DOCSLIB.ORG

Fishes of the Neosho River System in Oklahoma

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Fishes of the Neosho River System in Oklahoma Fishes of the Neosho River System in Oklahoma BRANLEY A. BRANSON • Reprinted from THE AMERICAN MIDLAND NATURALIST Vol. 78, No. 1, July, 1 967, pp. 1 26-154 Univenity of Notre Dame Press Notre Dame, Indiana Fishes of the Neosho River System in Oklahoma BRAN LEY A. BRANSON Department of Biology, Eastern Kentucky University, Richmond 40475 ABSTRACT: One hundred and three species of fishes, or 66% of the species known to occur in Oklahoma, are reported from the Neosho River and its tributaries. Notes on the habitat and habits of the various species, and some theoretical considerations as to how certain species may have entered the system by means of stream-capture from the White River System are included. The Neosho River, known as the Grand downstream from the mouth of the Spring River, rises in the Flint Hills region of Morris Co., near Parkerville, east-central Kansas. From its source, the stream flows in a southeasterly direction for about 478 miles to its confluence with the Arkansas River near Fort Gibson, Oklahoma, 0.9 mi downstream from the mouth of the Verdigris River. The Neosho and its tributaries flow across gently westward-dipping, successively older geological for- mations (Cretaceous, Permian, Pennsylvanian). The general topogra- phy varies from rolling prairies in the extreme upper portion, to rugged and broken terrain in the Flint Hills. The elevation above mean sea level at the headwaters is about 1500 ft (460 m), falling to 477 ft (145 m) in Arkansas. The channel of the main stream is tor- tuous and well-defined, and its banks are generally stable. The bed is in gravel and boulders, except where excessive siltation has occurred. Many of the smaller streams, once clear, are turbid as a result of strip mining and improper soil-tilling practices. The upland watershed has only a light covering of topsoil, which supports substantial growths of native grasses, elm, cottonwood, willows and sycamores. In the more or less broken terrain of Oklahoma, Missouri, and Arkansas, the soil thickness varies greatly and timber growths, principally oaks, pines, hickories, elms, cottonwoods and willows, are abundant. The Neosho watershed includes an area of approximately 12,660 square miles, 6,285 of which are in Kansas, 2,965 in Oklahoma, 2,995 in Missouri and 415 in Arkansas. The drainage basin has a width of about 30 miles in its upper reaches, about 70 near its center, and a maximum of about 90 near the Kansas-Oklahoma state line. The watershed is bounded on the north by the Kansas and Osage, on the east by the White and Illinois, and on the west by the Arkansas and Verdigris watersheds. There are three major tributaries to the Neosho. The Cottonwood River heads in eastern McPherson Co., Kansas, and extends 383 miles to its mouth near Emporia, Kansas. Spring River, the Neosho's largest feeder, arises near Aurora, Lawrence Co., Missouri, and empties into the Pensacola Reservoir about 6 mi N of Wyandotte, Oklahoma. Elk River, locally called Cowskin Creek, is formed by Big Sugar and Little Sugar creeks near Pineville, Missouri, and empties into the Neosho near the Oklahoma-Missouri state line. These three tributaries drain 43% of the entire watershed. 