ANNUAL (2005) AND FINAL (2001-2005) PERFORMANCE REPORT

SURVEY AND MANAGEMENT OF MARYLAND’S FISHERY RESOURCES

Maryland Department of Natural Resources Fisheries Service Inland Fisheries Management Program Tawes State Office Building B-2 580 Taylor Avenue Annapolis, Maryland 21401

U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service Federal Aid Grant: F-48-R-15

This grant was supported by funds from the Federal Aid in Fish Restoration Acts (Dingell-Johnson & Wallop-Breaux) and the State of Maryland Fisheries Management and Protection Fund

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Fisheries Information Resources...... A1 Environmental Review Angler Preference Survey Supplementary Information

Impoundment Fisheries...... B1 Survey and Inventory Administer Rodeo Pond Program Monitor Trends in Fish Populations

Coldwater Streams...... C1 Summary of Trout Population Statistics Survey and Inventory of Fish Species and Habitat

Major Rivers and Streams...... D1 Monitor Trends in Fish Population Dynamics

Tidal Freshwater Streams ...... E1 Adult Population Assessment Juvenile Recruitment Surveys Hatchery Contribution Tagging Studies Scale/Otolith Comparison Studies Angler Creel Surveys Tournament Surveys

ANNUAL PERFORMANCE REPORT 2005

Maryland Department of Natural Resources Fisheries Service Inland Fisheries Management Program

SURVEY AND MANAGEMENT OF FRESHWATER FISHERIES RESOURCES

Management of Fisheries Information Resources

USFWS Federal Aid Grant F-48-R-15

Study I

By:

Susan Rivers

A1

Table of Contents Fisheries Information Resources

Environmental Review...... A3

Angler Preference Survey...... A7

Supplementary Information: (not charged to project) Formulation & Evaluation of Conservation Regulations...... A24

A2

State: Maryland Project Number: F-48-R-15 Study No.: I Job No.: 1

Project Title: Survey and Management of Freshwater Fisheries Resources

Study Title: Management of Fisheries Information Resources

Job Title: Environmental Review

Introduction

The objective of this job was to conduct environmental reviews of any projects that might impact fish populations and their habitat.

Methods

The Environmental Review Section within the Department of Natural Resources or another lead agency for the given project contacted the Inland Fisheries Division of Maryland Fisheries Service to gain input and advice from staff. The local resource manager reviewed the project, checked historical data on the area in question, and conducted site visits to determine potential impacts on fish populations. All information collected during this procedure was evaluated and used to develop a position statement. In cases where no relevant data was available, a literature search of similar types of projects was conducted to aid in the development of a best course of action. For some projects, action included on-site sampling of the fish populations and existing habitat to gain additional information. If it was determined that impact from the proposed activity could not be avoided, mitigation alternatives were developed.

Projects subject to environmental review by the staff of Fisheries Service include: wetlands alteration, bridge and roadway planning and construction, forestry practices, acid mine mitigation, property acquisition, comprehensive plans, water allocation, and mining projects, research projects by other entities, and proposed discharge sources.

Results and Discussion

Major environmental review activities involved new and continuing projects in 2005. The continuing activities involved the review of forestry practices, strip mining, water allocation, waterway habitat issues and mitigation activities.

Environmental review continued on the proposed Inter-County Connector (ICC) roadway for Montgomery County as government officials have increased interest in the project. The proposed path of the roadway will be constructed over the headwaters of Paint Branch, in the Good Hope Tributary where naturally reproducing brown trout spawning has been documented. A3

Problems developed in the spring and early summer of 2005 on the Youghiogheny River as a result of warm thermal discharges from Deep Creek Lake in Garrett County. Staff learned that the management company for the Deep Creek Lake Hydro-electric Plant had changed and that the new managers were not aware of past agreements. Western Region staff negotiated with the new managers to insure that the negotiated thermal flow and discharge regimes from the lake to the river would be followed in the future.

Strip mining remediation activities continued to be an issue in Western Maryland. Staff gathered information on streams where proposed liming projects were scheduled and monitored existing sites. One site on George’s Creek in Allegany County experienced a catastrophic event when acid levels increased in the stream causing a total fish kill. Experts believe that an underground cell collapsed and flushed additional acidic water into the area and exceeded the capacity of the existing lime dosing unit. Staff is working with the Bureau of Mines and the Department of the Environment in an attempt to rectify the situation, but this will be an on-going project to gain back the resources in George’s Creek.

Land acquisition activities continued in Western Maryland to provide increased and safer access to fishing areas in Garrett and Allegany Counties. Most of these access opportunities are being pursued on the North Branch of the Potomac River.

A new environmental review activity was the review of collection permits for research proposals. Most of the collection permit proposals involved studies of pelecypod (mussels) or decapod (crayfish) species and accumulated contaminants. Staff reviewed the areas and activities proposed with each study to ensure that they would not interfere with on-going studies and that they would not adversely impact rare, threatened or endangered species of mussels and crayfish.

The information on environmental reviews for 2005 for Inland Fisheries is contained in Table 1.

Environmental review activities for the past five years have shown an increase in projects and impacts resulting from increased development (Table 2). Increases were observed in water allocation, road and bridge projects and wetland alteration. With the review of these projects also came the review of projects intended to mitigate the impacts of these activities. Stream restoration and fish passage activities are examples of mitigation processes dealing with population growth and development. An internal reorganization in Fisheries Service resulted in more permit reviews for academic collection and aquaculture. Since these activities can impact both managed species and rare threatened and endangered species, it is important to evaluate the impact of proposals on the fishery resources of the State.

A4

Conclusions

The following conclusions apply to the past year, the concluding 5-year study and future needs for environmental review.

• Environmental reviews must continue to protect the inland fishery resources of the State. • Staff must continue to pursue existing projects on the North Branch of the Potomac River, Youghiogheny River and Deep Creek Lake, Gunpowder Falls, George’s Creek, and Paint Branch. • Work with strip-mined areas in Western Maryland needs to continue to rehabilitate extirpated or threatened fish populations. • Staff needs to respond to new projects in a timely manner to protect fish populations. • Development in Maryland is increasing and staff will need to be prepared to respond to more environmental review projects that deal with urban expansion. • As more research groups work with species and environmental conditions, Inland Fisheries staff will be reviewing more collection permits and will need to closely monitor those studies that may conflict with Inland Fisheries studies.

