Kentucky Department of Fish and Wildlife Resources

Annual Research Highlights 2012

Volume VI, Oct. 2013

Kentucky Department of Fish and Wildlife Resources Annual Research Highlights 2012 Volume VI, Oct. 2013

Our Mission: To conserve and enhance fish and wildlife resources and provide opportunity for hunting, fishing, trapping, boating and other wildlife related activities.

Annual Research Highlights 2012 1 Foreword

Biologists band a young falcon and test it for disease / KY Transportation Cabinet

Conserving and enhancing fish and desired goals. The following project are labeled “non-federal aid” (NFA); wildlife resources in Kentucky is a pri- summaries serve as a testament to KD- however, most of the projects included mary goal of the Kentucky Department FWR’s vigilance in the conservation of in this document are partially or fully of Fish and Wildlife Resources (KDF- the fish and wildlife resources that we funded by federal programs such as the WR). Research and monitoring are key hold in trust for the public. State Wildlife Grant Program (SWG), steps towards conserving and enhanc- the Wildlife Restoration Act (Pittman- ing fish, wildlife, and habitat resources Robertson), the Sport Fish Restoration of the Commonwealth. The 2012 KD- Funding Sources and Guide to Program (Dingell-Johnson), and the FWR Research Highlights document Federal Programs Cooperative Endangered Species Con- represents targeted efforts by KDFWR KDFWR receives no general fund servation Fund (Section 6). and partners to fulfill statewide conser- taxpayer dollars. As a result, the De- These federal programs serve a va- vation goals. As stewards of all species partment relies on hunting and fishing riety of purposes; however, each has an in Kentucky that are not held in federal license fees, boat registration fees, and underlying goal of fish, wildlife, and/ trust, it is our job to ensure seasons and federal programs to fund the seven or habitat conservation. Brief descrip- bag limits are sustainable and to deter- divisions within KDFWR. Projects tions of each of these programs are as mine if management actions achieve that are entirely funded by the state follows:

2 Kentucky Department of Fish & Wildlife Resources FOREWORD

Federal Funding Source Program Goal

Wildlife To restore, conserve, manage and Restoration Act enhance wild birds and mammals (Pittman-Robertson) and their habitats To fund fishery management Sport Fish Restoration projects, boating access, and aquatic (Dingell-Johnson) Program education

Cooperative To fund conservation projects Endangered Species for candidate, proposed, or listed

Conservation Fund species (Section 6) To develop and implement programs that benefit wildlife and State Wildlife Grant their habitats; specifically, species (SWG) Program and habitats of conservation concern Salt River hybrids / Obie Williams

These federal programs provided FWR’s budget (see Figure 1). For volvement are included in the Table of approximately 17.5 million dollars to reference, we have included the state Contents. For projects that have been KDFWR in 2012, while the sale of and federal funding sources for each completed and not yet published, a de- hunting and fishing licenses provided project; however, these projects may be tailed summary will be included in the 25 million dollars, over half of KD- additionally supplemented by outside first portion (“completed projects”) of funding provided by non- the document. For projects that began 1,000,000 $2,826,600 profit organizations or uni- in 2012, a brief 1-page overview of versities. When possible, the project is included in the second $3,400,000 we listed these sources in portion (“project highlights”) of the addition to the state and document. For select ongoing projects, federal funding sources. brief status updates are included in the For each project summary, last section (“project updates”) of this we also identify the spe- document. In the table of contents, an cific goals addressed by expected date of completion, where ap- $17,581,400 either Kentucky’s Strategic plicable, is listed for each project. This Plan or Kentucky’s State will facilitate looking up detailed sum- Wildlife Action Plan, the maries of completed projects in later $25,000,000 two guiding documents for years. A comprehensive project refer- our agency. ence guide lists all projects included in Research Highlights documents, begin- How to Use This ning with publication year 2007. Document This document is di- Please use the following vided into four main sec- citation when referencing this Hunting and Fishing Licenses Program Income tions: published research, document: Federal Reimbursement Interest Income completed projects, project Kentucky Department of Fish Boat Registration Fees highlights, and project and Wildlife Resources Annual Re- updates. Citations for all search Highlights, 2012. Volume Figure 1. Kentucky Department of Fish and published research with VI. Publication of the Wildlife and Wildlife Resources Funding Sources 2012. Total Kentucky Department Fisheries Divisions. October, 2013, revenues for 2012 were $49,808,000. of Fish and Wildlife in- 116 pp.

Annual Research Highlights 2012 3 Table of Contents

modeling of forest-associated snakes within the Published Research southeastern United States. Ecological Applications Contact Research Coordinator, Danna Baxley 22:1084-1097. ([email protected]) for reprints of these publications. Tanner, E. P., A. M. Unger, P. D. Keyser, C. A. Harper, Barding, E.E., and M.J. Lacki. 2012. Winter diet of river J. D. Clark, J. J. Morgan. 2012. Survival of radio- otters in Kentucky. Northeastern Naturalist 19:157- marked versus leg-banded northern bobwhite 164. in Kentucky. Proceedings of the National Quail Symposium 7:212-216. Baxley, D.L., J.O. Barnard, and H. Venter. 2012. Chelydra serpentina (Common Snapping Turtle) Thackston, R.E., D.C. Sisson, T.L. Crouch, D.L. growth rates. Herpetological Review 43: 126-127. Baxley, and B.A. Robinson. 2012. Hunter harvest of pen-reared northern bobwhites released from Elliott, C.L. and T. Edwards. 2012. Evaluation of tooth- the surrogator. Proceedings of the National Quail wear and replacement method for aging white-tailed Symposium 7:72-76. deer (Odocoileus virginianus) on the Blue Grass Army Depot, Madison County, Kentucky. Journal of Unger, A. M., E. P. Tanner, C. A. Harper, P. D. Keyser, the Kentucky Academy of Science 73:73-76. J.J. Morgan. 2012. Northern bobwhite survival related to movement on a reclaimed surface coal mine. Griggs, A., M.K. Keel, K. Castle and D. Wong. 2012. Proceedings of the National Quail Symposium 7:223- Enhanced surveillance for white-nose syndrome in 228. bats. Emerging Infectious Diseases 18:530-532. West, A.S., P.D. Keyser, and J.J. Morgan. 2012. Johnson, J.S., J.N. Kropczynski, M.J. Lacki, and G.D. Northern bobwhite survival, nest success, and Langlois. 2012. Social networks of Rafinesque’s big- habitat use in Kentucky during the breeding season. eared bats (Corynorhinus rafinesquii) in bottomland Proceedings of the National Quail Symposium 7:217- hardwood forests. Journal of Mammalogy 93:1545- 222. 1558.

Johnson, J.S., and M.J. Lacki. 2012 Summer heterothermy in Rafinesque’s big-eared bats Completed Projects (Corynorhinus rafinesquii) roosting in tree cavities in bottomland hardwood forests. Journal of Comparative Fisheries Physiology B: 1-13. Impacts of Spawning Habitat Manipulation on Morgan, J.J., G. Sprandel, B.A. Robinson and K. Largemouth Bass Year-Class Production in Meldahl Wethington. 2012. A county-based northern Pool, Ohio River ...... 9 bobwhite habitat prioritization model for Kentucky. Proceedings of the National Quail Symposium 7:281- Analysis of the Environmental Requirements of 287. Etheostoma maydeni (Redlips Darter) and Percina squamata (Olive Darter) in the Rockcastle River, Niemiller, M.L., B.M. Fitzpatrick, P. Shah, L. Schmitz, Kentucky ...... 14 and T.J. Near. 2012. Evidence for repeated loss of selective constraint in rhodopsin of amblyopsid Description and Geography of Two Unique Populations cavefishes (teleostei: amblyopsidae). Evolution of the Stonecat, Noturus favus (Siluriformes: 67:732-748. Ictaluridae) ...... 22 Niemiller, M.L., J.R. McCandless, R.G. Reynolds, J. Caddle, T.J. Near, C.R. Tillquist W.D. Pearson, and B.M. Fitzpatrick. 2012. Effects of climatic Wildlife and geological processes during the Pleistocene on the evolutionary history of the northern cavefish, Northern Bobwhite (Colinus virginianus) Ecology on Ablyopsis spelaea. Evolution 67: 1011-1025. Reclaimed Mined Lands ...... 29

Steen, D.A., L.L. Smith, J. Brock, J.B. Pierce, J.R. Lee, Foraging and Roosting Behaviors of Rafinesque’s Big- D. Baxley, J. Humphries, B. Sutton, D. Stevenson, C. eared Bat at the Northern Edge of the Species Guyer, and B. Gregory. 2012. Multi-scale occupancy Range ...... 34

4 Kentucky Department of Fish & Wildlife Resources TABLE of CONTENTS

Status Survey for the Alligator Snapping Turtle Preliminary Assessment of a Newly Established Blue (Macrochelys temminckii) in Kentucky...... 40 Catfish Population in Taylorsville Lake Estimated Completion Date: June 30, 2012 ...... 58

Evaluation of the Growth of Two Different Sizes of Blue Catfish Stocked into Three North Central Kentucky Project Highlights Small Impoundments These projects began in 2012 Estimated Completion Date: June 30, 2014 ...... 60

Fishes Evaluation of a Supplemental White Crappie Stocking Program at Three Kentucky Reservoirs Evaluation of a Seasonal Rainbow Trout Fishery in Estimated Completion Date: December 30, 2013 .....62 Cedar Creek Lake Estimated Completion Date: April, 2016 ...... 46 Evaluation of a Smallmouth Bass Stocking Program at Paintsville Lake Kentucky Trout Fishing, Attitudes and Opinions: 2013 Estimated Completion Date: April 1, 2015 ...... 64 Trout Angler Survey Estimated Completion Date: April, 2014 ...... 47 Urban Fisheries

The Fishing in Neighborhoods (FINS) Program: Big Game Providing Fishing Opportunities to Residents in Cities across the Commonwealth ...... 66 Cause-Specific Mortality, Behavior, and Group Dynamics of Cow Elk in Kentucky Use of Flathead Catfish to Reduce Stunted Fish ...... 48 Estimated Completion Date: May 30, 2016 Populations in a Small Kentucky Impoundment Estimated Completion Date: June 30, 2014 ...... 67

Exploitation Rates of Stocked Channel Catfish and Rainbow Trout in Fishing in Neighborhoods (FINs) Project Updates Lakes Estimated Completion Date: June 1, 2014 ...... 68 This section includes brief updates for selected projects that began prior to 2012. Lake Investigations/ Cold Water Fisheries FISHES Investigation of the Restoration of Native Walleye in the Warm Water Fisheries Upper Levisa Fork Estimated Completion Date: March 31, 2019 ...... 69 Evaluation of a 20-inch Minimum Length Limit on Largemouth Bass at Cedar Creek Lake Investigation of the Walleye Population in the Estimated Completion Date: June 30, 2015 ...... 50 Rockcastle River and Evaluation of Supplemental Stocking of Native Strain Walleye Evaluation of a 12-inch Minimum Size Limit on Estimated Completion Date: June 30, 2020 ...... 70 Channel Catfish in Kentucky’s Small Impoundments Estimated Completion Date: June 30, 2015 ...... 52 Evaluation of a 36-inch Minimum Length Limit on Muskellunge at Three Kentucky Reservoirs Evaluation of Kentucky’s Largemouth Bass Stocking Estimated Completion Date: December 30, 2014 .....71 Initiative Estimated Completion Date: June 30, 2014 ...... 54 Evaluation of a 15-20-inch Protective Slot Limit and 5 Fish Creel Limit on Rainbow Trout in the Lake Black Bass Tournament Results in Kentucky Cumberland Tailwater Estimated Completion Date: June 30, 2020 ...... 56 Estimated Completion Date: June 30, 2014 ...... 72

Annual Research Highlights 2012 5 TABLE of CONTENTS

Investigation of the Restoration of Native Walleye in Estimated Completion Date: December 31, 2014 .....86 the Upper Barren River Estimated Completion Date: June 30, 2020 ...... 73 Distribution, Habitat, and Conservation Status of Rare Fishes in Kentucky ...... 87 Relative Survival, Growth, and Susceptibility to Angling of Two Strains of Brown Trout in the Lake Cumberland Tailwater Estimated Completion Date: June 30, 2015 ...... 74

River and Stream Fisheries WILDLIFE

River Sport Fishery Survey- Kentucky River ...... 75 Big Game

River Sport Fishery Survey- Ohio River ...... 76 Resource Selection, Movement Patterns, Survival, and Cause-Specific Mortality of AdultBull Elk in Ohio River Supplemental Stocking Survey- Markland Kentucky Pool ...... Estimated Completion Date: June 30, 2014 ...... 77 Estimated Completion Date: June 30, 2015 89

Ohio River Supplemental Stocking Survey- Meldahl Can Body Condition and Select Physiological Indicators Pool Predict Survival of Elk Post-Translocation? ...... 90 Estimated Completion Date: June 30, 2012 ...... 78 Estimated Completion Date: June 30, 2014

Warm Water Stream Sport Fish Surveys ...... 79 Small Game Sauger Stocking Evaluation in the Kentucky, Green, Barren, and Salt Rivers ...... 80 Population Ecology and Habitat use of Northern Bobwhite on a Reclaimed Surface Coal Mine in Lake Sturgeon Telemetry in the Cumberland River Kentucky Estimated Completion Date: April 1, 2015 ...... 81 Estimated Completion Date: June 30, 2015 ...... 91

Non Game Fishes Black Bear Lake Sturgeon Restoration in the Upper Cumberland River Drainage in Kentucky Population Ecology of Black Bear in Southeastern Estimated Completion Date: December 31, 2030 ....82 Kentucky Estimated Completion Date: June 30, 2014 ...... 92 Alligator Gar Propagation and Restoration in Western Kentucky Furbearer Estimated Completion Date: December 31, 2030 ....83 Exploring Methods for Monitoring Bobcats in Kentucky Alligator Gar Telemetry Project Estimated Completion Date: June 30, 2014 ...... 94 Estimated Completion Date: June 30, 2014 ...... 84

Propagation and Reintroduction of the Cumberland Darter (Etheostoma susanae) in the Upper Songbirds and Raptors Cumberland River Drainage Estimated Completion Date: December 31, 2014 ....85 Bald eagle tracking in Kentucky expands to collect information on adult home range ...... 95 Propagation and Reintroduction of the Kentucky Arrow Update on Long-term Monitoring for Peregrine Falcons Darter (Etheostoma sagitta spilotum) in the Upper ...... 96 Kentucky River Drainage in Kentucky

6 Kentucky Department of Fish & Wildlife Resources TABLE of CONTENTS

Reptiles and Amphibians

Inventory, Monitoring, and Management of Amphibians and Reptiles in Kentucky ...... 97

Mollusks

Artificial Culture of Freshwater Mussels using Advanced in vitro Culture Methods at the Center for Mollusk Conservation ...... 98

Culture and Propagation of the Black Sandshell, Ligumia recta, and the Endangered Pink Mucket, Lampsilis abrupta, for Restoration in the Green River, KY ...... 100

Research with the Endangered Fat Pocketbook, Potamilus capax ...... 101

Long-term Monitoring of Mussel Populations in Kentucky: Trends in Diversity and Densities in the Licking River, KY ...... 102

Propagation and Culture of Freshwater Mussels at the Center for Mollusk Conservation in Kentucky in 2012 ...... 105

Appendix This section includes references for projects from 2007- 2012...... 108

KDFWR Contacts More information regarding the project summaries within this publication can be obtained by contacting the listed KDFWR contact ...... 116

Evening activity in a gray bat cave / John MacGregor and Mark Gumbert Hunters preparing to flush bobwhite quail / Obie Williams

Annual Research Highlights 2012 7 Processing elk / John Brunjes Completed Projects

8 Kentucky Department of Fish & Wildlife Resources Fisheries / COMPLETED PROJECTS

Impacts of Spawning Habitat Manipulation on Largemouth Bass Year-Class Production in Meldahl Pool, Ohio River (KDFWR) staff met with angler associate with firm substrates such dissatisfied with the bass fishery in the as gravel and cobble often located Jason Herrala, David Baker, Meldahl Pool. Historical electrofishing adjacent to other structures (i.e., rocks, Nick Keeton, Kentucky data collected by KDFWR indicates stumps, logs [Kramer and Smith 1962; Department of Fish and Wildlife that a poor largemouth bass population Miller and Kramer 1971; Vogele and exists in the Meldahl Pool in Rainwater 1975; Nack et al. 1993; Resources comparison with other pools of the Hunt 1995]). Pearson and Krumholz Ohio River. (1984) documented the importance of Habitat requirements of embayments for successful spawning Introduction largemouth bass have been the focus of black bass in the Ohio River. Rising popularity and fishing of many previous studies (Aggus and Unfortunately, embayments in the pressure for black bass have led to Elliott 1975; Eipper 1975; Nack et Meldahl Pool have filled with silt from increased efforts to understand the al. 1993). The presence or absence erosion within the watershed, and very ecology and management of black bass. of critical habitats during different little structure still exists (D. Henley, Black bass make up an important part life stages, especially the first year personal comm.). Central to the of the sport fishery in Kentucky. In of life, likely restricts populations sustainability of black bass populations November 1997, Kentucky Department (Kramer and Smith 1962; Eipper 1975). is the recruitment of young-of-year of Fish and Wildlife Resources Spawning largemouth bass generally (YOY) fish into the population.

Impacts of spawning structure / Doug Henley

Annual Research Highlights 2012 9 COMPLETED PROJECTS / Fisheries

Electrofishing surveys performed 2010. Additionally, Christmas tree experimental embayments (27.9 fish/ by KDFWR indicate that year-class units (2 trees, 1 cinder block) were hr). Spotted bass followed that same production of largemouth bass may be added near SSS to provide cover for trend. Mean CPUE of spotted bass in limited by the lack of suitable spawning YOY fish, and silt meters were placed control embayments was 12.9 fish/hr habitat. in each embayment to record the level compared to 5.2 fish/hr in experimental The addition of artificial habitat of siltation that occurred annually. embayments. No consistent trends to aid largemouth bass spawning has All SSS were removed from each were seen in either largemouth bass been well documented (Vogele and experimental embayment prior to or spotted bass abundance following Rainwater 1975; Johnson and Stein spring sampling in 2010 to evaluate the the removal of the SSS from the 1979; Hoff 1991; Hunt 1995; Annett effect of spawning habitat loss. During experimental embayments in 2010. et al. 1996; Hunt and Annett 2002). the early spring of each year, each SSS Catch rates of largemouth bass declined Positive results (increased spawning was located and manually cleaned of in Big Snag Creek (8.0 fish/hr), but success and increased population silt. remained the same in Bracken Creek numbers) would indicate that year-class Nocturnal electrofishing (four (30.0 fish/hr). Catch rates of spotted production of largemouth bass in the 15-minute transects per embayment) bass following the removal of SSS in Meldahl Pool of the Ohio River may be was conducted in the spring and fall experimental embayments decreased improved by the addition of artificial of 2003 to gather preliminary, base- in Big Snag Creek (2.0 fish/hr) and spawning habitat. The objective of this line data from all embayments in the increased slightly in Bracken Creek study was to determine if the addition Meldahl Pool to document largemouth (1.0 fish/hr). of artificial spawning structures could bass population structure before the Spring electrofishing CPUE of enhance the reproductive potential addition of SSS. After the installation <8.0, 8.0 – 11.9, 12.0 – 14.9, and ≥15 of largemouth bass in the Meldahl of SSS, nocturnal electrofishing (four in largemouth bass was compared Pool of the Ohio River and improve 15-minute transects per embayment) between embayments. Mean CPUE YOY largemouth bass year-class was conducted each spring and fall of <8.0 in largemouth bass for contributions to the fishery. from 2004 to 2010. All black bass experimental embayments was 5.1 collected were measured to the nearest fish/hr and was slightly higher than 0.1 in and weighed to the nearest 0.01 mean CPUE in control embayments Study Area pound. Otoliths were taken from up to (4.5 fish/hr). Catch rates varied in all The Ohio River extends along 10 fish per inch class in spring 2004 to embayments throughout the study the entire 664-mile northern border of 2006 and in fall 2001 to 2005 in order but followed the same general trends. Kentucky, and drains 39,210 mi2 of to assess age and growth of largemouth Catch rates of <8.0 in largemouth bass the state. The Kentucky portion of the bass in the Meldahl Pool. peaked in 2008 for all embayments, Ohio River is comprised of 8 high-lift while 2009 and 2010 yielded catch dams and 2 wicket dams that form a rates that were below average in each series of pools and tailwaters along Results embayment. Mean CPUE of 8.0 – 11.9 the river. The Meldahl Pool runs from Spring in. fish was 10.2 fish/hr in experimental Ohio River Mile (ORM) 341 to ORM A total of 138 hr of electrofishing embayments and 14.2 fish/hr in 436 (95 mi), with a surface area of effort was expended during spring control embayments, and catch rates 170,469 acres. Four embayments in the 2003-2010 in the 4 embayments. in all embayments decreased with the Meldahl Pool were sampled: Bracken Largemouth bass dominated the catch removal of SSS in 2010. Mean CPUE Creek (ORM 426) and Big Snag Creek in both control and experimental of 12.0 – 14.9 in. fish was 8.5 fish/ (ORM 436) were used as study sites embayments throughout the study. hr in experimental embayments and with spawning structures added, and Mean CPUE of largemouth bass in all 11.2 fish/hr in control embayments and Big Turtle Creek (ORM 429) and Big embayments from 2003-2010 was 38.2 decreased in all embayments except Locust Creek (ORM 433) were used fish/hr compared to just 6.5 fish/hr for Big Turtle Creek with the removal of as control sites with no spawning spotted bass. Trends in CPUE data for SSS in 2010. Catch rates of largemouth structures added. largemouth bass data were consistent bass over 15 in varied greatly in and in all embayments throughout the study among embayments throughout the Methods period and were the highest for each study, but mean catch rates were Supplemental spawning structures embayment in 2008 (43.0 – 84.0 fish/ similar. Mean CPUE of largemouth (SSS) were added to Bracken Creek hr). Mean CPUE of largemouth bass bass ≥ 15 in. in experimental and Big Snag Creek beginning in 2004 in control embayments (36.2 fish/ embayments was 2.6 fish/hr and 4.0 and were maintained annually through hr) was higher than mean CPUE in fish/hr in control embayments.

10 Kentucky Department of Fish & Wildlife Resources Fisheries / COMPLETED PROJECTS

CPUE of <7.0, 7.0 – 10.9, 11.0 – bass in all embayments from 2003- (9.2 fish/hr); however, catch rates of 13.9, and ≥14 in spotted bass were also 2010 was 37.3 fish/hr, while mean age-1, age-2, and age-3 fish were all evaluated. Mean CPUE of spotted bass CPUE of spotted bass was just 6.8 higher in control embayments. Mean <7 in. was 1.1 fish/hr in experimental fish/hr. Mean CPUE of largemouth CPUE of age-4 largemouth bass were embayments and 3.8 fish/hr in control bass in control embayments (41.5 fish/ similar across all embayments. Age- embayments and fluctuated greatly hr) was higher than mean CPUE in 0 catch rates were below average in all embayments throughout the experimental embayments (33.1 fish/ in all embayments in 2003 and study. Catch rates of 7.0 – 10.9 in hr). Spotted bass followed that same 2008 indicating poor year classes. spotted bass averaged 2.8 fish/hr in trend. Mean CPUE of spotted bass in Conversely, CPUE of age-0 largemouth experimental embayments and 6.0 control embayments was 16.3fish/hr bass were consistently above average fish/hr in control embayments with compared to 6.6 fish/hr in experimental in 2005 and 2007. Age frequency consistently higher catch rates for all embayments. No negative effects on of spotted bass was also examined embayments occurring in 2006. Mean CPUE of largemouth bass or spotted from fall data. Mean CPUE of all age catch rates of 11.0 – 13.9 fish/hr was bass were seen with the removal of SSS classes examined were higher in control 0.9 fish/hr in experimental embayments in 2010. All embayments displayed embayments than in experimental and 2.2 fish/hr in control embayments. increased catch rates from 2009 when embayments. No age-0 spotted bass For spotted bass ≥14 in, mean CPUE SSS were still in place. were sampled in any embayments in in experimental embayments was Fall electrofishing CPUE of 2003 and were only captured in control 0.3 fish/hr and 0.4 fish/hr in control <8.0, 8.0 – 11.9, 12.0 – 14.9, and ≥15 embayments in 2008 (still below embayments. All length classes that in largemouth bass were compared average). As with largemouth bass this were evaluated yielded catch rates of between embayments. Mean is indicative of weak year classes in 0.0 fish/hr in multiple years within each CPUE of largemouth bass <8.0 in 2003 and 2008. embayment. in experimental embayments (12.9 Age frequency for largemouth bass fish/hr) was higher than in control was determined for each embayment embayments (8.2 fish/hr). Catch rates Discussion and Management from spring bass data. Mean CPUE for <8.0 in. largemouth bass increased Implications of all ages were greater in control in 2010 after SSS were removed in all Multiple studies have shown that embayments than in experimental but one embayment, Big Snag Creek the addition of bass spawning habitat embayments. Age-1 catch rates were (experimental embayment). For all can increase spawning success and low in all embayments in 2004 and other length classes evaluated, mean overall population numbers (Vogele 2009, indicating poor survival from CPUE of control embayments was and Rainwater 1975; Johnson and Stein the 2003 and 2008 year classes. Age higher than experimental embayments. 1979; Hoff 1991; Hunt 1995; Annett frequency of spotted bass was also The removal of SSS in 2010 showed et al. 1996; Hunt and Annett 2002); examined from spring bass data and no consistent effects on CPUE of other however, results from the Meldahl followed trends similar to largemouth length classes. Pool of the Ohio River were contrary. bass. Mean CPUE of spotted bass Fall electrofishing CPUE of <7.0, Noticeable increases in CPUE of black of all ages were greater in control 7.0 – 10.9, 11.0 – 13.9, and ≥14 in bass in experimental embayments were embayments than in experimental spotted bass were also evaluated. not seen after the deployment of SSS. embayments, and poor year class Mean CPUE for all length classes of Often times, spring and fall CPUE was survival from 2003 and 2008 was spotted bass were higher in control higher in control embayments with no evident from no age-1 spotted bass embayments than in experimental added structure than in experimental captured in 2004 and below average embayments. Similar to largemouth embayments in any given year. catch rates in 2009. bass, catch rates for <7.0 in spotted Additionally, the removal of SSS prior bass increased from 2009 to 2010 after to 2010 sampling did not have any Fall SSS were removed in all embayments. negative effects on catch rates of black A total of 104 hr of electrofishing Catch rates of other length classes had bass in experimental embayments as effort was expended during fall 2003- mixed results with the removal of SSS. both spring and fall CPUE was higher 2010. Fall sampling in 2006 was not Electrofishing CPUE for black in 2010 than in 2009. conducted due to dangerously high bass by age-classes for fall 2003-2010 The lack of success shown by the river levels. Largemouth bass were were also compared. Mean CPUE of addition of SSS likely indicates that the predominate black bass species age-0 largemouth bass in experimental the availability of suitable spawning in all 4 embayments throughout the embayments (11.0 fish/hr) was slightly habitat is not the main limiting factor study. Mean CPUE of largemouth higher than in control embayments to reproductive success of black bass in

Annual Research Highlights 2012 11 COMPLETED PROJECTS / Fisheries

Meldahl Pool. Additional factors such or lead to an unsuccessful hatch. requirements for all stages of the as flow, flood pulse length, siltation, Although, a relation between increased life cycle of largemouth bass. Pages and dissolved oxygen all likely play siltation levels and high spring flows 306-314 in L.E. Miranda and D.R. a role in the spawning success of was not directly observed in this study, Devries, editors. Multidimensional largemouth and spotted bass in Meldahl no siltation levels less than 2.1 in. were approaches to reservoir fisheries Pool. Of particular interest in this recorded from 2004-2008. Siltation in management. American Fisheries study is flow and the timing of high- all years was sufficient enough to have Society, Symposium 16, Bethesda, flow events. Poor catch rates of age-0 a possible negative impact on spawning Maryland. black bass in the fall and age-1 bass success. the following spring indicate that 2003 The addition of artificial spawning Bettoli, P.W. and M.J. Maceina. and 2008 were poor year classes for structures has been used to increase 1998. Variation in largemouth bass black bass. Above average spring river year class production in other systems recruitment in four mainstream flow and an extended flood pulse were (Aggus and Elliott 1975; Eipper 1975; impoundments of the Tennessee observed in both years. In 2005 and Heidinger 1975 Nack et al. 1993). River. North American Journal of 2007, below average spring flows were Data from 2003-2010 indicate that Fisheries Management 18:998-1003. observed on the Ohio River, and catch the addition of SSS in Meldahl Pool rates of age-0 black bass were far above of the Ohio River did not have the Eipper, A.W. 1975. Environmental average in all embayments during those desired effect, and their application in influences on the mortality of bass years. Bettoli and Maceina (1998) large river systems to improve year embryos and larvae. Pages 295- found that largemouth bass year class class strength appears to have little if 305 in R.H. Stroud and H. Clepper, strength was inversely related to late any merit. We believe that black bass editors. Black bass biology and spring discharge on the Tennessee year class production (i.e., spawning) management. Sport Fishing Institute, River. Weaker year classes were in the Ohio River is the first issue that Washington, D.C. associated with high flow events after limits abundance. To combat this, spawning, while stronger year classes the Department has begun stocking Hoff, M.H. 1991. Effects of increased were associated with prolonged periods fingerling (2 in.) largemouth bass in nesting cover on nesting and of low water. Conversely, Raibley the Markland and Meldahl Pools of the reproduction of smallmouth bass in et al. (2011) found that an extended Ohio River. Stockings occur in June northern Wisconsin. Pages 39-43 in flood pulse provided stronger year and likely avoid many of the problems D.C. Jackson, editor. Proceedings classes on the Illinois River. Spawning caused by high spring flows and of the first international smallmouth success was associated with prolonged siltation. Preliminary results indicate bass symposium. Mississippi inundation of floodplain habitat that strong survival and bolstered year Agricultural and Forestry Experiment was more conducive to spawning that classes due to departmental stockings. Station, Mississippi State University, many of the river’s backwater lakes. Although a more in-depth investigation Mississippi State. Inundation of the floodplain of Meldahl of environmental impacts on spawning Pool does not provide the habitat as success may be needed, it is possible Hunt, J. 1995. Reproductive described by Raibley et al. (2011), and that flow and increased siltation are the ecology of largemouth bass: habitat spawning success was generally lower limiting factors of spawning success in manipulation, habitat selection, and when spring flow was higher. Meldahl Pool. parental care. Doctoral dissertation. Increased siltation as a result of University of Kansas, Lawrence. high spring flows may also play a factor in poor year classes. Negative effects Literature Cited Hunt, J. and C.A. Annett. 2002. of siltation on spawning have been Aggus, L.R. and G.V. Elliott. 1975. Effects of habitat manipulation on documented for multiple species (Kemp Effects of food and cover on year- reproductive success of individual et al. 2011). Spawning largemouth bass class strength of largemouth bass in largemouth bass in an Ozark generally associate with firm substrates Bull Shoals Lake. Pages 317-322 in reservoir. North American Journal such as gravel and cobble (Kramer and R.H. Stroud and H. Clepper, editors. of Fisheries Management 22:1201- Smith 1962; Miller and Kramer 1971; Black bass biology and management. 1208. Vogele and Rainwater 1975; Nack et al. Sport Fishing Institute, Washington, 1993; Hunt 1995). Increased siltation D.C. Johnson, D.L. and R.A. Stein, in the Meldahl Pool of the Ohio River editors. 1979. Response of fish to likely rendered portions of spawning Annett, C.A., J. Hunt, and E.D. Dibble. habitat structure in standing water. substrate in embayment unusable 1996. The complete bass: habitat American Fisheries Society, North

12 Kentucky Department of Fish & Wildlife Resources Fisheries / COMPLETED PROJECTS

Central Division, Special Publication Funding Source: Sport Fish Restora- 6, Bethesda, Maryland. tion Program (Dingell-Johnson)

Kemp, P., D. Sear, A. Collins, P. KDFWR Strategic Plan. Goal 2, Naden, and I. Jones. 2011. The Strategic Objective 3. impacts of sediment on riverine fish. Hydrological Process 11:1800-1821.

Kramer, R.H. and J.L. Smith. 1962. Formation of year classes in largemouth bass. Transactions of the American Fisheries Society 9:29-41.

Miller, K.D. and R.H. Kramer. 1971. Spawning and early life history of largemouth bass (Micropterus salmoides) in Lake Powell. Pages 73-83 in G.E. Hall, editor. Reservoir fisheries and limnology. American Fisheries Society, Special Publication 8, Bethesda, Maryland.

Nack, S.B., D. Bunnell, D.M. Green, and J.L. Forney. 1993. Spawning and nursery habitats of largemouth bass in the tidal Hudson River. Transactions of the American Fisheries Society 122:208-216.

Pearson, W.D. and L.A. Krumholz. 1984. Distribution and status of Ohio River fishes. ORNL/Sub/79- 7831/1. Oak Ridge National Laboratory, Oak Ridge, Tennessee. 400p.

Raibley, P.T., T.M. O’Hara, K.S. Irons, K.D. Blodgett, and R.E. Sparks. 2011. Largemouth bass size distribution under varying hydrological regimes in the Illinois River. Transaction of the American Fisheries Society 126:850-856.

Vogele, L.E. and W.C. Rainwater. 1975. Use of brush shelters as cover by spawning black basses (Micropterus) in Bull Shoals Reservoir. Transactions of the American Fisheries Society 104:264- 269.

Annual Research Highlights 2012 13 COMPLETED PROJECTS / Fisheries

Analysis of the Environmental Requirements for Etheostoma maydeni (Redlips Darter) and Percina squamata (Olive Darter) in the Rockcastle River, Kentucky

Shepard & Burr 1984; Etnier & Starnes Michael Compton and The Olive darter (Percina squamata, Figure 1) is listed as 1993). A comprehensive assessment of Christopher Taylor, Texas Tech endangered (KSNPC 2007) and as a microhabitats and stream reaches used University species of greatest conservation need by the species is needed. (SGCN) by Kentucky Department of The incorporation of multiple KDFWR Contact: Matt Thomas Fish and Wildlife Resources (KDFWR spatial scales in species distribution and habitat association studies has and Stephanie Brandt 2005). This species occurs in the Cumberland and Tennessee River benefitted conservation efforts for systems in Georgia, Kentucky, North many fish species (e.g., Watson Carolina, and Tennessee (Page and & Hillman 1997; Heggenes et al. Introduction Burr 2011). It is considered imperiled 1999). Schlosser and Angermeier The southeastern region of the or critically imperiled in each of the (1995) demonstrated the importance United States has a rich fish fauna occupied states (NatureServe 2007; of knowing: 1) how the interaction of with numerous species restricted to a Jelks et al. 2008). It is known from ecosystem processes across spatial and few river systems (Page & Burr 2011). only 12 records in the Big South Fork temporal scales creates and maintains The conservation of these species and Cumberland River and Rockcastle habitat features that support fishes; and their stream ecosystems is a paramount River (Burr and Warren 1986); it 2) the spatial variation in demographic challenge for resource managers has not been collected from the processes such as emigration and (Dudgeon et al. 2006; Abell et al. Kentucky portion of the Big South immigration within lotic fish species 2008). The decline of many species has Fork Cumberland River since 1968 and across different hierarchical scales. been well documented (Etnier 1997; has been collected sporadically in the Understanding these factors would Warren et al.1997; Jelks et al. 2008), Rockcastle River. Although the species allow resource managers to identify with the local extinction of many has declined across its range, its status environmental factors necessary for the populations attributed to anthropogenic in Kentucky is uncertain. persistence of a species or assemblage alterations of the landscape, water The Redlips darter, Etheostoma (Schlosser & Angermeier 1995; Fausch pollution, habitat degradation, and maydeni, (= E. cinereum, Ashy darter, et al. 2002). Our study focused on the the presence of exotic species (Benke Figure 2) is endemic to the Cumberland Rockcastle River drainage because it 1990; Allan & Flecker 1993; Richter et River drainage in Kentucky and supports relatively robust populations al.1997; Dudgeon et al. 2006). Benthic Tennessee (Shepard & Burr 1984; of Olive darter and Redlips darter. species (e.g., madtoms and darters) Powers et al. 2004; Powers et al. We documented the distribution, are particularly susceptible to habitat 2012). The species is known from relative abundance, and environmental degradation, because habitat at the Big South Cumberland River, Buck resource use across stream reach and bottom of the stream is typically the Creek, Red River, and Rockcastle microhabitat spatial scales. Our goal most severely impacted (Angermeier River in Kentucky, where is it sporadic was to document spatial patterns of 1995). Effective management and and uncommon (Shepard & Burr Redlips darters and Olive darters to conservation of imperiled species 1984; Burr and Warren 1986). The facilitate conservation efforts in areas will require knowledge of life E. cinereum complex is considered most likely to enhance the persistence history, evolution, and multiscale vulnerable by Jelks et al. (2008) of the species. habitat associations; only then can due to habitat loss and increasing implementation of stream restoration range fragmentation. Effective projects, species reintroductions, Methods management of this species is hindered critical habitat designations, and sound Study Area because known habitat associations policy be made successfully (Warren et The Rockcastle River is a are primarily based on anecdotal al.1997; Fausch et al. 2002; Durance et moderate gradient, 5th order tributary observations and vary greatly (e.g. al. 2006). of the Cumberland River with a

14 Kentucky Department of Fish & Wildlife Resources Fisheries / COMPLETED PROJECTS

Figure 1: Percina squamata (Olive darter)/Matt Thomas

catchment area of approximately 4th and 5th order stream reaches and Percina sciera (dusky darter), resulting 2,000 km2 (764 mi.2). The watershed selected randomly. At each of the in 79 species now known from the is primarily within the Southwestern 30 sites, biological and physical data Rockcastle River. All of the fish SGCN Appalachian Ecoregion, with only the were collected from a series of plots for the Rockcastle River were collected, headwaters of the most northwestern during the summers of 2009 and 2010 except for Chrosomus cumberlandensis tributaries located within the Interior to construct reach and microhabitat (blackside dace). The families Plateau Ecoregion (Woods et al. 2002). use models for both species. Any Cyprinidae and Percidae were the most The watershed is approximately 40% focal species encountered were diverse with 22 and 15 species and the forest, 25% grassland, 25% urban and identified and enumerated for each most abundant with 62% and 20% of 10% agriculture (Homer et al. 2004). plot. In addition to the plot sampling, the total fish collected, respectively. In the headwaters of the watershed, supplemental electrofishing and Redlips darter and Olive darter ranked agriculture, grassland, and urban seining was conducted within a stream 9th and 14th in order of abundance, with land use are more common. The reach to enhance fish assemblage and each species representing 3.9% (365 lower mainstem of the river is mostly distributional data. Water quality data individuals) and 0.24% (23 individuals) forested and has been designated as was also collected at each site. All of the total darter individuals collected a Kentucky Wild River; this section focal species captured were measured from 2008 – 2010, respectively. of the watershed is primarily within for total length (TL mm) and classified the boundaries of the Daniel Boone as adult (TL ≥ 70 mm) or juvenile (< Olive Darter: National Forest. Coal mining activity 70 mm). A variety of univariate and Olive darters were restricted within the watershed was prominent, multivariate techniques were used in to larger sized streams within the but most current land use influences the development of habitat use models Rockcastle River drainage, but their include silviculture, agriculture, and and to understand the habitat linkage distribution was more isolated and numerous small communities scattered between the two scales. Analysis fragmented than the Redlips darter. across the landscape. The mouth of the techniques are detailed in Compton and Twenty-three individuals from eight river is inundated by the backwaters Taylor (2013). sites were encountered. All of the sites of the impounded Cumberland River except for the Middle Fork Rockcastle (Wolf Creek Dam), which fluctuates River location were 5th order and had seasonally and can influence the river Results a catchment area > 750 km2, with the approximately 10 river km upstream. Rockcastle River Fishes majority of locations present within A total of 46,475 individuals from the lower reaches of the mainstem. 67 species of fish were collected from Olive darters were encountered during Study Design 96 sample events during 2008 – 2010. 11 fish sampling events and ranged Fifty-six sites were established Seven new species were collected, from 1-4 individuals. The species was for the purpose of obtaining fish Acipenser fulvescens (lake sturgeon), always less than 0.01 % of the total fish distribution and assemblage data as Lepisosteus osseus (longnose gar), abundance and represented 0.4-2.6 % well as habitat data at the stream reach Notropis telescopes (telescope shiner), of darter species captured. and microhabitat scales during the Gambusia affinis (mosquitofish), Given the low abundance of summers of 2008-2010. Thirty of Morone saxatilis (striped bass), Olive darters, particularly from the the 56 sites were located within the Lepomis gulosus (warmouth), and plot surveys (7 individuals captured

Annual Research Highlights 2012 15 COMPLETED PROJECTS / Fisheries

Juveniles (n= 15) Adults (n= 23) Mann-Whitney U-Test

Variable Median I.R. Median I.R. U-statistic P-value Catchment Area (km2) 1,181.60 591.9 1,220.60 869.3 193 0.539 Elevation (m) 256.9 11.6 251.1 21 152 0.539 Maximum Depth (m) 1.5 0.2 1.6 0.2 216 0.162 Canopy Cover (1 – 4) 3 0.8 2.8 1 151.5 0.501 EPA RBP Habitat Score 147 19.3 158 19 245.5 0.029 Alkalinity (mg/L) 69.1 16.2 75.7 10.4 243.5 0.034 Conductivity (μs/cm) 215 18 222.1 20.3 217 0.183 Organic Carbon (mg/L) 2.4 0.2 2.2 0.6 141.5 0.354 % Urban 23 0 19 8.7 150 0.443 % Forest 39 0 45 15.2 195 0.443 % Grassland 27 0 26 4.5 150 0.443 % Agriculture 7 0 7 2.2 150 0.443 % Sand 15 8 14 8.3 151 0.519 % Pebble 25 15 23 13 142 0.36 % Cobble 19 11 23 9.8 189.5 0.611 % Boulder 8 8 13 11 225 0.116

Table 1: Stream reach scale comparison of juvenile and adult Redlips darter median and interquartile range (IR) environmental variable values and Mann-Whitney U-test results. Bolded variables were significantly different between juvenile and adult darters. during 4 sample events from 3 sites), Redlips Darter: Horse Lick Creek had a population analysis was limited to descriptive Redlips darters were encountered with a mean greater than ten individuals interpretation. Six of the eight sites at 23 sites in 4th and 5th order stream per collection. Individuals captured in where the species occurred were reaches having a catchment area greater Roundstone Creek and Sinking Creek very similar based on shared habitat than 100 km2. The species was present represented new drainage records for characteristics. Each of these sites at all of the mainstem reaches and the the species. During the course of our had a catchment area of at least 1500 lower reaches of the major tributaries, study, Redlips darters were encountered km2 with instream habitat composed except for Skegg Creek. The mean during 41 fish sampling events ranging of approximately 55% run, 33 % distance from the Redlips darter from 1-25 individuals per location and pool, and a maximum depth of 1.6 tributary locations to the confluence of event. The species was always less meters. Substrate composition was the Rockcastle mainstem was 2.7 river than 1% of the total fish abundance, predominantly boulder and cobble (40- km (SD = 2.8), with a range of 0.5-9.5 but represented 0.9 -13.9 % of the total 50 %), followed by pebble and gravel km. Redlips darters were consistently darter community, with a median value (30-40 %). The land cover associated present only at the most downstream of 4.9 %. with these sites is mostly forest (> locations in Horse Lick Creek, Middle 50 %) with urban and agriculture Fork Rockcastle River, and South Fork Habitat Use Analysis roughly 20 %, combined. All Olive Rockcastle River; presence was less Analysis of the stream reach and darters were encountered via backpack consistent in the mainstem Rockcastle microhabitat data revealed that the electrofishing. River. The most downstream site in distributions of adult and juvenile

16 Kentucky Department of Fish & Wildlife Resources Fisheries / COMPLETED PROJECTS

Redlips darters were non-random minimal sediment deposition, stable Comparison of substrate use (selective). In addition, Mann- banks, and a wide (> 20 m) riparian between adult and juvenile Redlips Whitney U-test indicated that adult and zone (Table 1). darters showed that adults were more juvenile darters use the same stream Comparison of microhabitat often associated with larger substrates reaches, but segregate themselves variables for adult and juvenile Redlips than juveniles (Table 2). Cobble and within the reaches by using different darters revealed several similarities boulder were present in 87% of the microhabitats. The stream reach and differences (Table 2). Mann- plots containing adults and composed characterization for Redlips darters Whitney U-tests indicated that the use 50% of the substrate within those plots. included all of the mainstem Rockcastle of the outside bend of the channel, In plots occupied by juveniles, cobble River reaches with catchment areas > gravel and boulder substrate, and mean and boulder were not as common and 750 km2 and 4th order tributary reaches largest boulder size were statistically was approximately 25% and 6% of with catchment areas > 100 km2 and different between adults and juveniles substrate composition within a plot, close proximity (< 10 river km) to the darters. Adults were present along respectively. Gravel, pebble and cobble mainstem. The land cover associated the margin of the stream channel in composed over 60% of the substrate with these reaches was approximately 68% of the plots, with 80% of those within plots containing juveniles. The 40% forest, 25% grassland, 20% urban plots present along the outside bend median largest-boulder size within plots and less than 10% agriculture. The of the channel, indicating a strong was approximately 50% greater in plots reaches contained approximately 12% association with the erosional zone of containing adults than for juveniles. riffle, 55% run, and 33% pool habitats, the channel. Juveniles were present Adults and juveniles were similarly with the maximum depth typically 1.5 along the margin of the channel in 54% associated with sand, silt, bedrock and meters. Substrate composition was of the plots and were present along the mud/clay, which represented a small approximately 50% cobble and pebble, outside bend of the channel in 52% of percentage (< 10%) of the substrate 15% boulder and 15% sand, with a those plots, indicating no preference in composition when the species was mixture of gravel, silt, and bedrock channel location. Although a difference present. Water willow and large woody comprising approximately 20% of the in channel location was seen among debris (LWD) were infrequently used remaining reach substrates. Redlips adult and juvenile darters, flow and by adult and juvenile darters (< 10% of darters were present exclusively at depth were not statistically different the plots containing the species). Large reaches containing at least one boulder between the groups. Flow was woody debris was used slightly more greater than 0.50 m in size within at typically classified as ‘slow’ (0.01-0.3 often by juveniles than adults, but this least 20% of the plots sampled within m/s), but was occasionally classified as habitat was present in less the 25% of that reach. Typically reaches included ‘no flow’. The median depth for adults plots occupied by juveniles and 15% of a diverse mixture of flow and depth and juveniles was 0.33 m and 0.34 m, plots occupied by adults. patterns, numerous habitat types with respectively.