126 1967 BRANSON : FISHES OF NEOSHO RIVER 127 There are few natural lakes or swamps in the watershed, as the water derived from approximately 40 inches of annual rainfall quickly percolates into the very rocky soil. Winters are moderate and the summers long with relatively high temperatures. This and most of the introductory material above was gleaned from U. S. House Document 442 (1948) of the 80th Congress. The following report is based upon collections made by Dr. Allan D. Linder, now of Idaho State University, Messrs. R. M. Sutton, W. G. Greer, G. H. Wallen, the author, and from collections made over the years by various interested parties from the University of Oklahoma and Oklahoma State University under the direction of Drs. C. D. Riggs and G. A. Moore, respectively. Professor W. C. Gibson made the collections at Northeastern Oklahoma A. and M. College, Miami, Oklahoma, available. COLLECTING LOCALITIES A 1. 24:VI:1955; Little Cabin Creek, 3 mi E of Vinita, U. S. 66, Craig Co. A 2. 24:VI:1955; Horse Creek, 3 mi SE of Afton, Ottawa Co. A 3. 25:VI:1955; Lost Creek, T 27N, R 24E, S 22, near Wyandotte, Ottawa Co. A 4. 25:VI:1955; Sycamore Creek, T 27N, R 24E, S 35, Ottawa Co. A 5. 25:VI:1955; Honey Creek, 3 mi E of State Highway 10, near Grove, Delaware Co. A 6. 25:VI:1955; Spavinaw Creek, 5.2 mi N of Colcord, Delaware Co. A 7. 12:VIII:1955; Coal Creek, T 27N, R 22E, S 21, 1 mi W of Narcissa, Ottawa Co. A 8. 12:VIII:1955; Tar Creek, T 28N, R 22E, S 30, at Miami, Ottawa Co. A 9. 12:VIII:1955; Elm Creek, T 28N, R 23E, S 28, 1 mi E of Miami, Ottawa Co. A10. 12:VIII:1955; Birch Creek, T 28N, R 22E, S 15, North Miami, Ottawa Co. All. 13:VIII:1955; Neosho River, T 28N, R 21E, S 9, 5 mi W of Com- merce, Ottawa Co. Al2. 13:VIII:1955; Lytle Creek, T 29N, R 23E, S 21, 1 mi E of Pitcher, Ottawa Co. A13. 14:VIII:1955; Warren Branch (trib. Spring River), T 28N, R 24E, S 14 and 15, 9 mi E, 2 mi W of Miami, Ottawa Co. A14. 2:IX:1955; Lost Creek, T 27N, R 24E, 5 28, Ottawa Co. A15. 2:IX:1955; unnamed spring-fed stream (trib. Neosho River), T 27N, R 24E, S 19, just off State Highway 10, 10 mi NE of Miami, Ot- tawa Co. A16. 3:IX:1955; Neosho River, T 29N, R 21E, S 1, Ottawa Co. A17. 3:IX:1955; Squaw Creek, T 29N, R 21E, S 22, 1 mi W of Solid South, Ottawa Co. A18. 23:XII:1955; Russel Creek, T 29N, R 20E, S 19 and 24, 1 mi S of Kansas-Oklahoma state line, Craig Co. A19. 23:XII:1955; Middle Creek, T 27N, R 19E, S 26 and 35, 2 mi W of West Point, Craig Co. A20. 24:XII:1955; Beer Creek, T 27N, R 20E, S 9 and 16, 2 mi N, 1.5 mi W of Pyramid, Craig Co. A21. 24:XII:1955; Pecan Creek, T 25N, R 19E, S 22, Craig Co. 128 THE AMERICAN MIDLAND NATURALIST 78(1) A22. 26:XII:1955; Mustang Creek, T 24N, R 21E, S 27 and 28, 1 mi N of Ketchum, Craig Co. A23. 26:XII:1955; White Oak Creek, T 24N, R 19E, S 1 and 2, 4 mi W of Hulwe, Craig Co. A24. 26:XII:1955; Rock Creek, T 24N, R 19E, S 21 and 28, 3.5 mi. W of Big Cabin, Craig Co. A25. 26:XII:1955; Little Cabin Creek, T 28N, R 21N, S 31, at Welch, Craig Co. B 1. 30:111:1956; Neosho River, low-water dam, Municipal Park, Miami, Ottawa Co. B 2. 30:111:1956; Elk River (Cowskin Creek), T 25N, R 25E, S 20, Dela- ware Co. B 3. 31:111:1956; small unnamed stream, T 24N, R 25E, S 16 and 17,2 mi S of Dodge, Delaware Co. B 4. 31:111:1956; Honey Creek, T 24N, R 25E, S 20 and 21, 2.4 mi S of Dodge, Delaware Co. B 5. 31:111:1956; Snail Creek, T 24N, R 24E, S 21 and 28, 3 mi S, 2 mi E of Grove, Delaware Co. C 1. 12:V:1956; Spring Creek, below Cedar Crest Lake Club, Mayes Co. C 2. 12:V:1956; Spring Creek, 3 mi above Cedar Crest Lake Club, Mayes Co. C 3. 12:V:1956; Little Spring Creek, 0.25 mi below U. S 82 Bridge, Mayes Co. C 4. 