DOCSLIB.ORG

Black Bass Habitat-Use at Multiple Scales in Middle Chattahoochee

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Black Bass Habitat-Use at Multiple Scales in Middle Chattahoochee Black Bass Habitat Use and Availability at Multiple Scales in Middle Chattahoochee River Tributaries by Charles Theophilos Katechis A thesis submitted to the Graduate Faculty of Auburn University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the Degree of Fisheries, Master of Science Auburn, Alabama December 12, 2015 Keywords: black bass, stream habitat, land use, stream survey, side-scan sonar, distribution Copyright 2015 by Charles Theophilos Katechis Approved by Terrill R. Hanson, Chair, Professor, School of Fisheries, Aquaculture, and Aquatic Science Steven Sammons, Research Fellow IV, School of Fisheries, Aquaculture, and Aquatic Science Jim Stoeckel, Associate Professor, School of Fisheries, Aquaculture, and Aquatic Science Abstract The focus of this study was on tributaries of the Middle Chattahoochee River where Shoal Bass Micropterus cataractae and Chattahoochee Bass Micropterus chattahoochae are experiencing declines, mainly due to anthropogenic disturbances of streams and introductions of non-native congeners. This study examined habitat use of black bass and the presence/absence of Shoal Bass and Chattahoochee Bass at multiple scales. Point and transect surveys, canoe surveys, side-scan sonar mapping techniques, and available land use data were used to measure habitat characteristics at each scale. Black bass were sampled by both backpack electrofishing and by canoe-mounted electrofishing. Results indicated that suitable habitat for Shoal Bass included rocky boulder habitats with shallow depths and wide stream banks in heavily forested areas of large watersheds and Chattahoochee Bass were found in highly natural and forested land cover areas small watersheds in wider sections of the stream in rocky and shallow fast-moving shoal habitats. Surveys revealed that Shoal Bass populations can persist in smaller watersheds with enough ideal habitat. Chattahoochee Bass would likely benefit from habitat restoration for Shoal Bass in streams where they are sympatric. Side-scan sonar surveys were conducted on smaller streams, smaller than previously attempted, and results indicated that this method was useful to map habitat in these systems. Conclusions of this study indicated that priority streams for Shoal Bass and/or Chattahoochee Bass restoration, restocking efforts, and the reduction in non-native bass populations included the Dog River, Centralhatchee, Hillabahatchee, Wehadkee, Mountain Oak, and Osanippa creeks. ii Acknowledgments I thank my mother, Angia A. Katechis, and my family for their continued support in pursuit of my graduate degree. I also thank the Thompson family for the help they provided during and after my undergraduate years. I thank Dr. Steven M. Sammons for hiring me as a field technician and then taking me on as a graduate student. He gave me an opportunity to continue my career in fisheries biology and has helped me throughout my graduate research. I thank Dr. Terry Hanson for giving me the opportunity to pursue a master's degree and his commitment, support, and guidance throughout the project. Also Dr. Jim Stoeckel has given me great insight on what my research objectives should focus on. I am very thankful for the assistance I have received from Kat Hoenke of the Southeast Aquatic Resource Partnership (SARP) who provided me with needed land use data. This study was funded by the Georgia Power Company (GPC), National Fish and Wildlife Foundation (NFWF), Georgia Department of Natural Resource - Wildlife Resource Division, Fisheries Management and Non-game Conservation sections (GADNR-WRD). I thank Joey Slaughter, GPC, for use of an extra backpack electrofisher. I thank Thom Litts, a GIS specialist for the GADNR-WRD, for use of side-scan sonar equipment, and providing guidance on the interpretation and acquisition of instream habitat data. I thank Auburn University personnel including Scott Snyder for their help on many project tasks. Finally, I thank David Belkoski, a field technician, and the many members of my field crew including undergraduate and graduate students. iii Table of Contents Abstract ........................................................................................................................................... ii Acknowledgments.......................................................................................................................... iii List of Tables ................................................................................................................................. vi List of Figures ............................................................................................................................... vii List of Abbreviations .................................................................................................................. viii Definitions of Note ....................................................................................................................... ix I. Introduction .................................................................................................................................1 I.1. Black Bass in the Chattahoochee River Basin...............................................................1 I.2. Black Bass Business Plan and Habitat Importance ......................................................3 I.3. Habitat Surveys .............................................................................................................4 I.4. Research Goals .............................................................................................................8 II. Methods ......................................................................................................................................9 II.1. Study Area ...................................................................................................................9 II.2. Field Surveys .............................................................................................................10 II.2.1. Microhabitat Survey ...................................................................................10 II.2.2. Mesohabitat Survey and Side-Scan Sonar Survey ......................................11 II.3. Macrohabitat Survey and Overall Habitat Analyses ..................................................13 III. Results .....................................................................................................................................17 III.1. Microhabitat Scale ....................................................................................................17 iv III.2. Mesohabitat Scale ....................................................................................................20 III.3. Macrohabitat Scale ...................................................................................................22 III.4. Side-Scan Sonar Analysis .........................................................................................25 V. Discussion ................................................................................................................................27 V.1. Connectivity and Stream Habitat Restoration ............................................................28 V.2. Land Use Conclusions ...............................................................................................30 V.3. Congeneric Spotted Bass Invasion .............................................................................32 V.4. Side-Scan Sonar Surveys of Small Streams ...............................................................33 V.5. Future Analyses..........................................................................................................35 VI. Conclusions and Management Implications ............................................................................36 VII. Literature Cited .....................................................................................................................42 VIII. Tables ..................................................................................................................................48 IX. Figures ...................................................................................................................................67 X. Appendices ..............................................................................................................................81 X.1. Side-Scan Sonar Start and End GPS Points ...............................................................82 X.2. Point and Transect Habitat Sampling Form .............................................................83 X.3. Point and Transect Electrofishing Form ....................................................................84 X.4. Handheld Canoe Electrofishing Transect Form .........................................................85 X.5. Land Cover Classifications ........................................................................................86 v List of Tables Table 1. Stream Sampling Locations ...........................................................................................49 Table 2. Modified Wentworth Scale of Substrates .......................................................................50 Table 3. Catch and Effort of Point and Transect Surveys.............................................................51 Table 4. Percent Substrate and Percent Cover of Point and Transect Surveys .............................52 Table 5. Pearson’s R Correlations of Microhabitats .....................................................................53
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Cities of Fairburn, Palmetto, and Union City Draft Surface Water Withdrawal Permit Response to Comments July 23, 2020
    Cities of Fairburn, Palmetto, and Union City Draft Surface Water Withdrawal Permit Response to Comments July 23, 2020 Atlanta Comment 1: Atlanta is particularly concerned with EPD’s apparent acceptance of the South Fulton Cities characterization of the underlying facts, including the reasons underlying the South Fulton Cities’ rejection of Atlanta’s existing, fully-permitted water capacity to provide the needed wholesale water supply to the South Fulton Cities. Atlanta has provided wholesale water to Fairburn and Union City since 1957 and has continued to do so despite Fairburn and Union City’s unwillingness to enter into a long term contract. Despite the South Fulton Cities’ protestations otherwise, this water supply is available and Atlanta remains willing and able to enter into a long term water supply contract with the South Fulton Cities. As such, this Permit should be denied. Response to Atlanta Comment 1: The absence of a long-term contract between the City of Atlanta and the Cities of Fairburn, Palmetto, and Union City (South Fulton Cities) has been considered by EPD in its review of the water withdrawal application by the South Fulton Cities. The fact that these cities and their citizens are without the benefit and guarantee of a long-term water supply contract weighs in EPD’s assessment and decision-making. EPD does not have the legal authority to determine, and therefore does not take a position on, who bears the responsibility of the lack of a contract. Under the 1999 Fulton County Service Delivery Strategy (SDS), the South Fulton Cities are designated water supply providers to citizens residing inside the cities’ geographic areas.