Figure 2: Etheostoma maydeni (Redlips darter)/Matt Thomas

Annual Research Highlights 2012 17 COMPLETED PROJECTS / Fisheries

contained plots of varying quality. juveniles frequently occupied pool Discussion In addition, the results indicated habitats, or occasionally along the The Olive darter was encountered that a sufficient network of suitable margins of run habitat, with similar too infrequently during this study to microhabitats within a reach is needed depths (0.20–0.80 m) and flows (slow make a quantitative assessment of to support a large population of adult or no flow). They were segregated habitat use. However, based on our darters. within the stream reach by channel observations the species appears to One of the most important location and rock substrate preference. be limited to reaches of the mainstem limiting factors for the Redlips darter Adults occurred more frequently along Rockcastle River with an abundance at the stream reach scale was stream channel margins, particularly the of large boulders. This type of habitat size. The species was present at all outside channel bend, and were mostly is common in the lower mainstem and of the mainstem sites (5th order with associated with larger substrates, such it is possible that the species is more catchment area > 750 km2), and in as boulder and cobble. Juveniles common than our results indicate. the lower reaches of the tributaries were more evenly distributed within Furthermore, the Olive darters that (4th order with catchment area > 100 the channel and were associated with were encountered typically did not km2) typically < 3 km upstream from smaller substrates, such as gravel fit the habitat descriptions as noted the Rockcastle River confluence. The and pebble. Adults were generally by Etnier and Starnes (1993) and species is known to inhabit small to associated with boulders approximately exhibited a wide range of habitats. large rivers (Etnier & Starnes 1993; 50% larger than the boulders associated Encompassing the entire study, Olive Powers & Mayden 2002; Page & Burr with juvenile darters. We view the darters were taken in swift water and 2011). We classified the Rockcastle large rock substrates as the primary associated with large boulders as River mainstem as a medium- cover for the species. Although described in Etnier and Starnes (1993), sized river, the major tributaries as bedrock (fractured bedrock) was not but they were also taken in areas with small rivers or large creeks, and the significantly associated with Redlips minimal flow. In general, Olive darter Cumberland River as a large river. darter use, we recognize its importance habitat can be characterized by areas We suspect that the species inhabits and similar function as cover (Etnier & with large boulders (often over 1.0 m, primarily medium-sized rivers based Starnes 1993). b-axis length), minimal fine substrate, on known occurrences in the Big Microhabitat features such as and with slow flow (0.01 – 0.3 m/s). South Fork Cumberland River in KY/ silt, LWD, and water willow have Lastly, only two juvenile darters were TN and Buffalo River in TN. The been associated with Redlips darter collected, which were both located species appears to have an occasional presence (Shepard & Burr 1984; Etnier along the margin of the channel. One or seasonal presence in small rivers & Starnes 1993; Boschung & Mayden juvenile, 64 mm TL, was associated (e.g., Buck Creek, KY) and large 2004). We quantified the use of these with a small boulder and large woody rivers (e.g., Clinch River, TN/VA). substrates and their importance relative debris. The largest adults were taken Large rivers may serve as important to other microhabitat features used. We in the mid-channel and in the swiftest natural dispersal corridors between found the Redlips darter occasionally waters. One adult, 139 mm TL, was populations. associated with silt, which represented taken at the head of a riffle in swift In addition to stream size, a a small proportion of the general water, associated with a large boulder minimal proportion of large boulders habitat. The species did not occur (1.1 m, b-axis length). within a stream reach was identified as in heavily silted areas unless a large The Redlips darter was common an important limiting variable for the boulder (> 1.0 m b-axis) was present and occasionally locally abundant in Redlips darter. Individuals were always in the immediate area along with an the 4th and 5th order segments. We present in reaches having at least one adjacent clean swept benthic area. We suspected that the environmental boulder > 0.5 m b-axis in 20% of the encountered three adults within this quality of the stream reaches and plots surveyed. Although boulders have habitat combination. Our observations microhabitats were linked, such as been identified as a substrate type used agree with other reports (e.g., Shepard higher quality reaches would have a by the species (Shepard & Burr 1984; & Burr 1984) that silt limits Redlips greater proportion of higher quality Etnier & Starnes 1993), our study is darter persistence and we emphasize plots containing Redlips darters and a the first to demonstrate the importance that excessive silt is one of the principal greater abundance of adult and juvenile of boulder size and frequency within a factors detrimental to the species. individuals within them. Our analysis stream reach. The use of LWD or water willow indicated that the two spatial scales Several microhabitat variables as cover was first noted by Shepard & were mostly independent of each other. influenced the distribution of Redlips Burr (1984) and has frequently been Lower and higher quality reaches darters within a reach. Adults and noted in subsequent works (Burr &

18 Kentucky Department of Fish & Wildlife Resources Fisheries / COMPLETED PROJECTS

Juveniles (n= 50) Adults (n= 60) Mann-Whitney U-Test Variable Median I.R. P.F. Median I.R. P.F. U-statis- P-value Outside bend (0/1)* 1 1 0.52 1 1 0.8 712 0.013 Large woody debris (0/1) 0 0 0.24 0 0 0.15 1347 0.18 Justicia spp. (0/1) 0 0 0.1 0 0 0.08 1472.5 0.741 Flow category (0 – 3) 1 1 0.7 0.8 1 0.63 1436.5 0.679 % Fines 0 0 0.06 0 0 0.15 1634 0.137 % Sand 12.5 25 0.54 0 13 0.42 1290 0.171 % Gravel 25 37.5 0.74 6.3 13 0.5 955.5 0.001 % Pebble 13 25 0.76 12.5 13 0.65 1211 0.076 % Cobble 25 25 0.86 25 31.5 0.87 1782.5 0.086 % Boulder 6.3 13 0.5 25 24.8 0.87 2270.5 < 0.001 % Bedrock 0 0 0.1 0 0 0.23 1696.5 0.073 % Mud/Clay 0 0 0.04 0 0 0.02 1465 0.456 Mean depth (m) 0.34 0.3 1 0.33 0.16 1 1507.5 0.964 Depth coefficient of variation 0.44 0.51 1 0.58 0.35 1 1768.5 0.107 Mean largest boulder (m) 0.48 0.32 0.92 0.73 0.37 1 2414.5 < 0.001

Table 2: Plot scale comparison of juvenile and adult Redlips darter median, interquartile range (IR), and plot frequency (PF) environmental variable values and Mann-Whitney U-test results. *adjusted to only account for plots along the margin of the stream channel. Bolded variables were significantly different between juvenile and adult darters.

Warren 1986; Etnier & Starnes 1993). concept is based on our findings that and dependency of local habitats to We found the species to be rarely the species primarily occupies sections maintain local populations increases associated with LWD when appropriate of medium-size rivers. We postulate (Yan et al. 2011). In addition, rock substrate (i.e., boulder) was that the Redlips darter conforms to viewing the insular tributaries in the present within a plot. When a boulder a nonequilibrium metapopulation framework of island biogeography was absent from a plot, LWD was model, where dispersal capabilities and theory (MacArthur & Wilson 1967), used presumably because it served connectivity of habitats are diminished we suspect that populations in the as the largest stable substrate. Water by natural or anthropogenic factors smallest and most isolated tributary willow was rarely used (< 10%), but (Harrison 1991; Falke & Fausch 2010). watersheds are at the greatest risk we speculate that the vegetative cover The tributaries of the Cumberland of local extirpation. For example, may play a role in other aspects of life and Tennessee rivers can be viewed the Little River population has been history not addressed in our study, such as separate systems relatively isolated documented as being stable/good as egg attachment (Etnier & Starnes from each other by the mainstem (Etnier & Starnes 1993), but has 1993). based on their spatial position within declined greatly (Powers et al. 2004). the drainages, and exacerbated by the We suspect that movement into this presence of impoundments (Osborne system is minimal or nonexistent Management Implications and Wiley 1992). Within this context, because of impoundment and local This research provides the rates of colonization and gene flow habitat degradation over time resulting foundation for two concepts that among populations inhabiting the in population decline. Therefore, could benefit the conservation of the tributaries decreases and the influence within this geographic framework, an species across its entire range. The first assessment of watershed size (km2),

Annual Research Highlights 2012 19 COMPLETED PROJECTS / Fisheries

connectivity, and colonization potential provides resource managers with a Durance, L., Le Pichon, C., & among the tributaries should be sound framework to focus endeavors Ormerod, S.J. 2006. Recognizing conducted. In addition, an assessment in local conservation efforts, such as the importance of scale in the of the available habitat within the biological surveys, critical habitat ecology and management of riverine tributaries should be made to prioritize protection, and stream restoration fish. River Research & Applications conservation efforts. Although we did efforts. 22: 1143—1152. not test for transferability within our study, we are confident that a strong Etnier, D.A. 1997. Jeopardized baseline in habitat use was achieved Literature Cited southeastern freshwater fishes: a and can be used cautiously in other Abell, R. & 26 coauthors. 2008. search for causes. Pages 87—104 tributaries. This should guide resource Freshwater ecoregions of the world: in G.W. Benz & Collins, D.E., managers in watershed restoration a new map of biogeographic units for editors. Aquatic fauna in peril: the projects, critical habitat enhancement, freshwater biodiversity conservation. southeastern perspective. Southeast or species augmentation efforts. BioScience 58: 406—414. Aquatic Research Institute, Lenz The second concept focuses on Design and Communications, the microhabitats used by Redlips Allan, J.D. & Flecker, A.S. 1993. Decatur, Georgia. darter. Our study provided strong Biodiversity conservation in running evidence that stable rock substrates, waters. BioScience 43: 32—43. Etnier, D.A. & Starnes, W.C. 1993. in particular large boulders (> 0.5 m), The fishes of Tennessee. University minimal silt, pool habitat, and no or Angermeier, P.L. 1995. Ecological of Tennessee Press, Knoxville. 681 slow flow are important variables in attributes of extinction prone species: pp. localized presence of the species. We loss of freshwater fishes of Virginia. hypothesize that adults are dependent Conservation Biology 9: 143—158. Falke, J.A. & Fausch, K.D. 2010. upon the hydrology within the From metapopulations to erosional zone of the channel and on Benke, A.C. 1990. A perspective metacommunities: linking theory the presence of large boulders. The on America’s vanishing streams. with empirical observations of erosional zone contains the greatest Journal of the North American spatial population dynamics of current velocities and sheer stress Benthological Society 9: 77—88. stream fishes. Pages 207—233 in within the channel during high flows K.B. Gido & Jackson, D.A., editors. (Rosgen 2006). During periods of Burr, B.M. & Warren, M.L. 1986. Community ecology of stream high flow the material is lifted and A distributional atlas of Kentucky fishes: concepts, approaches, and transported downstream, and is most fishes. Kentucky State Nature techniques. American Fisheries prevalent within the erosional zone Preserves Commission. Scientific Society, Symposium 73, Bethesda, of the channel, where finer substrates Technical Series 4. Maryland. such as sand and silt are flushed. It is this hydraulic flushing mechanism Compton, M.C. & Taylor, C.M. 2013. Fausch K.D., Torgersen, C.E., Baxter, that cleans the interstitial spaces Spatial scale effects on habitat C.V., & Li, H.W. 2002. Bridging between the larger substrates used by associations of the Ashy Darter, the gap between research and the Redlips darter. This is important Etheostoma cinereum, an imperiled conversation of stream fishes. because Redlips darter frequently fish in the southeast United States. BioScience 52: 483—498. occurs within pool habitat and is Ecology of Freshwater Fishes 22: associated with no or slow flows (< 178—191. Harrison, S. 1991. Local extinction 0.30 m/s) during base-flow periods. in a metapopulation context: an This makes pools highly susceptible to Dudgeon, D., Arthington, A. H., empirical evaluation. Biological excessive sediment loads. We suggest Gessner, M.O., Kawabata, Z., Journal of the Linnean Society. 42: the strong association between the Knowler, D. J., Lévêque, C. L., 73—88. Redlips darter and large boulders is Naiman, R. J., Prieur-Richard, related to the fact that boulders are A., Soto, D., Stiassny, M. L. J., & Heggenes, J., Bagliniere, J., & Cunjak, stable substrates that provide shelter Sullivan, C. A. 2006. Freshwater R. 1999. Spatial niche variability against increased suspended material biodiversity: importance, threats, for young Atlantic salmon (Salmo being transported downstream during status and conservation challenges. salar) and brown trout (S. trutta) in rain events. We believe this hypothesis Biological Reviews 81: 163—182. heterogeneous streams. Ecology of

20 Kentucky Department of Fish & Wildlife Resources Fisheries / COMPLETED PROJECTS

Freshwater Fish 8: 1—21. Osborne, L.L. & Wiley, M.J. 1992. Biological Society of Washington 97: Influence of tributary spatial position 693—715. Jelks, H.L., Walsh, S.J., Burkhead, on the structure of warmwater fish N.M., Contreras-Balderas, S., Diaz- communities. Canadian Journal of Warren, M.L. Jr., Angermeier, Pardo, E., Hendrickson, D.A., Lyons, Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences 49: P.L., Burr, B.M., & Haag, W.R. J., Mandrak, N.E., McCormick, F., 671—681. 1997. Decline of a diverse fish Nelson, J.S., Platania, S.P., Porter, fauna: patterns of imperilment B.A., Renaud, C.B., Schmitter-Soto, Powers, S.L., Mayden, R.L., & Etnier, and protection in the southeastern J.J., Taylor, E.B., & Warren Jr., D.A. 2004. Conservation genetics United States. Pages 105—164 M.L. 2008. Conservation status of of the ashy darter, Etheostoma in G.W. Benz & Collins, D.E., imperiled North American freshwater cinereum, (Percidae: Subgenus editors. Aquatic fauna in peril: the and diadromous fishes. Fisheries 33: Allohistium), in the Cumberland and southeastern perspective. Southeast 372—407. Tennessee Rivers of the southeastern Aquatic Research Institute, Lenz United States. Copeia 2004(3): Design and Communications, Kentucky’s Comprehensive Wildlife 632—637. Decatur, Georgia. Conservation Strategy. 2005. Kentucky Department of Fish and Powers, S.L., & Kuhajda, B.R., & Watson, G. & Hillman, T.W. 1997. Wildlife Resources, #1 Sportsman’s Ahlbrand, S.E. 2012. Systematics of Factors affecting the distribution Lane, Frankfort, Kentucky 40601. the Etheostoma cinereum (Teleostei: and abundance of bull trout: an http://fw.ky.gov/kfwis/stwg/. (Date Percidae) species complex (subgenus investigation at hierarchical scales. updated 9/21/2005). (Accessed Allohistium). Zootaxa 3277: 43–55. North American Journal of Fisheries November 2, 2007). Management 17: 237—252. Richter, B.D., Braun, D.P., Mendelson, KSNPC (Kentucky State Nature M.A., & Master, L.L. 1997. Threats Woods, A.J., Omernik, J.M., Martin, Preserves Commission). 2007. to imperiled freshwater fauna. W.M., Pond, G.J., Andrews, W.M., Report of Endangered, Threatened, Conservation Biology 11: 1081— Call, S.M., Comstock, J.A., & Taylor, and Special Concern Plants, 1093. D.D. 2002. Ecoregions of Kentucky Animals, and Natural Communities (2 sided color poster with map, for Rockcastle County, Kentucky. Rosgen, D.L. 2006. Watershed descriptive text, summary tables, and Frankfort, Kentucky. Assessment of River Stability and photographs). US Geological Survey Sediment Supply (WARSSS). (map scale 1:1,000,000). Reston, MacArthur, R.H. & Wilson, E.O. 1967. Wildland Hydrology. Fort Collins, VA. The theory of island biogeography. Colorado. Princeton University Press, Yan, Y., Xiang, X., Chu, L., Zhan, Y., Princeton. Schlosser, I.J. & Angermeier, & Fu, C. 2011. Influences of local P.L. 1995. Spatial variation in habitat and stream spatial position Mattingly, H.T. & Galat, D.L. demographic processes in lotic on fish assemblages in a dammed 2002. Distributional patterns of fishes: concepts, models, empirical watershed, the Qingyi Stream, China. the threatened Niangua darter, evidence, and implications for Ecology of Freshwater Fishes 20: Etheostoma nianguae, at three spatial conservation. Pages 392—401 199—208. scales, with implications for species in Nelson, J.L. editor. Evolution conservation. Copeia 2002(3): and the aquatic ecosystem: Funding Source: State Wildlife Grant 573—585. defining unique units in population Program (SWG) and Texas Tech Uni- conservation. American Fisheries versity NatureServe. 2007. NatureServe Society, Symposium 17, Bethesda, Explorer: An Online Encyclopedia Maryland. KDFWR Strategic Plan. Goal 1. of Life. Version 6.3 NatureServe, Strategic Objective 5. Comprehen- Arlington, Virginia. Available http:// Shepard, T. E. & Burr, B. M. 1984. sive Wildlife Conservation Strategy: www.natureserve.org/explorer. (Date Systematics, status, and life Appendix 3.9; Class Actinopterygii updated October 6, 2007. (Accessed history aspects of the Ashy Darter, and Cephalaspidomorphi: Taxa spe- November 14, 2007). Etheostoma cinereum (Pisces: cific research and survey project. Percidae). Proceedings of the

Annual Research Highlights 2012 21 COMPLETED PROJECTS / Fisheries

Description and Geography of Two Unique Populations of the Stonecat, Noturus flavus (Siluriformes: Ictaluridae)

Lisa J. Hopman and Brooks Noturus flavus Rafinesque species, it does have several diagnostic (Siluriformes: Ictaluridae), commonly M. Burr, Southern Illinois characteristics. These include a called Stonecat, has one of the largest light, cream colored blotch at the University Carbondale geographic ranges in the genus rear of the dorsal fin base and a occurring latitudinally from southern backward extension from each side KDFWR Contact: Matthew parts of Canada to northern Alabama of the premaxillary tooth patch Thomas and longitudinally from Montana to (Page and Burr, 2011). Due to its Vermont. Within Kentucky, Stonecats broad distribution, there is natural occur throughout the eastern half of morphological variation among the state in the Cumberland, Kentucky, Stonecat populations (Taylor 1969); Licking, and Salt River drainages, and however, there are several references to Introduction Tygarts Creek and the Little Sandy two distinct phenotypes that could be The genus Noturus (madtoms) is River (Figure 1). Stonecats occur in considered separate species. a strictly North American freshwater streams and small to large rivers where The first phenotype, which we ictalurid (North American catfishes) they are usually associated with riffle herein refer to as the “Highlands composed of approximately 30 species. habitats (Burr and Warren, 1986). Stonecat,” is found in the Cumberland Most are small, typically less than 10 The Stonecat attains the largest River (below Cumberland Falls) cm standard length (SL), and can be size among all the madtoms reaching drainage and sporadically in the differentiated from other ictalurids by up to 31 cm standard length (SL). Tennessee River drainage (Figure their attached adipose fin (Page and Although not as spectacularly 2). The Highlands Stonecat shows a Burr, 2011). pigmented as some other madtom distinctive pigmentation pattern of

Figure 1: Kentucky range map of Noturus flavus (modified from Burr & Warren 1986) depicting distributions of Stonecats (black spots, Ohio River basin), Highland Stonecats (blue dots, Cumberland River drainage), and Smalleye Stonecats (red line, Mississippi River mainstem).

22 Kentucky Department of Fish & Wildlife Resources Fisheries / COMPLETED PROJECTS

a cream-colored Table 1: Description of measurements crescent and two used in the morphometric analyses ovals across its 19. dorsal fin insertion to anal fin origin nape (Figure 4). In a recent 01. snout to occiput 20. dorsal fin insertion to adipose fin origin phylogeographic 02. snout to dorsal fin origin 21. pelvic fin origin to adipose fin origin analysis of Stonecat populations using 03. snout to pectoral fin origin 22. pelvic fin origin to anal fin origin mitochondrial DNA, 04. snout to pelvic fin origin 23. adipose fin origin to anal fin origin the Tennessee and Cumberland River 05. between the eyes to occiput 24. adipose fin origin to adipose fin insertion lineages formed 06. between the eyes to pectoral fin origin 25. adipose fin origin to anal fin insertion a monophyletic group which was 07. between the eyes to meeting of gills 26. adipose fin insertion to anal fin origin the sister group 08. meeting of gills to occiput 27. adipose fin insertion to anal fin insertion to all remaining populations (Faber 09. meeting of gills to pectoral fin origin 28. anal fin origin to anal fin insertion et al., 2009). 10. occiput to dorsal fin origin 29. standard length Several references to the 11. occiput to pectoral fin origin 30. pectoral spine length unique phenotype 12. head depth at occiput 31. dorsal spine length in the Cumberland and Tennessee 13. dorsal fin origin to pectoral fin origin 32. head width under nasal barbels River drainages 14. dorsal fin origin to pelvic fin origin 33. head width under eyes suggest that it represents a distinct 15. dorsal fin origin to dorsal fin insertion 34. body width at pectoral fin origin and undescribed 16. pectoral fin origin to pelvic fin origin 35. body width under dorsal fin origin species (Burr and Warren, 1986; 17. pectoral fin origin to dorsal fin insertion 36. least interorbital width Burr and Stoekel, 18. dorsal fin insertion to pelvic fin origin 37. orbit width 1999; Boschung and Mayden, 2004; Faber et al., 2009; Page and Burr, be isolated from N. flavus Mayden, 2004). 2011). in adjoining tributaries. Additionally, Objectives The second phenotype which we N. flavus has not been collected in Multiple observations since the refer to here as the “Smalleye Stonecat” tributaries to the Mississippi River late 1960s have been made regarding is found in the lower Missouri River below the Meramac River (Smith, these two distinct phenotypes of from approximately Kansas City, 1979; Pflieger, 1997) leading to N. flavus (see above) yet no formal Missouri, to its mouth and middle further isolation of these southern taxonomic study has been conducted Mississippi River from the mouth of Mississippi River populations. The to date. The recommendations by other the Missouri River to the mouth of the Smalleye Stonecat has smaller eyes researchers that these phenotypes could Hatchie River, Tennessee (Figure 2). than nominotypical N. flavus and be described as new species warrants A few specimens are available from they also appear to be less developed this research. Both the Highlands the Mississippi River in Kentucky, (almost vestigial). Faber et al. (2009) Stonecat and Smalleye Stonecat along and more trawling will probably included four Smalleye Stonecats with nominotypical Stonecats are yield a better sample size than what is from Cape Girardeau, Missouri, in found within or in waters bordering available at present. Larval Smalleye their phylogeographic analysis, and the state of Kentucky. Clarification Stonecats have been collected from the they discovered that they shared a of distinctions among these three is main channel of these rivers leading haplotype with the majority of the other essential to fully understanding the to the assumption that this phenotype lowland clade. Some references to this ichthyofauna of the state. remains in turbid, deep channel habitats phenotype suggest that it may warrant The objectives of this research are: for the duration of its life and may recognition as a distinct species (Burr and Stoeckel, 1999; Boschung and 1. To formally describe a new

Annual Research Highlights 2012 23 COMPLETED PROJECTS / Fisheries

Stonecats. These measurements form a typical box truss (Bookstein et al., 1985) along with additional standard morphological measurements (Hubbs and Lagler, 2004). All measurements were made with Mitutoyo Absolute Digimatic digital calipers to the nearest 0.1 mm on the left side of the specimens. Morphometric data were log-transformed and subjected to principal component analysis (PCA) using JMP 7.0.1 software. The low number of Smalleye Stonecats examined was due to the rarity of museum specimens and the difficulty of collecting this phenotype in large rivers. Field collected specimens of Stonecat, the Highlands Figure 2: General spot distribution of the Stonecat (Noturus flavus) in the Stonecat, and Smalleye Stonecat were northern United States and southern Canada. Stonecats (black spots), Smalleye also used in this study and deposited in Stonecats (red line), and Highland Stonecats (blue spots) are so indicated on the the SIUC Fluid Vertebrate Collection map. (SIUC FVC). Stonecats and Highlands Stonecats were collected using seines and backpack electrofishing methods in streams. Smalleye Stonecats were species of catfish (Ictaluridae) of the University (TU), University of Kansas collected using a benthic trawl. All genus Noturus related to Noturus flavus (KU), United States National Museum museum and field collected fish used (Stonecat) that is known in Kentucky, (USNM), Canadian Museum of Nature in this study were georeferenced using Tennessee, Alabama, and Virginia (CMNFI), Cornell University (CU), DeLorme Topo USA 7.0 software to only from the Cumberland River (e.g., The Manitoba Museum (MM), and the best possible location if latitude Rockcastle River, Big South Fork) University of Alabama (UAIC). and longitude were not provided by the and Tennessee River drainages herein Specimens were initially assigned lending institution. referred to as the “Highlands Stonecat”. to a phenotype (Stonecat, Highlands Three pigmentation patterns Stonecat, or Smalleye Stonecat) were scored using scales created 2. To describe and discuss the based on collection location and for this study (following Burr et al., population of Noturus flavus (Stonecat) historical references to the ranges 2005) based on the observed range herein referred to as the “Smalleye of these hypothesized phenotypes. of patterns. These patterns were Stonecat” that is known in the lower Specimens from the Missouri River observed and scored by using a Missouri River and Mississippi River downstream of Kansas City, Missouri, dissecting microscope or naked eye. from the mouth of Missouri River to the mouth, and Stonecats from In order to score nape pigmentation, to the mouth of Hatchie River and the Mississippi River downstream a scale ranging from 1 to 3 was recommend future work regarding this of the mouth of the Missouri River developed: 1) no nape pigmentation; population. were designated Smalleye Stonecats. 2) cream colored crescent on nape; Specimens from the Cumberland River 3) cream colored crescent and two drainage or Tennessee River drainage ovals on nape. Observations have Methods were designated Highlands Stonecats. also revealed a ventral pelvic fin and Specimens examined in this study Specimens from other locations were abdominal pigmentation pattern which were borrowed from natural history designated normal N. flavus (Stonecat). were scored as a number 1-4: 1) no collections at the following institutions: To evaluate shape variation among pigmentation present on abdomen or Southern Illinois University Carbondale the three putative taxa, a series of 37 in ventral pelvic fins; 2) pigmentation (SIUC), Illinois Natural History Survey point-to-point measurements (Table present in ventral pelvic fins only, 3) (INHS), University of Michigan 1) were taken on 229 N. flavus, 224 pigmentation present on abdomen Museum of Zoology (UMMZ), Tulane Highlands Stonecats, and 64 Smalleye

24 Kentucky Department of Fish & Wildlife Resources Fisheries / COMPLETED PROJECTS Sharp-shinned hawk nest / Tyler Rankin only, 4) pigmentation present on (Figure 3). However, when Highlands specimens examined) and Smalleye abdomen and in ventral pelvic fins. Stonecats and Smalleye Stonecats were Stonecats (98%) were typically The lower lip was also examined for analyzed apart from nominotypical scored as having no pattern and no any pigmentation and scored as a yes N. flavus, these two phenotypes specimens of these two types had the (presence) or no (absence) value. separated into nearly distinct clusters. complete crescent and oval pattern. A subset of specimens was Measurements driving this separation Highlands Stonecats were scored a 3 also examined to determine gender. were dorsal fin spine length and bony (complete pattern present) in 93% of These individuals were dissected and orbit width. the specimens examined and only 1%, examined internally when permission Analyses of each of the three 3 specimens, were scored as having was obtained from the lending phenotypes separately did not no pattern. The lip pigmentation institution. Gender was recorded as reveal any separation of body shape pattern showed similar results as the male, female, or undetermined. The among drainages except for one case nape pattern: Highlands Stonecats genital papillae were also examined involving Smalleye Stonecats. There typically had lip pigmentation present to determine if fish could be sexed by was a compelling pattern in which (91%) while normal Stonecats and external methods following Walsh and individuals from the Missouri River Smalleye Stonecats typically had no lip Burr (1985). formed a tight cluster that was separate pigmentation present, 94% and 100% from Mississippi River specimens. respectively. Missouri River Smalleye Stonecats Abdominal pigmentation pattern Results have slightly larger eyes and shallower was the most variable pattern scored Principal component analyses of heads than Mississippi River specimens in this study with almost all three the 37 body shape characters used in which show more variation in these phenotypes showing all four patterns this study did not separate N. flavus, the characters. scored. Highlands Stonecats were Highlands Stonecat, and the Smalleye The dorsal pigmentation usually scored as having some pigment Stonecat into separate clusters under pattern including the pale crescent present, 73% of specimens examined; any scenario (e.g., gender, size); along the nape does separate the whereas, nominotypical Stonecats Noturus flavus always clustered as Highlands Stonecat from N. flavus (79%) and Smalleye Stonecats (95%) an intermediate between Highlands and Smalleye Stonecat (Figure 4). usually were scored as having no Stonecat and Smalleye Stonecat Nominotypical Stonecats (97% of pigment present in either the pelvic fin or on the abdomen. Almost equal numbers of male and female fish were examined for each of the three phenotypes. Sheared PCA showed no separation of males from females for any of the phenotypes examined. Sex was not a determinate of any of the pigmentation patterns present either. External examination of the genital papillae was not successful in determining gender for any of the three phenotypes; Taylor (1969) also found that examination of the gonads was the only reliable method and external examinations were usually inconclusive. Dissection and internal examination in this case was much faster and gave conclusive results with minimal Figure 3: Plot of factor scores for 37 morphometric measurements on sheared damage. PC axes 2 and 3 for all Noturus flavus (N=228), Highlands Stonecat (N=224), and Smalleye Stonecat (N=64) specimens.

Annual Research Highlights 2012 25 COMPLETED PROJECTS / Fisheries

presumably found only in the main Discussion stems of the Lower Missouri River In his masterful revision of the and the Mississippi River from the genus Noturus, Taylor (1969) described mouth of the Missouri River to the 10 species and 1 subspecies as new to mouth of the Hatchie River, Tennessee, science. In two separate, but earlier requires further study centered on papers (Bailey and Taylor, 1950; karyology, DNA sequence data, Suttkus and Taylor, 1965) he had histology, and reproductive biology. already described 2 additional species. We have numerous tiny juveniles from As of 1970, there were 23 species the main stem Mississippi River that known and Taylor had described over we do not believe have been “washed” half of them. Because of the apparent out into the river from tributaries. The completeness of Taylor’s work most Smalleye Stonecat almost certainly systematic ichthyologists of the time spawns and lives out its entire life in turned to percids, cyprinids, and big rivers similar to the Macrhybopsis catostomids for new discoveries of chubs. No distinctive body shape or formally undescribed species of North pigmentation pattern differences could American freshwater fishes. be found in this study to distinguish The significance of Taylor’s (1969) Smalleye Stonecats from nominotypical work is, in part, that he showed external Figure 4: Pale crescent pattern along Stonecats. Smalleye Stonecats do have morphological characters that are the nape (yellow arrow) distinguishing longer dorsal fin spines and smaller generally informative of the taxonomic the Highlands Stonecat (A) from the eyes than Highlands Stonecats. Faber status of fish populations are conserved Stonecat (B) and Smalleye Stonecat. et al. (2009) showed that Smalleye among madtoms. He also demonstrated Photos by Matt Thomas (KDFWR). Stonecats from Cape Girardeau, that character differences among Missouri, shared a haplotype with the madtoms can be subtle, particularly body shape between the Highlands remainder of the Mississippi-Erie- in aspects of pigmentation. One other Stonecat and Smalleye Stonecat, but Hudson clade. We believe that more often overlooked detail is that several very little between nominotypical N. research is required before salient madtom species are naturally rare and flavus and either of the two phenotypes. differences can be found that separate occupy narrow ranges or are endemic However, the pigmentation patterns Smalleye Stonecats from the other two to relatively small physiographic across the nape and on the lips of the phenotypes. provinces (e.g., the Ozark Highlands). Highlands Stonecat can be used to The relatively recent phylogenetic Limited geographic ranges and the slow distinguish it from both nominotypical analyses completed by Hardman but steady decline of stream integrity Stonecat and Smalleye Stonecat and (2004), Near and Hardman (2006), have led to 6 species (20% of known hold true throughout the hypothesized and Egge and Simons (2009; 2011) species) being listed as endangered range. The pigmentation distinctions have included DNA sequence data, or threatened by the U.S. Fish and are again subtle but consistent and morphology, and venom gland Wildlife Service. One of these 6 have been shown previously in both structure. The trees generated by these species, Noturus trautmani, is probably editions of the Peterson Field Guide to studies include nearly all described extinct (not seen since 1957). Freshwater Fishes of North America species and corroborate species- The two phenotypes, Highlands (Page and Burr, 1991; Page and Burr, level distinctions and clearly defined Stonecat and Smalleye Stonecat, 2011), and in the fishes of Alabama clades of species for all 29 described partially described in this report (Mettee et al., 1996; Boschung and taxa. It does appear that there is little were also predicted to be unknown Mayden, 2004) and Virginia (Jenkins phylogenetic support for a separate in the formal taxonomic sense (i.e., and Burkhead, 1994). The recent book subgenus for Noturus flavus (subgenus undescribed; Burr and Stoeckel, 1999). on Indiana fishes (Simon, 2011) used Noturus), and the nomenclature of the The highly distinctive karyology the illustration of the Stonecat that future will probably reflect the idea (LeGrande and Cavender, 1980) and had been previously used in the fishes that species are not recognizable as mitochondrial DNA (Faber et al., of Alabama (Boschung and Mayden, such, but that distinct lineages and 2009) leave little doubt that what we 2004). The Highlands Stonecat does groups of lineages will be given clade are calling the Highlands Stonecat is not occur in Indiana. names. In the most recent phylogeny, a formally undescribed species. This The Smalleye Stonecat, Noturus flavus and 5 other species have study found some variation in the

26 Kentucky Department of Fish & Wildlife Resources Fisheries / COMPLETED PROJECTS

“unclear” relationships and have not well as distribution of pigmentation Burr, B. M., and J. N. Stoeckel. 1999. been placed in any named clade (Egge scores to depict phenotypic variation The natural history of madtoms and Simons, 2009). among populations; and 2) the (genus Noturus), North America’s formal description of the Highlands diminutive catfishes. American Stonecat, which will be included in a Fisheries Society Symposium 24:51- Management Implications forthcoming publication, will provide 101. Conservation involves the a table of characteristics useful in preservation, maintenance, sustainable distinguishing each of the phenotypes Burr, B. M., and M. L. Warren, Jr. use, restoration, and enhancement of relative to nominotypical Noturus 1986. A distributional atlas of biodiversity. Such programs must be flavus. Kentucky fishes. Kentucky Nature based upon knowing the organisms Preserves Commission Scientific and that are involved, where they live, and Technical Series 4:1-398. how they are related to one another (Savage, 1995). Several studies Literature Cited Butler, R.S . 2002. Imperiled fishes of have shown that poorly resolved Angermeier, P. L., and M. R. Winston. the Lower Tennessee-Cumberland taxonomy or inaccurate estimates 1999. Characterizing fish community Ecosystem, with emphasis on of taxonomic diversity can hinder diversity across Virginia landscapes: the non-federally listed fauna. conservation efforts (e.g., Funk et al., prerequisite for conservation. Unpublished report, U.S. Fish and 2002; McNeely, 2002). Numerous Ecological Applications 9:335-349. Wildlife Service, Asheville, North putative, but undescribed taxa in the Carolina. Tennessee and Cumberland River Bailey, R. M., and W. R. Taylor. 1950. Egge, J. J. D., and A. M. Simons. drainages are recognized by biologists Schilbeodes hildebrandi, a new 2009. Molecules, morphology, and the conservation community ameiurid catfish from Mississippi. missing data and the phylogenetic (Warren et al. 2000); however, for Copeia 1950:31-38. position of a recently extinct madtom most of these taxa, knowledge of their catfish (Actinopterygii: Ictaluridae). distributions, population densities, and Bookstein, F. L., B. Chernoff, R. L. Zoological Journal of the Linnean ecological requirements is insufficient Elder, J. M. Humphries Jr., G. R. Society 155:60-75. to make accurate conservation status Smith, and R. E. Strauss. 1985. assessments. Newly recognized taxa Morphometrics in evolutionary Egge, J. J. D., and A. M. Simons. tend to be imperiled at a higher rate biology: the geometry of size and 2011. Evolution of venom delivery than the general fish fauna, oftentimes shape change, with example from structures in madtom catfishes due to narrow endemicity (Burkhead fishes. Special Publication 15, The (Siluriformes: Ictraluridae). and Jelks, 2000). An accurate account Academy of Natural Sciences of Biological Journal of the Linnean of diversity is imperative for the Philadelphia, Pennsylvania. Society 102:115-129. wise management, preservation, and recovery of regional fishes (Butler, Boschung, H. T., Jr., and R. L. Etnier, D. A., and W. C. Starnes. 2002; Angermeier and Winston, 1999). Mayden. 2004. Fishes of Alabama. 1993. The fishes of Tennessee. The This study provides clarification Smithsonian Books, Washington University of Tennessee Press, of distinctions among three phenotypes D.C. Knoxville, Tennessee. of the stonecat and better resolution of their distributional limits. While Burkhead, N. M., and H. Jelks. 2000. Faber, J. E., J. Rybka, and M. Ohio River drainage populations of the Diversity, levels of imperilment, and M. White. 2009. Intraspecific Stonecat and the Highlands Stonecat in cryptic fishes in the southeastern phylogeography of the Stonecat the Cumberland River drainage appear United States. Essay 1, pp. 30-32 madtom, Noturus flavus. Copeia to be currently stable (Butler, 2002), in: R.A. Abell, D.M. Olson, E. 2009:563-571. the status of the Smalleye Stonecat in Dinerstein, P.T. Hurley, J.T. Diggs, the Mississippi River is less clear. The W. Eichbaum, S. Walters, W. Funk, V.A., Sakai, A.K., Richardson, following products generated from Wettengel, T. Allnutt, C.J. Loucks, K., 2002. Biodiversity: the this study provide a crucial foundation and P. Hedao, eds. Freshwater interface between systematics and for effective monitoring programs: ecoregions of North America: a conservation. Syst. Biol. 51, 235– 1) maps created in ArcGIS including conservation assessment. World 237. detailed species distributions based on Wildlife Fund, United States. Island georeferenced collection records, as Press, Washington DC.

