Arkansas River striped bass fishery assessment

              W 2800.7 FS32r/w no.28
F-SO-R-17 2010 c.1
FINAL REPORT
FEDERAL AID GRANT NO. F-50-R-17
Fish Research for Oklahoma Waters
PROJECT NO. 28
Arkansas River Striped Bass Fishery Assessment
OKLAHOMA DEPARTMENT OF WILDLIFE CONSERVATION
JANUARY 1, 2010 through DECEMBER 31, 2010
FINAL REPORT
State: Oklahoma Grant Number: F-50-R-17
Grant Title: Fish Research and Surveys for Oklahoma Lakes and Reservoirs
Project Number: 28
Project Title: Arkansas River Striped Bass Fishery Assessment.
Project Leader: Greg Summers
Contract Period: From: January 1, 2010 To: December 31, 2010
Project Objectives: 1.) To determine the size (total length) and age structure of the
Arkansas River striped bass population at five points along the river system: Kaw Dam,
Keystone Dam and Zink Dam, the lower Illinois River below Lake Tenkiller, and the
Eufaula tailwaters below Eufaula Lake. 2.) To determine the size and number of striped
bass harvested by anglers per trip in the five focus areas of the fishery.3). To use PIT tags
to determine the interconnectivity of the Arkansas River striped bass population at five
points along the river system: Kaw Dam, Keystone Dam and Zink Dam, the lower Illinois
River below Lake Tenkiller, and the Eufaula tailwaters below Eufaula Lake
1. Segment Objectives; 2.) To use Passive Integrated Transponder (PIT) tags to
determine the interconnectivity of the Arkansas River striped bass population at
five points along the river system: Kaw Dam, Keystone Dam and Zink Dam, the
lower Illinois River below Lake Tenkiller, and the Eufaula tailwaters below
Eufaula Lake. 3.) To determine the size and number of striped bass harvested by
anglers per trip in the five focus areas of the fishery.
II. Summary of Progress
A. Introduction
The Arkansas River system in Oklahoma supports one of the few inland populations of
naturally reproducing striped bass (Marone saxatilis) in the southeastern United States
(Dudley et al, 1977; Combs, 1980). Natural reproduction of striped bass occurs in several
areas of the Arkansas River between Kay and Sequoyah Counties. Bohnsack (1990) and
Shutters (1992) verified spawning sites above Keystone Reservoir, while other spawning
locations are known immediately below Keystone dam and further downstream at Zink
darn (Brent Gordon, Oklahoma Department of Wildlife Conservation, personal
communication). Oklahoma Department of Wildlife Conservation (ODWC) staff
collected striped bass broodstock from the river to produce striped bass and hybrid
striped bass for ODWC stocking programs throughout the state.
Recent proposals by Tulsa County, OK and legislative entities may threaten the striped
bass fishery in the Arkansas River. The proposed Arkansas River Corridor (part of Tulsa
County's Vision 2025 Plan) incorporates the establishment of numerous low-water darns
throughout Tulsa County on a stretch of river from Keystone Darn to the Tulsa/Wagoner
County line (68 krn) for enhancing aesthetic quality and development opportunities. The
proposed series of low-water darns along the Arkansas River in Tulsa County may impact
movements and reproductive success of resident striped bass. Arkansas River striped
bass implanted with ultrasonic transmitter tags below Keystone darn in 2006 and 2007
were observed to record any movements. Individual fish movements varied between
movements of a large distance and remaining in or near the tagging locations for the
duration of the transmitter life (Kuklinski and Groom, 2009). Other studies of striped
bass in southeastern river systems have reported movement and migration patterns based
on water temperature, flow regime, and spawning (Dudley et al, 1977; Combs, 1980;
Moss, 1985; Bjorgo et al, 2000). For striped bass to successfully reproduce, a long reach
of free-flowing river is needed for proper development of eggs and hatching of fry
(Davin, 1999). The proposed impounding structures have the potential to negatively
impact striped bass reproduction by impeding the long reaches of flow necessary for
developing eggs to properly mature and hatch.