    [Show full text]
  • Stream-Temperature Characteristics in Georgia
    STREAM-TEMPERATURE CHARACTERISTICS IN GEORGIA By T.R. Dyar and S.J. Alhadeff ______________________________________________________________________________ U.S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY Water-Resources Investigations Report 96-4203 Prepared in cooperation with GEORGIA DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION DIVISION Atlanta, Georgia 1997 U.S. DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR BRUCE BABBITT, Secretary U.S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY Charles G. Groat, Director For additional information write to: Copies of this report can be purchased from: District Chief U.S. Geological Survey U.S. Geological Survey Branch of Information Services 3039 Amwiler Road, Suite 130 Denver Federal Center Peachtree Business Center Box 25286 Atlanta, GA 30360-2824 Denver, CO 80225-0286 CONTENTS Page Abstract . 1 Introduction . 1 Purpose and scope . 2 Previous investigations. 2 Station-identification system . 3 Stream-temperature data . 3 Long-term stream-temperature characteristics. 6 Natural stream-temperature characteristics . 7 Regression analysis . 7 Harmonic mean coefficient . 7 Amplitude coefficient. 10 Phase coefficient . 13 Statewide harmonic equation . 13 Examples of estimating natural stream-temperature characteristics . 15 Panther Creek . 15 West Armuchee Creek . 15 Alcovy River . 18 Altamaha River . 18 Summary of stream-temperature characteristics by river basin . 19 Savannah River basin . 19 Ogeechee River basin. 25 Altamaha River basin. 25 Satilla-St Marys River basins. 26 Suwannee-Ochlockonee River basins . 27 Chattahoochee River basin. 27 Flint River basin. 28 Coosa River basin. 29 Tennessee River basin . 31 Selected references. 31 Tabular data . 33 Graphs showing harmonic stream-temperature curves of observed data and statewide harmonic equation for selected stations, figures 14-211 . 51 iii ILLUSTRATIONS Page Figure 1. Map showing locations of 198 periodic and 22 daily stream-temperature stations, major river basins, and physiographic provinces in Georgia.
    [Show full text]
  • Fisheries Across the Eastern Continental Divide
    Fisheries Across the Eastern Continental Divide Abstracts for oral presentations and posters, 2010 Spring Meeting of the Southern Division of the American Fisheries Society Asheville, NC 1 Contributed Paper Oral Presentation Potential for trophic competition between introduced spotted bass and native shoal bass in the Flint River Sammons, S.M.*, Auburn University. Largemouth bass, shoal bass, and spotted bass were collected from six sites over four seasons on the Flint River, Georgia to assess food habits. Diets of all three species was very broad; 10 categories of invertebrates and 15 species of fish were identified from diets. Since few large spotted bass were collected, all comparisons among species were conducted only for juvenile fish (< 200 mm) and subadult fish (200-300 mm). Juvenile largemouth bass diets were dominated by fish in all seasons, mainly sunfish. Juvenile largemouth bass rarely ate insects except in spring, when all three species consumed large numbers of insects. In contrast, juvenile shoal bass diets were dominated by insects in all seasons but winter. Juvenile spotted bass diets were more varied- highly piscivorous in the fall and winter and highly insectivorous in spring and summer. Diets of subadult largemouth bass were similar to that of juvenile fish, and heavily dominated by fish, particularly sunfish. Similar to juveniles, diets of subadult shoal bass were much less piscivorous than largemouth bass. Crayfish were important components of subadult shoal bass diets in all seasons but summer. Insects were important components of shoal bass diets in fall and summer. Diets of subadult spotted bass were generally more piscivorous than shoal bass, but less than largemouth bass.
    [Show full text]
  • Red Clay Is Amazingly Sticky. Mix Three Inches of Rain with a Georgia Dirt Road Made out of the Stuff, and You Can Lose a Car in It
    Red clay is amazingly sticky. Mix three inches of rain with a Georgia dirt road made out of the stuff, and you can lose a car in it. On the upside, I’ve found that most red-dirt roads in the South lead to out-of-the- way rivers, many with good fishing. Maybe that inaccessibility is why one of the region’s best game fishes remained unrecognized by science until 1999. That’s when Dr. James Williams and Dr. George Burgess, both researchers with the Florida Museum of Natural History, formally described the shoal bass for the first time. Though similar in appearance to their black bass cousins, shoal bass are in fact unique. They resemble an oversized cross between the red- eye bass (a smallish cousin of the largemouth bass) and a smallmouth. Their similarity to the red-eye led scientists to consider them part of the same species, until the advent of gene testing showed them to be different. Those scientists might have done well to talk to some southwest Background: Middle Georgia is famous for its red-dirt roads and, increasingly, its shoal bass fishery. Right: Catch a shoalie this size, and you’ll probably end up in a magazine spread. The average fish is about a pound. ZACH MATTHEWS 32 I AMERICAN ANGLER WWW.AMERICANANGLER.COM ROB ROGERS Backroad BULLIES Once an overlooked and unrecognized species, Georgia’s hard-fighting shoal bass are quickly becoming a destination warmwater target. by Zach Matthews WWW.AMERICANANGLER.COM MAY/JUNE 2010 I 33 Georgia old-timers, who as far back as the 1940s knew that only the Florida panhandle.