Annual Research Highlights 2012 27 COMPLETED PROJECTS / Fisheries

Hardman, M. 2004. The phylogenetic field guide to freshwater fishes of populations and congeners. Ohio relationships among Noturus North America north of Mexico. First Journal of Science 85:85-96. catfishes (Siluriformes: Ictaluridae) edition. Houghton Mifflin, Boston, as inferred from mitochondrial Massachusetts, USA. Warren, M. L., Jr., B. M. Burr, S. J. gene cytochrome b and nuclear Walsh, H. L. Bart, Jr., R. C. Cashner, recombination activating gene Page, L. M., and B. M. Burr. 2011. D. A. Etnier, B. J. Freeman, B. 2. Molecular Phylogenetics and Peterson field guide to freshwater R. Kuhajda, R. L. Mayden, H. W. Evolution 30:395-408. fishes of North America north Robison, S. T. Ross, and W. C. of Mexico. Second edition. Starnes. 2000. Diversity, distribution, Hubbs, C. L., and K. F. Lagler. 2004. Houghton Mifflin Harcourt, Boston, and conservation status of the native Fishes of the Great Lakes Region. Massachusetts, USA. freshwater fishes of the southern Revised Edition. University of United States. Fisheries 25(10):7-29. Michigan Press, Ann Arbor, Pflieger, W. L. 1975. The fishes of Michigan, USA. Missouri. Missouri Department of Conservation, Jefferson City, Funding Sources: State Wildlife Grant Jenkins, R. E., and N. M. Burkhead. Missouri. Program (SWG), Southern Illinois 1994. Freshwater Fishes of Virginia. University American Fisheries Society, Pflieger, W. L. 1997. The fishes of Bethesda, Maryland, USA. Missouri: revised edition. Missouri KDFWR Strategic Plan. Department of Conservation, Goal 1. Strategic Objective Lee, D. S., C. Gilbert, C. Hocutt, R. Jefferson City, Missouri. 5. Comprehensive Wildlife Jenkins, and McAllister. 1980. Atlas Conservation Strategy: Appendix of North American Freshwater Savage, J. M. 1995. Systematics and 3.9. Class Actinopterygii. Fishes. North Carolina Museum the biodiversity crisis. Bioscience of Natural History, Raleigh, North 45(10):673-679. Carolina. Simon, T. P. 2011. Fishes of Indiana: A LeGrande, W. H., and T. M. Cavender. field guide. Indiana University Press, 1980. The chromosome complement Bloomington, Indiana, USA. of the Stonecat madtom, Noturus flavus (Siluriformes: Ictaluridae), Smith, P. W. 1979. The Fishes of with evidence for the existence of a Illinois. University of Illinois Press, possible chromosomal race. Copeia Urbana, Illinois. 1980: 341-344. Suttkus, R. D., and W. R. Taylor. 1965. McNeely, J.A., 2002. The role of Noturus munitus, a new species of taxonomy in conserving biodiversity. madtom, family Ictaluridae, from J. Nat. Conserv. 10, 145–153. southern United States. Proceedings of the Biological Society of Mettee, M. F., P. E. O’Neil, and J. M. Washington 78:169-178. Pierson. 1996. Fishes of Alabama and the Mobile Basin. Oxmoor Taylor, W. R. 1969. A revision of the House, Birmingham, Alabama, USA. catfish genus Noturus Rafinesque, with an analysis of higher groups Near, T. J., and M. Hardman. 2006. in the Ictaluridae. United States Phylogenetic relationships of National Museum Bulletin. 282:1- Noturus stanauli and N. crypticus 315. (Siluriformes: Ictaluridae), two imperiled freshwater fish species Walsh, S. J., and B. M. Burr. 1985. from the southeastern United States. Biology of the Stonecat, Noturus Copeia 2006:378-383. flavus (Siluriformes: Ictaluridae), in central Illinois and Missouri streams, Page, L. M., and B. M. Burr. 1991. A and comparisons with Great Lakes

28 Kentucky Department of Fish & Wildlife Resources Wildlife / COMPLETED PROJECTS

Northern Bobwhite (Colinus virginianus) Ecology on Reclaimed Mined Lands

Evan Tanner, Ashley Unger, Patrick Keyser, and Craig Harper, The University of Tennessee; John Morgan, Kentucky Department of Fish and Wildlife Resources

Introduction Northern bobwhite (Colinus virginianus), here after “bobwhite,” have experienced declines throughout the species’ range, with a 2.8% decline in Kentucky between 1966–2009 (Sauer et al. 2011). Habitat degradation has been attributed to these range- Banding northern bobwhite / Evan Tanner wide declines in populations (Brennan 1991, Williams et al. 2004). Habitat selection. herbaceous vegetation (36%), shrub fragmentation has exacerbated these Little is known about the vegetation (25%), deciduous forests problems by isolating remaining suitability of reclaimed mined lands (22%), native warm-season grasses habitat. It is imperative to re-establish for supporting populations of bobwhite (NWSG) (8%), and small lakes, early successional vegetation at a (Stauffer 2011). The reclamation wetlands, and annual grain food plots landscape scale to reverse declining process can create a unique vegetative (9%). Habitat management on both population trends (Guthery 1997, landscape, and an understanding how units include dormant-season (January- Dimmick et al. 2002, Williams et al. this composition affects bobwhite March) prescribed fire, disking (all 2004). survival and habitat selection is months), and plantings of food plots. Reclaimed mined lands offer a essential for implementing effective Efforts have focused on maintaining unique opportunity to increase the management that optimizes population early successional vegetation while amount of habitat at a large-scale size. To understand if reclaimed mined trying to limit coverage of invasive, for bobwhite in many areas of the lands can support viable bobwhite non-native plants that had been eastern United States. Large tracts populations, and how habitat on established previously. We conducted of early successional vegetation are reclaimed mined lands affected our research on two different sites on often created through the auspices bobwhite survival, nest success, and Peabody WMA (Ken and Sinclair). of the Surface Mining Control and habitat selection, we conducted a radio These two sites are separated by the Reclamation Act of 1977 (SMCRA). telemetry study on Peabody Wildlife Green River and are 18 kilometers Although much of the area reclaimed is Management Area (WMA), Kentucky apart. Sericea lespedeza covered ≥ 50% in early successional vegetation, these from 2009-2011. of both sites. Forest covered 12% of the lands are often vegetated with species sites, while NWSG, open herbaceous, that may not provide suitable food, or and shrub areas covered ≥45% of the at seeding rates in which vegetation Study Area area. structure is not ideal (Eddy 1999). We conducted the study on To better understand the effects of a reclaimed coal mine, Peabody vegetation composition of reclaimed WMA (3,323 ha) in Muhlenberg and Methods mined lands on bobwhite, research Ohio counties in western Kentucky. We captured bobwhites year-round must focus at both survival and habitat The study area consisted of open (Sep 2009 - Sep 2011) using funnel

Annual Research Highlights 2012 29 COMPLETED PROJECTS / Wildlife

traps (Stoddard 1931). We defined the 95% fixed-kernel method (Seaman et Of all three stages of non-breeding season (1 Oct-31 Mar) al. 1999) and the Animal Movement survival analysis, our top model and breeding (1 Apr-30 Sep) based Extension (Hooge and Eichenlaub (group+year+site+season+FOR) on Burger et al. (1995). We fitted 1997) in ArcView 3.2. We estimated for explaining variation in survival captured birds with necklace-style seasonal survival rates using the known contained no landscape metrics, and collars weighing 6g based on meeting fate model with a logit link function in only one home range metric (% of a minimum body mass requirement Program MARK (White and Burnham forest in a bird’s home range). This (120g). We determined sex, age, and 1999). Each survival period (non- model was 1.54 times more likely than weight of all birds, and released birds breeding and breeding) consisted of the second best approximating model. at their capture site. Our trapping 183 days. Survival analysis consisted The beta estimate for the amount and handling methods complied with of 3 hierarchical stages with different of forest within a home range (β = University of Tennessee Institutional metrics: group, home range, and 0.024, CI = 0.003-0.046) suggested an Animal Care and Use Committee landscape. increase in survival associated with a Permit (no. 2042-0911) protocol. higher proportion of forest vegetation We attempted to locate radio- We estimated daily survival rate in a bird’s home range. marked individuals at least three times/ (DSR) of nests and the influence of week. We located birds by homing vegetation covariates on DSR using the within 50m. Once birds were detected, nest survival model with a logit link Nest survival we recorded the distance and azimuth function in Program MARK (White and We located a total of 57 nests, of to the actual bird location and recorded Burnham 1999). On Peabody WMA, which 46 were incubated by females the Universal Transverse Mercator we had a 122-day nesting period, which and 11 were incubated by males. Peak (UTM) coordinates. We then used encompassed 7 May-7 Sep across both nesting (number of nests initiated) the distance and azimuth to estimate years. We assumed a 23-day incubation occurred during the first week in June the location of each bird. We located period and defined nest survival as across both breeding seasons. Of transmitters emitting a mortality the probability of a nest surviving the 57 nests, 47.4% were successful signal (12-hr signal) immediately the incubation period. Nest survival and 52.6% were unsuccessful. Of after detection and determined the analysis consisted of 2 hierarchical the successful nests, 74.1% were fate of the individuals as predation stages: group and landscape. first-attempt female nests, 11.1% (mammal, avian), investigator induced, were second-attempt female nests, or unknown, based on evidence at the and 14.8% were first-attempt male site of recovery and condition of the Results nests. Predation was the primary recovered transmitter. Bobwhite survival cause of unsuccessful nesting events, During the breeding season, We captured and double-banded with mammalian predation being the we considered birds with identical 841 bobwhites (457 males, 326 greatest cause of losses. subsequent locations to be nesting. We females, and 58 birds for which we Of the two stages of analysis for located the actual nest and counted could not determine sex) from 1 Sep nest survival, our top model included eggs when the radio-marked bird was 2009 – 30 Sep 2011. We captured the site, nest age, and distance to bare away from the nest, then monitored the more juveniles (n = 674) than adults ground (DtoBG) from nest location incubation status daily by locating the (n = 167). Of the 841 captured birds, covariates. The beta value for the radiocollared adult. If incubating adults we radio-marked 627, but were DtoBG covariate (β = 0.011, CI = were located away from the nest, we only able to use 619 in our survival 0.006-0.039) suggests that the effect of returned to the actual location of the analysis because of censoring. The this covariate is minimal. Based on this nest to monitor the clutch (Taylor et al. only difference detected in survival top model, DSR for nests was 0.951 1999) every 7-10 days and recorded rates was between sites (χ2 = 7.87, P (SE = 0.010), and the probability of the nest fate. We recorded locations = 0.005; Sinclair = 0.141, 95% CI = a nest successfully hatching after the of broods daily, and flushed broods 0.097-0.184; Ken = 0.316, 95% CI = 23-day incubation period was 0.317 weekly to confirm their presence. 0.263-0.368). Mammalian predation (SE = 0.081). Nest age was the most accounted for the highest percentage influential covariate after two stages Survival Analysis of known mortalities during the non- of analysis, with daily survival rate We calculated home ranges for breeding season (40.3%) while avian (DSR) of nests increasing as nest age individual birds with >20 locations predation account for the highest increased. (DeVos and Mueller 1993) using the percentage of known mortalities in the breeding season (14.5%)

30 Kentucky Department of Fish & Wildlife Resources Wildlife / COMPLETED PROJECTS

Nest Site and Brood Habitat Selection brooding habitat selection model, were relatively low on the Sinclair site Based on our AIC value results, however the interaction of the two was (Burger et al. 1995, Seckinger et al. our models poorly explained nest not significant. Brooding birds avoided 2008, Holt et al. 2009). Differences in site selection. Our top model had an use of the forest, NWSG, and roads survival among sites may exist because AIC value of 200.61, and without (P ≤ 0.02). They also avoided areas of the variation in survival across covariates the AIC value was 204.26. 1 growing season after a burn or that space caused by factors such as habitat Most of our models did not explain had been disked, however they used suitability and predator abundance any of the variation in nest site areas burned 2 growing seasons prior (Terhune et al. 2007). selection, however our top model was as expected (P = 0.638). Despite the Estimated nest survival rates on significant (P = 0.02). It included lack of use for disked areas, they used our study site were relatively low only the contagion index value, and firebreaks more than expected (β = compared to the range of estimates had a negative parameter estimate (β 0.991). observed in previous research = -0.045), indicating that bobwhite throughout the species’ range. selected to build nest in areas with Vegetation composition and landscape more interspersion and dispersion of Discussion scale vegetation metrics were not vegetation types in the area. Bobwhite survival was statistically shown to be influential to nest survival. different between sites. Survival rates Nest site selection work was equally Vegetation type and treatment on the Ken unit were consistent with unrevealing, suggesting that selection were significant variables in our top previous research, but survival rates may be taking place at a more macro or

Northern bobwhite nest / Evan Tanner

Annual Research Highlights 2012 31 COMPLETED PROJECTS / Wildlife

mirco scale than what we considered. bobwhite in north Florida. SAS Institute. 2009. SAS user’s guide: Instead, nest age was shown to be the Proceedings of the National Quail statistics. SAS Institute Inc., Cary, most important factor to survival, with Symposium 3: 83-90. North Carolina, USA. DSR of nests increasing as nest age increases. This is to be expected in Eddy, T. A. 1999. Effects of sericea Sauer, J. R., J. E. Hines, J. E. Fallon, precocial species, because nests that are lespedeza infestations on wildlife K. L. Pardieck, D. J. Ziolkowski, ill placed or are in locations of higher habitat in Kansas. 61st Midwest Jr., and W. A. Link. 2011. The North risk will likely be predated earlier in the Fish and Wildlife Conference, Iowa American Breeding Bird Survey, incubation period (Klett and Johnson Conservation Commission, Des Results and Analysis 1966-2009. 1982). Moines, Iowa, USA. Version 3.23. 2011. USGS Patuxent Guthery, F. S. 1997. A philosophy of Wildlife Research Center, Laurel, habitat management for northern Maryland, USA. Management Implications bobwhites. The Journal of Wildlife Birds responded favorably year- Management 61:291-301. Seaman, D. E., J. J. Millspaugh, B. J. round to treatment, therefore we Kernohan, G. C. Brundige. 1999. recommend that disking and burning Holt, R. D., L. W. Burger, Jr., B. D. Effects of sample size on kernel continue. Management should also Leopold, D. Godwin. 2009. Over- home range estimates. The Journal focus on providing year-round woody winter survival of northern bobwhite of Wildlife Management 63(2):739- cover to potentially increase adult in relation to landscape composition 747. survival, while also focusing on and structure. Pages 432-446 in S. increasing coverage of native warm- B. Decerbaum, B. C. Faircloth, T. Seckinger, E. M., L. W. Burger, Jr., season grasses to increase nest success. M. Terhune, J. j. Thompson, J. P. R. Whittington, A. Houston, R. Carroll, eds. Gamebird 2006:Quail Carlisle. 2008. Effects of landscape VI and Perdix XII. 31 May-4 June composition on winter survival of Literature Cited 2006. Warnell School of Forestry and northern bobwhites. The Journal of Brennan, L. A. 1991. How can we Natural Resources, Athens Georgia, Wildlife Management 72(4):959-969. reverse the northern bobwhite USA. population decline? Wildlife Society Stauffer, D. F. 2011. Potential of Bulletin 19: 544-555. Hooge, P. N., and B. Eichenlaub. 1997. reclaimed mine-land habitat to Animal Movement Extension to support northern bobwhite–a pilot Burger, Jr., L. W., T. V. Dailey, E. ArcView, ver. 1.1. Alaska Biological study. Virginia Department of Game W. Kurzejeski, M. R. Ryan. 1995. Science Center, U. S. Geological and Inland Fisheries, Richmond, Survival and cause-specific mortality Survey, Anchorage, Alaska, USA. USA. http://www.dgif.virginia.gov/ of northern bobwhite in Missouri. quail/ The Journal of Wildlife Management Jenke, A. K., and R. J. Gates. 2012. 59(2): 401-410. Home range and habitat selection Taylor, J. S., K. E. Church, D. of northern bobwhite coveys in an H. Rusch, J. R. Cary. 1999. Cooper, A. B., and J. J. Millspaugh. agricultural landscape. The Journal Macrohabitat effects on summer 1999. The application of discrete of Wildlife Management. 77:405 – survival, movements, and clutch choice models to wildlife resource 413. success of northern bobwhite in selection studies. Ecology 80: 566 – Kansas. The Journal of Wildlife 575. Kuhfeld, W. F. 2000. Multinomial Management 63(2):675-685. logit, discrete choice modeling;an Dimmick, R. W., M. J. Gudlin, and D. introduction to designing choice Terhune, T. M., D. C. Sisson, J. B. F. McKenzie. 2002 The northern esperiments, and collection, Grand, H. L. Stribling. 2007. Factors bobwhite conservation initiative. processing, and analyzing choice influencing survival of radiotagged Miscellaneous Publication of the data with the SAS® system. SAS and banded northern bobwhites in Southeastern Association of Fish and Institute, Cary, North Carolina, USA. Georgia. The Journal of Wildlife Wildlife Agencies, South Carolina, Management 71: 1288-1297. USA. Roseberry, J. L., W. D. Klimstra. 1984. Population ecology of the bobwhite. White, G. C., and K. P. Burnham. 1999. DeVos, T., and B. S. Mueller. 1993. Southern Illinois University, Program MARK: survival estimation Reproductive ecology of northern Carbondale, USA. from populations of marked animals.

32 Kentucky Department of Fish & Wildlife Resources Wildlife / COMPLETED PROJECTS

Bird Study 46 (suppl): S120-S139.

Williams, C. K., R. S. Lutz, R. D. Applegate. 2004. Winter survival and additive harvest in northern bobwhite coveys in Kansas. The Journal of Wildlife Management 68:94-100.

Funding Sources: The University of Tennessee, Wildlife Restoration Program (Pittman-Robertson), and Quail Forever

KDFWR Strategic Plan. Goal 1. Strategic Objective 5. Comprehensive Wildlife Conservation Strategy: Appendix 3.2. Class Aves. Priority Research Project #2 and #3.

Annual Research Highlights 2012 33 COMPLETED PROJECTS / Wildlife

Foraging and Roosting Behaviors of Rafinesque’s Big-eared Bat at the Northern Edge of the Species Range

Joseph S. Johnson, Bucknell dramatically (Bennett et al. 2008, approximately 30% of the total University and Michael J. Lacki, Carver and Ashley 2008, Gooding area. Remaining land cover includes University of Kentucky and Langford 2004, Mirowsky et al. deciduous forests (hereafter forest; 2004, Trousdale and Beckett 2005, representing habitat on higher, drier Trousdale et al. 2008). The majority soil; 22%), forested and herbaceous KDFWR Contact: Brooke Slack of these studies were conducted in the wetlands (hereafter wetland; 39%), southern portion of the species range, and permanent lakes (8%) (Figure 1). where habitats and climate differ Dominant tree species on the WMAs from those present at northern edge of include bald cypress (Taxodium the range, including Kentucky. This distichum), water tupelo (Nyssa Introduction report focuses on summer daytime aquatica), sweetgum (Liquidambar Effective conservation of and nocturnal habitat use of colonies styraciflua), oaks (Quercus spp.) and bat populations requires detailed of Rafinesque’s big-eared bat in hickories (Carya spp.). Land use in knowledge of the daytime (day- bottomland hardwood forests, managed the area surrounding the WMAs is roosting) and nocturnal (foraging) by the Kentucky Department of Fish primarily agricultural. behaviors of various species during the and Wildlife Resources (KDFWR) as Bats were captured in mist nets summer and winter. This knowledge the Ballard and Boatwright Wildlife (Avinet, Inc., Dryden, NY) placed is needed now more than ever, as Management Areas, in western over rivers, forest roads, forest edges, populations of many bat species in Kentucky. Bottomland hardwood and outside known day-roosts of the United States and Canada are forests are frequently occupied by Rafinesque’s big-eared bats from late seriously threatened by loss of summer Rafinesque’s big-eared bats throughout May through September 2009–2011. habitat, mortality from collisions the southern portion of the range, so Age, sex, reproductive condition, with commercial wind turbines, and the data presented in this report provide body mass, and right forearm length infection with white-nose syndrome an important comparison of regional were recorded for all bats. We aged during winter hibernation (Arnett et behaviors. bats as adult or juvenile by examining al. 2008, Reeder et al. 2012). These epiphyseal-diaphyseal fusions of long anthropogenic factors threaten different bones in the wing and we categorized species to varying extents, and species- Methods females as pregnant, lactating or specific approaches to conservation are Data were collected on the Ballard post-lactating based on the presence merited. and Boatwright Wildlife Management of a fetus or teat condition. We This report is meant to aid in the Areas (WMAs) located in Ballard categorized females with no sign of a conservation of Rafinesque’s big- County, Kentucky (37.180° N, -89.029° fetus or lactation as non-reproductive. eared bat (Corynorhinus rafinesquii) W). The WMAs contain over 8,000 We categorized males as scrotal or in Kentucky, a rare forest-dwelling ha of land managed by KDFWR. The non-scrotal based on swelling of the bat found only in the southeastern WMAs consist of several disconnected epididymides. We banded bats for United States, and considered a species parcels ranging 280 m to 350 m in future identification with individually of conservation concern (Barbour elevation along the floodplains of numbered split-lip aluminum bat and Davis 1969, NatureServe 2010). the Ohio and Mississippi Rivers; bands supplied by KDFWR. Males Few data on the summer ecology the northern edge of the Mississippi were banded on the right forearm of Rafinesque’s big-eared bat were Alluvial Valley. KDFWR manages and females on the left forearm. We available to researchers and managers these lands primarily for waterfowl fitted adult males and females with until the last decade, during which habitat and recreational hunting, 0.42 g (model LB-2N and LB-2N-T, the number of studies investigating including maintenance of old and Holohil Systems, Ltd., Carp, Ontario) summer behaviors increased active agricultural fields covering radio-transmitters attached between

34 Kentucky Department of Fish & Wildlife Resources Wildlife / COMPLETED PROJECTS

the shoulder blades using surgical adhesive (Torbot, Cranston, RI; Perma- Type, Plainville, CT). All methods were approved by the University of Kentucky Institutional Animal Care and Use Committee (IACUC No. A3336- 01). We attempted to locate day-roosts of all radio-tagged bats by homing in on radio signals using TRX-1000S telemetry receivers (Wildlife Materials Inc., Murphysboro, IL) and three- element yagi antennas (Advanced Telemetry Systems, Inc., Isanti, MN). We triangulated nocturnal locations of radio-tagged bats during the first 5 hours of the night on 47 evenings to determine nighttime habitat use. Nocturnal locations were triangulated at 2-min intervals by two field personnel communicating with hand-held radios and recording simultaneous bearings. We took no more than five consecutive bearings on individual bats to reduce autocorrelation among locations. We followed bats by vehicle as they moved across the landscape, stopping to take bearings when possible. A dense network of roads in the study area facilitated this approach and allowed personnel to select temporary tracking stations situated close to the signal source, eliminating the need for a third person to ground-truth estimated locations. Nocturnal locations were triangulated using Locate III and imported into ArcView v3.2. We Figure 1: Aerial photo showing the northern section of the study area in Ballard generated 95% (hereafter, home County, Kentucky. White stars represent day-roosts used by Rafinesque’s big-eared range) and 50% (hereafter, core area) bats and white circles represent triangulated nocturnal foraging locations. probability areas using the fixed kernel method with the least square use at the second (placement of home the mean distance between nocturnal cross-validation method contained in ranges on the landscape) and third locations and available habitats to the Animal Movement Extension for (use of habitats within home ranges) the mean distances between random ArcView. Day-roost locations were order levels for bats with a sufficient locations and habitats using a multiple included in kernel estimates, using number of telemetry locations to analysis of variance (MANOVA). each roost location once, regardless of permit generation of kernel estimates Where habitat use was non-random, the number of days a bat occupied the using the Euclidean distance method. habitats were ranked from closest roost. We compared home ranges and Euclidean distance analysis determines to farthest from bat locations using core areas among sex and reproductive if triangulated locations are closer Student’s t-tests. We defined the study classes using a one-way analysis of to or farther from available habitats area for second order analysis by variance (ANOVA). than would be expected under random surrounding all bat locations with a We analyzed nocturnal habitat habitat use. This requires comparing minimum convex polygon and then

Annual Research Highlights 2012 35 COMPLETED PROJECTS / Wildlife

hypsometer (Opti-Logic 95% kernel home range 50% kernel home range Corp., Tullahoma, TN), (ha) (ha) diameters were measured with a dbh tape (Forestry Males (5) 116 ± 51.7 10.8 ± 4.8 Suppliers, Inc., Jackson, Pregnant females (9) 111 ± 37.1 10.3 ± 3.4 MS), and canopy cover Lactating females (10) 201 ± 63.5 12.3 ± 3.9 was visually estimated. Because many roost Post-lactating females (10) 102 ± 32.4 7.3 ± 2.3 trees were located in Non-reproductive females (3) 84.2 ± 48.6 14.4 ± 8.3 standing water, trees All bats (37) 173 ± 22.4 24.7 ± 3.4 were measured in August when water level was Table 1: Summary (means ± 1 SE) of 95% and 50% kernel home range estimates near the summer minimum. Roosts for sex and reproductive classes of Rafinesque’s big-eared bats radio-tracked in trees were categorized into roost types Ballard County, Kentucky, from May–September, 2009–2011. Sample sizes of bats based on the location of entrances are in parentheses. to the main cavity. Roost trees were classified as type I if possessing only a basal entrance to the main cavity, buffering this polygon by the greatest GPS (Garmin International, Inc., type II if possessing basal and top distance any bat was observed traveling Olathe, KS). We measured habitat entrances, type III if possessing a top in a single night (4,334 m). Thus, the characteristics of a sub-sample of but not a basal entrance, and type IV study area for analysis included land day-roost trees including tree species, if possessing only bole entrances to managed as part of the WMAs, as well diameter at breast height or above the main cavity. Habitat values for as surrounding lands. We selected five any basal swell (cm), roost tree height day-roosts used by lactating and post- habitats for our distance analysis using (m), canopy closure (%), cavity height lactating females were compared using the 2001 National Land-cover Database (m), number of cavities (n), presence Wilcoxon tests. (NLCD, available at http://kygeonet. of basal cavity entrances, presence of ky.gov/). We verified the NLCD by a “top” cavity entrance (broken tree comparing habitat polygons to 2008 tops, hollow knots or other cavities), Results aerial photographs (http://kygeonet. presence of entrances along the tree We captured 71 female (61 adult ky.gov) and by driving and walking bole (broken tree tops, hollow knots and 10 juvenile) and 16 male (8 adult the study area. Habitats included in or woodpecker cavities), and whether and 8 juvenile) Rafinesque’s big-eared analyses were: wetlands, forests, active or not the roost tree was alive or dead. bats during 42 nights of mist-netting and inactive agricultural fields, field– Heights were measured with a laser on the WMAs between May and forest edges, and lake–forest edges. We counted the number of Table 2: Second and third order habitat use of female reproductive classes of Rafinesque’s bats inhabiting each roost with big-eared bats radio-tracked in Ballard County, Kentucky, from May to September, 2009– emergence counts, visually 2011. inspecting the interior of tree cavities, or by taking digital Second order Closest Farthest photographs of bats inside tree Pregnant (9) Wetland A Forest A Lake edge B Field edge C Field D cavities. Emergence counts Lactating (10) Wetland A Forest B Lake edge C Field edge D Field E were conducted from 15 min prior to sunset to ca. 1 hour Post-lactating (10) Wetland A Forest B Lake edge B Field edge C Field D after sunset with the assistance of night-vision goggles (ATN Third order Closest Farthest Corp., San Francisco, CA). Pregnant (9) Forest A Wetland A, B Lake edge A, B Field edge B Field B We identified all roost Lactating (10) Forest Wetland Lake edge Field edge Field trees to species and recorded geographic coordinates for all Post-lactating (10) Forest Field edge Wetland Lake edge Field day-roosts with an accuracy Within rows, home ranges are located closer or farther from habitats not sharing common of 3 m using a handheld letters (P < 0.05).

36 Kentucky Department of Fish & Wildlife Resources Wildlife / COMPLETED PROJECTS

September of 2009–2011. An additional population counts for male roosts reproductive females also located their 6 captures of Rafinesque’s big-eared ranged from 1–13 (mean = 2.9 ± 1.1, n home ranges significantly closer to bats (5 female and 1 male) consisted = 15). Maximum counts did not differ these habitats than expected, suggesting of individuals that were previously between bald cypress and water tupelo their importance as nocturnal foraging captured and banded. We radio-tagged roosts (t = 1.57, P = 0.12). Southeastern habitats. 42 adult female (11 pregnant, 14 myotis (Myotis austroriparius) were We found no evidence to lactating, 11 post-lactating, and 6 non- not observed in 243 digital photographs suggest that size of home range reproductive females) and 6 adult male taken inside Rafinesque’s big-eared bat varied among sex and reproductive Rafinesque’s big-eared bats. Pregnant roosts; however, southeastern myotis classes of Rafinesque’s big-eared females were radio-tracked during were captured exiting big-eared bat bat. Rafinesque’s big-eared bats had the last 2 weeks of gestation before roosts on 2 different occasions; both home ranges that were smaller than parturition occurred in early June. individuals were captured exiting those recorded for bats in other North The average increase in wing-loading water tupelo trees. Roost counts, American genera (Lacki et al. 2007). was (3.9% ± 0.1 SE). Bats were radio- therefore, consisted almost entirely of These data are not surprising given tracked for 5–21 d (mean = 12.0 d ± Rafinesque’s big-eared bats. data on other Corynorhinus species 0.5) days each. We successfully located We located 64 day-roosts (Adam et al. 1994, Wethington et al. bats on 549 of 568 (97%) potential consisting of 45 bald cypress, 13 water 1996) and two studies of Rafinesque’s roost-days (1 roost-day = 1 radio- tupelo, 2 swamp white oak (Quercus big-eared bats inhabiting upland forest tagged bat tracked for 1 day). bicolor), 2 shellback hickory (Carya ecosystems (Hurst and Lacki, 1999, Home range (F = 0.54, P = 0.71) laciniosa), 1 sweetgum, and 1 concrete Menzel et al. 2001). Small home ranges and core area (F = 0.77, P = 0.55) slab bridge. Roost trees were located among Rafinesque’s big-eared bats may estimates did not differ among sex and almost exclusively in wetlands (n = be related to the wing morphology of reproductive classes (Table 1). Second 59; 92%) located in low-lying areas the species, which although well suited order habitat use by pregnant (Wilk’s such as lake edges and sloughs within to maneuverable flight and gleaning λ = 0.0007, F = 1120, P < 0.0001), the WMAs; however, swamp white prey off vegetation surfaces, is likely lactating (Wilk’s λ = 0.002, F = 448, P oak and shellbark hickory roosts were less efficient in long distance flights < 0.0001), and post-lactating females located in deciduous forests on higher compared to species with higher wing (Wilk’s λ = 0.0007, F = 1418, P < ground. No habitat characteristic loadings (Norberg and Rayner 1987). 0.0001) was different from random differed among trees used by lactating Bald cypress roosts averaged (Table 2). Third order habitat use by and post-lactating females (Table 3). 164 cm (± 5.1) in diameter, always lactating (Wilk’s λ = 0.65, F = 0.54, The majority of roost trees were type II presented access to the main cavity P = 0.74) and post-lactating females (44.1%) and type III (41.2%) trees. by either broken tops or holes located (Wilk’s λ = 0.51, F = 0.95, P = 0.52) along the bole, and were always hollow did not differ from random. Third order for the entire length of the tree bole. habitat use by pregnant females was Discussion Thus, bald cypress roosts offered large significantly different from random Wetlands and deciduous cavities for social groups to aggregate (Wilk’s λ = 0.10, F = 7.0, P = 0.04). forests were important habitats for in throughout the year. In our study, all We were unable to analyze habitat use Rafinesque’s big-eared bats in western roost counts ≥25 bats were observed by males (n = 5) and non-reproductive Kentucky. Bats roosted almost in bald cypress trees, with counts for 4 females (n = 3) due to insufficient exclusively in wetlands containing roosts ranging from 50–96 bats. Water sample sizes. large-diameter, hollow bald cypress tupelo roosts averaged 101 cm (± 6.0) Bats switched roosts every 3.0 or water tupelo trees. These roosts in diameter and often presented only days (± 0.4), with no difference among were situated in local topographic basal access to the main cavity (n = 3 sex and reproductive class (F = 1.44, depressions, with bald cypress located trees, 23%). These entrances remained P = 0.24) or colonies (F = 0.09, P = along the shallow edges of lakes, covered by flood waters until mid- 0.92). Bats traveled 829 m (± 112) and water tupelo located primarily in June and became re-submerged during between consecutive roosts, with sloughs. Reproductive females centered heavy rains, frequently making them distances varying among sex and their home ranges closer to wetlands unavailable for roosting. reproductive class (F = 9.93, P < 0.001) than any other habitat, likely because and among colonies (F = 16.7, P < of the critical day-roosting habitat 0.0001). Maximum population counts forested wetlands provided. Although Management Implications for female roosts ranged from 1–96 deciduous forests were relatively These data demonstrate that (mean = 18.3 ± 3.3, n = 43). Maximum unimportant as roosting habitat, Rafinesque’s big-eared bat in western

Annual Research Highlights 2012 37 COMPLETED PROJECTS / Wildlife

Table 3: Percentages or means (± SE) of habitat characteristics of day-roosts of Rafinesque’s big-eared bats in Ballard County, Kentucky, 2009.

Characteristic Lactating female Post-lactating female Male No. of roost trees 24 10 5 Diameter (cm) 150.5 ± 7.65 135.4 ± 11.8 150.6 ± 14.8 Tree height (m) 17.5 ± 1.2 17.9 ± 2.1 20.5 ± 3.3 Canopy cover (%) 27.7 ± 5.4 26.5 ± 8.8 20.0 ± 9.1 Type I trees (% of total) 0 10 20 Type II trees (% of total) 41.7 60 40 Type III trees (% of total) 45.8 20 40 Type IV trees (% of total) 12.5 10 0 Alive (% of total) 83.3 60 100 Cavity height* (m) 13.5 ± 2.0 10.7 ± 1.6 13.1 ± 4.6 No. of cavities 4.9 ± 0.77 7.0 ± 1.9 10.2 ± 4.7

*Cavity heights could not be measured for type III and type IV roosts, reducing sample sizes to 10 for lactating females, eight for post-lactating females, and three for males.

Kentucky is a highly social species in western Kentucky consider long- Literature Cited dependent on large tree cavities within term recruitment of future roosts and Adam, M.D., M.J. Lacki, and T.G. bottomland hardwood forests for short-term creation of artificial roosts. Barnes. 1994. Foraging areas and summer maternity roosts, most notably Promoting a continuous and dispersed habitat use of the Virginia big-eared in live bald cypress trees. Bald cypress availability of suitable roosts across bat in Kentucky. Journal of Wildlife trees are critical sites of social fusion the WMAs, while attempting to Management 58:462–469. because they offer roosting bats with connect these “islands” of bottomland the greatest amount of space for social hardwood forest to nearby forests, Arnett E.B., W.K. Brown, W.P. roosting. This suggests that potential should be a management goal for the Erickson, J.K. Fiedler, B.L. exists to enhance summer roosting long-term conservation of Rafinesque’s Hamilton, T.H. Henry et al. 2008. habitat of Rafinesque’s big-eared bat big-eared bat in western Kentucky. Patterns of bat fatalities at wind on both private and public lands in Further research exploring roosting energy facilities in North America. western Kentucky, and to increase behavior of Rafinesque’s big-eared Journal of Wildlife Management 72: carrying capacity of Rafinesque’s big- bats on the WMAs during the pre- 61–78. eared bats by managing bottomland hibernation and early hibernation hardwood forests to promote higher periods is needed to identify the extent Barbour R.W., and W.H. Davis. densities and wider distributions of to which these bats might overwinter 1969. Bats of America. University large-diameter live bald cypress trees. in bottomland hardwood forests in of Kentucky Press, Lexington, Silvicultural strategies are western Kentucky. Such a hibernation Kentucky.. also needed to ensure the future strategy would have implications for replacement of the existing cohort the vulnerability of these populations Bennett, F.M., S.C. Loeb, M.S. Bunch, of these tree roosts, as colonies of of Rafinesque’s big-eared bats to white- and W.W. Bowerman. 2008. Use and bats inhabiting areas with limited nose syndrome. selection of bridges as day-roosts availability of bald cypress will be by Rafinesque’s big-eared bats. further threatened when existing roost American Midland Naturalist 160: trees age and decline. It is prudent 386–399. that management actions on WMAs

38 Kentucky Department of Fish & Wildlife Resources Wildlife / COMPLETED PROJECTS

Carver, B.D., and N. Ashley. 2008. and flight in bats (Mammalia; Roost tree use by sympatric Chiroptera): wing adaptations, flight Rafinesque’s big-eared bats performance, foraging strategy (Corynorhinus rafinesquii) and and echolocation. Philosophical southeastern myotis (Myotis Transactions of the Royal Society of austroriparius). American Midland London B 316: 335–427. Naturalist 160: 364–373. Reeder, D.M., C.L. Frank, G.G. Turner, Gooding, G., and J.R. Langford. C.U. Meteyer, A. Kurta, E.R. Britzke 2004. Characteristics of tree roosts et al. 2012. Frequent arousal from of Rafinesque’s big-eared bat and hibernation linked to severity of southeastern bat in northeastern infection and mortality in bats with Louisiana. Southwestern Naturalist white-nose syndrome. PLoS ONE 49: 61–67. 7:e38920.

Hurst, T.E., and M.J. Lacki. 1999. Trousdale, A.W., and D.C. Beckett. Roost selection, population size 2005. Characteristics of tree and habitat use by a colony of roosts of Rafinesque’s big-eared Rafinesque’s big-eared bats bat (Corynorhinus rafinesquii) in (Corynorhinus rafinesquii). southeastern Mississippi. American American Midland Naturalist 142: Midland Naturalist 154: 442–449. 363–371. Trousdale, A.W., D.C. Beckett, and S.L. Lacki, M.J., J.P. Hayes, and A. Kurta. Hammond. 2008. Short-term roost 2007. Bats in forests: conservation fidelity of Rafinesque’s big-eared bat and management. The Johns (Corynorhinus rafinesquii) varies Hopkins University Press, Baltimore, with habitat. Journal of Mammalogy Maryland. 89: 477–484.

Menzel, M.A., J.M. Menzel, W.M. Wethington, T.A., D.M. Leslie Jr., M.S. Ford, J.W. Edwards, T.C. Carter, J.B. Gregory, and M.K. Wethington. Churchill et al. 2001. Home range 1996. Prehibernation habitat use and habitat use of male Rafinesque’s and foraging activity by endangered big-eared bats (Corynorhinus Ozark big-eared bats (Plecotus rafinesquii). American Midland townsendii ingens). American Naturalist 145: 402–408. Midland Naturalist 135: 218–230.

Mirowsky, K., P.A. Horner, R.W. Maxey, and S.A. Smith. 2004. Distributional records and roosts of Funding Source: State Wildlife Grant southeastern myotis and Rafinesque’s Program (SWG) and University of big-eared bat in eastern Texas. Kentucky Southwestern Naturalist 49: 294–298 KDFWR Strategic Plan. NatureServe. 2010. NatureServe Goal 1. Strategic Objective Explorer: An online encyclopedia 5. Comprehensive Wildlife of life. Version 7.1. Arlington, VA: Conservation Strategy: Appendix 3.2, NatureServe [web application]. Class Mammalia, Priority Research Available at: http://www.natureserve. Project #1 and #4, Priority Survey org/explorer. Project #1.

Norberg, U.M., and J.M.V. Rayner. 1987. Ecological morphology

Annual Research Highlights 2012 39 COMPLETED PROJECTS / Wildlife

Turtle are complicated by the fact that distribution and habitat requirements are not well understood, particularly for the northern limits of the range. In Kentucky, only ten verified Alligator Snapping Turtle records exist (Figure 1). Observation year for Kentucky’s verified records ranges from 1969 (Ernst and Ernst 1969) to 2004. In an era of limited conservation funding, it is important for state and federal fish and wildlife agencies to prioritize and focus conservation efforts. Within the southeastern United Alligator snapping turtle/ public domain photo States, the Alligator Snapping Turtle warrants a high degree of conservation Unsuccessful Attempt to attention for the following reasons: 1) Macrochelys is a monotypic genus; 2) Document Alligator Snapping This species has a limited distribution, confined only to Gulf Coast drainages; Turtle Populations (Macrochelys and 3) Severe population declines have previously been documented. temminckii) in Kentucky In an effort to better understand the status and distribution of the Alligator Danna Baxley and Jim Barnard, Kentucky Department of Fish Snapping Turtle, we conducted a and Wildlife Resources; Heather Venter, Murray State University multi-year survey, targeting historical distribution records and suitable habitat in Western Kentucky. Our ultimate goal was to identify populations Introduction in Kentucky to facilitate habitat The Alligator Snapping Turtle harvesting during the 1960’s and 1970’s management, population monitoring, (Macrochelys temminckii) is limited (Reed et al. 2002). and ensure persistence of remaining to the southeastern United States, in In response to these population populations. river systems draining into the Gulf of declines, all but one state fish and Mexico. Although status assessments wildlife agency pursued regulatory have occurred in multiple states, to action to ban commercial harvest by Materials and Methods our knowledge, no previous status 1998, and by 2004, commercial harvest Survey sites (Table 1) were assessment has occurred within the of the Alligator Snapping Turtle was identified based on a suite of criteria state. illegal throughout the range. Although including presence of historical Historically, Alligator Snapping regulatory efforts will safeguard the distribution records, access and Turtle populations have been negatively Alligator Snapping Turtle from future feasibility of sampling, habitat quality impacted by overharvest as well as overharvest, its current conservation assessed on the ground and from aerial habitat loss and alteration (Jensen and status is not promising: Texas, imagery, and anecdotal reports of Birkhead 2003, Riedle et al. 2005, Arkansas, Louisiana, Mississippi, Alligator Snapping Turtle sightings. Shipman and Riedle 2008). Age at Alabama, Georgia and Florida list the We made a strong effort to survey all first reproduction for this species is species as vulnerable (S3), Oklahoma, historical distribution records; however, estimated between 11 and 16 years Missouri, Kentucky, and Tennessee we were unable to survey within the of age (11-13 years, Dobie 1971; 16 list the species as imperiled (S2), and main stems of the Ohio and Mississippi years, Tucker and Sloan 1997). This Kansas and Illinois list the species as Rivers due to barge traffic and general delayed reproductive maturity, in critically imperiled (S1) (Nature Serve safety concerns. conjunction with other life history traits 2012). Sampled habitats included multiple such as a slow growth rate, contributed Management and restoration stream orders as well as slow-moving to the severe impacts of commercial decisions for the Alligator Snapping oxbow habitats directly adjacent to

40 Kentucky Department of Fish & Wildlife Resources Wildlife / COMPLETED PROJECTS

Captured Common Snapping Turtles (Chelydra serpentina) were marked with uniquely numbered metal cattle tags drilled into the rear marginal scute to allow for identification of re- captures.