12:V:1956; Saline Creek, U.S. 82 crossing, Mayes Co. C 5. 12:V:1956; Salt Branch of Saline Creek, Mayes Co. C 6. 12:V:1956; Little Saline Creek, 8 mi E of Salina, Mayes Co. C 7. 12:V:1956; Spavinaw Creek, near mouth, Mayes Co. 54. Spavinaw Creek, 7 mi S of Jay, Delaware Co. (Hubbs and Ortenburger, 1929). 55. Elk River, 7 mi N of Grove, Delaware Co. (Hubbs and Ortenburger, 1929). 56. Little Cabin Creek, 3 mi E of Vinita, Craig Co. (Hubbs and Orten- burger, 1929). 57. Pryor Creek, 1 mi NE of Chelsea, Rogers Co. (Hubbs and Ortenburger, 1929). J 1. 21:IV:1955; Sycamore Creek, 8 mi E of Fairland, U.S. 60, 2 mi N on State 10, Ottawa Co. (N. E. 0. A. and M.). J 2. 2:VIII:1955; Spavinaw Creek, 6 mi S and 2.2 mi E of Jay, Delaware Co. (N. E. 0. A. and M.). J 3. Black Hollow, Lower Spavinaw Lake, Delaware Co. (Jackson, 1954). J 4. 28:VIII:1954; 5 mi S of Miami, Ottawa Co. (N. E. 0. A. and M.). J 5. Lake Eucha, Delaware Co. (Jackson, 1958). J 6. Lake Spavinaw, Delaware Co. (Jackson, 1958). J 7. Grand Lake (Elkin, 1958). J 8. Grand Lake (Hall, 1951). J 9. 24:IV:1955; power pool, Grand River Dam, Mayes Co. (N. E. 0. A. and M.). J10. 15:IX:1953; low-water dam, Neosho River, Miami, Ottawa Co. (N. E. O. A. and M.). J11. 10:111:1954; Tar Creek, 0.5 mi S of Miami, Ottawa Co. (N. E. 0. A. and M.).
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Penobscot Rivershed with Licensed Dischargers and Critical Salmon
    0# North West Branch St John T11 R15 WELS T11 R17 WELS T11 R16 WELS T11 R14 WELS T11 R13 WELS T11 R12 WELS T11 R11 WELS T11 R10 WELS T11 R9 WELS T11 R8 WELS Aroostook River Oxbow Smith Farm DamXW St John River T11 R7 WELS Garfield Plt T11 R4 WELS Chapman Ashland Machias River Stream Carry Brook Chemquasabamticook Stream Squa Pan Stream XW Daaquam River XW Whitney Bk Dam Mars Hill Squa Pan Dam Burntland Stream DamXW Westfield Prestile Stream Presque Isle Stream FRESH WAY, INC Allagash River South Branch Machias River Big Ten Twp T10 R16 WELS T10 R15 WELS T10 R14 WELS T10 R13 WELS T10 R12 WELS T10 R11 WELS T10 R10 WELS T10 R9 WELS T10 R8 WELS 0# MARS HILL UTILITY DISTRICT T10 R3 WELS Water District Resevoir Dam T10 R7 WELS T10 R6 WELS Masardis Squapan Twp XW Mars Hill DamXW Mule Brook Penobscot RiverYosungs Lakeh DamXWed0# Southwest Branch St John Blackwater River West Branch Presque Isle Strea Allagash River North Branch Blackwater River East Branch Presque Isle Strea Blaine Churchill Lake DamXW Southwest Branch St John E Twp XW Robinson Dam Prestile Stream S Otter Brook L Saint Croix Stream Cox Patent E with Licensed Dischargers and W Snare Brook T9 R8 WELS 8 T9 R17 WELS T9 R16 WELS T9 R15 WELS T9 R14 WELS 1 T9 R12 WELS T9 R11 WELS T9 R10 WELS T9 R9 WELS Mooseleuk Stream Oxbow Plt R T9 R13 WELS Houlton Brook T9 R7 WELS Aroostook River T9 R4 WELS T9 R3 WELS 9 Chandler Stream Bridgewater T T9 R5 WELS TD R2 WELS Baker Branch Critical UmScolcus Stream lmon Habitat Overlay South Branch Russell Brook Aikens Brook West Branch Umcolcus Steam LaPomkeag Stream West Branch Umcolcus Stream Tie Camp Brook Soper Brook Beaver Brook Munsungan Stream S L T8 R18 WELS T8 R17 WELS T8 R16 WELS T8 R15 WELS T8 R14 WELS Eagle Lake Twp T8 R10 WELS East Branch Howe Brook E Soper Mountain Twp T8 R11 WELS T8 R9 WELS T8 R8 WELS Bloody Brook Saint Croix Stream North Branch Meduxnekeag River W 9 Turner Brook Allagash Stream Millinocket Stream T8 R7 WELS T8 R6 WELS T8 R5 WELS Saint Croix Twp T8 R3 WELS 1 Monticello R Desolation Brook 8 St Francis Brook TC R2 WELS MONTICELLO HOUSING CORP.
