by Nelson (1968). Otherwise gill nets could be set, but only for short periods in order to minimize the injury to the tagged fish. The tracking crew will carry several readied gill nets for spot-checking areas frequented by the tagged fish. Nelson (1968) reported that male sauger precede the females to the spawning grounds. The females tagged in the present study would presumably , remain apart from the concentrations of males until their eggs matured. Attempts would be made to capture a telemetered female entering areas of males in order to examine her sexual readiness. A female sauger probably sheds _all her eggs in one night, as does a female walleye (Priegel 1970), and may return h.
.^
9 to the reservoir downstream af ter spawning. If a tagged female continues downstream out of the primary study area toward Watts Bar Reservoir, attempts would be made to capture her to verify that she had spawned. The 16 formation gained from the movements of adult sauger would be used to search for sauger eggs. If male sauger show a tendency to frequent particular areas at night, those areas would be intensively sampled for eggs using the modified pump and larval fish drift nets. According to Nelson (1968) sauger eggs are strongly adhesive and can best be sampled by pumping, although some viable egg, may be collected in drift nets. The present study intends to determine whether the eggs, if spawned over sand and silt, retain their adhesiveness and are collected more of ten by pumping, or if they cease to adhere to the loose, fine substrate and are collected in drift nets as they are swept downstream. The amount of manpower required to pursue the study as proposed vould be substantial. Several man-days would be expended during the initial evening of collection to ensure adequate numbers of minimally injured adult sauger to carry the transmitters. Thereafter and throughout the rated 30-day life of the tags, the movements of the telemetered fish should be monitored during day and night periods several times weekly. Perhaps 10 man-weeks would be required to track the fish. However, if sufficient information to describe the spawning localities is gained before the transmitter batteries fail, the tracking could be halted and attention focussed on the collection of eggs. The drif t nets could easily be set day or night and allowed to fish during tracking or pumping operations. Weekly pump samples would be taken during the day at areas indicated by the telemetered adults. _, ~ .
- 10 Following the spawning season, processing of the egg samples, and analysis of the data, scuba divers will explore the more likely spawning grounds to describe in detail the various substrates preferred by sauger for spawning purposes.
9 I
11 CLINCH RIVER SAUGER STUDY GILL NET CAPTURE BREAKDOWN BY AREA, SEX, MATURITY TABLE 1, AREA 1. GALLARER BRIDGE UPSTREAM TO CRM 14.9. Net- Catch / Date Nights Total M F(im) F(gr) F(sp) -.F(flo) Net-Night 3-30-79 1 2 2 - - - - 2 4-10-79 2 27 IS 4 5 - - 13.5 4-19-79 2 4 1 - 2 1 2 2 5- 2-79 1 17 15 - - 2 - 17 5-10-79 3 21 12 4 2 3 - 7 TOTALS 9 71 48- 8 9 6 2 7.89 TABLE 2, AREA 2. CRM 15.0 to 15.5 - DOWNSTREAM OF SUBMERGED ISLAND 3-30-79 1 4 2 2 - - - 4 4-10-79 2 34 20 1 7 - 1 17 'i i 4-25-79 1 22 17 2 3 - - 22 2 18 5- 2-79 1 18 8 2 5 1 5-10-79 2 13 9 3 - 1 - 6.5 TOTALS 7 91 62 10 15 3 2 13.0
~' '. . , ., 12 TABLE 3. AREA 3. CRM 15.6 to 16.0 - ALONG SUBMERGED ISLAhT Net-. Catch Date Nights Total M F(im) F(gr) F(sp) F(flo) Ne t-Night 4-10-79 1 53 47 1 5 - -
53 4-19-79 2 53 49 - 4 - 3 26.5 4-25-79 3 40 31 2 6 1 - 13.3 5- 2-79 2 12 7 2 2 - 1 6 5-10-79 3 3 2 - - 1 - -1 TOTALS 11 161 136 5 17 2 4 14.04 1 TABLE 4. AREA 4. CRM 16.1 to 17.0. l 3-30-79 ~ 1 7 6 1 - - - 7 4-10-79 2 66 60 1 5 - - 33 4-25-79 1 16 13 - 2 1 - 16 5- 2-79 1 17 11 3 3 .- - 17 j 5-10-79 4 17 11 1 5 - 2 4.3 TOTALS 9 123 101 6 15 1 2 13.6 ___.______.__------_-_.-----_-_.-_--__a ._-__.____.u..______
\ 1 . 13 TABLE 5. GRAND TOTALS BY DATE FOR AREAS 1-4 COMBINED AND CATCH PER NET-NIGHT. Net- Catch Date Nights Total M F'im) F(gr) F(sp) F(flo) Net-Night 3-30-79 3 13 10 3 - - - 4.33 4-10-79 7 180 151 7 22 - 1 25.71 4-19-79 5 57 50 - 6 1 5 11.40 4-25-79 5 78 61 4 11 2 - 15.60 5- 2-79 5 64 41 7- 10 4 2 12.80 5-10-79 12 52 33 8 6 5 2 4.33 OVERALL 36 444 346 29 55 12 10 12.33 TABLE 6. MELTON HILL DAM LOCK WALLS, CRM 23.1 APPROXIMATELY ONE-HOUR SETS. 4- 3-79 3 95 28 7 7+ 1 (59 females maturity unknown) 5- 2-79 3 9 - 9 - - - TOTALS 6-1-hr. sets 104 28 9+ 7+ 1 (17.33 sauger/ net hour) (none flowing)
- - --- _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ . _ _ = _[.__________ . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ , _ _ .
~ .
Table 7. SEX RATIOS OF MALES TO MATURE FEMALES, AREAS 1-4 COMBINED AND SURFACE WATER TEMPERATURE ACTUAL NUMBERS IN PARENTHESIS. Date Males: Females Actual Number Temperature 3-30-19 10:0 ( 10,0) 50 4-10-79 1:0.15 (151,22) 53 4-19-79 1:0.14 ( 50,7) 54 4-25-79 1:0.21 ( 61,13) 58 5- 2-79 1:0.34 ( 41,14) 62 5-10-79 1:0.33 ( 33,11) 64 A
15
. Literature Cited Carr, W.E.S. October 1976. Harness for Attachment of an ultrasonic transmitter to the red drum. Sciaenops Ocellata. NOAA Fish. Bull.
74(4):998-1000. SFA 22(2). Cobb, E. S. 1960. The sauger fishery in the lower Tennessee kiver. TWRA Report, Proj . F-12-R. 15 pp. Eschmeyer, R. W. and C. G. Smith. 1943. Fish spawning below Norris Dam. Tenn. Acad. Sci. 18 (1) :4-5. Fletcher, J. W. 1977. Assessment of adult and larval fish populations of the lower Clinch River below Melton Hill Dam. M.S. thesis, Tennessee Technological University, Cookeville, Tennessee. 99 pp. Graham, P. J. and R. S. Penkal. 1978. Aquatic environmental analysis in the lower Yellowstone River. Mont. Dept. of Fish and Game. Bur. of Reclamation. 83 p. Hassler, W. 1957. Age and growth of the sauger, stizostedion canadense canadense (Smith), in Norris Reservoir. Tennessee. J. Tenn. Acad. Sci. 32(1):55-76. Manz, J. W. 1964. A pumping device used to collect walleye eggs from offshore spawning areas in western Lake Erie. Trans. Amer. Fish. Soc. 93(2):204-206. Nelson, W. R. 1968. Reproduction and early life history of sauger, Stizostedion canadense, in Lewis and Clark Reservoir. Trans. Amer. Fish. Soc. 97(2):159-166. Friegel, G. R. 1969. The Lake Winnebago sauger: age, growth, reproduction, food habits and early life history. Tech. Bull. No. 43. Dept. of Natural Resources, Madison, Wisc., 1970. Reproduction and early life history of the walleye in the Lake Winnebago region. Wisc. Dept. Nat. Res. Tech Bull. No. 45. 105 pp. Scott, W. B. and E. J. Crossman. 1973. Freshwater fishes of Canada. Bull. Fish. Res. Board of Canada. 184:966 pp. _______=_____-___--_____-_-_a
v
$$$f Y /~b ,.j
~
-,,...8-/
e . . 5 . A REFERENCE 4-1
~
A WESTINGl!aliSE Ei.E ' Tit!C COTii'OE ATION -
= PROPERTY OF ERYlH03.'JENut SYSICIS del'ALTSC;T w - l
* ~ . no.. W 2.4. D..p M~ M
~
.84so sr4y#G. _..:
r s i D._ , NTID300.1
,9 y
\ .
}
i- .;_ ._ . x z - o x
- 2. _ G _ ws - x' i+-~~^m><>-"~;' ' " ' ' * ~
*1, K
- . _ _ g .
Al PRO 1 I 2 a .. j ti' NOISE FROM CONSTRUCTION EQUIPMENT AND OPERATIONS, BUILDING EQUIPMENT, AND HOME APPLIANCES ;
'v'}}