Results Kentucky survey efforts from 30 May 2003 through 17 May 2012 resulted in no Alligator Snapping Turtle captures. The total survey effort comprised 118 survey nights and 829 net nights at 24 sites within 10 Kentucky counties. The average number of survey nights per site was 4.9 and average number of net nights per site was 34.5. Historical records occurred at 10 of the 24 total survey sites. The remaining 14 sites Figure 1. Historical occurrences and Sampling Locations for Alligator Snapping were surveyed due to the appearance Turtles in Kentucky of suitable habitat (e.g. abundant in-stream structure, intact riparian corridors). In total, we captured 3,071 the Mississippi River. As there was positioned nets immediately upstream turtles representing 10 species. no consistency in stream order for of aquatic structure, undercut banks, historical Alligator Snapping Turtle and log jams, when present. Metal occurrence records in Kentucky, we rebar or wooden stakes were used to Discussion did not eliminate smaller order streams secure nets in place, and nets were No Alligator Snapping Turtles from consideration and survey. positioned to allow captured turtles to were detected in this study, despite 829 Surveys were conducted between breathe (at least 7 cm of each net above net nights of effort within the historical 1 April and 19 September, when water water). Oxbow habitats were surveyed range in Kentucky. In his extensive temperatures exceeded 10º C. Within by placing hoop nets around the entire work on the Alligator Snapping Turtle, each stream reach or oxbow sampled, perimeter of the oxbow, while nets Pritchard (1989) indicates a low level we saturated suitable habitat with in riverine habitats were placed in a of confidence in direct sampling of hoop nets, baited with Bighead Carp staggered pattern until suitable habitat Alligator Snapping Turtle habitat unless (Hypophthalmichthys nobilis) or Koi was saturated. Nets were checked surveyors have years of experience as (Cyprinus carpio). Twenty total hoop each morning, all captured turtles a commercial or professional trapper. nets were used, ranging from 3-4 were processed, and nets were re- Although surveys for this species by hoops, length ranging from 1.5-2.4 m, baited regardless of the amount of bait biologists may be far less efficient and mesh size ranging from 3.8-12.7 remaining in the net. We consider one than efforts of commercial trappers, cm. Spreader bars made of 1.9 cm net night to be one baited hoop net set previous studies report catch per unit PVC pipe were cut to fit each net (2 for one 24 hour period, and one survey effort rates (CPUE; total number of per net) and used to minimize the risk night to be one continuous 24-hour captures divided by total number of net collapse and allow surveyors period of time. of net nights) ranging from 0.0 in to more easily position nets from the Captured turtles, with the Kansas to a high of 0.28 in Arkansas boat or the bank. The use of spreader exception of Trachemys scripta elegans (Table 2; Shipman et al. 1995; Trauth bars also allow surveyors to secure (Red-Eared Slider), were identified, et al. 1998). Two studies (Louisiana the nets using just one stake or point sexed, measured, weighed, and and Oklahoma) report CPUE of 0.06 of contact on the bank. Using twine, released at the site of capture. Due to (Boundy and Kennedy 2006; Riedle we suspended split bait fish from the high capture volume, we did not sex, et al. 2005). If Alligator Snapping hoop farthest from the net opening, and measure, or weigh Red-Eared Sliders. Turtles occurred in Kentucky at similar

Annual Research Highlights 2012 41 COMPLETED PROJECTS / Wildlife

Site Habitat Type # Survey # Net County Nights Nights Ballard Axe Lake Oxbow 3 18 Ballard Castor Lake Oxbow 11 62 Ballard Fish Lake Oxbow 6 36 Ballard Swan Lake Oxbow 6 64 Caldwell Eddy Creek 4th Order Stream 2 34 Calloway Beechy Creek 3rd Order Stream 3 15 Calloway Blood River Embayment 13 85 Calloway Blood River Bottoms 3rd Order Stream 2 22 Calloway Panther Creek 3rd Order Stream 8 72 Calloway Sugar Creek 2nd Order Stream 5 25 Calloway Wildcat Creek 2nd Order Stream 4 11 Carlisle Doug Travis WMA Oxbow 2 36 Carlisle Back Slough Oxbow 5 30 Fulton Bayou Du Chien 5th Order Stream 10 44 Fulton Obion Creek 6th Order Stream 11 46 Hickman Obion Creek 3rd Order Stream 2 20 Livingston Private Oxbow #1 Oxbow 2 34 Livingston Private Oxbow #2 Oxbow 2 34 Marshall Bee Creek 2nd Order Stream 1 5 Marshall Clark’s River NWR 3rd Order Stream 2 30 Marshall Jonathan Creek 3rd Order Stream 4 25 Marshall Sportsman’s Marina 3rd Order Stream 3 15 McCracken Clark’s River 5th Order Stream 2 34 Trigg Duck Pond at Lake Barkley Embayment 9 32

Table 1. Survey locations, habitat type, and survey effort for 24 survey sites in Kentucky. Sites listed in bold represent historical occurrences. densities, our sampling effort should and inform both commercial and while Lake Barkley was created in have resulted in 50 captured animals recreational fisherman of the desire to 1966 when the U.S. Army Corps of at a CPUE of 0.06 and 232 captured document extant populations within Engineers impounded the Cumberland animals at a CPUE of 0.28. the Ohio and Mississippi Rivers since River. The area in Kentucky with the It is important to note that the trapping is not feasible in these areas. highest density of verified historical main stems of the Ohio and Mississippi Western Kentucky has seen occurrence records is the Tennessee Rivers were not sampled, and it’s immense habitat changes over the River just north of Kentucky Dam. possible that these larger rivers sustain past 100 years. The Tennessee Valley Panther Creek, and the Blood River, Alligator Snapping Turtle populations. Authority impounded the Tennessee both located near the southernmost It would be worthwhile to educate River in 1944, creating Kentucky Lake, reaches of the Kentucky Lake

42 Kentucky Department of Fish & Wildlife Resources Wildlife / COMPLETED PROJECTS

impoundment, also produced verified currently characterized by row crop Alligator Snapping Turtles are occurrence records. Pre-impoundment, agriculture adjacent to riverine habitats, unsuccessful in targeted watershed(s), the Tennessee River likely offered with no riparian corridor. The open partner with Tennessee Wildlife excellent habitat for Alligator Snapping nature of streams and rivers lacking Resources Agency (TWRA) to conduct Turtles. Impounding the Tennessee riparian corridors typically limits in- a pilot re-introduction program in River eliminated any potential northern stream structure; consequently, nesting Kentucky. migration of turtles between the habitats within these areas is minimal. Ohio River and the Tennessee River. Further, the documented Alligator Literature Cited Snapping Turtles confirmed at the Management Implications Boundy, J. and C. Kennedy. 2006. southernmost reaches of the impounded It is likely that Alligator Snapping Trapping survey results for Kentucky Lake may be the result of Turtles remain in suitable habitats at the Alligator Snapping Turtle remnant individuals seeking more densities which were too low to detect (Macrochelys temminckii) in suitable habitat and moving south until with our survey methods. These Southeastern Louisiana, with Kentucky Lake dissolves in a network survey methods have been successfully comments on exploitation. Chelonian of small, ephemeral, 2nd order streams. used to document Alligator Snapping Conservation and Biology 5:3-9. These large-scale habitat changes in Turtle populations elsewhere. Given Western Kentucky may explain the our lack of success in Kentucky, Dobie, J.L. 1971. Reproduction and presence of Alligator Snapping Turtles future management steps, if deemed a growth in the Alligator Snapping in atypical stream reaches in Kentucky; KDFWR priority, would include: Turtle, Macroclemys temmincki specifically, 2nd through 4th order (Troost). Copeia 1971: 645-658. streams are widely assumed to be too 1) Identification of watershed(s) small to support Alligator Snapping in Kentucky where suitable nesting Ernst, C.H., and E.M. Ernst. 1969. Turtle populations elsewhere in the habitat and in-stream structure exists Turtles of Kentucky. International range. (e.g. Obion Creek) for Alligator Turtle and Tortoise Society Journal The landscape of western Snapping Turtles. 3:13-15. Kentucky is primarily agricultural. 2) Initiation of intensive trapping The United States Department of efforts within these watershed(s) to Jensen, J.B., and W.S. Birkhead. Agriculture (USDA) ranked Graves determine existing turtle community 2003. Distribution and status of and Hickman Counties (two counties structure (e.g. are other rare turtle the Alligator Snapping Turtle within our survey area) as the #2 species thriving?), and if Alligator (Macrochelys temminckii) in and #7 top agricultural counties in Snapping Turtles remain at low Georgia. Southeastern Naturalist Kentucky (USDA , 2011). Many densities in these watershed(s). 2:25-34. areas of historically suitable habitat are 3) If efforts to document

Publication Survey State Net Total CPUE Conclusions Year(s) Nights Captures Shipman et al., 1995 1991 Kansas 600 0 0 Possibly no breeding populations in Kansas Moler, P.E., 1997 1993-1996 Florida 367 92 0.25 Current harvest restrictions are adequate Continued depletion of large adults is not Trauth et al.,1998 1995-1997 Arkansas 352 98 0.28 sustainable Riedle et al., 2005 1997 Oklahoma 1,085 63 0.06 Dramatic population declines evident Recommend re-survey of sites to determine Boundy and Kennedy, 2006 1996-1997 Louisiana 3,504 200 0.06 trends Legal protection against harvest in Georgia is Jensen and Birkhead, 2003 1997-2001 Georgia 281 55 0.2 warranted Habitat alteration continues to impact Shipman and Riedle, 2008 1994, 1997 Missouri 396 48 0.12 populations Baxley et al., This study 2003-2012 Kentucky 829 0 0.00 No known breeding populations exist

Table 2. Review of Alligator Snapping Turtle trapping effort and catch per unit effort (CPUE) reported in the literature.

Annual Research Highlights 2012 43 COMPLETED PROJECTS / Wildlife

Moler, P.E. 1997. Alligator Snapping Tucker, A.D., and K.N. Sloan. 1997. Turtle Distribution and Relative Growth and reproductive estimates Abundance. Final Report to the from Alligator Snapping Turtles, U.S.Fish and Wildlife Service. Macroclemys temmincki, taken by Federal Number: E-1-III-2-2. commercial harvest in Louisiana. Chelonian Conservation and Biology Pritchard, P.C.H. 1989. The Alligator 2: 587-592. Snapping Turtle: Biology and Conservation. Milwaukee Public United Stated Department of Museum, Milwaukee, WI. 104 pp. Agriculture. 2011. National Agricultural Statistics Service, Reed, R.N., J.D. Congdon, and J.W. Kentucky Field Office. www.nass. Gibbons. 2002. The Alligator usda.gov. Snapping Turtle [Macrochelys (Macroclemys) temminckii]: A review of ecology, life history, and Funding Sources: State Wildlife Grant conservation, with demographic Program (SWG) and Murray State analyses of the sustainability of take University from wild populations. Report, Division of Scientific Authority; Comprehensive Wildlife United States Fish and Wildlife Conservation Strategy: appendix Service, Arlington, VA. 17 pp. 3.2. Class Reptilia, Priority Research Project #1. Riedle, J.D., D.B. Ligon, and K.Graves. 2008. Distribution and management of Alligator Snapping Turtles, Macrochelys temminckii, in Kansas and Oklahoma. Transactions of the Kansas Academy of Science. 111:21-28.

Riedle, J.D., P.A. Shipman, S.F. Fox, and D.M. Leslie, Jr. 2005. Status and distribution of the Alligator Snapping Turtle, Macrochelys temminckii, in Oklahoma. The Southwestern Naturalist 50:79-84.

Shipman, P.A., D.R. Edds, and L.E. Shipman. 1995. Distribution of the Alligator Snapping Turtle (Macroclemys temminckii) in Kansas. Transactions of the Kansas Academy of Science 98:83-91.

Shipman, P.A. and J.D. Riedle. 2008. Status and distribution of the Alligator Snapping Turtle (Macrochelys temminckii) in southeastern Missouri. Southeastern Naturalist 7:331-338.

44 Kentucky Department of Fish & Wildlife Resources Mussel release on the Big South Fork / Lee McClellan Project Highlights PROJECT HIGHLIGHTS / Fisheries

Evaluation of a Seasonal Rainbow Trout Fishery in Cedar Creek Lake

Dave Dreves and Paul Wilkes, Kentucky Department of Fish CEDAR CREEK LAKE and Wildlife Resources RAINBOW TROUT TAGGING STUDY dissolved oxygen profiles at Cedar KY Fish and Wildlife 3901 ainbow trout (Oncorhyncus Tag Creek Lake have mykiss) are stocked in many shown that suitable R small impoundments throughout water quality

Kentucky by KDFWR. This project conditions exist to represents an effort to create an alter- support trout from native fishery to traditional warmwater Rainbow Trout about the beginning species and to provide a fishing oppor- of October to about tunity during the cooler months of the early May. A total of year when other species do not bite as REWARD 21,000 harvestable- well. FOR ALL RETURNED TAGS size (9 in.) rainbow In a 2002 trout angler survey of trout will be stocked various waters stocked with trout, the Anglers receive a collectible pewter fish pin for each annually at Cedar category “lakes and reservoirs” was returned tag. Each tag returned also goes into a monthly Creek Lake, with second in terms of the amount of ef- drawing for 9 CASH awards ranging from $10 to $100. 12,000 fish being fort expended fishing for trout. Most Place tags in postage paid envelopes stocked in October of these impoundments are small found at any of the drop boxes and 9,000 fish in urban lakes that are part of KDFWR’s around the lake. For more February. Each information call (800) 858-1549. Fishing in Neighborhoods (FINS) stocking will be program. However the KDFWR does allocated evenly stock rainbow trout in a few larger res- among three ervoirs that are believed to have suffi- stocking sites: 1) the cient water quality to support trout year ing pressure during warmer months lower ramp, 2) the middle ramp and round. Cedar Creek Lake is the largest of the year. In a 2009 creel survey 3) the bank fishing area near the Hwy reservoir (784 acres) that KDFWR has conducted at the lake, there were an 1770 bridge. An exploitation study stocked with rainbow trout exclusively estimated 49.2 trips per acre and about and a creel survey will be conducted for a seasonal fishery. 245.8 man/hours per acre of fishing in years 1 and 3 to evaluate rainbow Cedar Creek Lake, impounded pressure. This represents more pres- trout angling pressure and harvest. The in 2002, is a KDFWR-owned lake in sure than at any other lake of a similar results of this study will be used to: Lincoln County. From conception, the size or larger. So, it is expected that the 1) make the determination to continue lake was designed and intended to be stocking of rainbow trout will provide the rainbow trout stocking program or primarily a sport fishing lake. There another fishing opportunity that will to cease stockings and 2) determine is no swimming, no water skiing or jet extend the quality fishing at the lake whether this type of fishery could skis allowed. The lake has a 300 ft buf- throughout the winter months. It is be successful in other warmwater fer zone around the shoreline which is hoped that this new fishing opportunity reservoirs in the state. also owned and managed as a Wildlife will spur increased fishing license and Management Area by KDFWR. Since trout permit sales. Funding Source: Sport Fish Cedar Creek Lake is promoted and The primary objective of this study Restoration Program (Dingell- managed by KDFWR as a “fishing is to evaluate the angler utilization of Johnson) lake,” it is reasonable to desire year rainbow trout and angler satisfaction round fishing opportunities for anglers. with this new seasonal fishery in Cedar KDFWR Strategic Plan. Goal 1, The lake already has tremendous fish- Creek Lake. Previous temperature and Strategic Objective 5.

46 Kentucky Department of Fish & Wildlife Resources Fisheries / PROJECT HIGHLIGHTS

Kentucky Trout Fishing, Attitudes and Opinions: 2013 Trout Angler Survey

Dave Dreves and Paul Wilkes, specifically targeting Kentucky trout problems by respondents in filling out Kentucky Department of Fish anglers. The trout angler attitude mail the survey will be addressed before the and Wildlife Resources survey was designed to gather informa- full mail out begins. tion from the broad spectrum of trout The survey sample will be anglers on their fishing habits and opin- randomly selected from the total ions. population of all anglers who here were an estimated 38,000 Now, a decade later, the KDFWR purchased a trout permit in 2012 Ttrout anglers in Kentucky who plans to again conduct a mail survey and who can be matched with an fished an estimated 336,000 days for of trout anglers to get an up-to-date address. The sample will not include trout in a 2006 U.S. Fish and Wildlife snapshot of trout water use, attitudes children under age 16 and persons Service survey. The KDFWR manages and opinions. Brainstorming sessions who purchased either Sportsman’s roughly 300 miles (97 miles in tail- with the Fisheries Division staff or Senior/Disabled licenses, though waters) of trout fisheries in 66 streams began in late summer 2012 in order to these populations can legally harvest (include 15 tailwaters). The KDFWR determine what questions should be trout. With a population of greater has periodically surveyed constituents asked of trout anglers. This process than 17,000 trout permit purchasers, to gain insight into angler attitudes re- continued through the end of the year a minimum of 400 responses will be garding fisheries resources, regulations, entailing multiple meetings and reviews needed for statistical significance at programs and needs. This information of potential questions via email by all the 95% confidence level. Based on is used to assist in making decisions on Fisheries Division staff. Revisions of observations from our previous mail where to focus management efforts and the survey questions will continue into surveys, very conservative estimates on where resources can best be utilized. 2013. A questionnaire booklet will the number of bad addresses and return The KDFWR surveyed Kentucky be constructed with the final survey rates are used to ensure an adequate anglers with a mail survey in 1982, a questions giving careful consideration beginning sample size. It is estimated telephone survey in 1991, and another to the layout of the survey. Copies that a sample size of 1,800 potential mail survey in 2003. Each of these of the survey booklet will then be respondents will be needed. surveys focused on general statewide distributed to a small number of The 2013 trout angler survey attitudes and opinions. In 2003, a sur- people having a wide spectrum of trout will again follow the multiple contact vey was conducted for the first time angling experience for pre-testing. Any model advocated by Dillman and the accepted standard in survey work. This methodology prescribes multiple contacts with each potential respondent to maximize response rate. Each person on the mailing list will be contacted a minimum of three times and a subset who don’t return the survey initially will be contacted a fourth time. The implementation of this survey is expected to occur in April and May of 2013 and results should be available by the end of the year.

Funding Source: Sport Fish Restoration Program (Dingell- Johnson)

KDFWR Strategic Plan. Goal 1, Trout Anglers / Dane Balsman Strategic Objective 5.

Annual Research Highlights 2012 47 PROJECT HIGHLIGHTS / Wildlife

transmission within a population. Harvest of individuals is presumed to be the greatest cause of mortality of cow elk in Kentucky, yet cause-specific mortality has not been documented. Therefore we aim to address, (1) cause- specific mortality, (2) lifespan, (3) lifetime reproductive rate of cow elk, (4) group membership, demographics, and movement between groups, and (5) develop a model to investigate how disease may spread through the population if a crisis situation were to occur. In the winter of 2013, an initial sample of 40 cow elk were outfitted with VHF radio collars and ear tags in order to monitor for cause-specific Cow elk recovering post-capture / John Hast mortality and behavioral patterns. Physiological data Cause-Specific Mortality, Behavior, and (e.g., age, body condition, body size) were collected Group Dynamics of Cow Elk in Kentucky and behavioral interactions between individuals, as well as herd membership, Brittany L. Slabach, John T. Hast, John J. Cox, and P.H. Crowley. are being assessed. Five vaginal University of Kentucky; Kristina Brunjes, R. Daniel Crank, Will transmitters have also been deployed to Bowling, and Gabriel Jenkins, Kentucky Department of Fish and assess the potential to monitor calving Wildlife Resources events and subsequently capture and sample calves of marked cows in an effort to assess reproductive rate and lifespan. Although age analysis has not been conducted, three known ince the reintroduction of elk in population. Cow elk differ behaviorally age individuals were recaptured SKentucky a variety of research has and in their activity patterns from bull including two original release cows been conducted in an effort to better elk in that they live in groups year both aged at least 15 years. Better understand population health and per- round. Group membership commonly understanding of the longevity and sistence. Post-release research provided consists of related individuals, with a lifetime reproductive rate will provide pivotal information regarding habitat variety of age classes present at any information to inform models of use and movement as well as produc- one time throughout the year (e.g., population growth and recruitment. tivity of the herd. With an established calf, yearling, and older individuals). Assessing behavioral patterns and herd that is actively hunted, informa- The lifespan, and potential lifetime group membership can provide tools tion concerning cause-specific mortal- reproductive rate (how many calves to assess hunter placement, minimum ity, habitat use, and herd demographics a cow has over her lifetime) of cow group size necessary for translocation, (e.g., the age and sex classes that com- elk is not completely understood, and mitigation of disease outbreak if it pose the herd) are important to under- but individuals more than twenty were to occur. stand population persistence. These years of age have been harvested. parameters can aid in management Group membership and dynamics Funding Sources: Rocky Mountain decisions concerning hunter placement, (interactions between individuals) Elk Foundation, Wildlife Restoration number of available tags, and overall can have important implications for (Pittman-Robertson) population health. population spread and use of habitat, Cow elk are ecologically important response to disturbances (e.g., hunter- KDFWR Strategic Plan. Goal 1. for the growth and persistence of the harvest and roadways), and for disease Strategic Objective 5.

48 Kentucky Department of Fish & Wildlife Resources Catching brown trout at Long Bar public access on the Cumberland River / Dave Baker Project Updates PROJECT UPDATES / Warm Water Fisheries

Evaluation of a 20-in Minimum Length Limit on Largemouth Bass at Cedar Creek Lake

Christopher W. Hickey and Ryan goal of producing as many high quality and forage that would be needed for the Kausing, Kentucky Department fisheries as possible in different regions bass population to thrive. The KDFWR throughout the state. And yet, prior to hoped to provide that final component of Fish and Wildlife Resources 2002, Kentucky was still missing what by establishing the type of regulations could be classified as a true “trophy” that would seriously limit the harvest largemouth bass lake. This changed of largemouth bass. The primary ob- in 2002 when the department decided jective for this research project was to s the most sought after sport fish that the newly constructed Cedar Creek monitor all aspects of the largemouth Ain Kentucky, Largemouth bass Lake would offer the best opportunity bass population at Cedar Creek Lake (Micropterus salemoides), or black to finally establish a highly-coveted tro- and then identify the fishery’s response bass (Micropterus sp.) in general, are phy largemouth bass population. This to highly-restrictive regulations that managed extensively by the Kentucky new 784-acre reservoir in central Ken- included a 1 fish daily creel and a 20-in Department of Fish and Wildlife Re- tucky was expected to already enjoy minimum length limit. sources (KDFWR) with the primary the ideal levels of productivity, habitat Since the spring of 2003,

Cedar Creek Largemouth bass / Chris Hickey

50 Kentucky Department of Fish & Wildlife Resources Warm Water Fisheries / PROJECT UPDATES

largemouth bass at Cedar Creek Lake spawn during the previous year. In restrictive regulations and still pushing have been sampled via nocturnal fact, it came from the catch rates of ≥ towards attaining the official status of a electrofishing at least twice a year 12.0 in largemouth bass (139.7 fish/ “trophy” fishery. (spring and fall). Each bass that hour), which was a substantial increase is sampled during these efforts is over spring 2010 when the previous counted, measured and weighed high of 90.7 fish/hour was obtained. Funding Sources: Sport Fish to gather data that will later be Ultimately, all results from largemouth Restoration Program (Dingell- analyzed to determine the relative bass sampling efforts in 2012 were at Johnson) abundance, length frequency, average or above normal, which included the condition, reproductive success, and examination of both the food habits in KDFWR Strategic Plan. Goal 1, sometimes, the age & growth of the the summer and the average condition Strategic Objective 5. entire largemouth bass population. (Wr = 88.1) of the fish in the fall. The Electrofishing efforts are also only exception may have been the conducted regularly during the summer lower catch rate of age-0 fish (18.2 to examine the stomach contents of fish/hour) during the late-September the fish, which provides valuable electrofishing efforts. This is an information on the feeding habits of the indication that the largemouth bass largemouth bass in Cedar Creek Lake. spawn during spring 2012 had below Periodically during the course of this average success, which may actually be project, other procedures have been needed to combat over-crowding that conducted to provide further insight usually accompanies any regulations into everything from the age & growth that reduce harvest rates. of the fish to the opinions of anglers The analysis of all the data who regularly use the fishery. Finally, obtained for this project over the years other fish populations in the lake have especially that from the latest sampling also been sampled to determine their efforts in 2012 provide evidence that status and how they are affected by the the construction of Cedar Creek Lake type of management decisions that are and KDFWR’s decision to specifically geared towards increasing the number manage for its largemouth bass fishery of large predators in the lake. is well on its way to being considered Once the first ≥ 20.0 in largemouth a success. It is more apparent every bass was collected in 2006, they have year that the 20-in minimum length become a regular occurrence, especially limit and 1 fish daily creel is still during the spring electrofishing efforts. working towards increasing the Even though catch rates of the larger number of high-quality fish in the fish have fluctuated during this project, lake, even if it still might be too early there has been a notable trend showing to officially designate it as a trophy that the number of ≥ 20.0 in bass has fishery. Many largemouth bass are been increasing from one year to the growing to total lengths of 20 inches next. This includes 2012 when during in just 5 to 6 years on a diet consisting mid-April electrofishing efforts, there of crayfish, silversides, bluegill and was a total of 26 largemouth bass in the gizzard shad. Creel surveys indicate sample that measured 20.0 in or more, that anglers are coming to the lake which is quite a jump from the 15 bass from all over the state in search of that were observed each year in both high-quality largemouth bass fishing. 2010 and 2011. Furthermore, overall In fact, estimates have shown that on catch rates of largemouth bass in 2012 an acre-by-acre basis, Cedar Creek (254.3 fish/hour) were the highest that Lake is one of the most heavily fished it has ever been since the sampling water bodies in the entire state. This efforts officially started in 2003, but project and the associated sampling more importantly, the increases did efforts will continue throughout 2013 not come from smaller age-1 fish that to make certain that the largemouth usually indicate a highly successful population is responding well to the

Annual Research Highlights 2012 51 PROJECT UPDATES / Warm Water Fisheries

Evaluation of a 12.0-in Minimum Size Limit on Channel Catfish in Kentucky’s Small Impoundments

Christopher W. Hickey and Ryan uring an average year, Kentucky’s which usually require fish that are at Kausing, Kentucky Department Dfish hatcheries will be asked to least 8 in long, are often the only way produce nearly 150,000 channel catfish to maintain a fishery at these water of Fish and Wildlife Resources that are needed to be stocked into vari- bodies because of high harvest rates ous small impoundments throughout and low to no levels of natural repro- the state. These annual stocking efforts, duction. Although the data on how anglers use these put-grow-take fisher- ies is very limited, those creel survey results that are available indicate that as much as 30% - 60% of these chan- nel catfish are harvested each year. Historically, there have been very few regulations placed on these fisheries even though the majority of the catfish are likely being harvested before they are able to reach their full potential. In 2004, the KDFWR started working on the first large scale attempt at regulat- ing these fisheries by implementing a 12.0-in minimum length limit for channel catfish populations at 11 state- owned lakes. This research project was developed to monitor the response of the channel catfish populations to this minimum size limit. Ultimately, KD- FWR wants to determine if the 12.0-in minimum length limit can be used ef- fectively at other small impoundments with catfish populations that are sus- tained solely through annual stocking efforts. During the early stages of this project, it was determined that tandem hoop nets (3 hoop nets fastened together) were the most effective method for sampling these channel catfish populations. A sampling protocol was soon developed that centered on allowing 5 baited tandem hoop nets soak for 3 days at each project lake. At the end of the sampling period, the tandem hoop nets would be retrieved by project biologists and all captured channel catfish would be counted, measured and weighed. The first stage of this project involved sampling the channel catfish every Collecting channel catfish for size limit study / Ryan Oster fall at 6 different water bodies, which

52 Kentucky Department of Fish & Wildlife Resources Warm Water Fisheries / PROJECT UPDATES

included 4 experimental lakes that lakes for several years now and despite pressure on the state fish hatcheries, were under the new 12.0-in minimum the regular stocking efforts, there are which is a system that is already being length limit and 2 control lakes that still low numbers of fish caught each asked to produce nearly 150,000 had no restrictions on catfish harvest. year. Both of these water bodies are channel catfish each year for lakes like The data collected from these study under heavy angling pressure and many these. lakes was used to monitor the status of of the channel catfish are harvested each catfish population and determine within the first year of being stocked. if the minimum size limit was able to The third lake chosen for this phase of Funding Source: Sport Fish improve the fishery. the project, Lake Reba, also receives a Restoration Program (Dingell- The experimental lakes for the first lot of pressure from anglers. However, Johnson) 6 years (2006 – 2012) of the project the numbers of channel catfish in the were Beaver, Elmer Davis, Guist population are kept at a level that is KDFWR Strategic Plan. Goal Creek and Shanty Hollow lakes and higher than the other two lakes because 1,Strategic Objective 5. all of their channel catfish populations of much more intensive stocking were being managed under the 12-in efforts. Resource managers hope that minimum size limit. Annual sampling by implementing the 12-in minimum efforts were used to determine if size limit on Lake Reba that they will this new size limit was adequately be able to maintain or even improve protecting the channel catfish without the channel catfish fishery even after causing too many fish to pile up just reducing the amount of fish that are below the 12-in mark. In fact, there stocked annually. were 2 different occasions during this The previous year, 2012, was first phase of the project that biologists more of a transition period for the made the decision to cut back on the project. The majority of the effort annual stocking densities to be certain was focused on gathering data from that stunted growth did not become a catfish populations at the 3 different problem. Alleviating demand on the water bodies that will serve as the limited resources at either of the two experimental lakes during the 2nd phase state fish hatcheries is considered to be of this project. As was expected, a big benefit of any new regulations. tandem hoop nets, which were used In total, these experimental lakes to sample channel catfish during the appear to be responding well to fall of 2012, continued to catch low the minimum size limit as all four numbers of fish from both McNeely fisheries could easily be considered at and Reformatory lakes. The same or above average. Because it appears methods to sample catfish at Lake Reba to be a benefit to both the fisheries resulted in catch rates that were similar and the state’s hatchery system, the to those of an experimental lake during 12-in minimum size limit on channel the first phase of the project. However, catfish has been considered a success, by this time of the year, Lake Reba especially for the lakes that have been had already been stocked with channel sampled regularly during the course of catfish on multiple occasions with total this study. numbers that were similar to that of The next logical step would be a lake that was at least twice its size. to expand this regulation to other In March 2013, the 12-in minimum small impoundments that are stocked length limit for channel catfish will regularly, but have below average be officially enforced at all 3 of these channel catfish fisheries. A good start lakes. Project biologists will continue would be to apply the regulation to to very closely monitor these channel McNeely and Reformatory Lakes, catfish populations for several years to which previously served as the control come. Ultimately, the hope is that the lakes for the first phase of this study. fisheries at each lake will improve over Tandem hoop nets have been used to years, even if stocking efforts need to sample channel catfish at both of these be cut back to alleviate more of the

Annual Research Highlights 2012 53 PROJECT UPDATES / Warm Water Fisheries

Evaluation of Kentucky’s Largemouth Bass Stocking Initiative

Christopher W. Hickey and Ryan Kausing, Kentucky Department of Fish and Wildlife Resources Warm

upplemental stocking is a common Smanagement tool that has been used in Kentucky to enhance large- mouth bass (Micropterus salemoides) fisheries, but as of late, there is an increasing demand on the state’s only two hatcheries that has required the smarter use of its resources. One pos- sible way to approach this is to develop a system that could predict where the fish are really needed each year so that limited number of largemouth bass fingerlings produced by the hatcheries will be stocked only in water bodies that will get the most benefit. Another advantage of a system that predicts the abundance of age-1 bass during that 1st year is that it gives resource managers a chance to assist a poor natural year class before it is too late to respond. For example, if the system predicts that Biologist mark largemouth bass / Chris Hickey a lake will have high numbers of age-1 bass in the following spring, then the understand the specific relationship lake’s annual fall sampling is inserted stocking could be diverted elsewhere between the density of age-0 fish in into this equation and the prediction so there is less chance of unintention- the fall and the density of age-1 fish is checked against the lake’s average ally disrupting the natural population. of the same year class in the following age-1 density. If the predicted value On the other hand, during a year with spring. Two predictive equations and is below the average, then it could a below average spawn, the system average year-class strength at age-1 be stocked with bass fingerlings at a should predict a low abundance of age- were developed for each lake using this density that can vary from a low of 2.5 1 fish, which would be a cue to stock historical data. The first equation uses fish/acre to a high of 15 fish/acre. The the largemouth bass fingerlings in the the overall age-0 catch rate (CPUE) of chosen density depends on how far fall in order to offset these numbers. largemouth bass in the fall to make a the predicted spring age-1 catch rate Kentucky’s Largemouth Bass Stocking prediction about spring age-1 density. is below the average for that lake. For Initiative (BSI) attempts to do just that The second equation is very similar, the first 7 years of this project (2005 – by developing a protocol that success- except that it relies only on the fall 2011), each largemouth bass fingerling fully predicts a below average number age-0 CPUE of larger fish that have a was marked with a specific fin clip of age-1 largemouth bass next spring length of ≥ 5.0 inches. The regression prior to being stocked, which is how by looking at the abundance of age-0 equation with the lowest p-value is then they would be distinguished from the bass this fall. used to predict the density of the year natural fish in the population. For each of the 34 lakes in the class at age-1. The catch rate of age-0 Ever since this project started project, historical data is used to bass that are determined during each in 2005, the predictive equations

54 Kentucky Department of Fish & Wildlife Resources Warm Water Fisheries / PROJECT UPDATES

generated via the BSI have been used fingerlings were marked with a fin clip had been regularly needed to mark to determine where largemouth bass are and stocked as a part of the BSI during every bass fingerling before it was stocked every fall. In earlier years of the fall of 2011. stocked. Project biologists will now the project, larger lakes with perennial During the spring of 2012, the rely solely on the strength of the spawning problems (i.e. Laurel River conditions were good enough to sample predictive equations and the average Lake) received the bulk of the fish all the project lakes and any catch rates year class strength for each project even though stocking the largemouth of age-1 largemouth bass were used lake to help make decisions on where bass fingerlings at densities of 5 – 10 to update the predictive equations for the bass fingerlings will be stocked fish/acre appeared to have very little that water body. In total, 6 of the 8 each year. If a stocked lake has impact on the fishery. Beginning inWarm lakes Water (75%) thatFisheries were stocked with above average numbers of age-1 bass fall of 2009, the project began placing bass fingerlings during the fall of 2011 in the following spring, it will then more emphasis on smaller lakes. This had recaptures of clipped fish. This be assumed that the addition of the shift actually lowered the overall indicates that once again hatchery- hatchery-reared largemouth bass to the demand on largemouth bass fingerlings reared largemouth bass have made natural population was successful of and allowed stocking densities to a notable contribution to the natural preventing a poor year class. be increased to as high as 15 fish/ population at the majority of the lakes acre. Not surprisingly, the higher that were stocked during the previous densities proved to be effective as fall. Statewide sampling efforts during Funding Sources: Sport Fish there were more recaptures of stocked the fall of 2012 indicated that only 6 Restoration Program (Dingell- fish during the spring 2010 than in project lakes exhibited a low enough Johnson) any other year of the project. In the year-class strength to warrant the fall of 2010, the higher 15 fish/acre supplemental stocking efforts. In 2012, KDFWR Strategic Plan. Goal 1, density was used again at 50% of the only a total of 88,000 largemouth bass Strategic Objective 5. stocked lakes. Even though flood fingerlings were needed to be stocked conditions throughout the spring 2011 for this project, but unlike previous made it difficult to effectively sample years, the bass were not marked prior largemouth bass, 6 of the 8 project to leaving the hatchery. In the near lakes that were eventually accessible future, including 2013, the plan will all had recaptures of recently stocked be to conserve the manpower that bass. Once again, in 2011, there were 8 project lakes that exhibited catch rates of age-0 largemouth bass that were low enough to be considered as a below-average spawn. Even though all 8 lakes eventually received fish, there were only 5 with poor enough densities of natural age-0 largemouth bass to be stocked at the highest rate of 15 fish/acre. In total, nearly 120,000 largemouth bass KDFWR Fisheries staff at work / Chris Hickey

Annual Research Highlights 2012 55 PROJECT UPDATES / Warm Water Fisheries

Bass fishermen preparing for a tournament / Ryan Oster Black Bass Tournament Results in Kentucky

Christopher W. Hickey and Ryan ated with these surveys also makes it the increased ability to explain and Kausing, Kentucky Department nearly impossible to use them on the forecast changes to various black bass of Fish and Wildlife Resources same lake over back to back years, populations. When the program data which would be necessary to identify is summarized into a yearly report, trends in the relationship between bass it should also prove useful to anyone populations and angler success. The looking to plan a fishing event in the he KDFWR is able to conduct KDFWR realizes how critical this kind near future. Telectrofishing efforts annually to of information is to the management After developing the specifics of sample black bass populations at lakes of the resource, so a program was initi- the program, especially what kind of and rivers throughout Kentucky, but ated in 1999 that sought to collect data data would be requested, researchers this data alone cannot describe every from black bass tournaments that were were faced with the task of getting aspect of the fishery especially when it already being organized at water bod- the necessary information out to all pertains to the anglers. Information on ies across the state. The tournament groups (i.e. bass clubs, marinas, etc) angler use and success can be gained results can provide invaluable infor- that organize bass tournaments in through creel surveys, but due to limi- mation on angler pressure and catch Kentucky. During 1999 and for first tations on funding and manpower, only rates that, when combined with survey few years that followed, this consisted a handful of them can be conducted at data gathered via annual electrofishing of mailing out information packets any given time. The high costs associ- efforts, will give resource managers that contained details on the program

56 Kentucky Department of Fish & Wildlife Resources Warm Water Fisheries / PROJECT UPDATES

and any materials that the tournaments how important tournament participation participate. would need to record and submit the was to the continued success of the necessary data. In time, the tournament program, so researchers hope to reverse reporting program evolved to include the current decline by increasing the Funding Source: Sport Fish an online system where organizers promotion efforts in 2013. Even Restoration Program (Dingell- could schedule their tournaments and though there was a substantial decline Johnson) ultimately report their catch data in in participation, it did not affect the an easier, more efficient manner. The other aspects of the catch data as much KDFWR Strategic Plan. Goal 1, word spread quickly about the online as would have been suspected. The Strategic Objective 5 system and its popularity lead to a 13,636 anglers, or 8,050 angling units steady increase in the number of fishing (individual anglers + teams), that fished events that were submitting their these events in 2012 appear to have data. Another tool that helped boost been more successful at catching bass the exposure of the program was the than in previous years. For instance, annual report. This report contained the number of anglers was down by information on the results that were over 33% from the 17,093 that were submitted during the previous year, reported in 2011, but when comparing which included statistics that presented the actual number of “keeper” bass details on the tournaments, the anglers caught in 2012 (n = 22,815) to those that participated in them and the quality in 2011 (n = 26,440), there was only of the bass that they caught. a 13.7% decrease. There were other In 2010, and for the first time important statistics derived from the since the program started, KDFWR 2012 tournament data that were higher made some major updates to the kind than they had been in previous years. of data that would be requested from These included the average weight of a tournaments. Besides making changes bass caught during a tournament (2.44 to the size at which a bass would be lb), the average number of bass caught classified as a “big fish”, these updates per angling-unit (2.83 fish/unit) and also started asking tournaments to the average weight to take 1st place at provide some detailed information on a standard 8-hour event (14.52 lbs). the format that they had used for the In comparison, 2011 was considered event. The primary reason for this to be a very good year for tournament was that team tournaments had grown fishing, but each of its values for these in popularity since the program was same statistics were lower and included initially designed. Once researchers 2.34 lb for average weight per bass, had information on tournament format, 2.49 fish per angling-unit and 13.62 lbs they could analyze the catch data to win the standard 8-hour event. The accordingly and start treating teams highest winning weight for a 1-day like a single unit rather the 2 individual tournament in 2012 was 29.38 lbs at anglers, which was a simple adjustment Lake Beshear and the biggest bass that would greatly increase the caught in a tournament was 8.83 lbs, accuracy of the results. caught from Lake Barkley. Further In 2012, tournament catch analysis of the catch data was also used data was reported from 27 different to demonstrate how the many water waterbodies throughout Kentucky. bodies in Kentucky can differ in terms There was a total of 233 tournaments of angler success, as well as the number that participated, which is down and size of the bass that they caught. considerably from the 350 events in Ultimately, the results from the 2012 2011. In fact, this was the 2nd year in tournaments contributed a great deal a row that the number of tournaments to the long-term database that has been participating in the program has building for well over a decade. This decreased. It has been several years program will continue into 2013, and as since there was any emphasis put on long as bass tournaments are willing to

Annual Research Highlights 2012 57 PROJECT UPDATES / Warm Water Fisheries

Taylorsville Lake blue catfish / Chris Hickey

anglers, and several of these fisheries Preliminary Assessment of a have exceeded expectations enough to indicate that they can produce trophy- Newly Established Blue Catfish sized blue catfish. Not long after the stocking started in 2002, it became Population in Taylorsville Lake apparent that the blue catfish popula- tion at Taylorsville Lake was well on its way to developing into a high-quality Christopher W. Hickey and Ryan he blue catfish Ictalurus( furcatus) fishery. Since very little was known Kausing, Kentucky Department Tstocking program is a relatively about the dynamics of this population, a of Fish and Wildlife Resources new tool used by the KDFWR to ex- research project was initiated in 2007 to pand the sport fishing opportunities at assess the status of the fishery. Howev- some lakes in Kentucky. These efforts er, it was soon realized that the fishery’s have undoubtedly established fisher- popularity was becoming a liability as ies that are popular among Kentucky the number a catfish being harvested