    [Show full text]
  • Southwest Missouri Water Quality Improvement Project (Wqip) Elk River Basin Water Quality Gap
    SOUTHWEST MISSOURI WATER QUALITY IMPROVEMENT PROJECT (WQIP) ELK RIVER BASIN WATER QUALITY GAP November 2008 PREPARED FOR: Environmental Resources Coalition 3118 Emerald Lane Jefferson City, Missouri 65109 PREPARED BY: MEC Water Resources, Inc. 1123 Wilkes Boulevard, Suite 400 Columbia, Missouri 65201 Ozarks Environmental Water Resources Institute, Missouri State University Temple Hall 328 901 South National Avenue Springfield, Missouri 65897 (page intentionally left blank) Southwest Missouri Water Quality Improvement Project Missouri State University Elk River Basin Water Quality Gap Analysis MEC Water Resources, Inc. TABLE OF CONTENTS EXECUTIVE SUMMARY...............................................................................................................................................vii I. INTRODUCTION...........................................................................................................................................................1 II. STUDY AREA ................................................................................................................................................................3 2.1. Basin Characteristics..................................................................................................3 2.2. Population and Land Use............................................................................................3 2.3. Permitted Point Source Discharges ..........................................................................7 2.4. Geology and Soils .....................................................................................................11
    [Show full text]
  • (GISD) 2021. Species Profile Gymnocephalus Cernuus
    FULL ACCOUNT FOR: Gymnocephalus cernuus Gymnocephalus cernuus System: Freshwater Kingdom Phylum Class Order Family Animalia Chordata Actinopterygii Perciformes Percidae Common name pope (English), river ruffe (English), Eurasian ruffe (English), blacktail (English), ruffe (English), redfin darter (English) Synonym Acerina cemua , (Linnaeus, 1758) Acerina czekanowskii Acerina fischeri Acerina vulgaris Perca cermua , Linnaeus, 1758 Similar species Stizostedion vitreum, Perca flavescens, Percopsis omiscomaycus Summary Gymnocephalus cernuus is introduced into new locations in the ballast water of ships. Introductions also occur through escaped or discarded live bait. It has become a threat to the Great Lakes in North America and some lakes in Europe. Gymnocephalus cernuus has become invasive due to its reproduction ablity; its wide habitat range and its aggressive feeding habits. view this species on IUCN Red List Species Description Gymnocephalus cernuus are small, reaching up to 20cm in length, with olive brown colouring on the back and pale sides. They have spiny dorsal and anal fins (Hajjar, 2002). Notes According to Hajjar (2002), \"Gymnocephalus cernuus have few predators in Europe and Asia, and most will only prey on G. cernuus when other prey is scarce. Predators include pike perch, northern pike, some eel, burbot, lake trout, small-mouth bass, black crappie, bullheads, walleye, Eurasian perch, yellow perch, cormorants, and kingfishers. To avoid predators, the ruffe prefers darkness, and uses special sensory organs called \"neuromasts\" to detect predators and prey. The ruffe also has a large, spiny dorsal fin likely unpalatable to predators. Global Invasive Species Database (GISD) 2021. Species profile Gymnocephalus Pag. 1 cernuus. Available from: http://www.iucngisd.org/gisd/species.php?sc=544 [Accessed 02 October 2021] FULL ACCOUNT FOR: Gymnocephalus cernuus Lifecycle Stages According to Hajjar (2002), “the reproductive potential of G.