Table 1. Environmental review activities for Inland Fisheries Division of Maryland Fisheries Service during 2005.

Management section Environmental Review Western Central Southern Eastern Planning Nontidal wetlands alteration 1 17 1 Tidal water/wetlands alteration 1 Comprehensive plans 4 Strip mining 5 Strip mining mitigation 3 Timber sales 9 Reservoirs/water allocation 7 8 Land acquisition 1 Bridge projects 4 6 Road projects 4 6 Stream restoration 7 5 Aquaculture permit 4 Collection permit 5 6 7 Sewage treatment plant permit 2 review Fish passage 10 Wastewater treatment plant 5 modification Utility impacts / dredging 5

A5

Table 2. Environmental review activities conducted by Maryland Inland Fisheries Division, 2001-2005.

Environmental Review 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 Nontidal wetlands alteration 52 35 13 19 19 Tidal water/wetlands alteration 4 1 1 Comprehensive plans 16 6 5 6 4 Strip mining 4 3 6 4 5 Strip mining mitigation 10 5 2 15 3 Timber sales 7 9 8 11 9 Reservoirs/water allocation 2 7 13 14 15 Land acquisition 6 4 6 5 1 Bridge projects 1 4 10 10 Road projects 14 8 10 Stream restoration 1 12 Aquaculture permit 4 Collection permit 18 Sewage treatment plant permit 2 review Gravel pit mining 1 1 Fish passage 10 Wastewater treatment plant 5 modification Utility impacts/dredging 5

A6

State: Maryland Project Number: F-48-R-15 Study No.: I Job No.: 2

Project Title: Survey and Management of Freshwater Fisheries Resources

Study Title: Management of Fisheries Information Resources

Job Title: Angler Preference Survey

Introduction

Angler preference surveys are an effective tool used by fishery managers. Surveys conducted through the mail provide an opportunity to delve beyond on-site opinions to measure how the public perceives management techniques and are used to better characterize the fishing public. Ultimately, a mail survey gives fishery managers the tools to better serve both anglers and the resource.

In spite of increased fishing opportunity in the late 1990’s, license and trout stamp sales have declined, indicating a loss of anglers and leading to the question “How well are we serving the freshwater anglers of Maryland?” Inland Fisheries staff developed an angler preference survey in the form of a mail survey to attempt to answer this question.

The survey objectives developed by staff were: 1) determine angler preferences; 2) measure how anglers interpret established management strategies; 3) gauge angler expectation; and 4) obtain angler characteristics and economic information.

Methods

Methods used for the “Angler Preference Survey can be found in Rivers (2004).

Results and Discussion

Of the 6,012 surveys mailed to anglers, 1,201 were completed and returned. The number of surveys returned as undeliverable totaled 747. The main reasons given for mail being undeliverable included: recipient moved and forwarding order expired; recipient not known; and address or zip code errors (errors that occurred when data was keyed in manually when the licensing computer failed to read the data off of the scanned driver’s license). The majority of returned surveys (over 60%) were for people who had moved and forwarding had expired. Detailed results can be found in Rivers (2004).

The Angler Preference Survey was designed to provide information on four objectives. The following discussion section will address each of the objectives.

A7

Objective 1. Determine angler preferences

Preferred fishing areas

Prior to the start of this survey, there was concern that anglers were passing up freshwater fishing in favor of Chesapeake Bay or tidal fishing. While the freshwater portion of the Potomac River ranked at the top of the “most fished areas” lists, the Bay and tidal Susquehanna River were in the top ten selections. Tidal bass and striped bass were cited for a major portion of the fishing in the Susquehanna, while many other tidal species dominated fishing activities in the Chesapeake. The “most fished areas” were highly diverse and showed that anglers cross the State to take advantage of fishing opportunities. The majority of freshwater fishing activities in 2002 occurred in the Western and Central Inland Fisheries Management Regions, where most of the freshwater resources are located.

Data gathered on the “most preferred areas” found that the first choice was the only choice for some anglers. The second and third choices showed an increase from 45 to 280 and 544 in the “no response” category, indicating that the first choice for at least 239 anglers was the only area fished in 2002. Anglers invested approximately five hours and traveled an average of 30 miles to fish each of their preferred areas. The top preferred area tended to be closer to home than the remaining choices. The top fish species sought on fishing trips were black bass, trout, striped bass (tidal and nontidal), perch and catfish. Fish species targeted specifically in tidal waters included tidal striped bass, tidal black bass, perch, catfish and croaker. However, the majority of freshwater anglers targeted freshwater areas.

Factors that motivated anglers to visit a given area appeared to center around the overall experience rather than filling a creel. Anglers were not fishing solely for food, but rather for the experience and pleasure of the outdoor experience. Slightly more than half of responding anglers released all that they caught, although a large trophy fish might tempt an angler to keep one fish.

Favorite freshwater fishing areas yielded some of the same answers as the “most fished” areas, with the exclusion of tidal waters. The Potomac River was the favorite area for many anglers (228 or 19.6%). It was five times more popular than the second favorite on Deep Creek Lake (47 or 4%). Management Regions I and II accounted for almost 80% of the favorite areas and this was consistent with the amount of freshwater fishing opportunities in those areas. Fish species are the primary attraction to get anglers to the favorite areas, but convenience to home and the scenic beauty also play a significant part in choosing to visit that location.

The preference for the Potomac River in several questions pointed out that this is a resource that needs to be carefully managed to protect existing fish populations while meeting the needs of anglers. In recent years, the Potomac has experienced increasing

A8

problems due to pollutant run-off and watershed degradation. While Maryland attempts to protect the Chesapeake Bay and its tributaries, the Potomac receives impacts from Virginia and West Virginia as well. Reports of pollution events from tributaries entering the river from those states have been increasing and the problem needs to be addressed. Fisheries has also seen problems with exotic species, like the northern snakehead (Channa argus), and problems with intersex abnormalities in some fish species.

Time preferences

Anglers tended to prefer any season other than winter for fishing in Maryland. Morning or early evening was the most popular time to fish. There was no clear preference for day of the week to fish, even among trout anglers who one would expect to take advantage of opening day on Saturday. The days of the week preferred by trout anglers were the same as those preferred by bass anglers and were evenly distributed between weekdays and weekends.