58 Kentucky Department of Fish & Wildlife Resources Warm Water Fisheries / PROJECT UPDATES

each year was increasing exponentially. needed to protect the fishery. The will be used repeatedly as project As a result, the focus of this project regulations, which were set for March biologists continue to monitor the ultimately shifted from being a simple 2011, limited the harvest to only 15 blue catfish population’s response to assessment to an evaluation of new catfish per day with only one that was the regulations. Even without recent regulations that were implemented to allowed to be 25 inches (in.) or more. evidence of natural reproduction, it is curb harvest rates and encourage the Although a “1-over” limit of 25 in was expected that the increasing numbers development of a trophy component to restrictive, it was needed because of of larger blue catfish in the population the fishery. the relatively young age of the fishery will eventually lead to a successful Information gathered prior to the and the growing need to protect enough spawn. As the regulations continue to start of this project indicated that the sexually mature fish to facilitate a work, biologists should soon be able blue catfish were doing well, with successful spawn. As the fishery gets to determine not only if the fishery is average growth rates of 3–5 inches a older and/or there is evidence of natural able to sustain itself through natural year. More specifically for this project, reproduction, resource managers will reproduction, but also if it is able to low-pulse DC electrofishing has been likely revisit the regulation to alter the produce trophy-size catfish on a regular conducted annually (2007 – 2012) “1-over” length limit to a level that basis. during the summer months to sample is appropriate for a fully-developed catfish in both the upper and lower blue catfish population (i.e. 1-over-30 ends of the lake. All blue catfish were inches). Funding Source: Sport Fish counted, measured and weighed before As previously mentioned, the Restoration Program (Dingell- being released. This data was analyzed purpose of this study shifted after Johnson) so that it could be used to identify any March 2011 to evaluate the newly changes to the fishery over time. Other implemented regulations on blue KDFWR Strategic Plan. Goal methods used during the course of this catfish at Taylorsville Lake. Low-pulse 1,Strategic Objective 5. project to evaluate the blue catfish and electrofishing has been conducted in the anglers that target them included the summer of both 2011 and 2012. an angler exploitation study that took Efforts in July 2011 concluded with place in 2008 and a creel survey that such a poor catch rate (27.1 fish/hr) was conducted during the peak fishing that biologist decided to repeat the season of 2009. sampling in order to ensure that these Results from the 2007 sampling results were indicative of the actual efforts indicated that blue catfish at population. After the additional efforts Taylorsville Lake were doing very well. in August 2011 ended with catch rates From both ends of the lake, 590 blue of around 50 fish/hr, it was determined catfish were sampled for an impressive that the previous sampling was indeed catch rate of 236 fish/hr. By 2009 and accurate regardless of poor results. 2010, catch rates had decreased to Fortunately, in July 2012, biologists only 119 and 116 fish/hr, respectively. were able to obtain catch rates from These catch rates actually represented low-pulse electrofishing that showed an acceptable density for what was that the blue catfish population in a young population of blue catfish Taylorville Lake was indeed improving. without any natural reproduction. Even though the upper end of the lake However, a 2009 creel survey estimated had only slightly improved (58 fish/hr), that nearly 12,000 blue catfish were the much higher catch rates obtained harvested during that year, which from the lower end (150 fish/hr) was turned out to be a 5-fold increase from enough to push the overall density up the 2,400 blue catfish that were taken and over the 100 fish/hr mark for the by anglers in 2006. This increase in 1st time since 2010. It is also important harvest and the more than 100 fish/ to note that the 2012 catch rates for hr decrease in catch rates from 2007 ≥ 25 in blue catfish reached over 6 through 2010 were alarming enough fish/hr, which is the highest density to warrant new regulations, especially ever obtained for the larger size- after surveyed anglers unanimously class. In 2013, and for several years agreed that further actions were that follow, low pulse electrofishing

Annual Research Highlights 2012 59 PROJECT UPDATES / Warm Water Fisheries

Evaluation of the Growth of Two Different Sizes of Blue Catfish Stocked into Three North Central Kentucky Small Impoundments

Christopher W. Hickey and Ryan efforts to monitor the status of these an all-fish diet, it is possible that when Kausing, Kentucky Department fisheries, it was revealed that growth blue catfish are stocked at a larger size of Fish and Wildlife Resources rates of the blue catfish in many of they are able to consume small forage these populations were erratic. For ex- fish immediately, which could lead to ample, some blue catfish would differ a higher overall growth potential. As a in length by as much as 15 inches even result, this project was developed with though they belonged to the same year- the objective of determining whether lue catfish (Ictalurus furcatus) class. There have been other studies or not the size at which a blue catfish is Bwere initially stocked into some that recognized such a large disparity stocked has an influence on the long- of Kentucky’s small impoundments as in growth rates, but there has been very term growth potential. a potential management tool aimed at little information on the relationship In order to reach this project’s improving bluegill fisheries. Although between this growth and the size of the objective, two distinct size groups they were not the ideal predator to con- blue catfish when they were stocked. of blue catfish (< 10 in and > 12 in) trol bluegill numbers, the blue catfish Since it has been identified that the were stocked at the same density into eventually became a popular fishery at growth of piscivorous fish does not in- three small impoundments. These some of these lakes. During regular crease substantially until they switch to study lakes (Boltz, Bullock Pen and

Beautiful blue cat taken during sampling / Chris Hickey

60 Kentucky Department of Fish & Wildlife Resources Warm Water Fisheries / PROJECT UPDATES

Reformatory lakes) were chosen goal of collecting a representative growth of the 2 size groups differently because the results from previous sample of both groups from each (i.e. differential angler harvest rates) sampling efforts indicated that they project lake. This was certainly the must first be ruled out. Hence, project contained blue catfish that were the case during the summer of 2012 when biologists will continue to sample same age, but had very different growth all lakes in the project were sampled the blue catfish populations at each rates. Beginning in 2007, age-1 blue multiple times in order achieve this study lake in 2013, while taking a catfish were stocked into each study goal. However, even when a total 152 broader look for anything that might be lake during the late summer for 3 clipped/tagged fish were collected specifically affecting the growth rates consecutive years. In order to keep during the year, they were spread out of these fish. track of the year it was stocked and among enough different lakes and what size group it belonged to, each study groups that there were still some catfish received two different marks sample sizes that were not as large Funding Sources: Sport Fish prior to going into a study lake. A as researchers desired. For instance, Restoration Program (Dingell- coded micro-wire tag was injected into Reformatory Lake was sampled with Johnson) a particular area of the fish’s body to low-pulse electrofishing on 3 separate identify the size group and a specific occasions in 2012, but there was KDFWR Strategic Plan. Goal 1, fin clip was used to mark the year that still only a total of 7 tagged catfish Strategic Objective 5. it was stocked. The blue catfish at recaptured from the < 10 in size group each study lake would then be sampled and an even smaller total of 5 tagged at least once every year using low fish collected from the > 12 in group. pulse DC electrofishing. Any catfish Luckily, there were a couple of collected during these efforts would situations in 2012 where the sample first be measured and then examined sizes have been large enough to closely for any marks. If a fish was produce reliable data, and like previous discovered to have had a fin clipped, years, these results continue to indicate the location would be noted and then that even though the blue catfish are a wand-style metal detector would growing, neither size group appears to be used to verify the presence and be doing substantially better than the position of the micro-wire tag. Since other. For example the analysis of the this whole procedure utilized non-lethal data collected from Boltz Lake in 2012 methods for identifying the existence shows that age-6 blue catfish stocked of the marks, each blue catfish would as part of the > 12 in size group (n eventually be released with the =11) had a mean length of only 17.0 opportunity to continue growing. The inches, while the same age fish stocked lengths from all stocked fish that were in the smaller < 10 in group (n = 14) identified as being a part of the same had a mean length of 16.6 inches. This size and year class would then be difference of only 0.4 inches actually averaged together in order to estimate means that the lengths of catfish in the how much each study group had grown 2 size groups might in fact be getting since being released into the lake. This closer together, especially since there process needs to be repeated for several was an average difference of around years after the last fish was stocked so 4.2 in when these fish were initially that project biologists would have the stocked in 2007. If this trend continues chance to monitor the growth of each and the mean lengths of the 2 size study group over longer time period. classes eventually turn out to be the After some unexpected difficulty same for multiple study groups, project during the first few years of the project, biologists might be able to effectively researchers have been able to sample dismiss the hypothesis that the blue blue catfish from both size groups with catfish’s size at the time of stocking some regularity since 2010. After the has an influence on the overall growth last batch of catfish was stocked for this potential. However, before this can project in 2009, sampling efforts have happen, further data is required and any increased substantially with the specific other factors that might influence the

Annual Research Highlights 2012 61 PROJECT UPDATES / Warm Water Fisheries

Shocking for white crappie / Chris Hickey

Evaluation of a Supplemental the most abundant. And yet unfortu- nately, it is the white crappie that is White Crappie Stocking Program caught with techniques that are most commonly associated with “crappie at Three Kentucky Reservoirs fishing” (ie. vertical jigging and using live bait under a slip bobber). So when Christopher W. Hickey and Ryan on different biotic and abiotic factors white crappie numbers decline, anglers Kausing, Kentucky Department coming together at the right moment. using these more traditional methods Subtle differences in the habitat re- are most likely to also experience de- of Fish and Wildlife Resources quirements of white (P. annularis) and creases in catch rates. Crappie anglers black crappie (P. nigromaculatus) also become very concerned when lower allow these factors to influence which catch rates occur for several years in a espite their popularity, crappie species will dominate the fishery. In row, which often leads them to request D(Pomoxis sp.) can be frustrating the past decade, some of Kentucky’s that the KDFWR take a more proactive to both anglers and resource manag- most popular crappie lakes (i.e. Ken- approach to addressing the issue. ers. The status of a fishery changes on tucky Lake) have seen a shift from Since regulations are already in a regular basis especially when suc- a fishery consisting of mostly white place at most water bodies, fisheries cessful crappie spawns rely so heavily crappie to one where black crappie are biologists had the task of identifying

62 Kentucky Department of Fish & Wildlife Resources Warm Water Fisheries / PROJECT UPDATES

other management options that have nets, which have been used effectively of 2012. Unfortunately, there were still been shown to help bolster crappie at both the Blood River Embayment no recaptures of stocked fish during populations. Some fish and wildlife of Kentucky Lake and Taylorsville the spring 2012 efforts to sample white agencies have turned to supplemental Lake. Unfortunately, with its steep crappie at Carr Creek Lake. However, stocking in an attempt to offset shorelines, Carr Creek Lake cannot be it is too soon to conclude that the consecutive years of poor crappie effectively sampled with trap nets, and stocking efforts have not contributed spawns. However, each attempt so by default, electrofishing has been to the population at all, especially seems to have been met with different used to sample its crappie population since it has already been noted that results; consequently, this project was even though this method itself can be electrofishing is not the ideal method started to evaluate the effectiveness of inefficient when it comes to collecting for sampling the smaller size classes the most recent attempts at stocking the smaller age-0 and age-1 fish that of crappie. As for the future of the white crappie in Kentucky and to have been targeted up to this point project, white crappie fingerlings will help identify any factors that could in the project. Besides the trap nets, once again be stocked at relatively high potentially increase the chances of their another method used to sample crappie rates during the fall of 2013 and all the success. at the Blood River Embayment in 2012 previously discussed sampling methods After four reservoirs were initially was bottom trawling, which in contrast will continue to be used. After a total chosen for the project, the number was to the electrofishing has proven to be of 5 year-classes of hatchery-reared reduced to three in order to focus the quite effective at collecting the younger white crappie have been stocked by efforts and allow stocking rates to be white crappie. The newest sampling the end of 2013, the efforts to sample increased. Prior to being delivered to method used during 2012 was possible crappie at all 3 project lakes will likely any lake, the white crappie fingerlings only through the assistance of local increase during the years to come. were marked so they could still be anglers who have allowed biologists identified many years after being to remove the otoliths from fish caught stocked. In the fall of 2009, the first during one of their tournaments at the Funding Source: Sport Fish official white crappie fingerlings were Blood River Embayment. This method Restoration Program (Dingell- produced and then stocked into Carr may actually turn out to be even more Johnson) Creek Lake, Taylorsville Lake and the important during the 2nd half of the Blood River Embayment of Kentucky project when further year classes of KDFWR Strategic Plan. Goal 1, Lake. This entire process was repeated stocked crappie begin to grow into the Strategic Objective 5. in 2010, 2011 and 2012 when white size range that is often targeted by the crappie fingerlings were marked and tournament anglers. transported to the same three reservoirs. During the past several years, the The most notable change came when level at which stocked white crappie a Missouri state fish hatchery began contributed to the natural population assisting with the production of often varied substantially by reservoir. the crappie fingerlings, which gave However, the preliminary results from resource managers the opportunity to fall 2012 trap net samples indicated that use stocking densities that would be stocked fish made up exactly 20% of very difficult to duplicate under normal the total combined catch of age-1 and situations. For instance, the stocking age-2 white crappie at both Taylorsville rates for the Blood River Embayment Lake and the Blood River Embayment. ranged from 12 – 20 fish/acre during However, when referring specifically the first couple years, but after the nd2 to fish that were only caught by anglers hatchery joined the project, the rates for at the Blood River Embayment, the same water body in 2011 and 2012 stocked crappie made a smaller 4.7% more than doubled to 45 – 55 fish/acre. contribution to all the age-2 fish in that Because of the different sample. Although this was less than topography of the lakes in this project, some might have expected, it is still there were a variety of different encouraging to find stocked crappie methods used in 2012 to sample making up any percentage of the the crappie populations. The most harvestable-size fish, especially since common gear used to sample crappie at this entire sample was pulled from a water bodies throughout the state is trap single tournament held during the fall

Annual Research Highlights 2012 63 PROJECT UPDATES / Warm Water Fisheries

could be used to re-establish the Evaluation of a Smallmouth Bass smallmouth bass fishery at Paintsville Lake under the conditions and habitat Stocking Program at Paintsville created by the new water release. Lake Smallmouth bass fingerlings have officially been stocked into Paintsville Lake during the late spring to early Christopher W. Hickey and Ryan lake and the trout in the tailwater may summer for 4 consecutive years (2009 Kausing, Kentucky Department have benefitted from this water release – 2012). With the exception of a much of Fish and Wildlife Resources schedule, the smallmouth bass began to smaller effort of 6.5 fish/acre during decline substantially as the critical cool the first year (2009), the target density water habitat faded from Paintsville for the stocking of smallmouth bass Lake during the summer months. fingerlings was 20 fish/acre, but since s part of the black bass family, When this was joined by multiple the main priority was to establish a Asmallmouth bass (Micropterous years of abnormally high amounts of fishery, higher rates were used based on dolomieu) are among the most popular rainfall, the increased discharge rates the maximum number of fish available. sportfish in Kentucky. Presently, popu- through the dam only compounded the Since the rates used from 2010 to 2012 lations are doing well in many of the habitat problems. After a while, the depended solely on the number of fish state’s rivers and streams, but they only smallmouth bass numbers declined being produced by the hatchery, the thrive in a handful of its reservoirs. As so much that they could no longer be actual stocking density ranged from past research has suggested, a potential found in either the anglers’ creel or a low of 17.8 fish/acre in 2010 to a reason for this is that smallmouth bass during the black bass sampling efforts. high of 43.9 fish/acre in 2011. The possess specific habitat requirements Despite its recent history, final stocking rate for smallmouth bass that are not commonly available. Aside Paintsville Lake has remained one fingerlings (27.7 fish/acre) in 2012 was from their preference for lower tro- of the few water bodies in Kentucky lower than that used in 2011 because phic levels and year-round cool water where minimal changes could biologists ended up stocking a large habitat, other characteristics (i.e. mean possibly create the type of habitat proportion of the final year’s fish as fry depth & exchange rate) have been iden- that is required for the establishment during the spring to accommodate the tified that coincide with self-sustaining a smallmouth bass fishery. Since its need to free up some of the hatchery’s smallmouth bass populations. These impoundment, the lake’s watershed resources earlier than in previous characteristics could also be used to remains undeveloped enough to years. So even though the number of predict if a waterbody might benefit maintain a lower trophic level. A new fingerlings stocked in 2012 was down, from smallmouth stocking efforts. water release schedule was developed the lake had already received over Paintsville Lake was first stocked in 2005 to offer a compromise to fish 100,000 smallmouth bass fry nearly 2 with smallmouth bass fingerlings populations already present in both the month earlier. All smallmouth bass, very soon after it was impounded in lake and tailwater, and to allow cooler with the exception of the fry stocked in 1983, and it was not long before a water to be held back. By 2005, the 2012, were marked via OTC immersion fishery developed that became popular cooler, oxygenated water (≤ 74.3 °F) prior to being released into the lake. among local anglers, even though it that smallmouth bass needed to survive This was done so that biologists could was determined that smallmouth only the summer months was returning determine that any smallmouth bass made up about 5% of all the black bass to the main lake. Even though this collected during the years that followed in the lake. Throughout the 1990’s, critical habitat might have been were those stocked for this study and the proportion of smallmouth bass unstable, especially during the longer not one of the few native fish that might in the population failed to improve; periods of heavy rainfall, KDFWR have remained from the historical eventually, the stocking program was made the decision to resume a multi- population. suspended to free up some of the year experimental stocking program Despite the fact that smallmouth state’s limited hatchery resources. for smallmouth bass to determine if bass have always been targeted during Shortly thereafter, the fish management the new water release schedule could annual black bass sampling (spring objectives for Paintsville Lake changed successfully accommodate all the and fall) at Paintsville Lake, very altogether and the dam began releasing sport fish populations for which it was few stocked smallmouth bass have cooler water in favor of conserving the originally developed. This specific been recaptured. Following a poor warmer water preferred by largemouth research project was implemented to showing in 2011, when only 3 stocked bass. Although the largemouth in the determine if this stocking program smallmouth bass where collected all

64 Kentucky Department of Fish & Wildlife Resources Warm Water Fisheries / PROJECT UPDATES

year, the black bass sampling in both the spring and fall of 2012 yielded only slightly better results when electrofishing efforts were able to bring in a total of 4 smallmouth bass that were stocked during this project. Although the efforts to locate the stocked fish will continue throughout 2013, the poor results so far have led to the decision to make the smallmouth bass stocking efforts in 2012 the last year for this program. The biggest concern is that it is possible that the critical habitat required for the smallmouth bass fishery to thrive has never really taken hold at Paintsville Lake. Although further investigation is warranted, high rainfall during the first few years of this study and continued problems with the release gates at the dam over the last couple of years have all worked against the establishment of the cooler, oxygenated water that smallmouth bass need to survive in Paintsville Lake year after year.

Funding Sources: Sport Fish Restoration Program (Dingell- Johnson)

KDFWR Strategic Plan. Goal 1, Strategic Objective 5.

Annual Research Highlights 2012 65 PROJECT UPDATES / Urban Fisheries

The Fishing in Neighborhoods (FINs) Program: Providing Fishing Opportunities to Residents in Cities across the Commonwealth

Dane Balsman and Jason McDowell, Kentucky Department of Fish and Wildlife Resources

n an effort to boost license sales Iand increase fishing opportunities, the Kentucky Department of Fish and Wildlife Resources (KDFWR) initiated the Fishing in Neighborhoods (FINs) program in 2006. The FINs program currently includes 39 lakes in 24 coun- ties. Quality fishing opportunities Young anglers fishing at a FIN’s lake / John Williams now exist in cities of all sizes across the Commonwealth thanks to partner- ships between KDFWR and local mu- sampled to ensure natural reproduction KDFWR website. nicipalities. As part of a cooperative is meeting the needs of the anglers. In Angler attitude surveys indicate agreement between KDFWR and local 2012, hybrid sunfish were produced that the FINs program is attracting governments, the lake owners provide at Pfeiffer Fish Hatchery and 17,375 families with 32% of anglers < 15 years a 25% in-kind match for services at the (5-7.5”) hybrids were stocked in old. The program is also recruiting lake to cover the cost of fish stockings. September at lakes that had poor new license buyers with 10% of anglers With the cooperative agreement, KDF- sunfish numbers or heavy fishing reporting they had never bought a WR works with the local parks depart- pressure. An additional 35,000 hybrid license and 24% reporting they had ments to arrange fish stockings, provide sunfish are expected to be ready for not bought a license the previous year. technical guidance and promote fishing stocking at FINs lakes in 2013. A Angler satisfaction was extremely high in the park lakes. standard set of creel limits is in place at the FINs lakes with 85% of anglers These lakes are conveniently at all FINs lakes to help spread out fish reporting their overall trip as “good” or located near large population centers. harvest and ensure fishing opportunities “excellent”. Attitude and creel surveys Anglers do not have to travel far from can be enjoyed by as many people continue at FINs lakes statewide. home to find good fishing. In 2012, as possible. Daily limits for each Fishing pressure continues to increase 137,500 trout and 98,650 catfish were angler fishing a FINs lake includes at these lakes and the feedback from stocked in the FINs lakes. The fish five rainbow trout, four catfish, one local parks and anglers has been very stockings provide fishing opportunities largemouth bass over 15 inches, and 15 positive. Additionally, an exploitation in lakes that in the past were overfished bluegill or other sunfish. study is currently ongoing to assess fish due to their size and fishing pressure Information kiosks have been catch and harvest rates at several FINs exceeding the resources’ capabilities. erected at nearly all of the lakes to lakes. These lakes require routine stockings disperse information to the public about of catchable-size fish to sustain quality fish stockings, license requirements, fishing opportunities to a diverse group fish identification, poacher hotline, Funding Source: Sport Fish of anglers. Lakes are stocked up to basic knot typing instructions and the Restoration Program (Dingell- four times annually with catchable- mission statement of the FINs program. Johnson) size catfish (12-18”) and three times Additionally, the program has been annually in the cool months (Oct.- intensively marketed through press KDFWR Strategic Plan. Goal Mar.) with rainbow trout (8-12”). Bass releases, social media, radio, television, 2, Strategic Objective 3, Goal 4. and sunfish populations are routinely license vendors, boat shows and the Strategic Objective 1.

66 Kentucky Department of Fish & Wildlife Resources Urban Fisheries / PROJECT UPDATES

Use of Flathead Catfish to Reduce Stunted Fish Populations in a Small Kentucky Impoundment

Dane Balsman and Jason Lake ranging in size from 3.8 to 38.2 been two strong spawning years McDowell, Kentucky inches. Flathead catfish were obtained in 2010 and 2011 and catch rates from Georgia Department of Natural observed in 2012 for bass were the Department of Fish and Wildlife Resources as part of their non-native second highest observed in 16 years Resources flathead catfish eradication program. of sampling. However, sunfish size All flathead catfish were fin-clipped structure has continued to decline, .J. Jolly Lake, a 175 acre im- prior to stocking to differentiate from while the catch rate for bluegill Apoundment located in Campbell native flatheads in subsequent sampling continues to increase, with fish in County, Kentucky has historically attempts. In addition to the Georgia the 2 – 4 inch range dominating the contained a sub-par sport fishery for flathead catfish, Pfeiffer Fish Hatchery population. Very few bluegill reach 6 sunfish and largemouth bass. The Ken- raised 2,862 flathead catfish averaging inches. Bluegill analyzed for ageing tucky Department of Fish and Wildlife 5.1 inches that were stocked on 2 revealed slow growth. Sampling Resources (KDFWR) has tried several September 2011. The hypothesis of the for flathead catfish has yielded low alternative management actions in an project was that the stocking of a top- numbers of fish. Sampling has been attempt to improve growth of sunfish level predator would reduce densities conducted at various times of the and largemouth bass. Management of abundant sunfish. Ultimately, this year, and with different DC pulse actions have included stocking interme- should help improve size structure and electrofishing settings with little luck. diate-sized largemouth bass to improve growth rates of sunfish and possibly Little information exists on effective recruitment of largemouth bass and other sport fish species including ways to sample for flathead catfish in stocking of blue catfish to consume largemouth bass and channel catfish. small impoundments. In 2012, 123 overabundant sunfish. Unfortunately, A regulation was passed in 2009 flathead catfish were sampled; however, these management actions have proven that prohibited the harvest of flathead 99 of the fish were < 7 inches (likely unsuccessful for improving the sunfish catfish from A.J. Jolly Lake. This from the 2,862 flatheads stocked from population. regulation was critical to ensure Pfeiffer Hatchery in 2011). Twelve of In June 2007, the KDFWR stocked that the stocked flathead catfish the 24 flatheads captured> 8 in were 417 flathead catfish that ranged in would remain in the lake to have the fish from the Georgia stockings, while length from 8.4 to 36.0 inches. In hypothetical desired effect. Sunfish the other 12 were native fish. There September 2009, an additional 308 and bass electrofishing are conducted were more flathead catfish sampled in flathead catfish were stocked. Fish each spring and fall to determine 2012 (123), than in 2011 (49), 2010 ranged in size from 3.0 to 32.3 abundance, size structure, age, growth (31), or 2009 (17). However, sampling inches. In June 2011, 403 flathead and condition. Bass catch rates and numbers remained low for the year catfish were stocked into A.J. Jolly size structure have improved over and the true population size of flathead the last several years. There have catfish is still unknown. KDFWR will continue to sample flathead catfish, largemouth bass, sunfish, and channel catfish, to determine if flathead catfish can improve sportfish populations at A.J. Jolly Lake.

Funding Source: Sport Fish Restoration Program (Dingell- Johnson)

KDFWR Strategic Plan. Goal 1, Flathead catfish sampled from Kentucky impoundment / Dane Balsman Objective 5.

Annual Research Highlights 2012 67 PROJECT UPDATES / Urban Fisheries

tagged with yellow carlin- dangler tags. The tags were attached to the fish using stainless steel wire threaded through the fish below and anterior to the dorsal spine. In total, 299 – 600 channel catfish were tagged in March, April and May at each of the three lakes. Exploitation rates were corrected for Tagged channel catfish awaiting release / Dane Balsman non-reporting, tag loss and tagging mortality Corrected Exploitation Rates of Stocked harvest rates ranged from 32 – 49%, while corrected catch rates ranged Channel Catfish and Rainbow from 69 – 85% at the three lakes. The average number of days the tagged fish Trout in Fishing in Neighborhoods were at large before being caught was 12 – 19 days with a median of 3 – 7 (FINs) Lakes days at the three lakes. From the exploitation study we Dane Balsman and Jason study ranged in size from 8.0 – 11.9 conclude the catfish are caught quickly McDowell, Kentucky inches and averaged 0.36 pounds. Fish after stocking, but less than one half of were tagged with yellow Floy FD-94 catfish are initially harvested. Trout are Department of Fish and Wildlife not caught as quickly as catfish likely Resources anchor t-bar tags below the dorsal fin. A total of 640 – 688 tagged trout due to fewer anglers fishing during the were stocked in each of the three lakes cool weather months. Exploitation in November, February and March. rates for trout were highly variable Exploitation rates were corrected for between lakes. When we view the creel he Fishing in Neighborhoods non-reporting, tag loss and tagging surveys, the estimated catch for catfish T(FINs) program provides fish- mortality with a 28%, 46% and 78% far exceeds the number of stocked fish, ing opportunities to cities of all sizes corrected harvest rate respectively. The while the number of harvested fish across the Commonwealth. These corrected catch rates were 88%, 86% mirrors the number of stocked fish. It lakes require routine stockings of and 82% at the three lakes respectively. appears the catfish are caught multiple catchable-size fish to maintain quality While harvest rates varied significantly times before ultimately being harvested fishing opportunities to a diverse group between the three lakes, the corrected by anglers. The exploitation study fails of anglers. An exploitation study was catch rates were quite similar among to capture the estimated higher harvest conducted at three FINs lakes from late all lakes. The average number of days rate due to the tag being removed the 2010 to 2012. Jacobson Park Lake (7 the trout were at large before being first time the fish is hooked and likely acres) in Fayette County currently has caught ranged from 23 – 40 days with a being harvested on subsequent catches. an ongoing exploitation study. These median of 16 – 23 days. The creel survey data for trout also exploitation studies in conjunction with A channel catfish exploitation estimates the catch to be larger than creel and attitude surveys are necessary study was also conducted at the three the number of stocked fish indicating for assessing angler use of the fishery above-mentioned lakes from March stocked trout are likely caught multiple and fine tuning stocking rates. – October. The dates of the study times by anglers. An angler exploitation study coincide with the date of the first of rainbow trout was conducted at stocking of the spring through the end Upper Sportsman’s Lake in Franklin of the anticipated fall fishing season. Funding Source: Sport Fish County (6.2 acres), Middleton Mills Only one catfish tag was returned after Restoration Program (Dingell- Shelterhouse Pond in Kenton County 31 October. Tagged channel catfish Johnson) (1.2 acres) and Stein Community Park ranged in size from 10.0 – 22.0 inches Lake in Campbell County (7 acres). and averaged 0.98 pounds. Fish were KDFWR Strategic Plan. Goal 1, Tagged rainbow trout released for the Strategic Objective 5.

68 Kentucky Department of Fish & Wildlife Resources Cold Water Fisheries / PROJECT UPDATES

Investigation of the Restoration of Native Walleye in the Upper Levisa Fork

Dave Dreves and Paul Wilkes, ment or were ultimately confined to Walleye are spawned and the resulting Kentucky Department of Fish lake systems (e.g. Lake Cumberland). fry are reared to fingerling size (1.5 in.) Since there are no known recent reports and Wildlife Resources in ponds, then stocked in the Levisa of walleye from the Levisa Fork or Fork in late May or early June. We are Fishtrap Lake, it is suspected that the using a stocking rate of a minimum of “northern” strain fry stockings in 1915 20 fingerlings/acre (240 fingerlings/ alleye is a freshwater fish native were not successful and the native pop- mile), and we plan to continue these Wto most of the major watersheds ulation in the river had been lost. efforts through at least 2015. In in Kentucky, including the Levisa Fork Although portions of the Levisa conjunction with stocking, we assess watershed located in extreme eastern Fork are impounded by Fishtrap 24-hour stocking mortality using mesh- Kentucky. By the late-1800’s, growing Lake, there are approximately 15 lined barrels secured in the river. To concern for declining fisheries prompt- miles of unimpounded mainstem of monitor and assess stocking success, ed the stocking of Kentucky rivers and the Levisa Fork between the lake and we sample walleye in the spring at lakes by the U.S. Fish Commission and the Virginia state line and at least that multiple sites using boat-mounted the Kentucky Game and Fish Commis- many more miles beyond. The broad pulsed DC electrofishing gear, and a sion. In 1912 and from 1914-1917, goal of this project is to re-establish a sample of walleye are collected such these two agencies stocked walleye fry reproducing native “southern” strain that weight and length measurements in various rivers and streams through- walleye population to this section and sex ratios can be recorded. All out Kentucky, including the Levisa of the Levisa Fork. An established stocked fingerlings are marked with Fork in 1915. Unfortunately, it was population of native walleye in the oxytetracycline (OTC) to determine not yet known that the Lake Erie strain Levisa Fork will serve as a source of recruitment of stocked fish. Limited walleye used in the stocking efforts are broodstock for potential native walleye sampling took place in 2011 and 2012 adapted to lentic (lake) environments, restorations in other Kentucky river due to the inability to navigate the unlike the native Kentucky walleye systems and will create a walleye sport river at anything but elevated flows which are adapted to lotic (river) envi- fishery in the upper Levisa Fork. In with good water clarity. Only a single ronments. Biologists later realized that order to accomplish these restoration walleye has been collected to date, these northern walleye are genetically goals, beginning in 2010, native strain however we have received multiple distinct from native Kentucky walleye; walleye were collected from Wood anecdotal reports of anglers catching as a result, it is believed that the major- Creek Lake and the Rockcastle River walleye. Beginning in 2016, small ity of these stocked northern walleye in the spring and transported to Minor walleye may be sacrificed and otoliths could not survive in the river environ- Clark Hatchery to be used as broodfish. removed for examination for OTC marks. We also plan to implant PIT tags in captured walleye to follow movement and growth rates. Walleye sampling in the Levisa Fork is slated to continue through 2020 to allow for the reproductive potential of the stocked walleye population to reach a point where natural recruitment is possible and detectable.

Funding Source: Sport Fish Restoration Program (Dingell- Johnson)

KDFWR Strategic Plan. Goal 1, Strategic Objective 5. Native walleye from the Upper Levisa Fork / Dave Dreves

Annual Research Highlights 2012 69 PROJECT UPDATES / Cold Water Fisheries

in the Rockcastle River and what, if Investigation of the Walleye any temporal and spatial differences exist between the native strain and the Population in the Rockcastle River Lake Erie strain; and 2) to evaluate the and Evaluation of Supplemental contribution of stocked native strain walleye to the existing population. Stocking of Native Strain Walleye We collect native strain walleye from the Rockcastle River each spring and transport them to Minor Clark Fish Hatchery to be used as broodfish. These walleye are spawned and resulting fish are reared to fingerling size (1.5 in). Fingerling walleye were marked with oxytetracycline (OTC) prior to stocking. Target stocking rates were a minimum of 20 fingerling/acre (270 fingerlings/mile) for 6 years. We conduct electrofishing surveys during various seasons and locations throughout the 54 miles of the mainstem Rockcastle River to monitor the walleye population. Captured walleye are measured, weighed, tagged, Native walleye from the Upper Barren River / John Williams released, and fin clips are taken for genetic analysis. Small individuals were sacrificed and otoliths removed Dave Dreves and Paul Wilkes, in the river. These broodfish were not for later examination for OTC marks. Kentucky Department of Fish from rivers in Kentucky, but were fish To date, all walleye captured in the and Wildlife Resources from Lake Erie origins. The Erie strain free-flowing section of the Rockcastle walleye evolved in a lentic (lake) en- River were found to be genetically pure vironment, thus they generally do not native walleye. The overwhelming make large spawning migrations up majority of walleye examined were rior to impoundment in 1952, the rivers in the spring, but rather spawn stocked fish, indicating no natural PCumberland River was known within the lake or reservoir. Before ad- recruitment of native walleye from for tremendous spring runs of walleye vances in genetics, it was erroneously 2002 to 2007. After 6 consecutive (Sander vitreum) that provided a very assumed that all walleye were the same years of stocking, native walleye popular regional fishery. This fishery and these stocked walleye would per- stocking was discontinued to determine included the Rockcastle River, a tribu- form well in lotic environments. It is the effect of stocking on the production tary to the Cumberland River which now believed that the majority of these of natural year-classes. A small amount enters at what is now the headwaters walleye, because of their lentic origins, of natural recruitment was observed in of Lake Cumberland. Walleye spawn- made their way back down into the spring 2012 walleye sampling. This ing runs at Lake Cumberland rapidly lake and remained within the reservoir. was the first time natural recruitment declined in the late 1950’s and early Fortunately, no Erie strain walleye were had been observed since stocking was 1960’s due to a variety of factors in- ever stocked by the KDFWR above the discontinued. This research study will cluding: 1) lack of spawning sites due inundated portion of the Rockcastle conclude in 2014. to the inundation of rock shoals by River. Consequently, Kentucky’s the impoundment; 2) over-harvest of unique strain of walleye still exists in adults during spawning runs; and 3) the Rockcastle River, while Lake Cum- Funding Source: Sport Fish acid mine pollution of spawning areas. berland continues to support the Erie Restoration Program (Dingell- The KDFWR first stocked walleye in strain. Johnson) the Cumberland River, above Lake There are two main goals of this Cumberland, in 1973 in attempts to study: 1) to assess the genetic origin KDFWR Strategic Plan. Goal 1, improve the declining walleye fishery of the existing walleye population Strategic Objective 5.

70 Kentucky Department of Fish & Wildlife Resources Cold Water Fisheries / PROJECT UPDATES

Evaluation of a 36-inch Minimum Length Limit on Muskellunge at Three Kentucky Reservoirs

Dave Dreves and Paul Wilkes, enhance the quality of the muskellunge All individuals of each cohort of Kentucky Department of Fish fishery, the KDFWR increased the stocked muskellunge were permanently and Wildlife Resources minimum length limit for muskellunge marked with a fin clip prior to stocking in Cave Run and Green River lakes in the fall. Population sampling was from 30 to 36 inches in spring 2010. conducted with boat-mounted pulsed The minimum size limit was also set at DC electrofishing gear from mid- he muskellunge (Esox masqui- 36 inches at Buckhorn Lake, which had February through the end of March nongy) is an ecologically and eco- T been changed to a 40-inch size limit in at all three reservoirs. Electrofishing nomically important sport fish in many 2003. The daily bag limit at all lakes catch per unit effort data (CPUE) temperate fresh water ecosystems of was maintained at one fish per day. collected in the spring of each year North America. The species is native The expected result of this regulation is being used to index age-1 year- to many of the river drainages of Ken- change is to increase the abundance class strength, the relative frequency tucky, including the Green, Kentucky of muskellunge below 36 inches and of various length groups of interest and Licking River drainages and histor- to increase the average length of all and mortality calculations. In the ically provided very popular fisheries. muskellunge in the populations at Cave future, length at age, relative weight During the 1960’s and 1970’s, the U. S. Run and Green River lakes. However, and length-weight equations will be Army Corps of Engineers constructed due to the paucity of information calculated and analyzed for changes dams impounding these rivers, creating pertaining to stocking efforts and the in growth and condition. Creel Buckhorn Lake (1,230 acres) on the aforementioned regulation changes, it is surveys and angler attitude surveys Middle Fork of the Kentucky River, unknown whether these effects will be will be conducted at each study lake. Green River Lake (8,210) on the Green realized with this management strategy, Muskellunge will also be tagged to River and Cave Run Lake (8,270) as well as how these population estimate angler exploitation. Statistical on the Licking River. The Kentucky changes may affect the entire fish comparisons of CPUE of size groups Department of Fish and Wildlife Re- community. A thorough evaluation for pre-regulation and post-regulation sources maintains a muskellunge fish- of this management strategy will add change will be made. We will also ery in these reservoirs through annual to the existing knowledge base in the compare the changes in CPUE of size stockings of 0.33 fish/acre. Each of field and allow the KDFWR to most groups within and among the three these reservoirs now supports excellent effectively manage the muskellunge study lakes. All existing muskellunge sport fisheries for muskellunge with ex- fishery and fish community in these data on each of the study lakes will be ceptional growth potential. A demand reservoirs. compiled, including CPUE, creel and for increased quality of angler attitude data. muskellunge fisheries by anglers precipi- tated recent fisheries Funding Source: management strategies Sport Fish Restoration directed towards estab- Program (Dingell- lishing trophy fisher- Johnson) ies through the use of regulations such as KDFWR Strategic minimum size and bag Plan. Goal 1, limits. These regula- Strategic Objective 5. tions are designed to equitably distribute the catch and protect cer- tain size classes of fish in order to develop the trophy fishery. In an effort to A couple of Kentucky muskellunge / Chad Nickell

Annual Research Highlights 2012 71 PROJECT UPDATES / Cold Water Fisheries

and survival, and if the wild strain fish are less susceptible to angling. The survival, growth, and contribution to the population of the two rainbow trout strains are being monitoring by conducting electrofishing surveys for fish previously marked with fin clips. Changes in the size and structure of the rainbow trout population as a result of the change in size and creel limit are being evaluated by relative abundance estimates from fall nocturnal electrofishing surveys. Periodically during the project, we clipped the adipose fin of a cohort of fish and then determined monthly A healthy rainbow from the Cumberland River/ Dave Dreves growth rates of rainbow trout during their first growing season by collecting those fish during monthly electrofishing. We Evaluation of a 15-20 Inch also conducted a creel survey in 2006 and 2009 to assess changes in angler Protective Slot Limit and 5 Fish catch rates, harvest rates, and pressure Creel Limit on Rainbow Trout in in comparison to the 2002 creel survey. Results from the strain analysis the Lake Cumberland Tailwater revealed that the domestic Arlee strain rainbow trout grew more slowly and suffered higher mortality than the Dave Dreves and Paul Wilkes, rainbow trout to prevent overharvest McConaughy strain. Creel survey Kentucky Department of Fish and increase quality, yet still allow for a results indicated that the Arlee strain and Wildlife Resources put-and-take fishery. was harvested at a much higher rate. The primary goal of this project is The Wolf Creek Dam rehabilitation to evaluate the effectiveness of these has resulted in poor water quality more restrictive regulations on rainbow conditions in the Lake Cumberland ver the last decade, the Kentucky trout in Kentucky’s most valuable tailwater since 2007. These conditions ODepartment of Fish and Wildlife trout fishery. Additionally, Wolf Creek have limited the rainbow trout Resources (KDFWR) have attempted National Fish Hatchery annually stocks population response to this new to optimize stocking practices in the a minimum of 5 strains of rainbow regulation; consequently, this research Lake Cumberland tailwater to increase trout, and long-term performance of study ended in 2012 and data analysis the quality of the put-and-take rainbow these various strains in the Cumberland will be completed in 2013. trout fishery. The KDFWR commission tailwater is unknown. As part of passed new regulations for rainbow the special regulation evaluation, trout that were implemented in 2004. we differentially batch marked and Funding Source: Sport Fish These regulations were a 15-20 inch stocked two rainbow trout strains in Restoration Program (Dingell- protective slot limit with a creel limit the tailwater (one domesticated strain Johnson) of 5 trout per day (only one of which and a relatively wild strain). The may be over 20 inches). These regula- goals of the strain evaluation were to KDFWR Strategic Plan. Goal 1, tions are expected to protect enough determine if there is differential growth Strategic Objective 5.