    [Show full text]
  • 11-1 335-6-11-.02 Use Classifications. (1) the ALABAMA RIVER BASIN Waterbody from to Classification ALABAMA RIVER MOBILE RIVER C
    335-6-11-.02 Use Classifications. (1) THE ALABAMA RIVER BASIN Waterbody From To Classification ALABAMA RIVER MOBILE RIVER Claiborne Lock and F&W Dam ALABAMA RIVER Claiborne Lock and Alabama and Gulf S/F&W (Claiborne Lake) Dam Coast Railway ALABAMA RIVER Alabama and Gulf River Mile 131 F&W (Claiborne Lake) Coast Railway ALABAMA RIVER River Mile 131 Millers Ferry Lock PWS (Claiborne Lake) and Dam ALABAMA RIVER Millers Ferry Sixmile Creek S/F&W (Dannelly Lake) Lock and Dam ALABAMA RIVER Sixmile Creek Robert F Henry Lock F&W (Dannelly Lake) and Dam ALABAMA RIVER Robert F Henry Lock Pintlala Creek S/F&W (Woodruff Lake) and Dam ALABAMA RIVER Pintlala Creek Its source F&W (Woodruff Lake) Little River ALABAMA RIVER Its source S/F&W Chitterling Creek Within Little River State Forest S/F&W (Little River Lake) Randons Creek Lovetts Creek Its source F&W Bear Creek Randons Creek Its source F&W Limestone Creek ALABAMA RIVER Its source F&W Double Bridges Limestone Creek Its source F&W Creek Hudson Branch Limestone Creek Its source F&W Big Flat Creek ALABAMA RIVER Its source S/F&W 11-1 Waterbody From To Classification Pursley Creek Claiborne Lake Its source F&W Beaver Creek ALABAMA RIVER Extent of reservoir F&W (Claiborne Lake) Beaver Creek Claiborne Lake Its source F&W Cub Creek Beaver Creek Its source F&W Turkey Creek Beaver Creek Its source F&W Rockwest Creek Claiborne Lake Its source F&W Pine Barren Creek Dannelly Lake Its source S/F&W Chilatchee Creek Dannelly Lake Its source S/F&W Bogue Chitto Creek Dannelly Lake Its source F&W Sand Creek Bogue
    [Show full text]
  • Rule 391-3-6-.03. Water Use Classifications and Water Quality Standards
    Presented below are water quality standards that are in effect for Clean Water Act purposes. EPA is posting these standards as a convenience to users and has made a reasonable effort to assure their accuracy. Additionally, EPA has made a reasonable effort to identify parts of the standards that are not approved, disapproved, or are otherwise not in effect for Clean Water Act purposes. Rule 391-3-6-.03. Water Use Classifications and Water Quality Standards ( 1) Purpose. The establishment of water quality standards. (2) W ate r Quality Enhancement: (a) The purposes and intent of the State in establishing Water Quality Standards are to provide enhancement of water quality and prevention of pollution; to protect the public health or welfare in accordance with the public interest for drinking water supplies, conservation of fish, wildlife and other beneficial aquatic life, and agricultural, industrial, recreational, and other reasonable and necessary uses and to maintain and improve the biological integrity of the waters of the State. ( b) The following paragraphs describe the three tiers of the State's waters. (i) Tier 1 - Existing instream water uses and the level of water quality necessary to protect the existing uses shall be maintained and protected. (ii) Tier 2 - Where the quality of the waters exceed levels necessary to support propagation of fish, shellfish, and wildlife and recreation in and on the water, that quality shall be maintained and protected unless the division finds, after full satisfaction of the intergovernmental coordination and public participation provisions of the division's continuing planning process, that allowing lower water quality is necessary to accommodate important economic or social development in the area in which the waters are located.
    [Show full text]
  • Chapter 335-6-11 Water Use Classifications for Interstate and Intrastate Waters
    Environmental Management Chapter 335-6-11 DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT WATER DIVISION - WATER QUALITY PROGRAM ADMINISTRATIVE CODE CHAPTER 335-6-11 WATER USE CLASSIFICATIONS FOR INTERSTATE AND INTRASTATE WATERS TABLE OF CONTENTS 335-6-11-.01 The Use Classification System 335-6-11-.02 Use Classifications 335-6-11-.01 The Use Classification System. (1) Use classifications utilized by the State of Alabama are as follows: Outstanding Alabama Water ................... OAW Public Water Supply ......................... PWS Swimming and Other Whole Body Shellfish Harvesting ........................ SH Fish and Wildlife ........................... F&W Limited Warmwater Fishery ................... LWF Agricultural and Industrial Water Supply ................................ A&I (2) Use classifications apply water quality criteria adopted for particular uses based on existing utilization, uses reasonably expected in the future, and those uses not now possible because of correctable pollution but which could be made if the effects of pollution were controlled or eliminated. Of necessity, the assignment of use classifications must take into consideration the physical capability of waters to meet certain uses. (3) Those use classifications presently included in the standards are reviewed informally by the Department's staff as the need arises, and the entire standards package, to include the use classifications, receives a formal review at least once every three years. Efforts currently underway through local 201 planning projects will provide additional technical data on certain waterbodies in the State, information on treatment alternatives, and applicability of various management techniques, which, when available, will hopefully lead to new decisions regarding use classifications. Of particular interest are those segments which are currently classified for any usage which has an associated Supp.