    [Show full text]
  • Immigrants I Through K
    I Iager, John, Switzerland, came to the county in 1865, in Newton County 1882 Atlas, patrons, from Missouri Pioneers Volume XVI Iberg, Jacob, Switzerland, 81, in the 1900 Federal Census of Newton CO, MO, Neosho Township Iburg, Herman C., Germany, 54, in the 1910 Federal Census of St. Clair CO, MO, Jackson Township. Also, Herman C. Iburg, Oenhousen [Oeynhausen ?], Germany, born February 23, 1855 [MO death certificate] died October 3, 1910, in St. Clair County, father John Iburg, mother Christina Daniels, informant Mrs. Herman C. Iburg Ihde, William, Petersdorf Cris Templen, Germany, from a 1915 petition for naturalization, McDonald County, Missouri, from Missouri Pioneers Volume XXVIII. Also, William Ihde, Germany, 59, in the 1920 Federal Census of McDonald CO, MO, Cyclone Ikenruth, Adam, Germany, 52, in the 1910 Federal Census of Cedar CO, MO, Linn Township Iker, Joseph, Baden, Germany, 37, in the 1870 Federal Census of Hickory CO, MO, Montgomery Township Iles, Thomas, England, 60, in the 1910 Federal Census of Dade CO, MO, Grant Township. [On son William Carl Iles’ MO death certificate from Dade County father is listed as Thomas Iles born in England and mother Ellen Perr__man[?] ] Imme, Adolph, Germany, 55, in the 1900 Federal Census of Jasper CO, MO, Webb City Immel, John, Germany, born January 28, 1834 [MO death certificate] died August 24, 1917, in Joplin, Jasper County. And, 68, in the 1900 Federal Census of Jasper CO, MO, Joplin Immel, Mrs. Katherine, Germany, born October 7, 1849 [MO death certificate] died June 1, 1933, in Joplin, Jasper County, father Christian Miller, mother Marie Hoffman, husband [deceased] John Immel Inch, Jack, England, 32, born May, 1868, in the 1900 Federal Census of Lawrence CO, MO, Vineyard Township Indermuehle, Gottlieb, Canton Bern, Switzerland, born March 14, 1830 [MO death certificate] died March 4, 1912, in Laclede County, father Christain Indermuehle, informant J.
    [Show full text]
  • Habitat Suitability and Detection Probability of Longnose Darter (Percina Nasuta) in Oklahoma
    HABITAT SUITABILITY AND DETECTION PROBABILITY OF LONGNOSE DARTER (PERCINA NASUTA) IN OKLAHOMA By COLT TAYLOR HOLLEY Bachelor of Science in Natural Resource Ecology and Management Oklahoma State University Stillwater, OK 2016 Submitted to the Faculty of the Graduate College of the Oklahoma State University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the Degree of MASTER OF SCIENCE December, 2018 HABITAT SUITABILITY AND DETECTION PROBABILITY OF LONGNOSE DARTER (PERCINA NASUTA) IN OKLAHOMA Thesis Approved: Dr. James M. Long Thesis Advisor Dr. Shannon Brewer Dr. Monica Papeş ii ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS I am truly thankful for the support of my advisor, Dr. Jim Long, throughout my time at Oklahoma State University. His motivation and confidence in me was invaluable. I also thank my committee members Dr. Shannon Brewer and Dr. Mona Papeş for their contributions to my education and for their comments that improved this thesis. I thank the Oklahoma Department of Wildlife Conservation (ODWC) for providing the funding for this project and the Oklahoma Cooperative Fish and Wildlife Research Unit (OKCFWRU) for their logistical support. I thank Tommy Hall, James Mier, Bill Rogers, Dick Rogers, and Mr. and Mrs. Terry Scott for allowing me to access Lee Creek from their properties. Much of my research could not have been accomplished without them. My field technicians Josh, Matt, and Erick made each field season enjoyable and I could not have done it without their help. The camaraderie of my friends and fellow graduate students made my time in Stillwater feel like home. I consider Dr. Andrew Taylor to be a mentor, fishing partner, and one of my closest friends.