Anglers and angling groups have recently begun to voice concerns about the Arkansas
River striped bass fishery. The Oklahoma Striped Bass Association (OSBA) angling
group has submitted a formal petition to ODWC asking for striped bass regulation
changes and a better understanding of the fishery to prevent over harvest of large
individuals from the system. There is a perception among some anglers of this fishery
that the Arkansas River has the potential to support "trophy" regulations, or restrictive
harvest of large striped bass. ODWC data from this system is currently lacking. Intense
sampling of this fishery will provide ODWC the data needed to make management and
regulatory decisions, assess the size and age structure, and help determine if the proposed
darns will have negative impacts.
A fish marking technique utilizing Passive Integrated Transponder (PIT) tags consists of
inserting a small encapsulated wire-wrapped antenna bound to an integrated circuit chip
into target fish (Prentice et al 1990). The tag-implanted fish can then be recorded in
future sampling by use of hand-held or remotely operated transmission antenna systems
which emit an AC 400kHz frequency to excite the inert tag upon contact with the
transmission antenna's magnetic field (Prentice et al 1990). The use of PIT tags would
allow individual fish to be identified upon initial collection and again at any subsequent
collection by study personnel.
B. Methods
Size and Age Structure
Striped bass were collected using boat-mounted electrofishing gear and angling at five
target locations between 24 March and 14 September, 2009 (Figure 1). Each fish was
measured for total length (mm) and weighed to the nearest 5-gram increment in the field.
Specimens were then placed on ice and taken to the laboratory for further processing.
Saggital otoliths were removed from all fish and each individual was dissected in order to
use reproductive organs to verify the sex of each fish when possible. Otoliths were
analyzed under a low power (2-3x magnification) microscope, and striped bass were aged
based upon the number of annuli present on the otoliths.
PIT Tagging
ODWC personnel collected striped bass at all five points along the Arkansas River and
tributaries using boat electrofishing. A minimum of eight hours of electrofishing was
conducted at each of the five sites so long as weather and river flow did not prevent boat
access. All striped bass collected were measured to the nearest millimeter, scanned for a
PIT tag and if no tag was present, returned to the water with a PIT tag implanted in the
left cheek musculature. PIT tags were implanted using a syringe with a 12 gauge needle
and implantation was completed in a matter of seconds. All fish were held in a fresh-water
flowing livewell for a maximum of 30 minutes prior to tagging.
Angler Interviews
ODWC personnel conducted interviews of striped bass anglers at each of the target
locations where electro fishing sampling occurred (Figure 1). ODWC personnel
identified themselves to anglers and asked anglers if they would be willing to participate
in a short interview. Striped bass anglers were identified by asking if the angler(s) was
fishing for striped bass. The angler(s) was included in the analysis if they answered yes
to this question, or if they answered no but had a striped bass in possession. All data
collected from the interviews are listed in Figure 3.
C. Results
Size and Age Structure
Combined electro fishing and rod and reel collection results by location were: Kaw
tailwaters, 74 fish in seven sampling trips; Keystone tailwaters, 87 fish in nine sampling
trips; Zink Dam tailwaters, 90 fish in three sampling trips; Eufaula tail waters, 109 fish in
10 sampling trips; and Lower Illinois River, 245 fish provided by commercial guides
throughout the sampling period. A total among all locations of 605 striped bass were
included in the analysis.
Mean length at age was calculated by location for all samples (Table 1). Few individuals
less than age-3 were collected with the exception of the Eufaula tailwaters location
(N=20, Table 1). Kaw tailwaters and Keystone tailwaters samples revealed a weak age-6
year class, however just downstream at the Zink Dam tailwaters a strong age-6 year class
was present (Table 1). The majority of fish present among all locations were ages 4 and
5 (Table I). Older striped bass were collected at several locations, the oldest fish from
the Kaw tailwaters (985mm, age-13).
The growth curves among locations were similar with Eufaula tailwaters striped bass
having the highest mean length at age, and Lower Illinois River striped bass having the
lowest mean length at age (Figure 2.) Catch curves were calculated using the Fisheries
Analysis and Simulation Tools (FAST©, Auburn University, 2000), and the estimated
average annual mortality among all locations was 0.349.