Fish species preference

The top fish species in order of preference were black bass, rainbow trout, catfish, bluegills, brown trout and crappie. The black bass and trout species have always been heavily managed in Maryland, while the other species have not. However, in recent years, managers sensed that the overharvest of catfish, bluegill and crappie might become a significant problem in some areas and placed creel limits on these species. With the increase in preference for these species, it appears managers were justified in providing some protection for these increasingly popular fish.

Preferred waterway to fish

Anglers expressed an equal preference for impoundments and flowing waters, but those who fished both indicated that their first choice would be for open, flowing waters. Factors that influenced this choice included more easy access to rivers, fewer boating restrictions and more easily identifiable fish habitat, as indicated in written comments. A slight majority of anglers preferred to fish from shore as opposed to fishing from a boat, and this preference may have been influenced by the greater abundance of river and stream bank opportunities with fewer restrictions. Impoundments, particularly water supply reservoirs, have many restrictions to protect the water supply, yet anglers do not comprehend the purpose for these restrictions.

Children’s fishing opportunities

Several anglers participated in fishing rodeos as children and the experience motivated most of them to become lifelong anglers. Many other anglers had not participated in rodeos, but recognized that such activities would be beneficial to children. Angling was used as an activity to pursue with children as a family activity and

A9

respondents indicated that such opportunities are needed for youth. Comments provided with the surveys indicated that such events can be used as a chance to teach children about nature, conservation and respect for the outdoors.

“Becoming an Outdoors Woman” program (BOW)

“Becoming an Outdoors Woman” programs began in the early 1990’s to provide women with the opportunity to experience and enjoy outdoor sporting activities. Past surveys had indicated that a low number of women fish on a regular basis, so BOW had the potential to introduce the sport to a non-user group. A very low number of women responding to the survey reported taking part in a BOW workshop, although there were several male respondents who had participated as instructors for some of the BOW activities. Through comments on other questions, it became apparent that many women fish as part of a family activity and had either learned from a spouse as an adult, or learned from a parent as a child.

Improvements for fishing in Maryland

Anglers cited water quality, fish habitat improvement and depleted or impacted fish populations as areas that need improvement in Maryland. These all dealt indirectly with fish by addressing the health of the aquatic environment. Issues that directly impact fishing, such as more areas, stocking and access were viewed as less important. Many of the free comments addressed the need for improved fishing management and enforcement, and better controls on litter and pollution. Recreational anglers were concerned with lack of enforcement for violations of fishing and boating regulations and the actions of commercial anglers. Issues of handicapped access and areas for families with children were factors of lesser importance that could improve the fishing experience for a wider variety of people. In the case of handicapped access, the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 mandates that more public facilities need to be available to citizens with disabilities, and access to fishing could become a mandate in the future.

Preferred angling method

The top methods for angling were spincasting using artificial lures, followed by baitfishing. Fly fishing and trolling were a distant third and fourth. The remaining methods had varying returns, but many stimulated negative responses in other parts of the survey. Some anglers did not see the usefulness of bushbobs in angling, and recommend doing away with the practice. The techniques of dipnetting and netting in general proved to be the most controversial methods. Many anglers associated netting with commercial angling and believe that this interferes with the recreational angler and key target species. Netting during spawning of tidal species and at times when recreational anglers are restricted from fishing were negative comments regarding this type of gear. (Netting and dipnetting were the top responses cited by anglers as activities that should be stopped or prohibited.)

A10

Boat usage by anglers

The dominant boats cited by anglers for common usage were john boats, bass boats and canoes. The most popular motor for these boats was the gas outboard, followed by electric motors.

Trout preferences

There has been controversy within the trout program for several years as to exactly what trout anglers want to see as standard practice for the stocking program. Trout anglers were asked whether they preferred: larger trout with lower numbers; more trout, but smaller in size; or the current size and number of trout stocked. Anglers preferred the current numbers and size of trout stocked, but there was a sizable group that wouldn’t mind seeing larger trout with lower numbers stocked. This was reinforced by the comments regarding trout stocked in Garrett and Allegany Counties in 2002. The drought that year forced hatcheries in western Maryland to curtail usual feeding schedules due to low flow and resulted in six to seven inch fish by stocking time. There were many complaints in the survey about these small fish and the failure of the State to stock the expected size of eleven to twelve inch trout the following spring.

Trout anglers preferred the stocked rainbow trout to other species, with brown and brook trout following. The native brook trout received consistent ranking for all anglers, where brown and rainbow trout preference fluctuated. Since browns and rainbows were stocked, the preferences may have been linked to stocked fish. Cutthroat trout were stocked in one watershed in Maryland and was the least preferred trout species as a result. However, there was some question as to whether anglers were able to identify the cutthroat, since some reports of catching the species were not consistent with stocking locations.

The subject of golden trout, a genetic variant of the stocked rainbow trout, was appealing to approximately 60% of trout anglers. Several anglers responded that they didn’t want an exotic import stocked in Maryland. (The golden trout in question is a genetic variant of the rainbow trout developed in West Virginia hatcheries in the 1950’s.) Maryland considered stocking the species several years ago, but a poorly conducted Internet survey failed to reveal opinions on the topic. A change of philosophy within the Department of Natural Resources brought about an experimental stocking in late 2004. The favorable comments from the public on the experimental introduction reinforce the findings of this survey that anglers would like to see this as an added dimension to the trout program.

Anglers had no clear preference for stocked over wild trout, but the survey revealed that anglers do not necessarily know what constitutes a wild trout. A few anglers reported fishing for wild trout in areas where the fish were not wild but stocked.

A11

Many stated that there are no wild trout in Maryland when the state has many wild brook and brown (and a few wild rainbow) trout populations. Responses to the survey also raised questions as to whether anglers know how to identify the different trout species. The question regarding native brook trout revealed that many anglers fish for brook trout in areas where the species does not occur, so they may not be able to identify them. However, even though they had trouble identifying brook trout, anglers were concerned about the conservation of the species.

The percentage of anglers who preferred to fill their creel with each fishing trip has not changed from past surveys. In the Fedler surveys, only 30% of anglers preferred catch and release for trout, where respondents to this survey practice catch and release for trout 30.5% of the time, virtually no change in 14 years (Fedler 1989). The data in this survey showed that bass anglers practice catch and release more than trout anglers (63.8% versus 30.5%).