    [Show full text]
  • 2012 Annual Report Maine Public Reserved
    2012 ANNUAL REPORT to the JOINT STANDING COMMITTEE on AGRICULTURE, CONSERVATION AND FORESTRY MAINE PUBLIC RESERVED, NONRESERVED, AND SUBMERGED LANDS Seboeis Lake Unit MAINE DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE, CONSERVATION AND FORESTRY Division of Parks and Public Lands March 1, 2013 2012 ANNUAL REPORT Maine Department of Agriculture, Conservation and Forestry Division of Parks and Public Lands TABLE OF CONTENTS I. INTRODUCTION…………………………………………………………………….. 1 II. 2012 HIGHLIGHTS…………………………………………………………………..1 III. SCOPE OF RESPONSIBILITIES………………………………………………….. 4 IV. LAND MANAGEMENT PLANNING……………………………………………….. 8 V. NATURAL/HISTORIC RESOURCES……………………………………………...9 VI. WILDLIFE RESOURCES……………………………………………………………11 VII. RECREATION RESOURCES………………………………………………………12 VIII. TIMBER RESOURCES……………………………………………………………...18 IX. TRANSPORTATION………………………………………………………………… 22 X. PUBLIC ACCESS…………………………………………………………………… 22 XI. LAND TRANSACTIONS……………………………………………………………. 23 XII. SUBMERGED LANDS……………………………………………………………… 24 XIII. SHORE AND HARBOR MANAGEMENT FUND………………………………… 24 XIV. COASTAL ISLAND PROGRAM…………………………………………………… 24 XV. ADMINISTRATION………………………………………………………………….. 25 XVI. INCOME AND EXPENDITURES ACCOUNTING – CY 2012………………….. 26 XVII. FINANCIAL REPORT FOR FY 2014……………………………………………… 29 XVIII. CONCLUSION……………………………………………………………………….. 36 Appendix A: Map of DPPL Properties & Acquisitions in 2012…………………. 37 Appendix B: Table of 2012 DPPL Acquisitions and Dispositions………………… 38 Appendix C: Federal Forest Legacy Projects Approved and Pending……………... 39 Cover Photo by Kathy Eickenberg
    [Show full text]
  • Restoration and Maintenance of the Access to the Neosho River at Jacobs Creek-John Redmond Reservoir)
    FEASIBILITY STUDY (RESTORATION AND MAINTENANCE OF THE ACCESS TO THE NEOSHO RIVER AT JACOBS CREEK-JOHN REDMOND RESERVOIR) 2008 Prepared for Kansas Water Office 901 South Kansas Topeka, KS 66612 Prepared by Watershed Institute, Inc. 1200 SW Executive Dr. Topeka, KS 66615 www.watershedinstitute.biz Cover Page Photo: Neosho River Logjam from Jacobs Landing FEASIBILITY STUDY — NEOSHO RIVER LOGJAM ASSESSMENT TABLE OF CONTENTS INTRODUCTION.......................................................................................................................................1 BACKGROUND INFORMATION...........................................................................................................2 PROJECT SETTING ...............................................................................................................................2 Neosho River Logjam..........................................................................................................................4 NEOSHO RIVER RESEARCH...............................................................................................................4 Natural and Regulated Flows/Historical Droughts ............................................................................4 High-Flow Frequency/Channel Geometry..........................................................................................5 Geomorphic Effects/Overflow Dams...................................................................................................5 Channel Stability Downstream from John Redmond Dam
    [Show full text]
  • Endangered Species
    FEATURE: ENDANGERED SPECIES Conservation Status of Imperiled North American Freshwater and Diadromous Fishes ABSTRACT: This is the third compilation of imperiled (i.e., endangered, threatened, vulnerable) plus extinct freshwater and diadromous fishes of North America prepared by the American Fisheries Society’s Endangered Species Committee. Since the last revision in 1989, imperilment of inland fishes has increased substantially. This list includes 700 extant taxa representing 133 genera and 36 families, a 92% increase over the 364 listed in 1989. The increase reflects the addition of distinct populations, previously non-imperiled fishes, and recently described or discovered taxa. Approximately 39% of described fish species of the continent are imperiled. There are 230 vulnerable, 190 threatened, and 280 endangered extant taxa, and 61 taxa presumed extinct or extirpated from nature. Of those that were imperiled in 1989, most (89%) are the same or worse in conservation status; only 6% have improved in status, and 5% were delisted for various reasons. Habitat degradation and nonindigenous species are the main threats to at-risk fishes, many of which are restricted to small ranges. Documenting the diversity and status of rare fishes is a critical step in identifying and implementing appropriate actions necessary for their protection and management. Howard L. Jelks, Frank McCormick, Stephen J. Walsh, Joseph S. Nelson, Noel M. Burkhead, Steven P. Platania, Salvador Contreras-Balderas, Brady A. Porter, Edmundo Díaz-Pardo, Claude B. Renaud, Dean A. Hendrickson, Juan Jacobo Schmitter-Soto, John Lyons, Eric B. Taylor, and Nicholas E. Mandrak, Melvin L. Warren, Jr. Jelks, Walsh, and Burkhead are research McCormick is a biologist with the biologists with the U.S.