72 Kentucky Department of Fish & Wildlife Resources Cold Water Fisheries / PROJECT UPDATES

Kentucky river systems and will create Investigation of the Restoration a walleye sport fishery in the upper Barren River. In order to accomplish of Native Walleye in the Upper these restoration goals, beginning Barren River in 2007, native strain walleye were collected from Wood Creek Lake and the Rockcastle River in the spring and Dave Dreves and Paul Wilkes, as a result, it is believed that the major- transported to Minor Clark Hatchery ity of these stocked northern walleye Kentucky Department of Fish to be used as broodfish. Walleye are could not survive in the river environ- spawned and the resulting fry are reared and Wildlife Resources ment or were ultimately confined to to fingerling size (1.5 in.) in ponds, lake systems (e.g. Lake Cumberland). and then stocked in the Barren River in Another walleye stocking attempt (4.15 late May or early June. We are using million walleye fry) in the Barren River a stocking rate of a minimum of 20 alleye is a freshwater fish native occurred in 1966, in response to low fingerlings/acre (240 fingerlings/mile), Wto most of the major watersheds population numbers, shortly after the and we plan to continue these efforts in Kentucky, including the Barren river was impounded in 1964. Since through at least 2013. In conjunction River watershed located in southwest- there are no recent reports of walleye with stocking, we assess 24-hour ern Kentucky. By the late-1800’s, from the Barren River or Barren River stocking mortality using mesh-lined growing concern for declining fisheries Lake, it is suspected that the “northern” barrels secured in the river. To monitor prompted the stocking of Kentucky riv- strain fry stockings in 1917 and 1966 and assess stocking success, we sample ers and lakes by the U.S. Fish Commis- were not successful and the native pop- walleye in the spring at multiple sion and the Kentucky Game and Fish ulation in the river has been lost. sites using pulsed DC electrofishing Commission. In 1912 and from 1914- Although portions of the gear, and a sample of walleye are 1917, these two agencies stocked wall- Barren River are impounded, collected such that weight and length eye fry in various rivers and streams there are approximately 31 miles measurements and sex ratios can be throughout Kentucky, including the of unimpounded mainstem of the recorded. We have been successfully Barren River. Unfortunately, it was Barren River above Barren River sampling walleye in the Barren River not yet known that the Lake Erie strain Lake. The broad goal of this project for several years now and fish have walleye used in the stocking efforts are is to re-establish a reproducing native been observed in excess of five pounds. adapted to lentic (lake) environments, “southern” strain walleye population In 2008, we began marking stocked unlike the native Kentucky walleye to this section of the Barren River. fingerlings with oxytetracycline which are adapted to lotic (river) envi- An established population of native (OTC) to determine recruitment of ronments. Biologists later realized that walleye in the Barren River will serve stocked fish. Beginning in 2013, small these northern walleye are genetically as a source of broodstock for potential walleye may be sacrificed and otoliths distinct from native Kentucky walleye; native walleye restorations in other removed for examination for OTC marks. We also have implanted PIT tags in captured walleye to determine movement and growth rates. Walleye sampling in the Barren River is slated to continue through 2016 to allow for the reproductive potential of the stocked walleye population to reach a point where natural recruitment is possible and detectable.

Funding Source: Sport Fish Restoration Program (Dingell- Johnson)

KDFWR Strategic Plan. Goal 1, Barren River native walleye / Dave Dreves Strategic Objective 5.

Annual Research Highlights 2012 73 PROJECT UPDATES / Cold Water Fisheries

Relative Survival, Growth and Susceptibility to Angling of Two Strains of Brown Trout in the Lake Cumberland Tailwater

Dave Dreves and Paul Wilkes, Kentucky Department of Fish and Wildlife Resources

rout (Oncorhyncus spp. and Salmo Tspp.) sport fisheries in Kentucky’s reservoir tailwaters are unique and important resources. These fisheries were created in reservoir tailwaters having coldwater discharges for either the entire year or a portion of the year. The Lake Cumberland tailwater trout fishery is the largest in Kentucky with more than 75 miles of suitable habitat available throughout the entire year. The Lake Cumberland tailwater receives the largest stocking in the state An impressive brown trout from the Cumberland River / Lee McClellan allocation of trout with approximately 161,000 rainbow (O. mykiss) and In 2007, a comparison was lower survival of brown trout has made 38,000 brown (S. trutta) trout stocked conducted between the Plymouth it challenging to catch enough of the per year. Growth and survival of Rock (PR) and Sheep Creek (SC) marked fish to make comparisons. stocked trout in the Cumberland River strains of brown trout stocked in the The dam rehabilitation appears are sufficient to create a high quality Lake Cumberland tailwater. Like in a to have been completed and Lake trout fishery with opportunities to catch previous rainbow trout strain analysis, Cumberland water levels are expected trophy-size fish. Since the brown trout the comparison is between a more to be partially raised to normal in fishery in the Lake Cumberland tail- “domesticated” hatchery strain (PR) spring 2013 and anticipated to be fully water is managed as a trophy fishery, it and another being a relatively “wild” raised in spring 2014. It may take a is imperative that stocked brown trout strain (SC). Preliminary results from year or two for conditions to return grow rapidly and reach trophy size in this study showed that growth was to normal in the Lake Cumberland as short a time period as possible. Over similar between the two strains but the tailwater, after which another cohort the last 15 years, the Kentucky Depart- SC strain was much more abundant of the two brown trout strains will ment of Fish and Wildlife Resources after one growing season than the be compared. Information gained (KDFWR) has used regulations and PR strain. This same comparison from this study will help to enhance stocking practices to enhance the trout was made again in 2009. This cohort the management of the trophy brown fishery in the Lake Cumberland tail- of the two strains performed more trout fishery in the Lake Cumberland water. One further way to optimize evenly. However, the Wolf Creek tailwater. stocking includes determining the most Dam rehabilitation has resulted in suitable strain of trout for the physical poor water quality conditions in the Funding Source: Sport Fish conditions and management goals of a Lake Cumberland tailwater since 2007 Restoration Program (Dingell- particular fishery. Characteristics such and has affected the comparison. The Johnson) as movement, mortality, growth and rehabilitation has also affected the susceptibility to angling are of particu- susceptibility to angling component of KDFWR Strategic Plan. Goal 1, lar importance. the research as poor water quality and Strategic Objective 5.

74 Kentucky Department of Fish & Wildlife Resources River and Stream Sport Fisheries / PROJECT UPDATES

River Sport Fishery Survey – Kentucky River

Jason Herrala, David Baker, the potential of establishing a self- were observed. Data collected by the and Nick Keeton, Kentucky sustaining sauger recreational fishery Department indicates that the sauger through supplemental stocking in select fishery in the Kentucky River is not Department of Fish and Wildlife pools of the upper Kentucky River. In self-sustaining, and that supplemental Resources the summer of 2011, the Department stocking will likely not create a self- suspended stocking sauger so that we sustaining fishery. A brief creel survey could evaluate whether the sauger done on the Kentucky River in 2012 population can be self-sustaining indicated that when river conditions he Kentucky Department of Fish through recruitment of naturally allowed for safe fishing, the majority Tand Wildlife Resources (KDFWR) reproduced fish. of anglers knew that the Department has stocked sauger and walleye in the Spring nocturnal electrofishing stocked sauger into the river and many Kentucky River since 1981. Between surveys were conducted in 2012 in the of the anglers were targeting them. 1981 and 1985, the Department stocked tailwaters of Lock and Dams 5, 10, 11, With that in mind, a put-grow-take over 2,000,000 sauger in the upper and 12. A total of 51 sauger, 41 white fishery may be the most viable option pools of the river. Walleye stocking bass, and 2 hybrid striped bass were for future sauger management on the began in 1989 with walleye fry and collected in 4.5 hr of electrofishing. Kentucky River. fingerlings being stocked in the upper Sauger catch rates were lower than in reaches of the Kentucky River. Howev- 2011, and have continuously declined er, neither stocking (sauger or walleye) since stocking ceased. Spring sauger Funding Source: Sport Fish was evaluated. As a result, the Depart- catch rates varied from 1.0 fish/hr at Restoration Program (Dingell- ment implemented a Sander study Lock and Dam 11 to 24.0 fish/hr at Johnson) along the entire reach of the Kentucky Lock and Dam 10 (mean=11.3 fish/hr). River in the winter/spring of 2002- Fall sampling also occurred to monitor KDFWR Strategic Pan: Goal 2, 2003. From this evaluation, it became catch rates of age-0 sauger. Only 17 Strategic Objective 3. evident that the walleye stockings were sauger were collected, and no age-0 fish not successful, with little reproduction hav- ing been documented. Because sauger are better adapted to the conditions present in the Kentucky River, it was decided that wall- eye stockings would cease and sauger fingerling stockings would begin again in Pools 4 through 14. In 2006, the KDFWR began stocking sauger fingerlings into the Kentucky River along with a full evaluation of the Sander populations in the mid and upper river sections. The goal of this study was to evaluate Kentucky River sauger / Nick Keeton

Annual Research Highlights 2012 75 PROJECT UPDATES / River and Stream Sport Fisheries

River Sport Fishery Survey – Ohio River

Jason Herrala, David Baker, to catch and release large catfish and Pool 52 of the Ohio River. Seventy-six and Nick Keeton, Kentucky commercial fishers that desire to catch total trotlines were fished throughout Department of Fish and Wildlife and sell large catfish to pay lakes. Of those three pools: 29 in Meldahl Pool, Resources particular interest is data obtained from 18 in Cannelton Pool, and 29 in Pool trophy catfish (blue and flathead catfish 52. Catch rates for blue catfish varied ≥35.0 in and channel catfish ≥28.0 in). and increased the further downriver Due to the increased interest in that sampling occurred. CPUE of blue ommercial fishing for catfish in catfish, the Kentucky Department of catfish in Cannelton Pool (3.7 fish/line) Cthe Ohio River has existed for de- Fish and Wildlife Resources began and Pool 52 (3.9 fish/line) fell near cades. Originally, commercial anglers looking at basic population parameters the historical average trotline catch; caught catfish for the flesh market, of the three major catfish species however, CPUE in Meldahl Pool (1.4 however in recent years much inter- (blue, channel, and flathead) from the fish/line) was well below that mark. est has developed in harvesting catfish Ohio River beginning in 2004. The Blue catfish lengths ranged from 10.1- and selling them to pay lakes. Pay study was initiated to obtain baseline 44.1 in. with a mean length of 24.2 lake owners increase angler interest information on length frequency, in. Channel catfish CPUE was above by stocking trophy size catfish in their weight, and age profiles of these three average in the Meldahl and Cannelton lakes. Many of these fish are believed species and determine methods to most pools (2.2 fish/line and 2.3 fish/line, to come from the Ohio River. At the efficiently catch each of these species. respectively), but was much lower same time, a high quality, primarily During spring 2012, trotlines (250 in Pool 52 (0.4 fish/line). Lengths catch and release trophy-size catfish feet each with 50 hooks) baited with of channel catfish ranged from 13.0- fishery has developed for sport anglers cut gizzard shad were used to sample 30.1 in. with a mean length of 20.0 in. in the Ohio River. This has led to con- blue, channel, and flathead catfish in Only three flathead catfish (<.01 fish/ flicts between sport anglers that desire Meldahl Pool, Cannelton Pool, and line) were caught with lengths ranging from 18.4-30.0 in. Trophy catfish (blue and flathead catfish ≥35.0 in. and channel catfish ≥28.0 in.) accounted for 3.8% of the total catfish catch. Otoliths were taken from blue and channel catfish to assess mean lengths at age for each species. On average, it took blue and channel catfish at least 16 years to grow to trophy size (≥35 in and ≥28 in, respectively).

Funding Source: Sport Fish Restoration Program (Dingell-Johnson)

KDFWR Strategic Pan: Goal 2, Strategic Objective 3.

Trotlining for big blues on the Ohio River / Doug Henley

76 Kentucky Department of Fish & Wildlife Resources River and Stream Sport Fisheries / PROJECT UPDATES

5.7 hrs of nocturnal electrofishing Ohio River Supplemental Stocking of the Markland Pool in April 2012. Catch rates of largemouth bass ranged Survey-Markland Pool from 40.2 fish/hr to 149.0 fish/hr (mean CPUE=88.2). Mean largemouth Jason Herrala, David bass CPUE was much higher than in previous years, 28.4 fish/ Baker, and Nick Keeton, hr in 2010 and 19.2 fish/hr in Kentucky Department 2011. of Fish and Wildlife A total of 673 largemouth Resources bass were collected during 5.6 hrs of nocturnal electrofishing in 6 embayments of the Markland Pool in September 2012. CPUE of largemouth ngler concerns over bass ranged from 66.7 fish/hr Athe decline in large- in Craigs Creek to 191.2 fish/ mouth bass in the Ohio hr in Gunpowder Creek (mean River became apparent to CPUE=116.4 fish/hr) and 0.0 the Kentucky Department of fish/hr in Steeles Creek to 21.6 Fish and Wildlife in 1997. Supplemental stocking the Ohio / Doug Henley fish/hr in Craigs Creek for Because of this concern, spotted bass (mean CPUE=7.8 research was initiated to document the selected embayments. Fingerlings fish/hr). Mean CPUE of largemouth structure of largemouth bass popula- were marked with oxytetracylcine bass followed the trend set by spring tions throughout the Ohio River, verify (OTC) in transit to each embayment, results, being the highest catch rate if largemouth bass are declining in the so that we could determine the ever recorded for the Markland Pool river and if so, identify the causes for contribution of stocked fish from and was nearly more than double any these declines. Recent research deter- age-0 to adulthood, compare growth previous years. Stocked fish were mined that largemouth bass year-class between stocked and wild fish, and collected in all embayments in fall production in the Ohio River may be determine the contribution of stocked 2012 except for Steeles Creek. Overall negatively impacted by an extended fish to year-class strength. Preliminary catch rates for age-0 largemouth bass flood pulse and increased sedimenta- results from this study showed that increased in all embayments sampled. tion. In turn, poor year-class production stocked fish composed 38% to 79% of Those embayments with the 50 fish/ results in the largemouth bass fishery the age-0 fish and that this contribution acre stocking rate (Craigs, Big Bone) in the river being less than optimal. to year-class strength appears to be showed no true pattern; overall age-0 Supplemental stocking has been shown adding to the fishery. To further largemouth bass catch rates remained to benefit largemouth bass population investigate the success of stocking the near 2011 levels in Craigs Creek, while levels in some large riverine systems, Ohio River embayments, in 2011 the Big Bone Creek increased from 26.5 but could supplemental stocking of stocking rates for study embayment fish/hr in 2011 to 66.0 fish/hr in 2012. largemouth bass in the Ohio River be a were varied (0 fish/acre, 50 fish/acre, Stocked fish comprised 38.1% of the viable technique used to increase year- and 100 fish/acre). This should allow age-0 largemouth bass sampled in the class strength and ultimately improve us to determine if a reduced stocking fall of 2012, which was nearly identical the bass fishery in the river? As a pilot rate will result in similar contributions to 2011 (38.6%), despite the reduced project, the Kentucky Department of to year class strength and the fishery number of overall largemouth bass Fish and Wildlife Resources began as well as the potential for movement stocked (reduction of around 20,000 stocking largemouth bass fingerlings out of stocked embayments. A total of fish) due to the changes in the study. produced at Kentucky’s fish hatcheries 139,879 fingerling (mean length=1.5 into embayments of the Markland Pool in) were stocked into these 13 Funding Source: Sport Fish in June of 2007 and continued stocking embayments. Restoration Program (Dingell- through June of 2012. Spring nocturnal electrofishing Johnson) For the duration of the initial was used to sample black bass stocking project, the goal stocking in 6 embayments. A total of 510 KDFWR Strategic Pan: Goal 2, rate was 100 fish/acre in each of the largemouth bass were collected during Strategic Objective 3.

Annual Research Highlights 2012 77 PROJECT UPDATES / River and Stream Sport Fisheries

Ohio River Supplemental Stocking conducted in each embayment in spring 2012 for a total of 33 transects (5.5 Survey-Meldahl Pool hr total sample time). Catch rates of black bass in 2012 were up from 2011 as a total of 133 largemouth bass and 44 spotted bass were collected. Mean CPUE of largemouth bass was 23.7 fish/hr and ranged from 0.0 fish/hr in Lees Creek to 42.2 fish/hr in Big Turtle Creek. Two stocked age-2 largemouth bass were captured; however, the oldest stocked fish in the Meldahl Pool were only age-1 (2011 year class) indicating that those 2 fish were stocked in 2010 in the Markland Pool and expanded upriver. A total of 133 largemouth bass were observed in 5.5 hr of nocturnal electrofishing in fall 2012. Catch rates ranged from 43.1 fish/hr in Big Snag Creek to 84.3 fish/hr in Big Turtle Creek, while the mean CPUE across all embayments for largemouth bass was Fishermen volunteered to help stock Meldahl Pool of the Ohio River / Doug Henley 66.4 fish/hr. Catch rates for stocked largemouth bass fingerlings in fall 2012 Jason Herrala, David Baker, limited spawning habitat. ranged between 14.6 fish/hr in the and Nick Keeton, Kentucky The Department implemented a Bracken Creek (stocking rate 100 fish/ spawning habitat manipulation study acre) and 45.5 fish/hr in Lees Creek Department of Fish and Wildlife (stocking rate 100 fish/acre). Mean Resources in 2003 through 2010 to determine if largemouth bass spawning could be CPUE of stocked age-0 largemouth enhanced through the introduction bass decreased slightly from 26.2 fish/ of supplemental spawning structures hr in 2011 to 23.1 fish/hr in 2012. Of eetings with Ohio River black and cover. While, black bass were interest is Big Turtle Creek embayment. Mbass fishermen in 1997 informed observed utilizing both structures, It was stocked with the highest rate the Department that problems existed the effort needed to significantly (200 fish/acre), yet it had the lowest with black bass population structure in influence black bass reproduction on a catch rate of stocked age-0 fish in 2011 the Meldahl Pool. Efforts were initi- pool wide basis through these means and the second lowest in 2012. As was ated to sample various embayments appeared immense. Based on the bass the case in 2011, all embayments in and main river sites in this pool and stocking study conducted in Markland 2012 except for Bracken and Big Turtle determine the factors influencing these Pool, it seems that stocking may be a Creek had a higher percentage of age- populations. The Department has sam- more viable option to increase year- 0 largemouth bass being stocked fish, pled Meldahl Pool since 1997; however class strength and ultimately enhance with stocked fish composing 63.9% of it began sampling using Ohio River the largemouth bass fishery. A total all age-0 fish collected in the Meldahl Fish Management Team sampling pro- of 33,447 largemouth fingerlings Pool. tocol during the fall of 2001. This pre- averaging 1.5 in were stocked in May liminary sampling confirmed anglers 2012. Five embayments (Big Snag, concerns and indicated that a relatively Big Locust, Bracken, Lawrence, and Funding Source: Sport Fish poor largemouth bass population exist- Lee’s Creek) were stocked at a rate of Restoration Program (Dingell- ed in Meldahl Pool compared to other 100 fish per acre and Big Turtle Creek Johnson) Ohio River Pools. Electrofishing sur- was stocked at a rate of 200 fish per veys indicated that young-of-the-year acre. KDFWR Strategic Pan: Goal 2, production was low, potentially due to Nocturnal electrofishing was Strategic Objective 3.

78 Kentucky Department of Fish & Wildlife Resources River and Stream Sport Fisheries / PROJECT UPDATES

Indeed, Kentucky has some quality fishing opportunities / Cory Woosley

Warm Water Stream Sport Fish current access sites and identify new public access sites. During the 2012 Surveys sampling season, eight streams were sampled at 33 sites. Data collected revealed that, trophy smallmouth bass David Baker, Jason Herrala maximizes the fisheries potential. (≥20 in.) and muskellunge (≥40 in.) Beginning in 2012, a new push were collected on the Barren and Green and Nick Keeton, Kentucky was made to conduct general sport fish Rivers. Green River recorded the best Department of Fish and Wildlife surveys on our streams in an effort to smallmouth bass catch rates at 39.8 Resources obtain base line data such as relative f/h. The Green, Barren, Salt, South abundance, size structure, growth rates Fork Licking and Drakes Creek all and condition. Sites are currently received smallmouth bass assessment being selected based on public access rating of “good” or “excellent” during and recommendations from Fishery 2012. The rock bass fishery in the here are countless miles of rivers District Offices based on public input. Green River (77.2 f/h), Slate Creek Tand streams that flow throughout Sampling will occur in the spring and (51.3 f/h) and Salt River (29.3 f/h) was Kentucky making stream fishing acces- fall when water temperatures range impressive not only for quantity but sible to all of Kentucky’s anglers. An- from 50-75°F. New sites will be added quality. Trophy sauger (≥18 in) was glers have taken notice of the resource, annually, with streams scheduled to be collected in the Licking River while and realize how valuable and produc- sampled on a 3-5 year rotation based on trophy walleye (≥25 in) was collected tive stream fishing is throughout the the amount of recreational pressure that in the Green River. state. With all this attention, the Ken- the stream receives. tucky Department of Fish and Wildlife These surveys are intended to Resources (KDFWR) has taken note collect sport fish data on rivers and Funding Source: Sport Fish that more information is needed to streams for the purpose of developing Restoration Program (Dingell- better inform the public of these op- trend data that will help the KDFWR Johnson) portunities while making sure that these make informed management decisions, resources are being managed in a way use this information to further promote KDFWR Strategic Plan. Goal 1, that not only protects these fisheries but stream fishing in Kentucky, inventory Strategic Objective 5.

Annual Research Highlights 2012 79 PROJECT UPDATES / River and Stream Sport Fisheries

Sauger Stocking Evaluation in the Kentucky, Green, Barren, and Salt Rivers

David Baker, Jason Herrala shows that supplemental stocking can in these three river systems will be and Nick Keeton, Kentucky enhance these populations. monitored through at least the spring of In an effort to enhance the sauger 2020 to determine if a self sustaining Department of Fish and Wildlife fishery in the Kentucky River, the fishery will develop. All stocked fish Resources Kentucky Department of Fish and will be marked with oxytetracycline Wildlife Resources implemented a to determine the contribution of the sauger stocking program from 2006- stocked hatchery fish to each year 2010 in the Kentucky River after a class. Stockings will be conducted in n Kentucky, sauger (Sander ca- 2002-2003 study indicated that walleye each river system as late in the spring Inadensis), are found in the Ohio stockings were not successful at as possible to reduce the potential and Mississippi Rivers and their major producing a self sustaining fishery. negative impacts that certain abiotic tributaries. Sauger are a native top-level The determination was made that the variables, such as high spring flows, predator that inhabit main channel ar- water conditions in the Kentucky River might have on the survival of the eas of large turbid rivers. During the were more suitable for sauger. Sauger stocked fish. The goals of this project spring, sauger tend to congregate below stocking in the Kentucky River have are to determine if stocking in these dams and near the mouth of creeks to been successful in establishing a put- systems will create a self-sustaining spawn, creating an important seasonal grow-take type fishery; however, very sauger recreational fishery, and to look fishery in many of Kentucky’s rivers. little natural reproduction has been at the utility of providing a put-grow- Sauger populations fluctuate detected. The lack of recruitment could take type fishery. naturally due to biotic and abiotic be due to many factors, including the factors that affect spawning success lack of suitable spawning habitat. Funding Source: Sport Fish and recruitment, causing year-class Similar stockings are being Restoration Program (Dingell- strength to be highly variable. Long- evaluated in the Green, Barren and Salt Johnson) term declines in sauger populations rivers. Fingerling sauger averaging are largely associated with the loss 1.5 inches in length will be stocked KDFWR Strategic Plan. Goal 1, of suitable spawning habitat due to in the Green, Barren, and Salt river Strategic Objective 5. channel alterations and barriers that systems from 2012-2016 at an annual impact seasonal migrations. Research rate of 10 fish/acre. Sauger populations

Kentucky River sauger / Nick Keeton

80 Kentucky Department of Fish & Wildlife Resources River and Stream Sport Fisheries / PROJECT UPDATES

Juvenile lake sturgeon being stocked into the Cumberland River / Matt Thomas Lake Sturgeon Telemetry in the

Cumberland River of fish are still in Lake Cumberland below the KY Route 90 Bridge. Four the success of the hatchery stocking Jason Herrala, David Baker, months of manual tracking has yielded program. three detections, all of which were Nick Keeton, Steve Marple, In April 2012, 30 lake sturgeon recorded near the edges of the study and Nick Skudlarek, Kentucky were surgically implanted with site. Although not enough manual Department of Fish and Wildlife ultrasonic transmitters at the Pfeiffer detections exist to quantify habitat use, Resources Fish Hatchery. These 3.0 to 6.5 lb all three detections occurred in inside sturgeon were held at the hatchery for bend habitats which provide sandy two weeks to allow surgery wounds to substrate and low velocity habitats heel and recover. Twelve stationary often preferred by lake sturgeon. ake sturgeon were once native to receivers were deployed at sites Manual tracking will continue Lthe Mississippi, Ohio, and Cum- upstream and downstream of the two through November 2013, and VR2s berland Rivers in Kentucky, but since stocking sites in the Big South Fork will be downloaded monthly until the 1950’s lake sturgeon have been and Cumberland River to determine the conclusion of the study in 2015. extirpated from the Cumberland River movement out of the stocking areas. Trotlining efforts will begin in spring due to destruction of habitat and loss Fifteen of the implanted lake sturgeon 2014 to gather CPUE, survival, and of range due to barriers. Because of were stocked at the mouth of the Laurel age/growth data and assess the success this, the Kentucky Department of Fish River, and 15 were stocked at the of the Department’s stocking efforts. and Wildlife Resources (KDFWR) has Turkey Run Ramp on the Big South If reintroduction efforts are proved committed to a twenty year stocking Fork. All fish have been accounted for to be successful and a self-sustaining program to restore lake sturgeon popu- throughout the study and all stationary population is established, we can begin lations in the Cumberland River Basin. receivers have detected fish. Some of to manage for a unique sport fishing One major component to the success of the lake sturgeon have been detected opportunity. reintroduction programs is to assess the moving over 35 miles, while others survival, movements, and habitat use appear to be staying in the areas of stocked sturgeon and document their where they were stocked. The fish Funding Source: Sport Fish transition into the natural environment. that displayed movement traveled Restoration Program (Dingell- A telemetry project can provide insight downstream into Lake Cumberland Johnson) into survival, movements, and habitat during the summer and early fall, and preferences of stocked lake sturgeon, current tracking data and stationary KDFWR Strategic Pan: Goal 2, leading to initial measures to quantify receiver logs indicate that the majority Strategic Objective 3.

Annual Research Highlights 2012 81 PROJECT UPDATES / Non-Game Fishes

The Cumberland River at the mouth of Laurel River received 959 fish (average 7.4-8.5 inches) in 2008; 2,004 fish (average 7.5 inches) in Lake Sturgeon / Rick Hill 2009; 4,539 fish in 2010 (average 5.5-7.8 inches); and 2,150 fish (average 8.2-8.9 inches) in Lake Sturgeon Restoration in the 2011. The Big South Fork Cumberland River at the Alum Creek access area Upper Cumberland River Drainage received 716 fish (average 7.4 inches) in Kentucky in 2008; 1,973 fish (average 7.5 inches) in 2009; and 4,063 fish (average 5.5- 7.8 inches) in 2010. No Lake Sturgeon Matthew Thomas, Steven Marple, occurred historically. The project area were stocked at either location during and Stephanie Brandt, Kentucky extends from Wolf Creek Dam, up- 2012. Total Lake Sturgeon stocked stream to Cumberland Falls, including into the Cumberland River above Lake Department of Fish and Wildlife major tributaries such as Rockcastle Cumberland is 16,404 fish. Young Lake Resources River and Big South Fork. Sturgeon were differentially marked Since 2007, fertilized eggs by sequentially removing two adjacent he Lake Sturgeon is considered have been obtained annually from scutes in the lateral series to distinguish Tcritically imperiled in Kentucky, the Wisconsin Department of year classes: right anterior scutes 2-3 where it is currently limited to the Natural Resources taken from upper for 2007, left anterior scutes 2-3 for Ohio and Mississippi Rivers. In 2007, Mississippi basin stock (Wisconsin 2008, right anterior scutes 3-4 for the Kentucky Department of Fish and River). These eggs are hatched and 2009, left anterior scutes 3-4 for 2010, Wildlife Resources (KDFWR) initi- reared at the Pfeiffer Fish Hatchery a n d r i g h t a n t e r i o r s c u t e s 5 - 6 f o r 2 0 1 1 . ated a long-term (20+ years) project to in Frankfort, Kentucky. Since spring Twenty reports of Lake Sturgeon restore a self-sustaining population of 2008, young Lake Sturgeon have been captured by anglers were received in Lake Sturgeon to the upper Cumber- released annually at two locations in 2009-2012. A variety of sampling land River drainage, where the species the upper Cumberland River drainage. techniques are being evaluated to determine survival, habitat use, and movement patterns of stocked fish. A telemetry project will occur from 2012-2015 within the restoration area. KDFWR biologists implanted transmitters in 30 Lake Sturgeon to monitor habitat use and movement patterns. Twelve stationary receivers were placed within the restoration area to track large range movement patterns.

Funding Source: State Wildlife Grant Program (SWG)

KDFWR Strategic Plan. Goal 1. Strategic Objective 5. Comprehensive Wildlife Conservation Strategy: Appendix 3.2; Class Actinopterygii and Cephalaspidomorphi: Priority The Cumberland River above Lake Cumberland / Stephanie Brandt Research Project #1.

82 Kentucky Department of Fish & Wildlife Resources Non-Game Fishes / PROJECT UPDATES

The last alligator gar to be verified in Kentucky was in 1977 when a dead specimen was found floating in Kentucky Lake near the Cypress Creek embayment. In an effort to restore this species back to the waters of the Commonwealth, the Kentucky Department of Fish and Wildlife Resources (KDFWR) implemented a captive propagation and stocking program in 2009. In partnership with the United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS), the KDFWR has committed to a long-term restoration effort of this species. Annually, the Juvenile alligator gar ready to be stocked / Michael Flinn KDFWR will receive alligator gar fry from the Private John Allen National Alligator Gar Propagation and USFWS Fish Hatchery. These fry will be reared at both the Pfeiffer Restoration in Western Kentucky Fish Hatchery and Minor Clark Fish Hatchery prior to being released brackish waters. The alligator gar is into the wild. Alligator gar stocking Steve Marple, Matt Thomas, the most salt tolerant of all the gar sites will be those areas that have and Stephanie Brandt, Kentucky species. In Kentucky, the alligator gar historically contained alligator gar and Department of Fish and Wildlife occupied sluggish pools, backwaters, which still provide suitable habitat for Resources and embayments of big rivers and optimal survival of alligator gar. larger reservoirs in western Kentucky. From 2009-2012, a total of 19,520 Female alligator gar tend to grow larger alligator gar were stocked by the than males and reach sexual maturity at KDFWR. Size at stocking ranged he alligator gar (Atractosteus 11 years and live in excess of 50 years. from 7.3 to 14.5 inches. Alligator gar Tspathula) is the largest of the living Males reach sexual maturity at 6 years were stocked in the following areas: gars and one of the largest freshwater and live up to 26 years. (1) Clarks River; (2) Phelps Creek; (3) fishes in North America. These fish are Alligator Gar records have been Bayou Creek; (4) Tradewater River; capable of reaching lengths of over 9 confirmed from five locations in (5) Deer Creek; (6) Obion Creek; (7) feet and weights of over 300 lbs. The Kentucky: 1) Cumberland River, 3 Massac Creek; (8) Bayou de Chein; (9) largest reported size of an alligator miles below Dycusburg, Crittenden Mayfield Creek; (10)Ballard WMA; gar is 9 feet, 8 inches. This specimen County (1925); 2) Ohio River at (11) Barlow Bottoms WMA; and (12) weighed approximately 302 lbs. Its Shawnee Steam Plant, McCracken Doug Travis WMA. native range once occurred from the County (1975); 3) mouth of the Ohio Florida panhandle west into the Gulf River, Ballard/Carlisle County (1966); Coastal Plain to Veracruz, Mexico and 4) mouth of Bayou du Chein, Fulton Funding Source: State Wildlife Grant throughout the Mississippi River Basin, County (1974); and 5) Kentucky Lake Program (SWG) including the lowermost Cumberland at Cypress Creek embayment, Henry and Tennessee Rivers. In Kentucky, County, TN (1976). Alligator Gar KDFWR Strategic Plan. Goal the alligator gar is native to the Ohio, have not been reported in Kentucky 1, Objective 5. Comprehensive Mississippi, and lower Cumberland and since 1977, despite numerous surveys. Wildlife conservation Strategy: Tennessee River systems. Currently, the Alligator Gar is listed Appendix 3.2; Class Actinopterygii Little is known about the biology as endangered by the Kentucky State and Cephalaspidomorphi: Priority and habitat of this species in Kentucky Nature Preserves Commission and Research Project #8. and throughout the majority of its is listed as a Species of Greatest native range. In its southern range, Conservation Need by the Kentucky the alligator gar typically inhabits Department of Fish and Wildlife big rivers, swamps, bayous, and Resources Wildlife Action Plan.

Annual Research Highlights 2012 83 PROJECT UPDATES / Non-Game Fishes

Alligator Gar Telemetry Chart 1. Home Range Estimates (Note some gar were left out because they did not meet the minimum number of relocations Project for the home range calculations)

Number of Transmitter # Linear Home Range (km) Jared Militello and Dr. Michael relocations Flinn, Murray State University 39863 15 5.11 KDFWR Contacts: Matthew 39865 14 15.43 Thomas and Stephanie Brandt 39868 9 6.26 39869 8 0.91 39870 25 14.43 s part of a restoration initiative by 39871 18 15.15 Athe Kentucky Department of Fish and Wildlife Resources (KDFWR), 20 39872 22 16.72 age-0 juvenile alligator gar (~ 60 cm) 39873 9 1.27 were released into the Clarks River 39874 16 14.31 of northwestern Kentucky in October 2010. Each fish was surgically im- 39876 23 15.8 planted with both Vemco V13 acoustic 39877 21 12.33 transmitters and 2.2 mm microwire tags for tracking and identification purposes. 39878 13 6.58 The focal objective associated with 39879 20 14.95 reintroducing this extirpated species 39880 20 9.03 is to determine seasonal and spatial movement patterns and distribution. In 39881 22 10.95 order to obtain migration information, Mean 14.15 10.62 mobile tracking via watercraft was implemented, which allowed for real- time relocations of individual fish on a ing heavily to fluctuations in water lev- in different reaches of the Clarks weekly basis. This biweekly tracking els during the summer and fall. Initial River by performing transect surveys. was conducted for approximately one stomach content samples (n = 8) have Additional hydrology related data is full year, commencing immediately been dominated by small forage fish. also being collected through the use upon release of the gar in October Further analysis will be performed to of YSI multi-probes and HOBO water 2010 and lasting until late September determine actual prey species, frequen- loggers. Final results will provide the 2011. At the end of this time period cy of occurrence and entire weights of KDFWR with vital information on contact with 12 alligator gar was still stomach samples. Furthermore, sta- juvenile alligator gar movement trends, being maintained on a regular basis tionary receivers were also deployed in habitat suitability and diet selectivity. within the mainstem of the Clarks the Clarks River, Tennessee River and River. Home range calculations (Chart Ohio River to supplement mobile track- Funding Source: State Wildlife 1, n = 15) show a high degree of vari- ing. Uploaded detections on both the Grant Program (SWG), Murray State ability among individual fish (0.91 km Tennessee and Ohio Rivers have shown University – 16.72 km), but, as a group overall, that select individuals have utilized the mean home range for these tagged these larger bodies of water at some KDFWR Strategic Plan. Goal fish is relatively large (10.62 km). A point, but then returned to the Clarks 1, Objective 5. Comprehensive distinct seasonal distribution pattern River at a later date. Wildlife conservation Strategy: was exhibited by the juvenile gar, with Field sampling is currently being Appendix 3.2; Class Actinopterygii fish overwintering in deep bend pools, conducted to continue to identify gar and Cephalaspidomorphi: Priority spending a majority of the spring on the diet preferences using experimental Research Project #8 floodplain or in flooded back waters, gill nets and gastric lavage, along with and moving up tributaries or respond- distinguishing habitat types present

84 Kentucky Department of Fish & Wildlife Resources Non-Game Fishes / PROJECT UPDATES

released into two nearly adjacent Propagation and Reintroduction reaches in lower Cogur Fork, McCreary Co., Kentucky. A week or so prior to of the Cumberland Darter release all fish were marked on either (Etheostoma susanae) in the Upper the right or the left dorsum beside the first dorsal fin with a green visible Cumberland River Drainage. implant elastomer (VIE) tag. Since 2009, a total of 2,549 captive-spawned Cumberland Darters have been Matthew Thomas and Stephanie Cumberland Darters were collected marked and released into Cogur Fork. Brandt, Kentucky Department of on 18 January from Barren Fork, Following each release, mark-recapture McCreary County, Kentucky. Eight Fish and Wildlife Resources; sampling was conducted to assess individuals were large adults and the survivability and initial movements. Crystal Ruble, Patrick Rakes, rest were small (<40 mm TL) presumed These surveys were conducted in Cogur Melissa Petty, and J. R. Shute, young-of-the-year. A portion of these Fork using backpack electrofishing Conservation Fisheries, Inc. adults were utilized as broodstock in within the release section, as well as the 2012 propagation effort along with arbitrarily chosen distances upstream the remaining (N=28) collected in and downstream of that section. 2010—2011 production efforts. All fishes captured were identified, he Cumberland Darter, Etheostoma Following observations of darkly enumerated, and released on site. So Tsusanae, has a limited range in pigmented males (heads and fins) far, monitoring efforts have resulted the upper Cumberland River drainage, defending cavities under slabs, weekly in recapture of up to 15% of tagged most of which is in Kentucky. The checks for eggs were initiated on 22 fish and have confirmed the survival U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service recently March, at which time the first nest was of propagated individuals released into published a final rule (September 8, collected. By 9 April all eggs from Cogur Fork for periods exceeding one 2011; Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. the first clutch had hatched and water year. Although evidence of natural 153) designating the Cumberland temperatures were ~17°C. The last nest reproduction has not yet been detected, Darter as endangered because of recent (~ 40 nests total) was collected on 11 other non-game fish restoration range curtailment and fragmentation May, at which point temperatures were attempts have shown that it can take resulting from habitat degradation. In ~19°C. From 3,940 eggs produced by up to 10-15 years to document success, 2008, the Kentucky Department of Fish the Cumberland Darters, 2311 larvae particularly for smaller, short-lived hatched (~59%). Approximately 1,827 and Wildlife Resources (KDFWR) part- species. nered with Conservation Fisheries, Inc. larvae were reared successfully to (CFI) to develop successful spawning juveniles yielding ~79% overall larval survivorship. protocols for the Cumberland Darter Funding Source: State Wildlife On 14 June and 28 August, and produce offspring needed to re- Grant Program (SWG), Conservation a portion (1,127) of the juvenile establish extirpated populations within Fisheries Inc. its historic range. Cogur Fork (Indian propagated Cumberland Darters were Creek-upper Cum- KDFWR Strategic berland River drain- Plan. Goal 1. age) in McCreary Strategic Objective County was chosen 5. Comprehensive as the reintroduction Wildlife Conservation stream because: 1) it Strategy: Appendix is within the historic 3.9; Class range of the species; Actinopterygii and 2) habitat conditions Cephalaspidomorphi: are suitable; and 3) Taxa specific research there is some level of project #1. protection (i.e., within the Daniel Boone Na- tional Forest). A total of 25 Cumberland darter / Conservation Fisheries, Inc.