Bass preferences

Black bass anglers were more prevalent than in past surveys and over 60% released all bass caught. Most anglers had no species preference and fished for largemouth and smallmouth equally.

Angling for bass was spread equally in freshwater impoundments and rivers and streams. Tidal bass fishing accounted for only a small portion of bass anglers. However, tidal bass caused confusion and anglers presented mixed responses on fishing for tidal and nontidal residents.

While the majority of bass anglers stated that they preferred catch and release (63.8%), they cited different reasons for that option. Many returned all fish to preserve bass populations, but others stated they didn’t like the taste of bass. Some anglers expressed concern over bass fishing tournaments and the damage they could inflict on bass populations. Problems with bass tournaments included: tournaments during spawning or high stress periods; culling; and a perceived special treatment for these events by allowing tournaments during no harvest periods.

The minimum size preferred by bass anglers reflected the catch and release philosophy of many with a “0”size as a minimum. Other anglers set excessively high minima that essentially translated to a zero creel. The most preferred minimum size other than “0” was the current 12 inch regulation already in force.

Objective 2. Measure how anglers interpret established management strategies

A12

Fishing activity in 2002 and the issue of Tidal Bass

Survey respondents stated that 93% of them fished in freshwater areas in 2002 as compared to only 35% who stated they fished tidal waters for tidal bass. However, tidal bass fishing questions in this freshwater survey caused some confusion for anglers. Three questions in the survey dealt with tidal bass fishing and the mixed responses indicated that anglers do not understand tidal bass. The questions dealing with tidal bass were as follows:

2. Did you fish: B. In tidal water for tidal largemouth and smallmouth bass? yes no 6. B. In 2002, how many fishing trips did you take for tidal bass? 0 to 5 6 to 10 11 to 15 16 to 20 Over 20 31. Do you fish for largemouth or smallmouth bass in any of the following areas? Check all that apply. tidal waters freshwater impoundments freshwater streams & rivers

A cross query linking these three questions was conducted in the Mail Survey database. Answers indicating fishing tidal bass would have included 2.b, in question 6 any response other than 0, and a check for “tidal waters in question 31. In all 257 (26.4%) of bass anglers gave conflicting responses to these questions, so it is uncertain how many actually understand what constitutes tidal bass.

The existing tidal bass fishing program was instituted in the 1980’s during the moratorium on striped bass in the tidal waters of the State. The responsibility for the program was assigned to the nontidal fisheries program (now the Inland Fisheries Division). This may create confusion in the minds of anglers. Other questions in the angler preference survey showed that anglers do not understand tidal bass management under a nontidal program, or that anglers were not clear about the tidal/nontidal dividing lines.

Management of State Park and water supply waters

The Fisheries Service manages the waters and fishery resources of the State alone or in cooperation with local municipalities. Anglers understand many of the strategies on solely State-controlled waters, but do not understand policies on many of the shared waters. Areas of the most concern to anglers were State Park lands and water supply reservoirs. Anglers’ comments for several questions expressed concerns with State Park management areas on the hours that waters are open within each park. As a cooperative agreement, Fisheries shares the management of these waters with the parks, but abides by regulations established by each area to provide security and safety for all user groups. Hours are usually set to daylight hours when park rangers can insure the safety of anglers out on the water. Rangers also are allowed to restrict fishing areas to protect swimmers

A13

or sensitive wildlife; to support special youth programs; and to keep anglers out of hazardous areas.

Problems anglers cited with water supply areas included: restricted access areas; restricted hours and seasons; boat restrictions; and restriction to electric motors. The managers for the water supply reservoirs, including the Washington Suburban Sanitary Commission (WSSC) and the Baltimore City Department of Public Works, are responsible for providing safe drinking water to urban residents. Gas-powered boats present the potential for water contamination with spilled fuel, a factor that is poorly understood by boaters. Also, many of these reservoirs are large and difficult to police, so access points and hours are restricted. Finally, the threat of introduced pest species like zebra mussels motivates the water managers to carefully permit and monitor boats that are used on these areas.

Artificial habitat in impoundments

The Inland Fisheries Division introduces numerous brush piles and other devices into impoundments to provide habitat for lake fish species. These devices are installed during the fall and winter months when impoundments are drawn down for winter maintenance. As shown in previous questions, this is a time when few anglers are out on the water, so they may not know when or where the devices have been installed. Only 33% of the respondents had knowingly fished artificial substrate. Many did not understand the reasoning behind the habitat improvements and only a third of those who knew about the devices thought they benefited the resource.

Bass size preference on the Potomac River

The question regarding whether bass anglers preferred a minimum or a maximum size of 12 inches on the Potomac River from Chain Bridge in Washington D.C to Cumberland, Maryland drew interesting responses. Even though 80% preferred the current 12 inch minimum, several anglers expressed interest in a slot limit for the Potomac as a new management strategy for the river. The interesting part was that Inland Fisheries had a slot limit on a portion of the river through the 1990’s that was eventually removed because it did not result in the expected population changes. The strategy allowed for harvest up to 11 inches, with a protected slot from 11 up to 15 inches, with possible harvest of five bass per day, one of which could be over 15 inches. Fisheries managers found that bass anglers were not willing to harvest fish under the 11 inch slot to reduce the abundance of small fish. Even though the regulation was in effect for at least ten years and was listed in the Freshwater Sportfishing Guide, anglers seemed to be unaware of the past regulation.

A14

Barbless hooks

The question regarding barbless hooks revealed that while many anglers practice catch and release, many do not use barbless hooks to support that form of fishing. Most acknowledge that barbless hooks increase survival and make it easier to release fish alive, but they tend to prefer barbed hooks. Several comments addressed the fact that it is difficult to find lures and hooks that are barbless. If barbless hooks and lures supplied with barbless hooks were more readily available on the market, anglers might be more inclined to use them

Objective 3. Gauge angler expectation

In general anglers expressed the belief that an angler’s license should provide a lot more benefits than those granted by the license. Access to private or restricted lands was high on the list of expectations. Some anglers also believed that the license should allow unlimited and unrestricted harvest, although these were clearly in the minority and decreased from past surveys. In the past, anglers were intolerant of variations in fish populations and immediately blamed management agencies. Now anglers are beginning to realize that other aspects, such as environment, population size and fishing pressure come into play in fishery management and, as a result, more tolerance is evident.