    [Show full text]
  • ECOLOGY of NORTH AMERICAN FRESHWATER FISHES
    ECOLOGY of NORTH AMERICAN FRESHWATER FISHES Tables STEPHEN T. ROSS University of California Press Berkeley Los Angeles London © 2013 by The Regents of the University of California ISBN 978-0-520-24945-5 uucp-ross-book-color.indbcp-ross-book-color.indb 1 44/5/13/5/13 88:34:34 AAMM uucp-ross-book-color.indbcp-ross-book-color.indb 2 44/5/13/5/13 88:34:34 AAMM TABLE 1.1 Families Composing 95% of North American Freshwater Fish Species Ranked by the Number of Native Species Number Cumulative Family of species percent Cyprinidae 297 28 Percidae 186 45 Catostomidae 71 51 Poeciliidae 69 58 Ictaluridae 46 62 Goodeidae 45 66 Atherinopsidae 39 70 Salmonidae 38 74 Cyprinodontidae 35 77 Fundulidae 34 80 Centrarchidae 31 83 Cottidae 30 86 Petromyzontidae 21 88 Cichlidae 16 89 Clupeidae 10 90 Eleotridae 10 91 Acipenseridae 8 92 Osmeridae 6 92 Elassomatidae 6 93 Gobiidae 6 93 Amblyopsidae 6 94 Pimelodidae 6 94 Gasterosteidae 5 95 source: Compiled primarily from Mayden (1992), Nelson et al. (2004), and Miller and Norris (2005). uucp-ross-book-color.indbcp-ross-book-color.indb 3 44/5/13/5/13 88:34:34 AAMM TABLE 3.1 Biogeographic Relationships of Species from a Sample of Fishes from the Ouachita River, Arkansas, at the Confl uence with the Little Missouri River (Ross, pers. observ.) Origin/ Pre- Pleistocene Taxa distribution Source Highland Stoneroller, Campostoma spadiceum 2 Mayden 1987a; Blum et al. 2008; Cashner et al. 2010 Blacktail Shiner, Cyprinella venusta 3 Mayden 1987a Steelcolor Shiner, Cyprinella whipplei 1 Mayden 1987a Redfi n Shiner, Lythrurus umbratilis 4 Mayden 1987a Bigeye Shiner, Notropis boops 1 Wiley and Mayden 1985; Mayden 1987a Bullhead Minnow, Pimephales vigilax 4 Mayden 1987a Mountain Madtom, Noturus eleutherus 2a Mayden 1985, 1987a Creole Darter, Etheostoma collettei 2a Mayden 1985 Orangebelly Darter, Etheostoma radiosum 2a Page 1983; Mayden 1985, 1987a Speckled Darter, Etheostoma stigmaeum 3 Page 1983; Simon 1997 Redspot Darter, Etheostoma artesiae 3 Mayden 1985; Piller et al.
    [Show full text]
  • Bryan Et Al. 2004
    Environmental Biology of Fishes 70: 80, 2004. © 2004 Kluwer Academic Publishers. Printed in the Netherlands. Threatened fishes of the world: Noturus placidus Taylor, 1969 (Ictaluridae) Janice L. Bryana, Mark L. Wildhaberb & Douglas B. Noltiea aDepartment of Fisheries and Wildlife Sciences, 302 ABNR, University of Missouri-Columbia, Columbia, MO 65211, U.S.A (e-mail: [email protected]) bU.S. Geological Survey, Columbia Environmental Research Center, 4200 New Haven Road, Columbia, MO 65201, U.S.A Common names: Neosho madtom (T). Conservation status: Listed federally as threatened 22 May 1990 (USFWS 1991). Identification: One of 25 madtom species, distinguished from four madtoms in its range by two distinct crescent-shaped bands of pig- ment on caudal fin and lack of dark pigment extending to edge of adipose fin (Taylor 1969). Pectoral spines have poorly developed saw-like teeth on front margin. Fin ray counts: anal rays 13–16 (14.72); pelvic rays 8–12 (9.06), soft pelvic rays 7–9 (7.99); caudal rays 49–59 (54.32); vertebrae: 32–36 (33.62). Adults typically greater than 50 mm TL (Bulger & Edds 2001). Males in spawning condition exhibit swollen cephalic epaxial muscles and elongated genital papil- lae; both sexes exhibit reddened tooth patches during spawning season. Photograph by Janice L. Bryan. Distribution: Endemic to Neosho River basin in Kansas, Missouri, and Oklahoma (Taylor 1969). Species’ range historically extended south to Illinois River in Oklahoma; currently restricted by reservoirs to approximately two-thirds of original range (Moss 1981). Abundance: Large population fluctuations occur seasonally and annually (Moss 1981). In 1 year, Wilkinson et al.