    [Show full text]
  • Alabama Bass (Micropterus Henshalli) Ecological Risk Screening Summary
    1 Larry Hogan, Governor | Jeannie Haddaway-Riccio, Secretary Alabama Bass (Micropterus henshalli) Ecological Risk Screening Summary Joseph W. Love, October 2020 [Maryland Department of Natural Resources] 1. Background and Description Alabama bass (Micropterus henshalli) is one of at least twelve recognized temperate black basses indigenous to the freshwater rivers and lakes of North America. It is an aggressive species that generally does not grow as big as largemouth bass, can rapidly become abundant when introduced into an ecosystem, competes with other black bass for food, and can genetically pollute populations of smallmouth bass (M. dolomieu) and largemouth bass (M. salmoides), as well as other species of black bass (e.g., Shoal Bass, Spotted Bass). Because of its fighting ability, anglers from black bass fishing clubs have illegally introduced Alabama bass to Georgia, North Carolina, and Virginia waters. It has been introduced by government agencies in Texas and California, and possibly abroad in South Africa. Where introduced, the species has not been eradicated, though harvest may be encouraged. Anglers have debated the merits of a control program dedicated to Alabama bass because some enjoy fishing for the species, while others recognize the problems it poses to other black bass species. Alabama bass has not been reported in Maryland but there is Photo: Image courtesy of concern anglers could introduce the species into Maryland. Matthew A. Williams, posted Additionally, out-of-state suppliers might unwittingly sell on iNaturalist. Alabama bass, which look similar to largemouth bass, to Marylanders. Alabama bass was a subspecies of spotted bass and was widely referred to as Alabama spotted bass.
    [Show full text]
  • 1121 Georgia Bass Grand Slam Airdates
    Script: 1121 Georgia Bass Grand Slam P a g e 1 o f 1 3 Airdates: 5/15/2001 >>Skinner: This is only part of the 60,000 piece arsenal that anglers all over the state of Georgia use to pursue black bass. Did you know there are six different species of black bass in Georgia? Most of us are familiar with the largemouth bass, but there’s also the spotted bass, the smallmouth bass, the coosa or the red-eyed bass, the shoal bass, and the Suwannee bass. Today, on Georgia Outdoors I’m going to try and catch all 6 species of black bass in Georgia for the first ever Bass Grand Slam. Hey, how’re you doing today? Well, I’m in a bit of a hurry because I’ve got to catch all six species of bass in Georgia in one day and I don’t know if I’m going to make it. Well I’ve got all my gear, I think I’m all set, 1st stop—Paradise Public Fishing area in south Georgia. Our friend Bert Deener says this is a sweet spot for Large Mouth, our first bass of the day. And I’d better get going if we’re going to catch all six species! >>Skinner: I’m a little cautious to say that that this is- that we’ve got a good chance cause I’d never want to say that with any species of bass or fish period, but you’ve said that they’ve been moving pretty good and we stand a pretty good chance here.