Annual Research Highlights 2012 85 PROJECT UPDATES / Non-Game Fishes

Propagation and Reintroduction of the Kentucky Arrow Darter (Etheostoma sagitta spilotum) in the Upper Kentucky River Drainage

Matthew Thomas and Stephanie Brandt, Kentucky Department of Fish and Wildlife Resources; Crystal Ruble, Patrick Rakes, Melissa Petty, and J. R. Shute, Conservation Fisheries, Inc.

he Kentucky Arrow Darter, Ethe- Tostoma spilotum, has a limited distribution in the upper Kentucky River drainage, where it inhabits head- water (mostly first- and second-order) Long Fork in Clay County / Stephanie Brandt streams. The Kentucky Department of Fish and Wildlife Resources (KDFWR) Three male and 8 adult female and CFI. We captured 47 (5.7%) of the indentified the Kentucky Arrow Darter Kentucky Arrow Darters were collected tagged fish; most were found in pools as a Species of Greatest Conservation on 8 March 2012 from Big Double (about 8” to 24” deep) with mixed- Need in its State Wildlife Action Plan Creek, Clay County, Kentucky near sized rock substrate with exposed to address research and survey needs where the currently held brood stock areas of bedrock and often with some for the species. Based upon the species were collected from 2008—2011. marginal cover (e.g., undercut or tree apparent, recent decline, the U.S. Fish The 2012 collections brought the total roots). These individuals appeared to and Wildlife Service determined that number of broodstock females and be in very good condition and some the Kentucky Arrow Darter warrants males used in this year’s effort to 21 growth was evident. We observed an listing under the Endangered Species and 5, respectively. abundance of aquatic insect larvae Act. It is currently a Candidate for Breeding groups were first actively swimming over the substrate, Federal Listing based on its inclusion introduced on 8 March. On 10 March suggesting that food resources are in the USFWS Candidate Notice of Re- spawning was observed with water plentiful in the stream. Captive view published in the Federal Register temperatures ranging from 8-11°C. propagation and field monitoring will on November 10, 2010. Spawning activity by the various continue in 2013. In 2008, the KDFWR partnered breeding groups continued through the with Conservation Fisheries, Inc. end of April. Manual egg collections (CFI) to develop successful spawning and total passive collection of Funding Source: State Wildlife protocols and produce offspring needed Kentucky Arrow Darter larvae were Grant Program (SWG), Conservation to re-establish extirpated populations the highest to date. From the 163 eggs Fisheries Inc (CFI) within the Kentucky Arrow Darter’s that hatched and 1,102 larvae captured, historic range. Long Fork (Red Bird 835 survived to the early juvenile stage KDFWR Strategic Plan. River drainage) in Clay County was (~66% survivorship). Goal 1. Strategic Objective chosen as the reintroduction stream A total of 829 VIE-tagged 5. Comprehensive Wildlife because: 1) it is within the historic young-of-year fish were released into Conservation Strategy: Appendix range of the species; 2) habitat Long Fork in August and October, 3.2; Class Actinopterygii and conditions are suitable; and 3) there is 2012. On January 29, 2013 surveys Cephalaspidomorphi: Taxa specific some level of protection (i.e., within were conducted using a seine, visual research project #8. the Daniel Boone National Forest). observation, and dip nets by KDFWR

86 Kentucky Department of Fish & Wildlife Resources Non-Game Fishes / PROJECT UPDATES

representing 16 families was collected Distribution, Habitat, and from 47 sites distributed throughout the drainage. Overall faunal composition Conservation Status of Rare Fishes has changed slightly during the past in Kentucky 25 years, although shifts in relative abundances in several species and the longitudinal distribution of species have also occurred. Twelve species reported previously were not detected in our study; however, we documented new drainage records for seven species, including three fish Species of Greatest Conservation Need (SGCN). This discrepancy likely resulted in large part from differences in sampling gear used From top to bottom, left to right: Mountain Brook Lamprey, undescribed barcheek between the present and past surveys, but may also reflect changes in habitat darter, Spring Cavefish, Flame Chub / Matt Thomas and environmental fluctuations. The Buck Creek drainage supports seven fish SGCN. Among these, the Bloodfin Darter Etheostoma( Matthew Thomas and Stephanie fish SGCN. In 2010, we initiated a sanguifluum) has the strongest Brandt, Kentucky Department of basin-wide assessment of the fish fauna population with the most occurrences Fish and Wildlife Resources of Buck Creek, a tributary of the upper and highest abundance levels; it was Cumberland River drainage in Lincoln, one of the most abundant species in Pulaski, and Rockcastle counties. A the middle and lower sections of the comprehensive survey of the fishes of mainstem and was also present in Buck Creek had not been accomplished lower Brushy Creek. Mountain Brook pecies of Greatest Conservation in over 25 years. Our objectives were Lamprey (Ichthyomyzon greeleyi), SNeed (SGCN) are recognized in the to assess long-term changes in fish Lake Sturgeon (Acipenser fulvescens), Kentucky Wildlife Action Plan (Ken- community structure and evaluate and Southern Cavefish (undescribed tucky Department of Fish and Wildlife the status of SGCN. Fish community form of Typhlichthys subterraneus) Resources, 2013), based on levels of sampling in Buck Creek was completed are documented here for the first time endemism, lack of knowledge of cur- in 2012. A total of 68 species in the Buck Creek drainage. These rent population status, distribution, and life history characteristics, and poten- tial importance as hosts to rare mussel species. Many fish species on this list are also included on the current List of Rare and Extirpated Biota of Kentucky (Kentucky State Nature Preserves Commission, 2011), as well as six spe- cies listed by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service as threatened or endangered. In 2010, the Kentucky Wildlife Action Plan was revised for the first time since its inception in 2005. Of the state’s 244 native fish species, the Plan identifies 68 as in need of conservation action. The Cumberland River drainage supports one of the most diverse and unique assemblage of fishes in Kentucky, including 28 (41%) of 68 Red River, Logan County / Matt Thomas

Annual Research Highlights 2012 87 PROJECT UPDATES / Non-Game Fishes

Buck Creek, Pulaski County / Matt Thomas species appear to be rare and limited river basins (e.g., Green River). In within this system. Sampling in to specific habitat types in the lower 2010, we initiated an assessment of 2012 detected the Blotched Chub portion of the drainage. The Popeye the fish fauna of the Kentucky portion (Erimystax insignis) at two sites in the Shiner (Notropis ariommus), Redlips of the Red River to obtain more South Fork Red River, one of which Darter (Etheostoma maydeni), and complete and up-to-date information represents an upstream expansion of Striped Darter (undescribed form on the distributions and population the known distribution of this species of Etheostoma virgatum) were status of rare or imperiled fishes. As of in the drainage. The Smallscale Darter documented previously and continue 14 September 2012, fish community (Etheostoma microlepidum) persists to persist, but are rare (i.e., fewer data were obtained from a total of 41 in the mainstem Red River in Logan than 20 total individuals at 1-3 sites) sites, including 12 with baseline data County and a new drainage record for within the drainage. The Striped for comparison. A total of 55 species this species was documented in the Darter is of particular concern because have been recorded to date, including South Fork Red River. In 2013 we will it was detected at less than 10% of five of eight fish SGCN known from complete fish community sampling sites having historic presence and the drainage. A new drainage record needed to complete the basin-wide now appears to be restricted to Flat was obtained for the Flame Chub ichthyofaunal assessment for the Red Lick Creek. Changes in fish species (Hemtremia flammea), a species River drainage in Kentucky. composition and community structure that had not been seen in Kentucky documented in Buck Creek demonstrate for more than 120 years and was Funding Source: State Wildlife Grant the need for periodic surveys to monitor presumed extirpated from the state. Program (SWG) the distribution and population status of This small, colorful minnow appears rare species. We recommend periodic to be restricted to Spring Creek, a KDFWR Strategic Plan. Goal 1, (every 5-10 years) fish sampling in small spring-fed stream in Simpson Strategic Objective 5. Comprehensive Buck Creek at fixed locations having County. Historic occurrences for Spring Wildlife Conservation Strategy: baseline data to assess changes to the Cavefish (Forbesichthys agassizii) were Appendix 3.9, Class Actinopterygii fish community. substantiated and new occurrences in and Cephalaspidomorphi. Priority The Red River, a tributary of three streams were documented. The monitoring needs by taxonomic class the lower Cumberland River located Stone Darter (Etheostoma derivativum) (p.1). Establish protocols, schedules, in south-central Kentucky and north- was documented at five sites in and sites for long-term population central Tennessee is known to contain Whippoorwill Creek, where suitable monitoring to assess status and at least seven fish SGCN, but available habitat conditions remained intact; one trends for priority species. fish collection records are sparse and of these sites represents a downstream unevenly distributed relative to other expansion of its known distribution

88 Kentucky Department of Fish & Wildlife Resources Big Game / PROJECT UPDATES

2012 totaled 18 and 55, respectively Resource Selection, Movement (73 to date). The detection of more varied forms of mortality can be largely Patterns, Survival, and Cause- attributed to the increased number of Specific Mortality of Adult Bull Elk collars in the Hazard study area. In 2011, there were 47 collared animals in Kentucky in the Hazard study area, while prior to the fall hunting season in 2012 that number was increased to 89. Using John Hast and John J. Cox, All 67 bulls captured in 2011, the Lincoln-Petersen estimator from University of Kentucky; Kristina would have been at least 4.5 years an August mark-resight exercise, we Brunjes, R. Daniel Crank, Will old in fall 2012. Additionally, 31 of conclude that approximately 42% of 62 bulls darted in 2012 would also Bowling, and Gabriel Jenkins, the bulls in the area are wearing our fall in the ≥ 4.5 age class. Anecdotal tracking collars. Thus, a larger number Kentucky Department of Fish evidence suggests that the 4.5-5.5 age of collars in the study area has likely and Wildlife Resources class represent an approximately 280 allowed for a more representative inch bull that is selected for harvest sample and estimate of bull mortality. by the majority of both archery and In summary, hunting appears to gun season hunters. When examining be the greatest source of mortality ver the past two years we have Figure 1, it can be seen that hunter for bull elk in Kentucky, thus careful Osuccessfully captured and radio- harvest comprised 74% of mortality management of hunter numbers collared 168 adult bull elk in south- events occurring over the course of this remains critical to maintaining bull elk eastern Kentucky to estimate survival, study. Additionally, we have detected harvest numbers and quality, overall determine cause-specific mortality, and a 7% wounding loss rate overall with a hunter experience, and breeding to characterize resource selection and 9% wounding loss rate during the fall individuals within the population. movement patterns of this important 2012 hunting season. Other sources of mortality we have age-gender class. Herein we describe In the fall of 2012, we saw a 68% observed, such as meningeal worm preliminary findings on survival and increase in both the number of hunter and wounding loss, appear to be cause-specific mortality. Cementum harvested mortality events as well as important and should be accounted for annuli analysis from captured bulls has other causes of mortality not observed in population models. Additionally, allowed us to determine age-specific in 2011; hunter harvest mortality wounding loss numbers were mortality rates where sufficient sample events rose from 11 in 2011 to 43 in surprising, and reduction would be size is available. 2012. Bull mortality for 2011 and largely dependent on hunter education and willingness to avoid poor shot unknown, 2, 3% wounding loss, selection. Because hunters are by 5, 7% roadkill, 1, 1% far the largest contributor to bull elk mortality, this dictates an adaptive poaching, 1, 1% bow harvest management strategy that must account meningeal fence kill for hunter numbers and appropriate worm, 8, harvest zone delineation to meet gun harvest 11% population management and hunting bow harvest, meningeal worm experience goals. 29, 40% poaching gun harvest, 25, 34% roadkill Funding Source: Wildlife Restoration unknown Act (Pittman- Robertson) wounding loss KDFWR Strategic Plan. Goal 1. fence kill, 2, 3% Strategic Objective 5.

FigureFigure 1: Cause 1: Cause specific specific mortality mortality events events for for adultadult bullbull elk in in Kentucky from from January 1, 2011January to the present. 1, 2011 N=73. to the present. N=73.

Annual Research Highlights 2012 89 PROJECT UPDATES / Big Game

Can Body Condition and Select Physiological Indicators Predict Survival of Elk Post-Translocation?

Aaron M. Hildreth, John T. Hast, translocation (all elk are fitted with Alejandra Betancourt, and John GPS collars and will be monitored by the University of Missouri and Virginia J. Cox, , University of Kentucky; Department of Game and Inland Kristina Brunjes, Gabriel Fisheries upon release). A successful Jenkins, Will Bowling, and Dan predictive survival model could inform Crank, Kentucky Department of wildlife managers as to characteristics Fish and Wildlife Resources of individual elk most likely to survive future capture and translocation efforts. In 2012, KDFWR captured a tates began reintroducing elk total of 58 elk (37 cows, 13 calves, 8 S(Cervus elaphus) only a few spike bulls) with either corral traps (n decades after extirpation from the = 46) or chemical immobilization (n eastern United States in the mid-1800s. =12) and held them in quarantine for a Cow Elk / Aaron Hildreth The majority of these reintroduction period of 90 days before translocation attempts failed, although the causes to Missouri and Virginia. The elk were were often unknown or misunderstood. tested twice for tuberculosis (TB) physiological data collected will be It is well-established that elk and many during the holding period. We weighed, used to construct a model to determine other ungulates are susceptible to stress drew blood, collected ticks, and a fecal factors predictive of elk survival post- and physical injuries that can lead sample for each individual elk on all 5 translocation. to death during capture, processing, handling days. In addition to the fecal In May 2012, 35 elk were captivity, translocation, and shortly samples collected during each workup, translocated to Missouri, 15 to Virginia, after release. Despite these problems, we collected fecal samples from each and 1 bull was relocated within little is known about what factors pen throughout the quarantine period. Kentucky. A total of 7 elk died or were determine the relative susceptibility We also measured rump fat and loin euthanized while in quarantine in of individuals to injurious or lethal thickness with the aid of an ultrasound Kentucky. Upon release in Missouri, 9 conditions from capture through final during each workup. elk died as a result of factors associated release. Fecal samples were analyzed with translocation. In January 2013, With a reintroduced elk population for parasite load by performing a KDFWR captured 51 additional elk > 10,000 individuals, the Kentucky fecal float and assayed to determine (23 cows, 28 calves). As a result of Department of Fish and Wildlife fecal glucocorticoid levels. Fecal knowledge gained in 2012, changes to Resources (KDFWR) is now able to glucocorticoid levels will help us the holding facility, workup procedures, serve as a source state to other states understand how elk respond to and dietary regimen have been desiring elk. In 2011, Missouri became quarantine and handling stressors. implemented for 2013. Analysis of the first recipient of translocated We performed a total panel blood 2012 and 2013 data has begun and will Kentucky elk followed by Virginia in test on each blood sample to look for be completed by August 2013. 2012, with the goal of moving up to 50 indicators of capture-related stress. per year over the next several years. We Ultrasound measurements of rump fat took advantage of this opportunity to thickness were used to determine the Funding Sources: Rocky Mountain Elk work with captive elk to characterize overall body condition of each elk and Foundation, University of Kentucky, and monitor body condition and select how it changed throughout quarantine. and Wildlife Restoration (Pittman- physiological parameters during a Loin thickness measurements will be Robertson) 90-day holding period, and to model compared from the first workup to whether one or more of these factors the third to look for signs of protein KDFWR Strategic Plan. Strategic are predictors of elk survival post- catabolism. Morphometric and Goal 1. Strategic Objective 5.

90 Kentucky Department of Fish & Wildlife Resources Small Game / PROJECT UPDATES

covey-call surveys, we estimated fall Population Ecology and Habitat populations of quail on Peabody of 2,481 (2009), 3,889 (2010), 3,838 use of Northern Bobwhite on a (2011), and 4,156 birds (2012). We Reclaimed Surface Coal Mine in have found 89 bobwhite nests in the 3 breeding seasons since the project Kentucky began. The nest success (hatched ≥ 1 egg) rates for these 3 years were 50% (n = 32), 46% (n = 24), and David Peters, Jarred Brooke, species, such as sericea lespedeza 61% (n = 33), respectively. During Craig Harper and Patrick (Lespedeza cuneata) and tall fescue winter (October-March), birds used Keyser, University of Tennessee; (Schedonorus phoenix), which may not annual food plots, native warm-season provide suitable nesting or brooding grass, and shrubland vegetation John Morgan and Eric Williams, cover for northern bobwhites. more than expected. During summer Kentucky Department of Fish The Kentucky Department of Fish (April-September), birds have used and Wildlife Resources and Wildlife Resources (KDFWR) native warm-season grass and open began implementing broad-scale herbaceous (dominated by forbs and habitat management on Peabody WMA Lespedeza cuneata) vegetation more in western KY in 2009 to improve than expected and frequently used orthern bobwhite (Colinus habitat for northern bobwhite. We disked areas as well. We suspect habitat virginianus) populations are N are monitoring movements, habitat selection is influenced by structural rapidly declining because of range- selection, reproduction, and survival components of the vegetation. In wide loss of habitat. The decline has of northern bobwhite via radio the summer of 2012, we sampled been attributed to deterioration of telemetry to quantify the effects of micro-site vegetation characteristics early successional habitat as a result this management. We are using an at 248 bird locations and 248 random of clean farming practices, lack of experimental design that incorporates locations to identify structural disturbance, and habitat fragmentation. treated and untreated areas on the components influencing selection. An opportunity to create large areas 8,200-acre study site. We will continue to monitor of contiguous habitat is through Since August 2009, we have bobwhite response at Peabody as management of reclaimed surface trapped and collared 1,207 birds, KDFWR continues to manipulate mines. There are 1.5 million acres with a 2.65% trapping success rate, habitat. Our research should document of reclaimed surface mines in the which is comparable with other the influence of these habitat eastern US, and more than 600,000 studies performed throughout the management practices on northern acres within Kentucky. Unfortunately, Southeast. Overall, crude mortality bobwhite and provide wildlife many of these reclaimed areas have rate has averaged 67.5%. Using managers information needed for sound been planted to invasive, non-native decision making when managing reclaimed mined lands for northern bobwhite.

Funding Source: Wildlife Restoration Act (Pittman- Robertson) and the University of Tennessee

KDFWR Strategic Plan. Goal 1. Strategic Objective 5. Comprehensive Wildlife Conservation Strategy: Appendix 3.2. Class Aves. Priority Research Project #2 and #3. Small game biologists at Peabody WMA / Fred Adkins

Annual Research Highlights 2012 91 PROJECT UPDATES / Bears

Cubs keep warm while their mothered is being processed / Aaron Hildreth

Population Ecology of Black Bears Kentucky in counties bordering Virginia, West Virginia, and Tennessee. in Southeastern Kentucky During the past 30 years, increased nuisance complaints and roadkills in southeastern Kentucky counties Sean Murphy and John J. Cox, he black bear (Ursus americanus) (KDFWR, unpublished data), coupled University of Kentucky; Jayson Thistorically inhabited all of with live-trapping data and den Plaxico and Steven Dobey, Kentucky, but was extirpated from site visits (University of Kentucky, unpublished data) suggest that Kentucky Department of Fish the state by the early 1900s as a result of overexploitation, habitat loss, and population growth and expansion is and Wildlife Resources habitat fragmentation. Beginning continuing. Cumulatively, these data during the mid-1980s, however, the prompted the Kentucky Department of black bear naturally recolonized Fish and Wildlife Resources (KDFWR) a portion of extreme southeastern to implement the first annual legal

92 Kentucky Department of Fish & Wildlife Resources Bears / PROJECT UPDATES

black bear hunt in Kentucky in over study design to estimate population suggesting that anthropogenic mortality a century during winter 2009, yet the abundance, density, growth rate, and may play a larger role in slowing quota (10 bears/year) was only met genetic characteristics and patterns growth of the southeastern Kentucky during the 2012 season, suggesting of range expansion of black bears in black bear population than previously the bear population may still be southeastern Kentucky. In 2011 and speculated. Live trapping of bears will relatively small, has experienced little 2012, we hair snare surveyed what be repeated in summer 2013. reproductive range expansion beyond has been generally considered the 2 the core counties, and is likely not core population areas (Pine Mountain- connected to a separate subpopulation Black Mountain and Cumberland Gap Funding Sources: Wildlife Restoration in Big South Fork National River National Historic Park), and a number (Pittman-Robertson) and University of and Recreation Area in south-central of surrounding publically owned Kentucky Kentucky that resulted from a late protected areas (Redbird Wildlife 1990’s reintroduction effort (Hast 2010, Management Area, Kentucky Ridge KDFWR Strategic Plan: Murphy 2011). State Forest) considered high quality Goal 1. Strategic Objective Although the legal harvest has bear habitat. Hair snares were checked 5. Comprehensive Wildlife remained a short season with a small weekly from late May thru August Conservation Strategy: appendix quota, recent changes to the bear for 8 consecutive weeks. A total of 3.9; Class Mammalia: Taxa specific harvest, including a longer duration 384 hair samples were collected in conservation project. season and implementation of a hound 2011, and 432 collected in 2012 from chase season, have been implemented. survey areas. Hair samples are being Because black bears are one of the analyzed using ≥ 12 microsatellite loci slowest reproducing mammals, and to identify individuals and delineate the current population size is estimated gender of sampled individuals. The hair < 500 individuals, overharvest of snare survey in the core reproductive black bears can be considered one areas will be repeated in summer 2013, of the primary threats to maintaining with the potential addition of one or a viable population in Kentucky. It more peripheral study areas. Robust is therefore important that empirical design population models, which allow population data be obtained to inform closed-population models to be used harvest regulations so as to ensure for estimating yearly population size persistence of this important ecological and density, will be used to estimate and economic resource to the population growth rate from 2011 – Commonwealth. We therefore initiated 2014. a population study of the black bear To estimate survival and identify in 2011 with the following research cause-specific mortality of black bear, objectives: 1) estimate population live-trapping during the same summer abundance, density, and growth rate of trapping window was used to capture black bears in southeastern Kentucky individual bears. Captured individuals counties considered the reproductive are outfitted with vhf or GPS radio- core range, 2) estimate survival and collars to enable tracking. Aerial determine cause-specific mortality of telemetry via fixed-wing aircraft is black bears in southeastern Kentucky, conducted every 10-14 days to locate 3) characterize patterns of range individuals and determine survival expansion of black bears on high status. A total of 54 individual yearling quality public lands in peripheral or older black bears were captured counties adjacent to (within 50km) during the summers 2011 and 2012, the reproductive core bear range in and 10 (18.5%) have since died (3 southeastern Kentucky. were hit and killed by vehicles, 2 were To accomplish these objectives, illegally poached, 2 were euthanized we conducted a non-invasive hair due to excessive nuisance behavior, 2 sampling survey and live capturing in were legally harvested in Virginia, and a systematic capture-mark-recapture 1 was legally harvested in Kentucky),

Annual Research Highlights 2012 93 PROJECT UPDATES / Furbearers

occurred; one harvested male and one Exploring Methods for Monitoring female determined to have died from an infected wound. Bobcats in Kentucky Bobcat carcasses continue to be collected from harvesters. These are examined for pregnancy rates, litter Laura Patton, Danna Baxley, run consecutive survey periods through sizes as determined from placental April 2013. The 240km² survey grid Brian Gray, Gary Sprandel, scar counts, and ages identified by is divided into 1.5km² blocks and and Steven Dobey, Kentucky cementum analysis. We will use the covers the Green River Lake Wildlife Department of Fish and Wildlife age data as well as harvester effort and Management Area and surrounding auxiliary data to participate in a multi- Resources private lands. The entire grid is state exploratory study to determine surveyed every one hundred days; whether a suitable population model forty cameras are rotated every twenty- can be derived for bobcats using s bobcat populations have five days throughout the grid. We statistical population reconstruction successfully recovered and will determine whether or not we can A techniques. continue to exhibit increases in identify individual bobcats by unique population numbers throughout North markings and hope to identify bobcats Funding Source: Wildlife Restoration America, managers seek to identify that we have collared within the study Act (Pittman- Robertson) effective methods with which to area. To date, 18 bobcats (10M, 8F) monitor the species. We initiated a have been collared with either gps or KDFWR Strategic Plan. Goal 1. camera survey in June 2012 and will vhf radio-collars. Two mortalities have

Collared female bobcat / Chris Mason

94 Kentucky Department of Fish & Wildlife Resources Songbirds and Raptors / PROJECT UPDATES

Bald eagle tracking in Kentucky expands to collect information on adult home range

Kate Heyden, Kentucky Department of Fish and Wildlife Resources

DFWR expanded the bald eagle Ktracking project which began in 2010 to include an adult male known to nest at Ballard WMA. The bird was trapped in April 2012, using a rocket- net and fitted with a backpack harness satellite transmitter which records locations each hour. The home range of the adult male during the nesting season (usually November-July) is a bit larger than expected. Nesting territories are densely packed in Ballard County with nests as close as 1 mile from each other. While the adult male spends most of his time within 1 mile of his nest on Ballard WMA, his locations span as far as 16 miles (Figure 1). The adult male has travelled up to 10 miles from his Figure 1: Locations of adult male during April through December spanning 16 miles nest, assumingly to forage. The summer drought in 2012 dried up many smaller lakes and sloughs on Ballard WMA and not surprisingly the adult male’s locations for July and August were mostly concentrated on the larger lakes in the area which still had water for fishing. Eagle tracking updates are available via the web at: http://fw.ky. gov/eagletrack.asp.

Funding Source: US Army Corps of Engineers

KDFWR Strategic Plan. Goal 1. Strategic Objective 5.

Adult bird being fitted with transmitter / KDFWR Photo

Annual Research Highlights 2012 95 PROJECT UPDATES / Songbirds and Raptors

Adult peregrine falcon / Charlie Gannon Map of peregrine territories in Kentucky

(Figure 1). he American peregrine falcon Update on Long- In 1999, the peregrine falcon (Falco peregrinus anatum) T was removed from the Federal List of experienced severe population decline term Monitoring Threatened and Endangered Wildlife. during the mid 1900’s. This decline was Extensive monitoring has continued for Peregrine mostly attributable to eggshell thinning throughout the eastern United States caused by the widespread use of the to ensure the species maintains healthy Falcons in pesticide DDT. In fact, there were population levels. Productivity and no known nesting pairs of peregrine survival of peregrine falcons are Kentucky falcons in Kentucky for about 60 years monitored through the resighting of until 1997, when peregrine falcons colored leg bands with a unique series were discovered nesting in downtown Kate Heyden, Kentucky of colors, letters and numbers. Louisville. Since then, the number of A total of 13 peregrine falcon Department of Fish and Wildlife territorial pairs has increased steadily territories were documented within Resources and productivity has greatly increased Kentucky state lines during the 2012 nesting season. There were 12 territorial pairs, and one solitary male. All nests were located on manmade structures including buildings, bridges, and power generating stations. Nine nests were successful in fledging young. There were 30 young produced and 28 were assumed to survive fledging. KDFWR banded all accessible young (24).

Funding Source: USFWS Post- delisting Monitoring Funds

KDFWR Strategic Plan. Goal 1. Figure 1: Productivity of peregrine falcons since reestablishment Strategic Objective 5.

96 Kentucky Department of Fish & Wildlife Resources Reptiles and Amphibians / PROJECT UPDATES

Inventory, Monitoring, and Management of Amphibians and Reptiles in Kentucky

Will Bird and Phil Peak, Kentucky Herpetological Society

KDFWR Contact: John MacGregor

n the course of developing IKentucky’s State Wildlife Action Plan (SWAP), it was determined by KDFWR that more baseline data needed to be collected in order to execute effective conservation action plans for our native reptile and amphibian species. While general distributions for reptiles and Timber rattlesnake / Phil Peak amphibians in Kentucky have been determined, more detailed distribution ectotherms we are able to utilize The information about where and abundance records need to be Artificial Cover (AC) to locate many of specimens are located is recorded in collected so that the populations of the animals we search for. Heavy metal a very precise manner so that these these animals can be monitored over objects that absorb heat from the sun’s locations can be visited and monitored time. Many of the records that we have rays and provide protection from the into the future in order to continue to in our current database are decades elements are set out at our study sites. monitor populations and dynamics. old and very vague. Species for which We also deploy large wooden boards Since the project began we have baseline data is most needed from which retain moisture even during secured many new survey locations all groups of reptiles and amphibians the drier months and provide refuge in areas targeted by the SWAP and have been identified as have the for many of the creatures that might continue to gather information and data regions within Kentucky where this otherwise stay far below the surface of for species of interest. information should be gathered. the ground where they could remain Locating reptiles and amphibians undetected. There are species of reptiles can be difficult. We begin the process and amphibians for which AC has Funding Source: State Wildlife Grant by identifying locations where we proven less effective. When targeting (SWG) and Kentucky Herpetological believe targeted species can be found. these species we use box style funnel Society These locations are on state, federal, traps to assist in their location and also and private lands. Once permission search natural forms of cover such as Comprehensive Wildlife conservation is granted to conduct surveys we rocks and logs. Most importantly, we Strategy: Appendix 3.4, Class use different methods for locating drive along old country roads when the Reptilia: Prioritized Survey Projects specimens based on their biological conditions that induce snakes to move 1 and 2. Class Amphibia: Priority requirements. Because they are are present. Survey Projects #1 and #2.

Annual Research Highlights 2012 97 PROJECT UPDATES / Mollusks

Artificial Culture of Freshwater Mussels using Advanced in vitro Culture Methods at the Center for Mollusk Conservation (CMC)

Christopher Owen, Monte McGregor, Adam Shepard, Fritz Vorisek, Andy McDonald, Travis Bailey, and David Cravens, Center for Mollusk Conservation, Kentucky Department of Fish and Wildlife Resources

n vitro mussel culture is a method Iused to develop glochidia (larval stage) into newly metamorphosed pediveligers (early stage juveniles) using a modern incubator with antiobiotics and physiological salts Figure 1: Invitro culture in CO2 incubator / Monte McGregor (Figure 1). Glochidia develop using basal cell culture media, animal sera serum source, lipids, cholesterol, contamination. Over the course of and various nutritional and antibiotic amino acids, vitamins and sugar this research, 36 species of North additives, thereby bypassing the host sources. Additional work has been American unionid species have been fish altogether. Considerable research done to test various combinations of shown to successfully metamorphose has gone into testing various media antibacterial and antimycotic agents in vitro. Testing with multiple unionid components, including basal media, for controlling fungal and bacterial tribes and brooding strategies indicates general success with most mussels (Table 1). The only group of mussels to not metamorphose in vitro are species that grow during metamorphosis. While many species were confirmed to metamorphose in vitro, research was not conducted to assess their growth and survival post-metamorphosis. Two large scale cultures were produced in vitro using the Plain Pocketbook (Lampsilis cardium, Figure 2) and the Wavyrayed Lampmussel (Lampsilis fasciola). Total number of viable larvae, percent metamorphosis, number of pediveligers and number of juveniles were estimated. Length – weight regressions were also recorded. Approximately ~144,000 glochidia Figure 2: Lampsilis cardium, thousands, reared in vitro and grown in closed were recovered from one female L. systems./ Monte McGregor cardium. Of those ~128,000 were

98 Kentucky Department of Fish & Wildlife Resources Mollusks / PROJECT UPDATES

viable (89%), and after 15 survival at 100 days was 9.4% for L. days in vitro, the number cardium and 11.4% for L. fasciola. of newly metamorphosed The potential for culturing thousands pediveligers was ~113,152 (Figure 3) of juveniles from just a (88%). After 100 days, an few mussels is one reason the CMC estimated 13,560 individuals has developed this technique and is remain, ranging from 2.8 pioneering its approach. mm to 1 cm. Approximately ~63,500 glochidia were recovered from one female L. Funding Source: State Wildlife Grant fasciola. Of those ~52,500 Program (SWG), Kentucky Aquatic were viable (83%), and after Resources Fund (KARF) 18 days in vitro, the number of newly metamorphosed KDFWR Strategic Plan: pediveligers was ~50,400 Goal 1. Strategic Objective (96%). After 100 days, an 5. Comprehensive Wildlife estimated 7,232 individuals Conservation Strategy: Appendix Figure 3: Small cup of Lampsilis cardium cultured remain, ranging from 3 mm 3.2, Class Bivalvia. Priority in small bowl systems. / Monte McGregor to 1.1 cm (Figure 2). Overall Research Project #1.

Culture Start Species River Source # Females # Glochidia # Juveniles % Metamorphosis Date

Utterbackia imbecilis Pond, Butler Co. 1 4/2/2012 28,000 14,280 51% Lampsilis siliquoidea Licking River 2 4/23/2012 100,000 98,000 98% Utterbackia imbeciliis Owen County 3 4/30/2012 194,000 189,150 98% Epioblasma triquetra Cumberland River 1 5/15/2012 2,500 1,500 60% * Lampsilis abrupta Tennessee River 2 5/21/2012 18,000 - 0% Ellipsaria lineolata Tennessee River 4 6/1/2012 84,000 - 0% Elliptio dilatata Green River 1 6/13/2012 20,000 - 0% Fusconaia ebena Tennessee River 2 6/13/2012 3,000 - 0% Quadrula cylindrica Green River 3 6/13/2012 15,000 - 0% Quadrula pustulosa Green River 1 6/13/2012 3,000 - 0% Lampisilis fasciola Green River 1 6/19/2012 40,000 37,840 95% * Toxolasma lividus Green River 1 6/19/2012 3,000 600 20% * Lampsilis cardium Tennessee River 1 6/20/2012 120,000 118,320 99% * Ligumia recta Tennessee River 2 6/25/2012 46,000 39,560 86% * Lampsilis teres Ohio River 4 6/26/2012 156,000 145,080 93% * Lampsilis teres Ohio River 3 7/16/2012 215,600 6,600 3% * Lampsilis fasciola Green River 1 7/19/2012 86,000 78,260 91% Lampsilis cardium Tennessee River 1 7/24/2012 144,000 126,720 88% * Lampsilis cardium Tennessee River 1 8/16/2012 97,293 - 0% Lampsilis ovata Green River 1 8/20/2012 54,000 - 0% 1,429,393 855,910 60% Table 1: List of the freshwater mussels cultured using in vitro culture methods in 2012. * currently in grow out stage

Annual Research Highlights 2012 99 PROJECT UPDATES / Mollusks

all juveniles were held in Barnhart Culture and Propagation of the “mucket bucket” systems and were Ligumia recta fed a diet of marine and freshwater Black Sandshell, , algae. After mussels reached 4-6 mm and the Endangered Pink Mucket, in length, they were transferred to a re-circulating bowl system. The bowl Lampsilis abrupta, for Restoration system consists of 14 five liter bowls that have been partially filled with pool in the Green River, KY sand. When the mussels reached a size of 12mm or greater in length, they were tagged. On September 14, 2012, both Adam C. Shepard, Monte A. of some type of management (i.e., species were released at two sites in McGregor, Travis J. Bailey, augmentation, translocation, or the Green River. Two hundred sixteen reintroduction). However, the Green pink muckets (avg. length ~14.0 mm) Ben Davis, Fritz C. Vorisek, River ranks sixth in North American and Jacob Culp, Center for and 82 black sandshells (avg. length river systems with respect to freshwater ~22.9 mm) were released upstream of Mollusk Conservation, Kentucky mussel diversity (Haag 2012). Trend Mammoth Cave National Park (Figure Department of Fish and Wildlife data from the KDFWR monitoring 1). One hundred six pink muckets Resources; Bob Carson, efforts indicate recruitment for many (avg. length ~14.4 mm) and 99 black species in the last 7 years, thus showing sandshells (avg. length ~22.9 mm) Mammoth Cave National Park; signs of increasing mussel populations and Leroy Koch, U.S. Fish and were released in the Green River in for some sites. In 2011 and 2012, Mammoth Cave National Park. These Wildlife Service the Center for Mollusk Conservation mussels were released at current long- (CMC) initiated propagation efforts term monitoring stations, which are with the endangered pink mucket quantitatively accessed every 5 years (Lampsilis abrupta), and the non- (Figure 2). he Green River in Kentucky is listed black sandshell (Ligumia recta) Thome to 74 species of freshwater for augmentation in the Green river. mussels, 17 (23%) of which are Both species are rare in the river, and Funding Source: State Wildlife Grant currently federally endangered. Five researchers have only observed a few Program (SWG), Kentucky Aquatic of the 17 species are now considered pink muckets in the last 10 years. Resources Fund (KARF) extinct and another 7 species extirpated Glochidia were extracted from the from the river. Twenty nine mussel black sandshell and pipetted on the KDFWR Strategic Plan: species are listed as a Species of gills of sauger (Sander canadensis) Goal 1. Strategic Objective Greatest Conservation Need. The and on the gills of largemouth bass 5. Comprehensive Wildlife Center for Mollusk Conservation (Micropterus salmoides) for the pink Conservation Strategy: Appendix (CMC) considers the Green River mucket. Host fish are held in Aquatic 3.2, Class Bivalvia. Priority to have ~ 28% of its fauna currently Habitat © Units during infestation Research Project #1. stable, and 42 species are in need (Figure 1). For initial grow out,

Figure 1: Aquatic habitat units used to hold host fish during propagation./ Monte Figure 2: Ligumia recta and Lampsilis abrupta release in the Green River, McGregor 2012 / Monte McGregor

100 Kentucky Department of Fish & Wildlife Resources Mollusks / PROJECT UPDATES

Research with the Endangered Fat Pocketbook, Potamilus capax

Travis J. Bailey, Monte McGregor, Adam Shepard, Christopher Owen, Fritz Vorisek, Andy McDonald, and David Cravens, Center for Mollusk Conservation, Kentucky Department of Fish and Wildlife Resources

ince 2010, the Center for Potamilus capax juveniles / Monte McGregor SMollusk Conservation (CMC) has been conducting research with 100 gallon quarantine system equipped (Aplodinotus grunniens), the only the production of the fat pocketbook, with a biological filtration system, known host . We also tested 2 white Potamilus capax . This species has automatic algae feeder system, and crappie (Pomoxis annularis ), 2 black proven difficult due to several factors: an automated water exchange system. crappie (Pomoxis nigromaculatus),and high mortality in captivity, non-hardy Adult females are held in 30 gallon 1 sculpin (Cottoidea spp.) as potential fish host (only 1 species), inability to tanks with Ohio River substrate from host fish. We collected 1,672 collect brood stock in the spring when the collection site. This year the CMC transformed juveniles throughout the the animals are brooding, and lastly, has worked with 7 adult female P. year, all from freshwater drum host. unique habitat conditions. The adult capax, yielding approximately 230,500 We currently have about 500 juveniles P.capax are currently being held in a larvae infested on 167 freshwater drum of P.capax at the CMC. Some of these were the result of infesting 7 freshwater Potamilus capax drum with 13,000 P.capax larvae in 6.00 2013 from broodstock held during the winter. Individuals are growing at a 5.00 rate similar to that observed in the wild populations (Figure 1). Much research 4.00 is needed with this species with respect to diets, host fish work, habitat and 3.00 water quality requirements, and general

Length (mm) husbandry. 2.00 Funding Source: Kentucky Aquatic 1.00 Resources Fund (KARF)

0.00 2/28/2013 3/14/2013 3/29/2013 4/10/2013 4/24/2013 KDFWR Strategic Plan: Goal 1. Strategic Objective Sand Screen Silt 5. Comprehensive Wildlife Conservation Strategy: Appendix Figure 1: Growth of the fat pocketbook in closed systems at the Center for 3.2, Class Bivalvia. Priority MolluskFigure 1. GrowthConservation. of the fat pocketbook in closed systems at the Center for Mollusk Conservation. Research Project #1.

Annual Research Highlights 2012 101

PROJECT UPDATES / Mollusks

are still found today and 42% of the Long-term Monitoring of Mussel fauna is stable. Ongoing monitoring has discovered recruiting populations Populations in Kentucky: Trends of the endangered fanshell, Cyprogenia in Diversity and Densities in the stegaria, at multiple sites in the river. We assessed the natural recovery Licking River, KY. after removal of individuals from the survey site for a relocation project. In 2007, prior to fanshell removal, we estimated the population size at one site by randomly sampling a 20m x 50m area with 40 meter square grids (Figure 1). Twenty three species and an average of 29.9 mussels/m2 were collected. Ten species were present at densities > 1.0/m2 and four species were present at densities > 2.0/m2 : the latter include Truncilla donaciformis, Elliptio dilatata, Truncilla truncata, and Cyprogenia stegaria. Population Figure 1: Quantitative sampling for estimates for each of these four species mussels. / Monte McGregor ranged from 30,750 to 84,000 (with total numbers for all species estimated at 437,625 mussels). Fanshells were found in 35 samples (densities up to 6/ Monte A. McGregor, Adam Figure 2: Cyprogenia stegaria high m2). In 2010, we surveyed a 5 x 5 m Shepard, Fritz Vorisek, Travis densities in the lower Licking River / area (25 samples) where all mussels Bailey, Christopher Owen, Monte McGregor were removed, measured, and returned and Jacob Culp, Center for (except the fanshell) to the original Mollusk Conservation, Kentucky grid. Twenty four species and 36.5/ 2 Department of Fish and Wildlife HUC 8 (larger watersheds) priority m were collected. Ten species were present at densities > 1.0/m2 and six Resources; Leroy Koch, U.S. management units and several HUC 14 (smaller units) within the larger HUC species were present at densities > 2.0/ Fish and Wildlife Service 8. The highest HUC 8 was labeled m2. Fanshell densities averaged 4.2/m2 Priority Management Unit 1. These (104 individuals) (Figure 2). In 2012, ten Priority Management Units (PMUs) the grid was resurveyed to determine n 2004, the Center for Mollusk support most of the freshwater mussel immigration of new individuals of IConservation (CMC) established richness in Kentucky. The PMUs in fanshells into the grid. Post survey several sites and protocols for order by highest rank are the Green analysis revealed 24 species (one new quantitatively sampling freshwater River, Barren River, Upper Cumberland species and one undetected) and 32.4 mussel populations in Kentucky. Sites River (rank 3, 5, and 6), Licking River, mussels/m2. Thirty individuals of the were selected based on locations lower Tennessee River, lower Ohio fanshell had immigrated into the grid within priority management units River, and upper Ohio River. Within (28.8% recolonization in 2 years). with boundaries defined by HUC most of these rivers, the CMC has Total densities of all species were (hydrologic units) 14. In Kentucky established monitoring sites. In 2012, within normal variation over a 5 year these areas have been identified we assessed 2 sites on the Licking monitoring period. based on presence of imperiled River and one site on the Green River mussels as the most appropriate areas that had been previously examined. Clay Wildlife Management Area for augmentation, expansion, and Monitoring Site and Cooperative reintroduction. Species richness was Licking River Monitoring Sites effort with the Pennsylvania Game identified within each of the HUC Fifty-nine species of freshwater and Boat Commission to Reintroduce units and prioritized based on the mussels have been reported in the the Northern Riffleshell, Epioblasma level of richness. We identified ten Licking River in Kentucky: 48 (81%) torulosa rangiana

102 Kentucky Department of Fish & Wildlife Resources Mollusks / PROJECT UPDATES

2012 (30 m2 samples) 2007 (32 m2 samples) mussels, and placed in a 30 day quarantine Density Scientific Species Density Mussels % of Mussels Mussels % of Mussels tank where they (/m2) Name (/m2) were fed and 79 27.40% 2.63 Actinonaias ligamentina 71 24.60% 2.37 maintained. This holding tank 3 1.00% 0.1 Amblema plicata 10 3.50% 0.33 consisted of a 0 0.00% 0 Cyclonaias tuberculata 1 0.30% 0.03 110 gallon (~ 70 0 0.00% 0 Cyprogenia stegaria (FE) 3 1.00% 0.1 gallons of water) polypropylene 1 0.30% 0.03 Ellipsaria lineolata 0 0.00% 0 tank with a 13 4.50% 0.43 Elliptio dilatata 8 2.80% 0.27 biological filter 1 0.30% 0.03 Epioblasma triquetra (FE) 0 0.00% 0 (media) sump 2 0.70% 0.07 Fusconaia flava 1 0.30% 0.03 (~70 gallon) and a 2 gallon 72 25.00% 2.4 Fusconaia subrotunda 81 28.00% 2.7 feeder (algae and 1 0.30% 0.03 Lampsilis cardium 4 1.40% 0.13 river sediment) 5 1.70% 0.17 Lasmigona costata 4 1.40% 0.13 connected to an automated timed 10 3.50% 0.33 Leptodea fragilis 4 1.40% 0.13 delivery system. 2 0.70% 0.07 Ligumia recta 2 0.70% 0.07 Water changes 30 10.40% 1 Megalonaias nervosa 28 9.70% 0.93 were done daily. Animals were 11 3.80% 0.37 Obliquaria reflexa 9 3.10% 0.3 targeted for release 2 0.70% 0.07 Pleurobema sintoxia 2 0.70% 0.07 after a minimum 6 2.10% 0.2 Potamilus alatus 3 1.00% 0.1 of 30 days after the start of the 13 4.50% 0.43 Ptychobranchus fasciolaris 10 3.50% 0.33 quarantine period 2 0.70% 0.07 Quadrula metanevra 4 1.40% 0.13 (started on ~ 19 6.60% 0.63 Quadrula pustulosa 18 6.20% 0.6 September 17-18, thus ~ October 4 1.40% 0.13 Strophitus undulatus 2 0.70% 0.07 18), but flows 1 0.30% 0.03 Truncilla donaciformes 1 0.30% 0.03 in the Licking 11 3.80% 0.37 Truncilla truncata 23 8.00% 0.77 River were too high (> 400 cfs) 288 100% 9.6 Totals 289 100% 9.63 for completing this task. All Unique Species: 21 Overlapping species: 19 Unique Species: 21 97 remaining animals (2 died Table 1: Table 1. List of the freshwater mussels found at the Clay WMA in 2010 and 2012 in the 5x5 grid in quarantine) were then monitoring area with the number of individuals, % abundance, and density/m2. transferred to the KDFWR Minor In 2011, KDFWR worked with the and the KDFWR team collected 99 Clark Hatchery KY Field Office (KFO) of the USFWS northern riffleshell Epioblasma( (KDFWR has been holding several to develop a plan to reintroduce the torulosa rangiana) mussels from the rare mussels at the MC Hatchery since Northern Riffleshell into Kentucky. Alleghany River site at Hunter Station 2006) where they were held in 8 feet KDFWR/KFO recommended 100 Bridge in Forest County, Pennsylvania. long feed trough tanks supplied with individuals be translocated to two sites On Sept 14-18, 2011, all individuals gravity flow Cave Run Lake (Licking in Kentucky. In 2011, the PA Scientific of the northern riffleshell were tagged River) water (supplying ~ 5-10 gallons Collection permit was approved (bee tags and P.I.T. tags), measured, per minute of wild water to the tanks). aged, weighed and checked for zebra From Dec 2011 to June 2012, 67 of the

Annual Research Highlights 2012 103 PROJECT UPDATES / Mollusks

Figure 3: Licking River at Clay WMA / Monte McGregor

97 mussels died (67%) in captivity. The displaying and had spawned at the site Funding Source: State Wildlife Grant Licking River remained high (> 200cfs) (i.e., gravid). Overall river survival Program (SWG), United States Fish and until the following spring when the was 40% of the 30 released in June Wildlife Service (USFWS) animals were released in mid June 2012. 2012. The Clay WMA area has three On June 15, 2012, thirty (30) northern endangered mussels, Cyprogenia KDFWR Strategic Plan: Goal 1. riffleshells were transferred from the MC stegaria, Epioblasma triquetra, and Strategic Objective 5. Comprehensive Hatchery to the Licking River at Clay Plethobasus cyphyus (only found in Wildlife Conservation Strategy: Wildlife Management Area. Individuals qualitative searches). With the addition Appendix 3.2, Class Bivalvia. Priority were placed in a 3x3 m area. of the northern riffleshell, there are Survey Project #1. On August 21, 2012, quantitative now four endangered mussels at the mussel sampling was conducted at the site. KDFWR will be adding Lampsilis Licking River release site at the Clay abrupta (propagated animals) in WMA (as part of the 5 year monitoring 2013 and possibly others in the program). The PIT tags attached to the future. The area has additional rare northern riffleshells were located with species outside of the monitoring grid a monitoring probe. Of the original 99 location, such as Obovaria subrotunda, mussels collected from PA, 97 (98%) Simpsonaias ambigua, Alasmidonta survived the quarantine period (min viridis, A. marginata, and others that of 30 days), 30 (31%) survived the 8 are considered species of greatest month holding period, and 12 (12%) conservation need in Kentucky (Figure were collected during the evaluation 3). Results from the 2012 survey period in August 2012. Of the 30 indicated 21 species (9.6 mussels/m2) released at the Clay WMA site, 25 PIT (See Table 1). This site compares well tagged animals were located (28 were to other quality sites supporting T&E PIT tagged, ~89% recovery): 20 were species in the state of Kentucky. We females and 10 males. Survival was plan to try this release again but earlier 41% for the females and 33% for the in the year to allow more time post males. Of the 12 live animals, 7 were quarantine to release the adult mussels. females and at least 2 individuals were

104 Kentucky Department of Fish & Wildlife Resources Mollusks / PROJECT UPDATES

Propagation and Culture of Freshwater Mussels at the Center for Mollusk Conservation in Kentucky in 2012

Figure 2: Algae culture systems at the CMC / Monte McGregor

Figure 3: Downweller system for culturing early stage juvenile mussels./ Monte McGregor

Figure 1: Culture systems for starter mussels / Monte McGregor feeding levels and cultured freshwater algae (Figure 2) and commercially- available saltwater algae as well as Monte A. McGregor, Christopher strategy. Due to degraded water bacterial cultures are fed continuously Owen, Adam Shepard, Andy quality in much of the state (and, in throughout the day. The standard McDonald, Fritz Vorisek, fact, the nation), it is important to “Mucket bucket” design has been Travis Bailey, and David be able to grow these animals in re- altered for flow-through recirculation circulating systems with controlled Cravens, Center for Mollusk from a sump to improve water quality water exchange. We have constructed and ease maintenance (Figure 1). New Conservation, Kentucky various closed, recirculating systems larger-scale acrylic downweller systems Department of Fish and Wildlife which are capable of producing have been designed and fabricated Resources ~200,000-400,000 mussels per year (Figure 3). Large-scale upweller to a tagable or stockable size for systems and sand-substrate bowl release. The challenge of raising large systems are also designed for grow- he restoration and recovery of numbers of these small sensitive out of larger-sized juveniles (Figure Tendangered species of mussels animals has led to the development of 4). Small and large bowl systems are in Kentucky via captive propagation advanced recirculating systems with also used to culture juveniles to a and grow-out of these species is system checks and low maintenance larger size in a more natural setting becoming an important component requirements. Particle counts are in our modern greenhouse (Figure of the state-wide mussel conservation monitored to maintain appropriate 5). UV and mechanical filtration have

Annual Research Highlights 2012 105 PROJECT UPDATES / Mollusks

Figure 4: Large scale upwelling system for mussel culture. / Monte McGregor been integrated into the design of the systems to control nuisance and disease organisms. Many functions of each system are automated including water changes and feeding. As the animals grow, moving them onto larger screens and increasing the grow-out area is essential. Flow rates are maintained at specified levels in all systems and daily maintenance and monitoring is performed. Currently, ~30,000 mussels are growing in these systems, ranging in size from 2mm to 10mm. Water quality is analyzed on a routine basis in the new research lab using a Hach © spectrophotometer; and algae cell counts are examined using a Beckman particle counter (Figure 6). Hatchery protocols, system design, and water quality parameters are recorded daily to document growth and survival of juvenile mussels. As of 2012, the CMC has worked with 54 species found in Kentucky, have grown 21 species to a tagable size, released 8 species back Figure 5: Small bowl system for culturing juvenile mussels. / Monte McGregor in the wild, and have worked with 13 endangered species (Table 1). Multiple species are scheduled for release in 2013.