PIT Tagging
A total of339 striped bass ranging in length from 413 mm to 1181 mm (mean = 736.6
mm, SE = 7.2768) were implanted with PIT tags in 2010, of which ten individuals were
recaptured. The lower Illinois River had the largest mean length of tagged (768.9 mm)
while Keystone fish were the smallest tagged (mean = 663.2 mm, Table 3). To compare
differences in mean lengths of tagged striped bass between tagging sites, data were tested
using a nonparametric Kruskal-Wallis one way analysis of variance. Kaw tailwaters
tagged striped bass were the least different form the other locations, while Keystone
tailwaters tagged fish were only similar to fish from Zink. Stripers from the Lower
Illinois River were only similar to Kaw fish (Table 3).
Of the ten recaptured striped bass, nine were recaptured in the same location as the initial
tagging. One fish was implanted with a PIT tag below Eufaula Dam on April 9, 2010 and
recaptured in the Lower Illinois River on July 22,2010. This individual traveled at least
68 km from the tagging site within roughly 100 days, growing 15 mm in length. Mean
recaptured striped bass growth was 0.278 mm per day or about 8.33 mm per month.
Angler Interviews
ODWC personnel conducted 141 angler interviews at four locations between 23 February
and 17 August, 2009. No interviews were completed from the Zink Dam location. It
should be noted that only anglers targeting striped bass or anglers with a striped bass in
possession were included in interviews.
Striped bass anglers averaged 2.46 individuals/party, among all locations (N=347).
These anglers harvested 493 striped bass (1.42 fish per angler per trip). Interviews
revealed a striped bass release rate of31 % (222 of715 fish caught). Of the 141
interviews, 43 (30%) noted that no striped bass were harvested and 98 (70%) harvested at
least one fish.
The mean length of striped bass harvested by anglers among all locations was 624.4mm
(24.6 inches, Table 2). Kaw tailwaters anglers harvested the largest fish (x =643.1mm,
25.3 inches), and Eufaula tailwaters anglers harvested the smallest (x =553.7mm, 21.8
inches) (Table 2).
The current harvest regulations for all locations allow the harvest of 15 striped bass per
angler per day, with only five of those fish over 20 inches in length. The interview data
showed that 70 of 493 (14%) striped bass harvested were less than 20 inches in length,
and 58 of 493 (12%) fish were greater than 30 inches in length. The majority (365 of
493, 74%) of striped bass harvested by anglers were between 20 and 30 inches in length.
D. Conclusions/Recommendations
• Arkansas River system striped bass were fast-growing compared to ODWC age
and growth data from Oklahoma reservoirs.
• A majority (74%) of fish seen in Arkansas River angler interviews were between
20 and 30 inches total length. This indicates that they are targeting larger fish, or
that smaller striped bass are not as abundant.
• Based on the angler interview data in conjunction with size and age structure data,
creel and length limit regulation changes may be needed on the Arkansas River
system (five fish daily creel limit with a restriction of only one fish over 762 mm).
However a better idea of exploitation is needed.
• Ongoing implantation of Arkansas River system striped bass with PIT tags to
determine exploitation and the connectivity of the fishery is recommended.
• Ongoing angler interviews are recommended.
III. Significant Deviations: None
Prepared by: _
Greg Summers
Date:
Approved by: _G0J2??-=--"--~__ ---'~~=--'=="='--- _
Fisheries Administration
lahoma Department of Wildlife Conservation
U John Stafford
Federal Aid Coordinator
Oklahoma Department of Wildlife Conservation
E. Literature Cited
Bjorgo, K.A., J.J. Isely, and C.S. Thomason. 2000. Seasonal movement and habitat use
by striped bass in the Combahee River, South Carolina. Transactions of the
American Fisheries Society 129:1281-1287.
Bohnsack, B.L. 1990. Factors affecting spawning locations and reproductive success of
striped bass in the Arkansas River, Oklahoma. M.S. Thesis, Oklahoma State
University, Stillwater, OK. 83pp.
Combs, D.L. 1980. Fish population changes in Keystone Reservoir fourteen years after
striped bass introductions. Proceedings of the Southeastern Association of Fish
and Wildlife Agencies 34:167-174.
Davin, W. T., C. Ethridge, C. Babb, and S. Hileman. 1999. Estimation of striped bass
(Marone saxatilis) egg drift in the lower Savannah River. Final Report to the
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Savannah District.
Dudley, R.G., A.W. Mullis, and J.W. Terrell. 1977. Movements of adult striped bass
(Morone saxatilis) in the Savannah River, Georgia. Transactions of the American
Fisheries Society 106:314-322.