    [Show full text]
  • Stream Restoration of Tanyard Creek in the Little Sugar Creek Watershed B
    1. Cover Page: 2012 State Wildlife Grant Pre-Proposal a. Title of Project: Stream Restoration of Tanyard Creek in the Little Sugar Creek Watershed b. Project Summary: A 2,500 foot section of Tanyard Creek will be enhanced and restored. Unstable streambanks and excessive woody debris are compromising the aquatic and terrestrial habitat of this Karst area, and accelerated streambank erosion is contributing approximately 1,600,000 lbs/yr of sediment and 200 lbs/yr of total phosphorus to the Little Sugar Creek basin. Aquatic habit is limited from severe sedimentation which has diminished riffle/pool features and from stream instability resulting in degradation of the riparian area. A natural channel design approach will be used to restore and enhance the channel in a manner that reduces streambank erosion, transports sediment efficiently, and improves the riparian area and aquatic habitat for 13 SGCNs. c. Project Leader: Sandi Formica, Executive Director Watershed Conservation Resource Center 380 West Rock, Fayetteville, AR 72701 [email protected], 501-352-5252 d. Project Partners: Darrell Bowman, Lake Ecology/Fisheries Manager, Bella Vista Village Property Owners Association (Bella Vista POA); [email protected], (479) 855-5068 Drew Holts, Executive Director, Elk River Watershed Improvement Association (Elk River WIA), [email protected], (417) 223-3414 Steve Filipek, Assistant Chief Special Programs, Arkansas Game & Fish Commission (AG&FC), [email protected], 501- 223-6369 David Casaletto, President, Ozark Water Watch and Multi-Basin Regional Water Council, [email protected], (417) 739-4100 e. Project Budget: Amount of SWG Funds Requested: $70,000 (37%) Total Matching Funds Provided: $121,000 (63%) Total Project Cost: $191,000 1 2.
    [Show full text]
  • Short Creek and Shoal Creek in the Spring River Watershed Water Quality Impairment: Total Phosphorus
    NEOSHO BASIN TOTAL MAXIMUM DAILY LOAD Waterbody / Assessment Unit: Short Creek and Shoal Creek in the Spring River Watershed Water Quality Impairment: Total Phosphorus 1.0 INTRODUCTION AND PROBLEM IDENTIFICATION Subbasin: Spring Counties: Cherokee HUC8: 11070207 HUC10(12): 08(06) & 09(04) Ecoregion: Ozark Highlands, Springfield Plateau (39a) Drainage Area: Shoal Creek = approximately 10.1 square miles in Kansas Short Creek = approximately 5.94 square miles in Kansas Water Quality Limited Segments Covered Under this TMDL: Station Main Stem Segment Tributary Station SC570 Short Creek (881) Station SC212 Shoal Creek (2) Unnamed Stream (886) 2008, 2010, 2012 & 2014 303(d) Listings: Kansas Stream segments monitored by stations SC212 on Short Creek and SC570 on Shoal Creek, are cited as impaired by Total Phosphorus (TP) for the Neosho Basin. Impaired Use: Special Aquatic Life, Expected Aquatic Life, Contact Recreation and Domestic Water Supply. Water Quality Criteria: Nutrients – Narratives: The introduction of plant nutrient into surface waters designated for domestic water supply use shall be controlled to prevent interference with the production of drinking water (K.A.R. 28-16-28e(c)(3)(D)). The introduction of plant nutrients into streams, lakes, or wetlands from artificial sources shall be controlled to prevent the accelerated succession or replacement of aquatic biota or the production of undesirable quantities or kinds of aquatic life (K.A.R. 28-16- 28e(c)(2)(A)). The introduction of plant nutrients into surface waters designated for primary or secondary contact recreational use shall be controlled to prevent the development of objectionable concentrations of algae or algal by-products or nuisance growths of submersed, floating, or emergent aquatic vegetation (K.A.R.
    [Show full text]