Survey respondents seemed to be more sympathetic and supportive of fishery managers across the State. Many anglers stated that they realized fishing in 2002 was impeded by the drought and imposed their own restrictions on harvest to protect fish populations.

Black bass stamp to support tidal bass management

Bass anglers were not interested in a black bass stamp to support tidal black bass management. The few anglers who supported the black bass stamp for tidal bass wanted strict assurances that this money would only be used for that purpose.

Objective 4. Obtain angler characteristics and economic information

Sample Population Characteristics

The sample responses gave a picture of the “average” Maryland freshwater angler. The “average” angler is male and age 48.7 years. While the ratio of males to females has not changed since the Rivers survey (1985), the angling population has aged more rapidly. The age of anglers averaged 40 in 1985 and 42.7 in 1989. In this survey the average is six years older than the last survey conducted. This signifies the ageing of the large group of “baby boomers” and that they are becoming a main force in the fishing public.

A15

An examination of the responses by county or state of residence showed that there was a fairly even distribution of responses as compared to the sample population. The decision to cancel a proposed second mailing to non-respondents and draw new names provided a more even distribution of anglers and gave a better representation across the State. Other states and some of the counties from the eastern shore of Maryland showed poor representation. The eastern shore counties showing low response were those with few freshwater fishing opportunities. There were other returns from these counties, but those responses were from senior citizens who do not fish freshwater areas, so those surveys were not usable for the purposes of this study.

Website Usage

Since the last anglers’ surveys in the late 1980’s, the Internet has become an integral part of everyday life. However, only 43.5% of respondents stated that they had visited the Department of Natural Resources website (www.dnr.maryland.gov) and the associated Fisheries webpage. While some anglers stated that they did not own a computer or have access to the Internet, others are simply not aware of the existence of the webpage. All publications contain the webpage address and the survey also provided the information for respondents. In view of the low number of people using the Internet, Fisheries must remain vigilant in providing information by more traditional methods of communication. Although the Internet remains a valuable tool in conveying information to the public, personal contact still provides a mechanism to meet the satisfaction and needs of anglers.

Licensing and License Sales

The question that dealt with licenses, stamps or permits purchased to fish during 2002 revealed that some anglers were not sure what they bought, or what they were required to purchase to fish in given areas. This could be caused by poor memory, but it could also be due to poor communication from DNR’s Fisheries and Licensing Divisions. Both groups may need to visit how each license and permit is described so that each description can be made clearer for anglers.

Work on the “2002 Angler Preference Survey” pointed out problems with the current licensing system. Some of these problems occur as part of the automated licensing system, where drivers’ licenses are scanned to provide information for the angler’s license. The computer has problems scanning some Maryland licenses and some licenses from other states. In these cases where information must be keyed into the computer, keyboard errors and the failure of the license recipient to check the issued license resulted in many undeliverable surveys. This inaccurate information on the fishing license could also raise legal issues regarding fines and citations for illegal fishing activities. The system also creates “blank records” and duplicates that were provided with the sample population. The license database was difficult to work with and did not always provide the expected information.

A16

Another licensing problem was created when the Fisheries Service abolished the Senior license for nontidal waters in favor of a Senior consolidated license that combined nontidal, tidal and trout stamps for one $5.00 fee. The new license does not distinguish between anglers who do and do not fish in nontidal waters. This resulted in a sample population for this survey that contained nonusers and irritated some senior anglers. Also, it appeared that seniors had a poor understanding of the Senior consolidated license.

While angler surveys provide information on angler preference and usage, license sales provide a quicker method for evaluating how well the Inland Fisheries Division is serving the angling public. Angler surveys are conducted less frequently and are time consuming, whereas license sales are available yearly.

The Angler Preference Survey was conducted in 2002 during the worst drought in recent history. Some anglers who responded to the survey commented that even though they bought the license, they didn’t fish because conditions were either too poor or they didn’t want to damage impacted fish populations by fishing over them. A review of license sales showed that all licenses, except Chesapeake charter boat licenses, declined in 2002. To rate the license declines and to see whether they resolved when the drought broke in 2003, license records for the past 10 years were obtained from the Licensing and Registration Service with the Department of Natural Resources (Table 1).

In 2003 staff expected to see a rebound in license sales with improved water and fishing conditions. Instead, as the records show, declines continued. (It must be noted that the 2003 fishing season was an exceptionally wet year as compared to the previous drought year, and high water may have also impeded fishing activities.) A good fishing year in 2004 resulted in a modest increase in most nontidal licenses and stamps. The fishing year 2005 license returns should show whether this is a continuing trend as recovery from the drought. (As a contrast, most Chesapeake Bay licenses and stamps continued to decline in 2004.)

Since the last preference survey in 1988, distinct management areas have increased from 96 to 181, and public impoundments open to fishing have increased from 92 (totaling 23,458 acres) to 110 (totaling 28,900 acres), so factors other than fishing opportunity appear to be driving the decline in usage. While drought was a significant factor in 2002, managers will have to closely monitor usage trends for the next few years.

The general trend of a decline in fishing license sales is not unique to Maryland. In the “2001 National Survey of Fishing, Hunting, and Wildlife-Associated Recreation – Maryland,” license sales across the United States declined for the 10-year period from 1991 through 2001 (US Dept. of the Interior 2003). The greatest declines nationwide occurred from 1996 to 2001. While this was a period that fluctuated between extreme drought and record precipitation, the good fishing years showed no improvement in angler usage in the national study.

A17

In the past in Maryland, resource usage has declined every time there has been an increase in fees. Comments in this survey, particularly those for the question regarding a black bass stamp to fund tidal bass, indicated that anglers would only approve of a new fee or increase if it could be proven that the money would go directly to species protection and habitat restoration. A study by Duda et al. (2004) showed that residents of Maryland did not fully understand funding sources for programs under the Maryland Department of Natural Resources and very few knew about funding from the Federal Aid in Sportfish Restoration programs. The majority of anglers responding to the Duda study (67%) believed that fees for angling activities were “about the right price.” However, 66% of the same anglers said they would support increased user fees if they would be used to protect and manage fish resources and provide more angling opportunities. The sentiment regarding the protection and management of fish resources mirrors comments received in this angler preference survey.