    [Show full text]
  • Florida Fishing Regulations
    2009–2010 Valid from July 1, 2009 FLORIDA through June 30, 2010 Fishing Regulations Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission FRESHWATER EDITION MyFWC.com/Fishing Tips from the Pros page 6 Contents Web Site: MyFWC.com Visit MyFWC.com/Fishing for up-to- date information on fishing, boating and how to help ensure safe, sus- tainable fisheries for the future. Fishing Capital North American Model of of the World—Welcome .........................2 Wildlife Conservation ........................... 17 Fish and wildlife alert reward program Florida Bass Conservation Center ............3 General regulations for fish management areas .............................18 Report fishing, boating or hunting Introduction .............................................4 law violations by calling toll-free FWC contact information & regional map Get Outdoors Florida! .............................19 1-888-404-FWCC (3922); on cell phones, dial *FWC or #FWC Freshwater fishing tips Specific fish management depending on service carrier; or from the pros..................................... 6–7 area regulations ............................18–24 report violations online at Northwest Region MyFWC.com/Law. Fishing license requirements & fees .........8 North Central Region Resident fishing licenses Northeast Region Nonresident fishing licenses Southwest Region Lifetime and 5-year licenses South Region Freshwater license exemptions Angler’s Code of Ethics ..........................24 Methods of taking freshwater fish ..........10 Instant “Big Catch” Angler Recognition
    [Show full text]
  • WATERS THAT DRAIN VERMONT the Connecticut River Drains South
    WATERS THAT DRAIN VERMONT The Connecticut River drains south. Flowing into it are: Deerfield River, Greenfield, Massachusetts o Green River, Greenfield, Massachusetts o Glastenbury River, Somerset Fall River, Greenfield, Massachusetts Whetstone Brook, Brattleboro, Vermont West River, Brattleboro o Rock River, Newfane o Wardsboro Brook, Jamaica o Winhall River, Londonderry o Utley Brook, Londonderry Saxtons River, Westminster Williams River, Rockingham o Middle Branch Williams River, Chester Black River, Springfield Mill Brook, Windsor Ottauquechee River, Hartland o Barnard Brook, Woodstock o Broad Brook, Bridgewater o North Branch Ottauquechee River, Bridgewater White River, White River Junction o First Branch White River, South Royalton o Second Branch White River, North Royalton o Third Branch White River, Bethel o Tweed River, Stockbridge o West Branch White River, Rochester Ompompanoosuc River, Norwich o West Branch Ompompanoosuc River, Thetford Waits River, Bradford o South Branch Waits River, Bradford Wells River, Wells River Stevens River, Barnet Passumpsic River, Barnet o Joes Brook, Barnet o Sleepers River, St. Johnsbury o Moose River, St. Johnsbury o Miller Run, Lyndonville o Sutton River, West Burke Paul Stream, Brunswick Nulhegan River, Bloomfield Leach Creek, Canaan Halls Stream, Beecher Falls 1 Lake Champlain Lake Champlain drains into the Richelieu River in Québec, thence into the Saint Lawrence River, and into the Gulf of Saint Lawrence. Pike River, Venise-en-Quebec, Québec Rock River, Highgate Missisquoi
    [Show full text]
  • Stream-Temperature Charcteristics in Georgia
    STREAM-TEMPERATURE CHARACTERISTICS IN GEORGIA U.S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY Prepared in cooperation with the GEORGIA DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION DIVISION Water-Resources Investigations Report 96-4203 STREAM-TEMPERATURE CHARACTERISTICS IN GEORGIA By T.R. Dyar and S.J. Alhadeff ______________________________________________________________________________ U.S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY Water-Resources Investigations Report 96-4203 Prepared in cooperation with GEORGIA DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION DIVISION Atlanta, Georgia 1997 U.S. DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR BRUCE BABBITT, Secretary U.S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY Charles G. Groat, Director For additional information write to: Copies of this report can be purchased from: District Chief U.S. Geological Survey U.S. Geological Survey Branch of Information Services 3039 Amwiler Road, Suite 130 Denver Federal Center Peachtree Business Center Box 25286 Atlanta, GA 30360-2824 Denver, CO 80225-0286 CONTENTS Page Abstract . 1 Introduction . 1 Purpose and scope . 2 Previous investigations. 2 Station-identification system . 3 Stream-temperature data . 3 Long-term stream-temperature characteristics. 6 Natural stream-temperature characteristics . 7 Regression analysis . 7 Harmonic mean coefficient . 7 Amplitude coefficient. 10 Phase coefficient . 13 Statewide harmonic equation . 13 Examples of estimating natural stream-temperature characteristics . 15 Panther Creek . 15 West Armuchee Creek . 15 Alcovy River . 18 Altamaha River . 18 Summary of stream-temperature characteristics by river basin . 19 Savannah River basin . 19 Ogeechee River basin. 25 Altamaha River basin. 25 Satilla-St Marys River basins. 26 Suwannee-Ochlockonee River basins . 27 Chattahoochee River basin. 27 Flint River basin. 28 Coosa River basin. 29 Tennessee River basin . 31 Selected references. 31 Tabular data . 33 Graphs showing harmonic stream-temperature curves of observed data and statewide harmonic equation for selected stations, figures 14-211 .
    [Show full text]