Funding Source: State Wildlife Grant Program (SWG), Kentucky Aquatic Resources Fund (KARF)

KDFWR Strategic Plan: Goal 1. Strategic Objective 5. Comprehensive Wildlife Conservation Strategy: Appendix 3.2, Class Bivalvia. Priority Figure 6: Water quality monitoring station in new research lab at the CMC. Research Project #1. / Monte McGregor

106 Kentucky Department of Fish & Wildlife Resources Mollusks / PROJECT UPDATES

Table 1

Common Species Name Scientific Species Name Endangered Species Cultured to a Tagable Size Juveniles Released

Mucket Actinonaias ligamentina

Mussel Pheasantshell Actinonaias pectorosa 

Cumberland Elktoe Alasmidonta atropurpurea  

Propagation Elktoe Alasmidonta marginata

Slippershell Mussel Alasmidonta viridis  

and Release Flat Floater Anodonta suborbiculata

Rock Pocketbook Arcidens confragosus

Activity at Fanshell Pearlymussel Cyprogenia stegaria 

Dromedary Pearlymussel Dromus dromas 

the Center Butterfly Ellipsaria lineolata 

Elephantear Elliptio crassidens

for Mollusk Spike Elliptio dilatata

Cumberlandian Combshell Epioblasma brevidens 

Conservation Oyster Mussel Epioblasma capsaeformis  

Snuffbox Epioblasma triquetra   

Wabash Pigtoe Fusconaia flava

Longsolid Fusconaia subrotunda

Pink Mucket Lampsilis abrupta   

Plain Pocketbook Lampsilis cardium 

Wavyrayed Lampmussel Lampsilis fasciola 

Pocketbook Lampsilis ovata

Fatmucket Lampsilis siliquoidea  

Yellow Sandshell Lampsilis teres 

White Heelsplitter Lasmigona complanata

Flutedshell Lasmigona costata 

Fragile Papershell Leptodea fragilis

Black Sandshell Ligumia recta  

Cumberland Moccasinshell Medionidus conradicus

Round Hickorynut Obovaria subrotunda

Littlewing Pearlymussel Pegias fabula 

Sheepnose Plethobasus cyphyus 

Clubshell Pleurobema clava  

Ohio Pigtoe Pleurobema cordatum

Pyramid Pigtoe Pleurobema rubrum

Round Pigtoe Pleurobema sintoxia

Fat Pocketbook Potamilus capax 

Pink Papershell Potamilus ohiensis

Bleufer Potamilus purpuratus

Kidneyshell Ptychobranchus fasciolaris

Giant Floater Pyganodon grandis 

Rabbitsfoot Quadrula cylindrica  

Salamander Mussel Simpsonaias ambigua  

Creeper Strophitus undulatus 

Purple Lilliput Toxolasma lividus 

Lilliput Toxolasma parvus

Pistolgrip Tritogonia verrucosa

Fawnsfoot Truncilla donaciformis

Deertoe Truncilla truncata

Paper Pondshell Utterbackia imbecillis 

Rainbow Villosa iris

Little Spectaclecase Villosa lienosa

Kentucky Creekshell Villosa ortmanni

Painted Creekshell Villosa taeniata

Cumberland Bean Villosa trabalis    Annual Research Highlights 2012 107 PROJECT REFERENCES 2007-2012

Hartman, P.J., D.S. Maehr, and J.L. Larkin. 2009. Habitat selection Published Research by cerulean warblers in Eastern Kentucky. The Wilson Journal of Ornithology 121(3):469-475. Barding, E.E., and M.J. Lacki. 2012. Winter diet of river otters in Kentucky. Northeastern Naturalist 19:157-164. Heyden, K.G. 2010. 2010 Barn Owl (Tyto alba) inventory and current management for the species in Kentucky. The Kentucky Warbler Barding, E.E., M.J. Lacki, and L.L. Patton. 2010. Recovery of the 86(4): 79-85. river otter to Kentucky. Proc. Annu. Conf. S.E. Assoc. Fish and Wildlife Agencies (In press). Heyden, K. G. 2010. Current status of nesting Bald Eagles (Haliaeetus leucocephalus) in Kentucky. The Kentucky Warbler 86(4):85-89. Baxley, D.L., J.O. Barnard, and H. Venter. 2012. Chelydra serpentina (Common Snapping Turtle) growth rates. Herpetological Review Hopkins, R.L. 2009. Use of landscape pattern metrics and multiscale 43: 126-127. data in aquatic species distribution models: a case study of a freshwater mussel. Landscape Ecology 29:943-955. Britzke, E.R., B.A. Slack, M.P. Armstrong, and S.C. Loeb. Effects of orientation and weatherproofing on the detection of bat echolocation Hopkins, R.L., M.D. Burns, B. Burr, and L.J. Hopman. 2008. Building calls. 2010. Journal of Fish and Wildlife Management 1(2):136-141. a centralized database for Kentucky fishes: Progress and future applications. Journal of the Kentucky Academy Corn, J.L., M.E. Cartwright, K.J. Alexy, T.E. Cornish, E.J.B. Manning, of Science 69 (2): 164-169. A.N. Cartoceti, and J.R. Fischer. 2010. Surveys for disease agents in introduced elk in Arkansas and Kentucky. Journal of Wildlife Hopkins, R.L. and B.M. Burr. 2009. Modeling freshwater fish Diseases 46(1):186-194. distributions using multiscale landscape data: A case study of six narrow range endemics. Ecological Modeling 220:2024-2034. Culp, J.J., A.C. Shepard, and M.A. McGregor. 2009. Fish hosts and conglutinates of the pyramid pigtoe (Pleurobema rubrum). Johnson, J.S., J.N. Kropczynski, M.J. Lacki, and G.D. Langlois. 2012. Southeastern Naturalist 8(1):19-22. Social networks of Rafinesque’s big-eared bats (Corynorhinus rafinesquii) in bottomland hardwood forests. Journal of Culp, J.J., W.R. Haag, D.A. Arrington, and T.B. Kennedy. 2011. Mammalogy 93:1545-1558. Seasonal and species-specific patterns in abundance offreshwater mussel glochidia in stream drift. Journal of the North American Johnson, J.S., and M.J. Lacki. 2012 Summer heterothermy in Benthological Society 30:436-445. Rafinesque’s big-eared bats (Corynorhinus rafinesquii) roosting in tree cavities in bottomland hardwood forests. Journal of Dzialak, M.R., K.M. Carter, M.J. Lacki, D.F. Westneat, and K. Comparative Physiology B: 1-13. Anderson. 2009. Activity of post-fledgingperegrine falcons in different rearing and habitat conditions. Southeastern Naturalist Larkin, J.L., D.S. Maehr, J.J. Krupa, J.J. Cox, K. Alexy, D.E. Unger, 8(1):93-106. and C. Barton. 2008. Small mammal response to vegetation and spoil conditions on a reclaimed surface mine in eastern Kentucky. Edmonds, S. T., D. C. Evers, D. A. Cristol, C. Mettke-Hofmann, L. Southeastern Naturalist 7(3):401-112. L. Powell, A. J. McGann, J. W. Armiger, O. P. Lane, D. F. Tessler, P. Newell, K. Heyden, and N. J. O’Driscoll. 2010. Geographic Lynch, W.L., and C.N. Moreira. 2008. Nest arrival vocalizations of and seasonal variation in mercury exposure of the declining Rusty the Turkey Vulture Cathartes aura (Cathartidae: Falconiformes). Blackbird. The Condor 112(4):789-799. Vulture News 59:3-6.

Eisenhour, D.J., A.M. Richter, and J.M. Schiering. 2011. Conservation Morgan, J.J., G. Sprandel, B.A. Robinson and K. Wethington. 2012. A status of the longhead darter, Percina macrocephala, in county-based northern bobwhite habitat prioritization model for Kinniconick Creek, Kentucky. Southeastern Fishes Council Kentucky. Proceedings of the National Quail Symposium 7:281- Proceedings 53:13-20. 287.

Elliott, C.L. and T. Edwards. 2012. Evaluation of tooth-wear and Niemiller, M.L., B.M. Fitzpatrick, P. Shah, L. Schmitz, and T.J. Near. replacement method for aging white-tailed deer (Odocoileus 2012. Evidence for repeated loss of selective constraint in rhodopsin virginianus) on the Blue Grass Army Depot, Madison County, of amblyopsid cavefishes (teleostei: amblyopsidae). Evolution Kentucky. Journal of the Kentucky Academy of Science 73:73-76. 67:732-748.

Frary, V.J., J. Duchamp, D.S. Maehr, and J.L. Larkin. 2011. Density Niemiller, M.L., J.R. McCandless, R.G. Reynolds, J. Caddle, T.J. Near, and distribution of a colonizing front of the American black bear C.R. Tillquist W.D. Pearson, and B.M. Fitzpatrick. 2012. Effects Ursus americanus. Wildlife Biology 17:404-416. of climatic and geological processes during the Pleistocene on the evolutionary history of the northern cavefish, Ablyopsis spelaea. Griggs, A., M.K. Keel, K. Castle and D. Wong. 2012. Enhanced Evolution 67: 1011-1025. surveillance for white-nose syndrome in bats. Emerging Infectious Diseases 18:530-532. Owen C.T., J.E. Alexander, Jr., and M.A. McGregor. 2010. Control of microbial contamination during in vitro culture of larval unionid Harris, D., C. Elliott, R. Frederick, and T. Edwards. 2009. Habitat mussels. Invertebrate Reproduction and Development. 54 (4):187- characteristics associated with American woodcock (Scolopax 193 minor Gmelin) nests in central Kentucky. The Journal of the Kentucky Academy of Sciences 70(2):114-144. Songbirds and2007-2012 Raptors PROJECT REFERENCES

Survival of Elk Post-Translocation? Owen, C.T., M.A. McGregor, G.A. Cobbs, and J.E. Alexander Jr. Volume V ...... 103 2010. Muskrat predation on a diverse unionid mussel community: Volume VI…...... 90 Impacts of prey species composition, size and shape. Freshwater Biology 56(3): 554-564. Cause-Specific Mortality, Behavior, and Group Dynamics of Cow Elk in Kentucky Patton, L.L, D.S. Maehr, J.E. Duchamp, S. Fei, J.W. Gassett and J.L. Volume VI ...... 48 Larkin. 2010. Do the golden-winged warbler and blue-winged warbler exhibit species-specific differences in their breeding habitat Chronic Wasting Disease Surveillance in Kentucky use? Avian Conservation and Ecology 5(2). Volume I ...... 27

Reidy, J.L., F.R. Thompson III, and J.W. Bailey. 2011. Comparison Genetic Characteristics of Restored Elk Populations in Kentucky of methods for estimating density of forest songbirds from point Volume II…...... 62 counts. Journal of Wildlife Management 75:558-568. Volume III ...... 112 Volume IV...... 95 Ruder, M.G., A.B. Allison, D.L. Miller, and M.K. Keel. 2010. Volume V ...... 130 Pathology in practice. Journal of the American Veterinary Medical Association 237(7):783-785. Hunters’ use of the Kentucky Department of Fish and Wildlife Resources’ Telecheck System Shock, B.C., S.M. Murphy, L.L. Patton, P.M. Shock, C.Olfenbuttel, J. Volume II ...... 7 Beringer, S. Prange, D.M. Grove, M. Peek, J.W. Butfiloski, D.W. Hughes, J.M. Lockhart, S.N. Bevins, S. VandeWoude, K.R. Crooks, Kentucky Residents’ Awareness of and Opinions on Elk V.F. Nettles, H.M. Brown, D.S. Peterson and M.J. Yabsley. 2011. Restoration and Management Efforts Distribution and prevalence of Cytauxzoon felis in bobcats (Lynx Volume V ...... 16 rufus), the natural reservoir, and other wild felids in thirteen states. Veterinary Parasitology 175:325-330. Maternal Antibody Transfer and Meningeal Worm Infection in Kentucky Elk Steen, D.A., L.L. Smith, J. Brock, J.B. Pierce, J.R. Lee, D. Baxley, J. Volume II...... 13 Humphries, B. Sutton, D. Stevenson, C. Guyer, and B. Gregory. 2012. Multi-scale occupancy modeling of forest-associated snakes Meningeal Worm (Parelaphostrongylus tenuis) Infection Rate within the southeastern United States. Ecological Applications and Effects on Survival of Reintroduced Elk (Cervus elaphus 22:1084-1097. nelsonii) in Kentucky Volume I ...... 22 Tanner, E. P., A. M. Unger, P. D. Keyser, C. A. Harper, J. D. Clark, J. J. Morgan. 2012. Survival of radio-marked versus leg-banded Prevalence of Select Parasites of Elk in Southeastern Kentucky northern bobwhite in Kentucky. Proceedings of the National Volume V ...... 104 Quail Symposium 7:212-216. Resource Selection, Movement Patterns, Survival, and Cause- Thackston, R.E., D.C. Sisson, T.L. Crouch, D.L. Baxley, and B.A. Specific Mortality of Adult Bull Elk in Kentucky Robinson. 2012. Hunter harvest of pen-reared northern bobwhites Volume IV ...... 61 released from the surrogator. Proceedings of the National Quail Volume V ...... 129 Symposium 7:72-76. Volume VI…...... 89

Unger, A. M., E. P. Tanner, C. A. Harper, P. D. Keyser, J.J. Morgan. Using FLIR (Forward-Looking Infrared Radiography) To 2012. Northern bobwhite survival related to movement on a Estimate Elk Density and Distribution in Eastern Kentucky reclaimed surface coal mine. Proceedings of the National Quail Volume I ...... 10 Symposium 7:223-228. Volume II ...... 9

Vukovich, M. and G. Ritchison. 2008. Foraging behavior of Short- Eared Owls and Northern Harriers on a reclaimed surface mine in Kentucky. Southeastern Naturalist 1(1):1-10. Small Game West, A.S., P.D. Keyser, and J.J. Morgan. 2012. Northern bobwhite survival, nest success, and habitat use in Kentucky during the (Quail, Squirrels, Rabbits) breeding season. Proceedings of the National Quail Symposium 7:217-222. A New Approach to Mast Surveys in Kentucky Volume I ...... 35

Big Game Assessment of Habitat Value for Recovering Disturbed Warm- (Elk and Deer) Season Grass Using Volume II ...... 25 Assessment of Reproductive Output for White Tailed Deer in Kentucky Volume I…...… ...... 26 Avian Response to Production Stands of Native Warm-Season Grasses Can Body Condition and Select Physiological Indicators Predict Volume III ...... 77

Annual Research Highlights 2012 109 PROJECT REFERENCES 2007-2010 PROJECT REFERENCES 2007-2012

Volume V ...... 59 Black Bear Resource Selection, Demographics, and Movement Patterns in Kentucky Bobwhite Focal Area Activity and Monitoring in KY Volume I ...... 11 Volume III ...... 79 Volume II ...... 60 Volume IV ...... 79 Volume IV ...... 99 Volume V ...... 132 Conservation Reserve Enhancement Program (CREP) Landscape Monitoring Initiative Colonization of the Black Bear in Eastern Kentucky: Conflict and Volume IV ...... 34 Tolerance Between People and Wildlife Volume I ...... 13 Efficacy of Surrogate PropagationTM As a Quail Restoration Technique Volume V ...... 45 in Central Kentucky Volume III ...... 80 Estimating Black Bear Populations in Kentucky Volume IV ...... 34 Volume I ...... 21 Volume II ...... 17 Monitoring Efforts for Northern Bobwhite Populations in Kentucky Volume I ...... 36 Genetic Diversity, Structuring, and Recolonization Patterns of Black Bears in Eastern Kentucky Northern Bobwhite Population Ecology on Reclaimed Mined Land Volume II ...... 61 Volume III ...... 78 Volume III ...... 33 Volume IV ...... 97 Volume IV ...... 98 Volume V ...... 131 Volume VI ...... 29 Population Size and Density of Black Bears in McCreary County, Kentucky Population Ecology and Habitat use of Northern Bobwhite on a Volume IV ...... 62 Reclaimed Surface Coal Mine in Kentucky Volume V ...... 36 Volume VI ...... 91 Volume VI ...... 92

Turkey Birds Wild Turkey Reproduction in Kentucky Volume I ...... 38 Songbirds and Raptors Assessing Avian use of land enrolled in Conservation Practice 33 (CP33), Conservation Reserve Program Volume I ...... 42 Furbearers Volume II ...... 70 Bobcat space use in the Paul Van Booven Wildlife Management Area, Assessing Raptor Populations of Peabody Wildlife Management Area Southeastern KY and Throughout Kentucky Volume V ...... 22 Volume I ...... 43

Distribution, Population Status and Habitat Characteristics of the River Bald eagle tracking in Kentucky expands to collect information on Otter (Lontra canadensis) in Kentucky adult home range Volume I ...... 18 Volume VI ...... 95 Volume III ...... 113 Volume V ...... 26 Barn Owl Management and 2010 Inventory Volume IV ...... 64 Exploring Methods for Monitoring Bobcats in Kentucky Volume V ...... 105 The Common Raven in Cliff Habitat: Detectability and Occupancy Volume VI ...... 94 Volume II ...... 54 Volume V ...... 64 Geographic Distribution and Prevalence of Cytauxzoon felis in Wild Felids Cooperative Cerulean Warbler Forest Management Project Volume II ...... 63 Volume I ...... 44

Ecological and Behavioral Interactions Between Golden-Winged and Blue- Winged Warblers in Eastern Kentucky Bear Volume I ...... 20

Bias in GPS Telemetry Studies: A Case Study Using Black Bears in Estimating Abundance of Species of Concern in the Central Hardwoods Southeastern Kentucky Region Volume III ...... 38 Volume II ...... 56

110 Kentucky Department of Fish & Wildlife Resources 2007-2012 PROJECT REFERENCES

Evaluating the Effects of Grassland Management on Nesting and Avian Influenza Monitoring throughout Kentucky Migrating Songbirds at Shaker Village of Pleasant Hill Volume I ...... 28 Volume III ...... 70 Volume II ...... 71

Evaluating the Effects of Grassland Management on Raptor Habitat Marsh Bird Monitoring in Kentucky Use at Peabody WMA Volume III ...... 74 Volume III ...... 69 Migratory Shorebirds, Colonial Water Bird, and Woodcock An Evaluation Tool for Avian Monitoring Programs Investigations Volume II ...... 55 Volume I ...... 29

Golden-Winged Warbler Monitoring Monitoring and Management of Kentucky’s Waterfowl Volume II ...... 58 Volume I ...... 30 Volume II ...... 73 Grassland Songbird Survey Volume II ...... 59 Monitoring Giant Canada Goose Populations in Kentucky Volume I ...... 31 Investigating Local Declines of Rusty Blackbirds in Kentucky Volume II ...... 74 Volume III ...... 68 Monitoring, Migrating, and Wintering Sandhill Cranes in Cecilia, Monitoring Priority Songbird Populations Kentucky Volume I ...... 45 Volume V ...... 106 Monitoring the Effects of WMA Forest Stand Improvements on Mourning Dove Banding in Kentucky Songbirds Volume I ...... 32 Volume III ...... 71 Post-Season Banding of American Black Ducks in Kentucky Population Status and Reproductive Success of the Bald Eagle in Volume III ...... 75 Kentucky Volume I ...... 46 Proactive Wood Duck Management in Kentucky Volume I ...... 34 Population Status and Reproductive Success of the Peregrine Falcon in Kentucky Reproductive Success of the Interior Least Tern in Kentucky Bats Volume I ...... 47 Volume I ...... 33 Volume II ...... 53 Sharp-shinned Hawks in Kentucky: Detection, Abundance, Nest-Site Volume III ...... 112 Selection, and Breeding Success Volume III ...... 72 Cave Protection and Monitoring of Federally Listed Bat Species in Volume IV ...... 30 Kentucky Volume I ...... 40 Statewide Osprey Nesting Survey Volume V...... 133 Determination of Bat Species Within Interior Forested Areas Using Anabat II Systems and Mist-Netting in Daniel Boone National Studying the Movements of Two Young Bald Eagles Forest Volume IV ...... 65 Volume I ...... 15

Turkey and Black Vulture Invertebrate Nest Association Effects of Orientation and Weatherproofing on the Detection of Volume IV ...... 66 Echolocation Calls in the Eastern United States.

Volume II ...... 34 Update on Long-term Monitoring for Peregrine Falcons in Kentucky

Volume VI ...... 96 Foraging and Roosting Ecology of Rafinesque’s Big-eared bat in Kentucky Vocalizations of adult Turkey Vultures as they Arrive at Nest Sites Volume III ...... 81 during the Nesting Season Volume IV ...... 102 Volume I ...... 48 Volume VI ...... 34

Identifying and Protecting Hibernation Roosts for Endangered Bats in Migratory Shorebirds and Colonial Nesting Kentucky Waterbirds Volume I ...... 41 Volume II ...... 37 American Woodcock Nocturnal Field Usage during Spring Migration in Central Kentucky Surveillance and Monitoring of Cave Roosts for Abnormal Emergence Volume III ...... 73 Behavior By Rare and Endangered Bats in Kentucky Volume IV ...... 101 Volume III ...... 82 Volume V ...... 52

Annual Research Highlights 2012 111 PROJECT REFERENCES 2007-2012

Reptiles and Amphibians Rearing Juvenile Freshwater Mussels Volume I ...... 49 Effects of Phragmites Removal on Species of Greatest Conservation Volume III ...... 111 Need at Clear Creek WMA Volume IV ...... 106 Volume III ...... 67 Volume V ...... 70 Volume IV ...... 104 Volume V ...... 84 Endangered Species Recovery in Kentucky: Restoring the Freshwater Mussel via Population Augmentation Inventory, Monitoring, and Management of Amphibians and Reptiles Volume I ...... 50 in Kentucky Volume I ...... 39 Volume II ...... 52 Evaluating the Present Status of Mussel Resources in Kentucky: Volume III ...... 114 Quantitative and Qualitative Survey and Monitoring Efforts Volume IV ...... 103 Volume I ...... 51 Volume V ...... 134 Volume VI ...... 97 Fanshell, Cyprogenia stegaria augmentation in Ohio and West Virginia Volume IV ...... 56 Life History and Population Assessment of the Western Cottonmouth in Western Kentucky Fish host determined for the Kentucky Creekshell, Villosa ortmanni Volume II ...... 50 and a new fish host found for the Cumberland Combshell, Epioblasma brevidens Status Assessment and Conservation of the Eastern Hellbender Volume IV ...... 58 Volume II ...... 51 Five Year Quantitative Monitoring at Thomas Bend on the Green River, Status Survey of the Alligator Snapping Turtle (Machrochelys Kentucky temminckii) in Kentucky Volume III ...... 60 Volume III ...... 66 Volume VI ...... 40 Freshwater Mollusk Monitoring in the South Fork Kentucky River System Volume II ...... 49 Volume IV ...... 40

Mollusks Long-term Monitoring of Mussel Populations in Kentucky: Trends in Diversity and Densities in the Licking River, KY Artificial Culture of Freshwater Mussels using Advanced in vitro Volume VI ...... 102 Culture Methods at the Center for Mollusk Conservation Volume VI ...... 98 Propagation and Culture of Freshwater Mussels at the Center for Mollusk Conservation in Kentucky in 2012 Advances in the Propagation of Rare and Endangered Mussel Species.. Volume VI ...... 105 Volume II ...... 46 Research with the Endangered Fat Pocketbook, Potamilus capax Augmentation of the Cumberland Bean, Villosa trabalis and its host Volume VI ...... 101 fish, the Striped Darter, Etheostoma virgatum in Sinking Creek, Kentucky Rockcastle River Mussel Survey Volume III ...... 62 Volume IV ...... 59

Augmentation of the Slippershell Mussel, Alasmidonta viridis in Guist Successful Reintroduction of Two Endangered and Two Candidate Creek, Kentucky Mussel Species to the Big South Fork Cumberland River, Kentucky Volume III ...... 58 Volume II ...... 47

Augmentation of the Snuffbox, Epioblasma triquetra in the Rolling Successful Augmentation of the Fatmucket, Lampsilis siliquoidea, in Fork River, Kentucky the Elkhorn Creek, Kentucky Volume III ...... 59 Volume II ...... 48

Culture and Propagation of the Black Sandshell, Ligumia recta, and the Endangered Pink Mucket, Lampsilis abrupta, for Restoration in the Green River, KY Crayfish Volume VI ...... 100 The Conservation Status of Cambarus veteranus (Big Sandy Crayfish) Development of a Bivalve Diet for Use in Early Stage Juvenile in Kentucky Freshwater Mussel Culture Volume III ...... 63 Volume I ...... 17 Volume V ...... 76

Development of In Vitro (artificial) Laboratory Culture Methods for The Conservation Status of Cambarus parvoculus (Mountain Midget Crayfish) in KY

112 Kentucky Department of Fish & Wildlife Resources 2007-2012 PROJECT REFERENCES

Volume III ...... 64 Volume IV ...... 9 Volume V ...... 76 Distribution, Habitat, and Conservation Status of Icthyofaunal Species Response of Crayfish Populations to Restored Stream Habitats in of Greatest Conservation Need Disturbed Portions of East Fork Little Sandy River basin, Lawrence Volume I ...... 59 & Boyd Counties, Kentucky Volume III ...... 65 Distribution, Habitat, and Conservation Status of Rare Fishes in Volume V ...... 80 Kentucky Volume III ...... 110 Volume IV ...... 89 Volume VI ...... 87 Fishes Evaluation of a 12.0-in Minimum Size Limit on Channel Catfish in Alligator Gar Propagation and Restoration in Western Kentucky Kentucky’s Small Impoundments Volume III ...... 54 Volume I ...... 60 Volume IV ...... 88 Volume III ...... 95 Volume VI ...... 83 Volume IV ...... 78 Volume V ...... 115 Alligator Gar Telemetry Project Volume VI ...... 52 Volume VI ...... 84 Evaluation of a 15-20 Inch Protective Slot Limit and 5 Fish Creel Limit Analysis of the Environmental Requirements for Etheostoma cinereum on Rainbow rout in the Lake Cumberland Tailwater and Percina squamata in the Rockcastle River Volume I ...... 61 Volume II ...... 41 Volume III ...... 90 Volume III ...... 109 Volume IV ...... 73 Volume IV ...... 22 Volume VI ...... 72 Volume VI ...... 14 Evaluation of a 36-in Minimum Length Limit on Muskellunge at Three A Survey of Fishes in Terrapin Creek, Kentucky Kentucky Reservoirs Volume I ...... 56 Volume IV ...... 54 Volume III ...... 115 Volume V ...... 121 Volume VI ...... 71 Black Bass Tournament Results in Kentucky Volume III ...... 103 Evaluation of a 40-Inch Muskellunge Minimum Length Limit at Volume IV ...... 86 Buckhorn Lake Volume V ...... 110 Volume I ...... 62 Volume VI ...... 56 Volume III ...... 93

Captive Propagation and Reintroduction of the Cumberland Darter and Evaluation of a Seasonal Rainbow Trout Fishery in Cedar Creek Lake . Kentucky Arrow Darter in Southeastern Kentucky Volume VI ...... 46 Volume II ...... 42 Volume III ...... 107 Evaluation of a Smallmouth Bass Stocking Program at Paintsville Lake Volume IV ...... 91,92 Volume V ...... 101 Volume VI ...... 85,86 Volume VI ...... 64

Conservation Status and Habitat of the Longhead Darter in Kinniconick Evaluation of a Supplemental White Crappie Stocking Program at Four Creek, Lewis County Kentucky Kentucky Reservoirs Volume I ...... 57 Volume IV ...... 55 Volume II ...... 69 Volume V ...... 109 Volume III ...... 21 Volume VI ...... 62

Databasing and Geo-Referencing Fish Collection for Kentucky Evaluation of Kentucky’s Largemouth Bass Stocking Initiative Volume I ...... 58 Volume I… ...... …63 Volume III ...... 96 Description and Geography of Restricted Range Kentucky Fish Volume IV ...... 79 Endemics Volume V ...... 112 Volume III ...... 57 Volume VI ...... 54 Volume IV ...... 90 Evaluation of the Growth of Two Different Stocking Sizes of Blue Description and Geography of Two Unique Populations of the Catfish Stocked into Three North Central Kentucky Small Stonecat, Noturus favus (Siluriformes: Ictaluridae) Impoundments Volume VI ...... 22 Volume I ...... 64 Volume III ...... 98 Distribution and Ecology of the Blackfin Sucker Thoburnia( atripinnis) Volume IV ...... 81 in the Upper Barren River, Kentucky Volume V ...... 114 Volume III ...... 55 Volume VI ...... 60

Annual Research Highlights 2012 113 PROJECT REFERENCES 2007-2012

Evaluation of Trophy Brown Trout Regulations and Stocking Strategies the Blacktail Redhorse, in Terrrapin Creek, Graves County, in the Lake Cumberland Tailwater Kentucky Volume I ...... 65 Volume I ...... 71 Volume III ...... 87 Volume II ...... 27 Volume IV ...... 16 Monitoring and Management of Ohio River Sport Fisheries (Meldahl Evaluation of White Bass Stocking to Enhance Existing Reservoir Pool) Populations Volume I ...... 72 Volume I ...... 66 Volume III ...... 100 Volume III ...... 89 Volume IV ...... 83 Volume IV ...... 72 Volume V ...... 126 Volume V ...... 124 Volume VI ...... 78

Exploitation Rates of Stocked Channel Catfish and Rainbow Trout in Monitoring Trends in Black Bass Fisheries Fishing in Neighborhoods (FINs) Lakes Volume I ...... 73 Volume V ...... 99 Volume VI ...... 68 Ohio River Largemouth Bass Supplemental Stocking Study (Markland Pool) The Fishing in Neighborhoods (FINS) Program: Providing Fishing Volume I ...... 74 Opportunities to Residents in Cities across the Commonwealth Volume III ...... 102 Volume V ...... 116 Volume IV ...... 85 Volume VI ...... 66 Volume V ...... 127 Volume VI ...... 77 Impacts of Spawning Habitat Manipulations on Largemouth Bass Year- Class Production in Meldahl Pool, Ohio River Palezone Shiner Status Survey and Habitat Delineation Volume I ...... 67 Volume I ...... 24 Volume III ...... 99 Volume IV ...... 82 Preliminary Assessment of a Newly Established Blue Catfish Volume V ...... 128 Population in Taylorsville Lake Volume I ...... 75 Investigation of the restoration of Native Walleye in the Upper Levisa Volume III ...... 97 Fork Volume IV ...... 80 Volume V ...... 102 Volume V ...... 113 Volume VI ...... 69 Volume VI ...... 58

Investigation of the Restoration of Native Walleye in the Upper Barren Preliminary Assessment of Bluegill and Redear Sunfish Populations in River Small Impoundments Volume I ...... 68 Volume I ...... 76 Volume III ...... 92 Volume III ...... 91 Volume IV ...... 75 Volume IV ...... 74 Volume V ...... 122 Volume V ...... 118 Volume VI ...... 73 Relationships Between Primary Productivity and creation of a Trophy Investigation of the Walleye Population in the Rockcastle River and Largemouth Bass Fishery: Monitoring and Management of Cedar Evaluation of Supplemental Stocking of Native Strain Walleye Creek Lake Volume I ...... 69 Volume I ...... 77 Volume III ...... 88 Volume III ...... 94 Volume IV ...... 71 Volume IV ...... 77 Volume V ...... 123 Volume V ...... 111 Volume VI ...... 70 Volume VI ...... 50

Kentucky Trout Fishing, Attitudes and Opinions: 2013 Trout Angler Relative Survival, Growth and Susceptibility to Angling of Two Strains Survey of Brown Trout in the Lake Cumberland tailwater Volume VI ...... 47 Volume III ...... 104 Volume IV ...... 70 Lake Sturgeon Restoration in the Upper Cumberland River System Volume V ...... 119 Volume I ...... 70 Volume VI ...... 74 Volume III ...... 108 Volume IV ...... 94 River Sport Fish Surveys – Kentucky River Volume VI ...... 82 Volume III ...... 101 Volume IV ...... 84 Lake Sturgeon Telemetry in the Cumberland River Volume V ...... 125 Volume V ...... 100 Volume VI ...... 75 Volume VI ...... 81 River Sport Fish Surveys- Ohio River Life History and Population Characteristics of Moxostoma poecilurum, Volume V ...... 126

114 Kentucky Department of Fish & Wildlife Resources 2007-2012 PROJECT REFERENCES

Volume VI ...... 76 Peabody Wildlife Management Area Volume I ...... 82 Sauger Stocking Evaluation in the Kentucky, Green, Barren, and Salt Volume II ...... 78 Rivers Volume VI ...... 80 Evaluation of Warm Season Grass Thinning Treatments on Green River Wildlife Management Area: Spring Disking, Glyphosate, and Select Status, Life History, and Phylogenetics of the Amblyopsid Cavefishes Herbicides in Kentucky Volume I ...... 83 Volume II ...... 44 Volume III ...... 105 Grassland Management and Restoration in Kentucky Volume IV ...... 87 Volume I ...... 84 Volume V ...... 9 Impacts of Herbicide Application Following a Late Summer Burn, Status survey of the Northern Madtom, Noturus stigmosus, in the KDFWR Headquarters Lower Ohio River Volume I ...... 85 Volume II ...... 45 Volume II ...... 77 Volume III ...... 28 Implementation of Habitat Restoration and Improvement Practices on A Survey of Fishes of Rock Creek, Kentucky, with Emphasis on the Kentucky Wildlife Management Areas in the Bluegrass Region Impact of Stocking Rainbow Trout on Native Fishes Volume III ...... 83 Volume II ...... 43 Volume III ...... 9 Managing Rank Native Warm Season Grass Stands in Kentucky Volume V ...... 107 Taxonomic Resolution, Life History, and Conservation Status of the Undescribed “Sawfin” Shiner and Kentucky Arrow Darter Maximizing Wildlife Habitat and Cattle Production on T.N. Sullivan Volume I ...... 78 Wildlife Management Area Volume I ...... 86 Urban Fishing Program in Kentucky Volume I ...... 80 Mill Branch Stream Restoration Project, Knox County, Kentucky Volume III ...... 85 Volume I ...... 87 Volume IV ...... 68 Native Warm Season Grass Suppression Treatments in Harrison County Volume V ...... 116 Volume I ...... 88 The Use of Flathead Catfish to Reduce Stunted Fish Populations in a Natural Grassland Survey of the Original Barrens-Prairie Region of Small Kentucky Impoundment Kentucky Volume I ...... 79 Volume II ...... 67 Volume III ...... 86 Volume IV ...... 107 Volume IV ...... 69 Volume V ...... 92 Volume V ...... 117 Volume VI ...... 67 Quail Unlimited Warm Season Grass Test Plot Project on Kentucky River Wildlife Management Area Using GIS-based Technology for Aquatic Conservation in the Upper Volume I ...... 89 Green River Drainage, Kentucky Volume I ...... 81 Restoration of Bur Oak on the Clay Wildlife Management Area by

Means of Direct Seeding Warm Water Stream Sport Fish Surveys Volume II ...... 65 Volume VI ...... 79 Sericea Lespedeza Control on Peabody Wildlife Management Area West Creek Fish Barrier Removal – Harrison County, Kentucky Volume I ...... 53 Volume III ...... 56 Shorebird Management Unit Creation and Invasive Willow Control Volume I ...... 90

Habitat Restoration / Management Use of Rodeo Herbicide to Control Phragmites australis on Peabody Wildlife Management Area An Investigation of Herbicide Treatments to Eradicate Autumn Olive Volume I ...... 54 on Taylorsville Lake Wildlife Management Area

Volume I ...... 52 Use of Temporary Electric Fencing to Eliminate Deer damage to

Sunflower Plantings on the Blue Grass Army Depot Bottomland Hardwood and Riparian Restoration in Obion Creek/Bayou Volume I ...... 91 de Chien Watersheds Volume II ...... 64 Using Varying Frequencies of Prescribed Fire in Combination With Volume III ...... 115 Herbicide Applications to control Sericea Lespedeza on Peabody Wildlife Management Area Direct Seeding of Shrubs/Brambles on Reclaimed Mine Ground on Volume I ...... 55

Annual Research Highlights 2012 115 KDFWR Contacts

ore information regarding David Baker [email protected] the project summaries within M Dane Balsman [email protected] this publication can be obtained by contacting the KDFWR authors or Travis Bailey [email protected] contacts listed below. Jim Barnard [email protected] Danna Baxley [email protected] General questions can be directed to: Will Bowling [email protected] The Kentucky Department of Stephanie Brandt [email protected] Fish and Wildlife Resources John Brunjes [email protected] # 1 Sportsman’s Lane Frankfort, KY 40601 Kristina Brunjes [email protected] 1-800-858-1549 Dan Crank [email protected] [email protected] David Cravens [email protected] Steven Dobey [email protected] Dave Dreves [email protected] Tom Edwards Thomas. [email protected] Brian Gray [email protected] Jason Herrala [email protected] Christopher Hickey [email protected] Kate Heyden [email protected] Gabe Jenkins [email protected] Ryan Kausing Ryan. [email protected] Nick Keeton [email protected] John MacGregor [email protected] Steve Marple [email protected] Andy McDonald [email protected] Jason McDowell Jason. [email protected] John Morgan [email protected] Monte McGregor [email protected] Christopher Owen [email protected] Ryan Oster [email protected] Laura Patton [email protected] Jayson Plaxico [email protected] Rocky Pritchert [email protected] Ben Robinson [email protected] Adam Shepard [email protected] Brooke Slack [email protected] Gary Sprandel [email protected] Matt Thomas [email protected] Fritz Vorisek [email protected] Eric Williams [email protected] Rabbit on the run / Joe Lacefield Paul Wilkes [email protected]

116 Kentucky Department of Fish & Wildlife Resources