General fishing in 2002 – trips, expenditures and income

The license and stamp sale numbers were used to generate an estimate of license sales revenues. Since the Senior Consolidated license covers both tidal and nontidal anglers, the percentage of senior respondents to this survey who stated they only fished tidal waters was used to determine that 72.3% of seniors fished in nontidal waters. This percentage was applied to the total Senior Consolidated license numbers to estimate sales for that license. Total license and trout stamp income listed below is the minimum amount collected. Reciprocal licenses with other states would increase the amount of money collected. The license income information can be found in Table 2.

Data from questions 6 and 7 were used to develop estimates of expenditures by anglers for fishing during 2002. Anglers reported 17,837 trips in question 6 (13,939 freshwater and 3,898 tidal). In question 6, one option for anglers was “greater than 20 trips” and many selected this response, indicating that trip counts were probably low. To calculate estimated expenditures for all license buyers in 2002, the number of licenses sold (179,452) was divided by the sample size from the Angler Preference Survey (1,201) to yield a multiplier of 149.42. This number was used to expand expenditures from the sample and project yearly revenues from fishing in 2002. Data from question 6 were used to calculate yearly expenditures and total trip spending.

Question 6 also gave information on tidal bass anglers and their trips, including both those who did and did not fish freshwater areas. Many of the anglers who fished only tidal waters purchased both tidal and nontidal licenses, but chose to fish only for tidal bass in 2002. (A few of these anglers were senior citizens who purchased the Senior Consolidated License and never fished in freshwater.) There were 453 anglers who fished for tidal bass, with estimated trips totaling 3,898. Due to the confusion with tidal bass, only actual data was used, with no projection to the whole population. Yearly

A18 expenditures for tidal and nontidal waters could not be separated in the data. The results using trips from question 6 are contained in Table 3.

The total money returned to the Maryland economy by all fishing activities managed by the Inland Fisheries Division of Fisheries Service, based on returns to this survey was $77,611,842.34.

The number of estimated freshwater fishing trips (Table 53 in Rivers 2004) was compared to those estimated in the 2001 National Survey of Fishing, Hunting and Wildlife-Associated Recreation: Maryland (US Dept. of the Interior 2003). The federal estimates for 2001 were 3,496,000 while the 2002 estimates from this survey totaled 2,665,204.5. By using the average trips per angler from this survey and applying them to the license sales for 2001 (199,405 eligible freshwater licenses – resident and non- resident, senior consolidated and 5-day license), 2,492,562.5 trips were estimated for 2001. This number was less than trips for either 2001 or 2002. This indicated that fishing rate decreased in 2002.

A decrease in fishing trips in 2002 could be attributed to a number of factors. The 2002 drought probably had a significant impact on fishing trips, as reinforced by angler comments. Another factor affecting the number of trips may have been the restrictions in question 6 to categories listing ranges of numbers for trips. Question 3 of this survey asked for actual numbers of trips as opposed to giving a category to the respondent and yielded a larger numbers of trips of more than 28,767 as opposed to the estimated 17,837 trips reported in question 6. However, a portion of the question 3 trips were to tidal areas and were difficult to separate from the freshwater trips, so the question 6 trips were used. Responses to all questions regarding trips in this survey were open-ended, so responses of “greater than,” “a lot” and ” too numerous to count” contributed to low trip estimates.

Conclusions

This survey provided many answers to address how the Inland Fisheries Division has been serving the anglers of Maryland. Anglers were basically satisfied with fishing in freshwater, but have certain ideas that could improve the experience. The survey showed that anglers were looking at factors beyond return to creel as part of the overall fishing experience. Concerns were repeated in several of the questions regarding impacts on fish populations, whether they were overfishing, pollution, habitat loss, fishing over spawning fish and anglers who do not respect the resource (littering, poachers and commercial anglers). Issues emerged from the survey that should be considered for management purposes.

Problems associated with the license information system may be solved in the near future if the system is changed. The recommendation has been made to attempt the survey again with a better angler database.

A19

Returns to the survey may have been higher if the database was more up-to-date. Returns resulting from change of address messages from the post office indicated that the drivers’ license system is not keeping up with the movement of Maryland citizens in view of the fact that many forwarding orders had expired. Returns could also increase if the full budget allotted for the survey were available and response incentives were allowed.

The following management recommendations should be pursued by Inland Fisheries in order to meet the needs identified in this survey:

• Anglers need to be better educated on Fisheries management strategies through the Freshwater Sportfishing Guide, the DNR website, informational signs, and other communications with the public. Areas in need of emphasis include: bass slot limit areas; wild trout management areas; cooperative management strategies with other municipalities; and species identification.

• Resolve angler confusion over tidal bass and the division between tidal and nontidal waters.

• Do not pursue black bass stamp for tidal bass management until public is better educated and Fisheries has clear strategy for the use of generated funds.

• Clearly explain to anglers management issues that are out of the hands of Fisheries Service, such as fishing in public parks and water supply reservoirs.

• Pursue more activities for children and families.

• Modify information gathered for Senior Consolidated License sales to provide more information on usage by the senior angler. The current license does not provide information on which fishing resources are used by our senior citizens.

• Work to improve angler access to areas and amenities at those areas and provide more access for the handicapped.

• Gather additional information to determine whether female anglers are being adequately served by Fisheries Service. Female anglers have remained stable at 10% of license buyers, but information on this group is lacking.

• Provide more education or information for anglers on the use of barbless hooks.

• Develop and increase cooperation with other agencies to improve water quality and waterway habitat.

• Educate anglers on the purpose and location of artificial habitat and structures placed in impoundments to enhance fish populations. A20

• Maintain current size and numbers of trout stocked, but also provide some larger trout as a bonus to anglers.

• Pursue protection for brook trout populations and habitat.

• Minimize the stocking of cutthroat trout.

• Pursue golden trout as an addition to the trout stocking program.

• Increase efforts to protect the Potomac River by addressing pollution and watershed management, exotic species and fish health.

• Continue management of the Potomac River from Chain Bridge (District of Columbia) to Cumberland with minimum size of 12 inches for bass.

• Promote the DNR webpage and make anglers more aware of this resource, but keep up printed publications for anglers who do not access information by way of the Internet.