Kuklinski, K.E. and D. Groom. 2009. Survey and assessment ofthe Arkansas River
throughout Tulsa County. ODWC Federal Aid Report F-50-R-(22). 14 pp.
Moss, J.L. 1985. Summer selection of thermal refuges by striped bass in Alabama
reservoirs and tailwaters. Transactions of the American Fisheries Society 114:77-
83.
Prentice, E.F., T.A. Flagg, and C.S. McCutcheon. 1990. Feasibility of using implantable
passive integrated transponder (PIT) tags in salmonids. American Fisheries
Society Symposium 7:317-322.
Shutters, M.K. 1992. Effects of the addition of hydropower to Kaw Dam on striped bass
egg abundance in the Arkansas River, Oklahoma. M.S. Thesis, Oklahoma State
University, Stillwater, OK. 61pp.
Table 1. Mean length (mm) and sample size (N) of striped bass by age class for
individuals collected at five points along the Arkansas River system, OK in 2009.
Striped bass older than age-7 were not included because oflow sample size.
Location Age-2 Age-3 Age-4 Age-5 Age-6 Age-7
Kaw --- (0) 389.0 599.9 (32) 711.0 (30) --- (0) 767.5 (6)
Tailwaters (1)
Keystone --- (0) 563.4 (9) 596.5 (55) 658.4 (18) 685.0 (1) 792.3 (3)
Tailwaters
ZinkDam --- (0) 540.0 (4) 614.9 (15) 702.1 (23) 764.0 (26) 810.5 (16)
Tailwaters
Eufaula 391.0 (20) 521.0 (41) 675.8 (11) 736.7 (7) 809.3 (3) --- (0)
Tailwaters
Lower 320.0 515.6 (27) 573.3 680.4 (73) 706.2 (16) 758.1 (11)
Illinois R. (1) (108)
Table 2. Striped bass angler harvest statistics from four interview locations along the
Arkansas River system, OK in 2009.
Mean Length (mm) Number of Fish Number ofFish
Location of Harvested Fish Harvested Released
Kaw Tailwaters 643.1 207 22
Keystone Tailwaters 594.4 62 14
Eufaula Tailwaters 553.7 23 7
Lower Illinois 622.3 201 179
River
All Locations 624.4 493 222
Combined
Table 3. Descriptive statistics for striped bass implanted with PIT tags from five
locations along the Arkansas River system, OK in 2010. Different superscript letters
signify significant difference (a=O.OS) between means using Kruskal-Wallis one way
analysis of variance.
Location Mean Length (mm) Number of Fish Standard Error
Kaw Tailwaters 731.SA 33 17.671
Keystone Tailwaters 663.2B 33 7.774
Zink Tailwaters 676.6BC 19 14.391
Eufaula Tailwaters 726.6AC 103 15.533
Lower Illinois 768.9AD 151 10.890
River
All Locations 736.6 339 7.277
Combined
Figure 1. Arkansas River system striped bass sample sites for 2009.
Figure 2. Mean length (mm) at age for Arkansas River system striped bass collected in
2009. Annual mortality estimates were calculated with FAST© software.
900 -
800 - .••.....
EE
---- 700 - ..•..c..
0> c 600
Q) -'
ell .•... 500
0 I-
400
300 Age-2 Age-3
Eufaula } _clW
Annual Mortality = 0.349
Age-4 Age-5 Age-6 Age-7 Age-8
Keystone link
Figure 3. Creel interview data sheets used when interviewing striped bass anglers on the
Arkansas River system in 2009.
STRIPED BASS CREEL INTERVIEW
DATE _ LOCATION: Kaw _ Keystone _ Zink _ Eufaula_Illinois_
ODWC Employee (names) _
TARGETING STRIPED BASS YES NO ANGLER ZIP CODE(S). _
NO. ANGLERS IN PARTY _ BOAT _ BANK _
10
NO NO. STRIPERS RELEASED
Striped Bass # Length Striped Bass # Length
15 29
16 30
17 31
18 32
19 33
20 34
21 35
22 36
23 37
24 38
25 39
26 40
27 41
28 42
COMPLETED TRIP YES
Striped Bass # Length
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
11
12
13
14
One data sheet/party (unless caught more than 42 fish); One fish/number; Measure fish to nearest inch
(total length-tip of nose to end of tail with forks squeezed together)