A21

Table 1. License sales for Maryland Fisheries Service, 1995-2004, used for in the MDDNR Fisheries Service 2002 Maryland’s Angler Preference Survey.

License type 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 Resident nontidal 180696 168001 168487 161488 156124 Nonresident nontidal 14112 14093 14282 15090 16073 Trout stamp 71078 69203 71719 71532 72123 Senior Consolidated 19428 18290 18028 17821 17381 3-day nontidal 5-day nontidal 12605 12227 12871 13670 12938 Resident bay sport 155307 147228 140178 162733 171189 Nonresident bay sport 24656 24009 25457 30240 33899 5-day bay 20865 19572 19299 21688 16970 Pleasure boat 34235 32471 32448 33606 34735 Charterboat (6) 337 335 337 338 337 Charterboat (7) 82 88 89 92 93

License type 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 Resident nontidal 155963 160595 143001 134527 135839 Nonresident nontidal 17165 15350 13480 12563 12802 Trout stamp 71322 71330 64242 62727 63484 Senior Consolidated 18002 18188 16985 17013 17054 3-day nontidal 3669 5116 7248 5-day nontidal 13069 10310 7022 5680 4919 Resident bay sport 168251 173329 158153 148671 145169 Nonresident bay sport 34781 35176 32540 30486 29266 5-day bay 16173 14970 13805 11543 10650 Pleasure boat 36322 43667 44281 44298 45823 Charterboat (6) 354 342 354 332 307 Charterboat (7) 112 123 128 132 136

A22

Table 2. License and stamp revenues for Maryland Fisheries Service for 2002, as reported in the MD DNR Fisheries Service 2002 Maryland’s Angler Preference Survey.

License or Number sold Fee Income stamp type Resident nontidal 143,001 $10.00 $1,430,010.00 Non-resident 13,480 *Minimum $20.00 $269,600.00 nontidal * 3-day nontidal * 3,669 *Minimum $5.00 $18,345.00 5-day nontidal * 7,022 *Minimum $7.00 $49,154.00 Senior consolidated 12,280 (estimated) $5.00 $61,400.00 Total eligible 179,452 Total license $1,828,509.00 licenses income Trout stamp 64,242 $5.00 $321,210.00 Total licenses and 243,694 Total license and $2,149,719.00 stamps stamp income * These are reciprocal licenses for anglers from other municipalities. The amount paid for each license is the minimum, or the prevailing rate for non-residents in the angler’s home municipality.

Table 3. Angler expenditures freshwater and tidal bass fishing for 2002 using trip estimates from question 6 of the MD DNR Fisheries Service 2002 Maryland’s Angler Preference Survey.

Sample license population Total license population (estimated) Number of licenses 1201 179,452 Number of freshwater trips 17,837 2,665,204.5 Number of tidal bass trips 3,898 Expenditures Yearly fishing expenses $183,325.00 $27,392,421.50 2002 Money spent for all trips $321,100.00 + $47,978,762.00 Yearly expenses + total trip $504,425.00 = $75,371,183.50 License revenues 2002 for + $1,828,509.00 freshwater activities Trout stamps + $321,210.00 Tidal bass trip money + $90,940.34 License purchase + angler $77,611,842.34 expenditures

A23

State: Maryland Project Number: F-48-R-15 Study No.: I

Project title: Survey and Management of Freshwater Fisheries Resources

Study title: Management of Fisheries Information Resources

Supplementary Information: Formulation and Evaluation of Conservation Regulations ™ The following information covers work not charged to this federal aid project, but describes outcomes resulting from data and research collected in this project.

Introduction

Each year the Maryland Inland Fisheries Service uses information gathered on fish populations and related resources across the State to develop management strategies to insure the perpetuation of fish species, and to provide maximum fishing opportunities and quality of the experience. The development of regulations helps meet these strategies by guiding anglers to help maintain the fishery. While this is not a federally funded project and none of these activities have been charged against the F-48 project, promulgated regulations are reported as additional information that assists the process of adequate management of the resource.

Methods

In the spring of each year, the Inland Fisheries staff meets to discuss regulation changes that are needed to meet management needs of freshwater fish species. Staff considers species and waterway characteristics, current population data and fishing pressure information when developing regulations for a given body of water or for statewide application. Regulations are reviewed and, if approved, are enacted the following January. Through research in this federal aid project, the effectiveness of these regulations is evaluated, and changes are proposed and enacted if population goals are not met within an established period of time.

Results and Discussion

Regulation changes that were proposed during the last five years to better manage fish populations are summarized in this section.

Maryland shares two waterways with the state of Pennsylvania, the Youghiogheny Reservoir and the Conowingo Reservoir. By cooperative agreement, Maryland honors Pennsylvania’s fishing regulations on the Youghiogheny while the reverse is true for Conowingo. A check of these regulations found that they had not been

A24

updated for several years. While the regulation inaccuracies for the Youghiogheny involved minor conflicts of fishing season, the Conowingo regulations had more problems. Maryland had enacted size and creel limits for species in Conowingo Reservoir following returns in Maryland surveys and angler information. Even though creel and size limits were different for some species, key changes involved creel and/or size limits for American eels and madtoms that were enacted to help conserve these species. Table 1 shows the changes that were made to existing regulations. Pennsylvania will enact these regulations in 2006.

Several new areas were added to the list of Put-and-Take Trout Fishing areas. They were: Tuckahoe Creek and Pond (Queen Anne’s County); Cotton Cove Pond (Allegany County); and, Snowy Creek (Garrett County). These areas were surveyed and found to have habitat and water quality suitable to support trout on a seasonal basis.

New sections of Beaver Creek (Washington County) and Patuxent River (Montgomery County) were added to the list of Catch and Return Trout Fishing Areas limited to the use of Artificial Flies. Recent habitat and water quality improvements to the section of Beaver Creek indicated that a quality fishery was possible in that area. Subsequent surveys have revealed positive data toward meeting that goal. Water temperature cooling and sediment reduction have all been achieved. The new section of the Patuxent River section was contained in a tailrace area below Triadelphia Reservoir. The Washington Suburban Sanitary Commission that manages the reservoir agreed to cooperate with Inland Fisheries to provide cold water releases to that section during critical thermal periods. An upper area of the Patuxent is managed as a Catch and Release Trout Fishing Areas using Artificial Lures area and a limitation to that area has been water temperature. The new area will be an opportunity to compare a temperature- regulated versus a non-regulated section.

A section of the upper Savage River (Garrett County) from Poplar Lick Run to Westernport Road was added to the list of Delayed Harvest Trout Fishing areas. A portion of this area was created on land that in the past had been managed for trout and had recently been donated to the State. The management proposed for this area would take advantage of the seasonal quality of the water and provide extended opportunities for anglers. “Delayed Harvest” means that the area is managed as a catch and release area when water temperatures are ideal and reverts to harvest in June when temperatures have the potential to surpass thermal maxima for trout species present.

The regulations on the Trophy Trout Fishing section of the lower Savage River were modified. Fishery staff noticed increased hooking mortality and damage to fish in the artificial lures section of the river. The change required the use of lures with treble hooks that had been trimmed down to a single hook and prohibited the use of any multiple hooks in that section. Staff is monitoring trout in this section for hooking injuries and changes in population dynamics as a result of this change.

A25

Two new areas were added to the list of Catch and Return Impoundments, where all species caught must be released. The new areas were Waterworks Park (Anne Arundel County) and Governor’s Bridge Natural area (Prince George’s County). These were areas that had recently been made available for public fishing and staff wanted to preserve fish populations in those areas.

The Inland Fisheries Service strives to make fishing opportunities available for all user groups and several new fishing areas were added to meet this goal. Little Antietam Creek (Washington County) and George’s Creek (Allegany County) were added to the list of Youth and Blind trout fishing areas. These areas were easily accessible and provided enough habitat to allow a good area for youth to both fish and learn to fish and a safe spot for blind anglers. Lion’s Park Pond (Allegany County) was added to the list of "under 16, 65 and older and blind angler trout fishing areas". It provided opportunity for children, senior citizens and blind anglers to fish in a safe area.

A closed season for black bass species was extended to the William Jennings Randolph Reservoir (Garrett County) to protect spawning black bass. The reservoir has been a developing fishery for the past few years, as it receives water from the North Branch of the Potomac River and from treated acid mine tributaries in the watershed. As the acid neutralization became more and more successful, the spawning success of black bass increased. Staff made the decision to include the reservoir in the statewide closure period for the spawning of black bass to protect fish on nests. Following this regulation, staff observed more young-of-year bass in the reservoir than in previous years.

Improved water quality in the North Branch of the Potomac River in Allegany County contributed to an increasing smallmouth bass population during the last five years. In order to allow the population to reach maximum potential, the area from Keyser West Virginia downstream to Cumberland, Maryland was added to the list of Catch and Return black bass areas.

Observations of fish populations in inland waters across Maryland indicated that uncontrolled harvest of fish was having an impact on some populations. The decision was made to establish creel and possession restrictions for the following species with the noted restrictions:

Sunfish, including bluegills and rock bass – 15 daily, 30 possession Crappie – 15 daily, 30 possession Suckers – 30 daily 60 possession Carp – 15 daily, 30 possession

Staff found that channel catfish needed creel limits to protect populations across the state, so a limit of 5 daily and 10 in possession was established. By specifying channel catfish only with these limits, staff hoped that anglers would be encouraged to harvest other catfish species instead. Recent concerns over nuisance species of blue and

A26

flathead catfish prompted staff to encourage anglers to harvest these species while protecting the channel catfish.

Size limits were changed for two species. The northern pike minimum size statewide was increased to 30 inches to protect expanding populations. Striped bass in Liberty Reservoir (Carroll County) previously had a minimum size of 20 inches, but the population did not respond to this regulation. Staff anticipated that the fish would grow larger if not harvested but data did not support this goal. The size limit was changed to the statewide level of a creel limit of two fish per day, minimum size of 18 inches, with one fish per creel allowed to be over 30 inches. These striped bass were all part of the reproducing populations found in landlocked impoundments in Maryland and represent freshwater striped bass that do not require salt water as part of their life cycle.

Yellow perch regulations were included for the first time in inland regulations in order to provide continuity with the tidal regulations. In order to protect tidal yellow perch populations, no harvest was allowed from tidal or nontidal waters in the Magothy River, Severn River, Nanticoke River, South River, Patapsco River and West River. Harvest from other river systems was limited to five fish in possession per day with a minimum size of nine inches. There were no restrictions for yellow perch caught from reservoirs, lakes, ponds, or other freshwater impoundments.

Inland Fisheries placed a prohibition on the harvest of bivalves and shellfish in nontidal waters in order to protect native bivalves and shellfish. With many of these specimens on the rare, threatened and endangered list, or in need of conservation, this regulation afforded the species needed protection.

Creel limits and season restrictions for American (white) shad and hickory shad, and blueback and alewife herring to be consistent with tidal regulations. Current regulations show a closed season for American and hickory shad, while the season for blueback and alewife herring is open from January 1 through June 5.

The North Branch of the Potomac River showed improvements in water quality and experimental stocking of trout species proved to be very successful, so a “Zero Creel and Possession Limit Trout fishing area” was established below the Upper Potomac River Commission Wastewater Treatment Plant at Westernport. The Zero Creel” designation meant that there was no limit on fishing gear for trout, but no harvest was allowed.

The Trophy Bass fishing area regulation on the Potomac River was found to be ineffective in affecting a change in proportional stock density (PSD), so a maximum size limit was imposed on the same area and is being evaluated. The Trophy regulation involved a slot where smallmouth bass harvest below 11 inches was allowed, 11 up to 15 was protected, and one fish over 15 was allowed per day. Staff hoped that smaller fish would be harvested and the larger fish would increase in number, but this did not occur. Anglers were reluctant to harvest the small bass under 11 inches.

A27

A regulation was enacted to prohibit the culling of trout. Anglers were restricted from culling trout in their creel. Once a trout was caught, the angler had to decide immediately to keep or return the fish. Fish could not be returned to water from a creel. This was enacted to reduce observed mortalities in trout that were culled from creel.

Conclusions

• Staff needs to monitor regulations, evaluate their effectiveness and propose modifications as needed to benefit the resource.

• Staff needs to review existing regulations to insure that they reflect the intended management strategies and management areas.

• Staff needs to communicate regularly with the state of Pennsylvania to coordinate regulations contained in cooperative agreements for the Conowingo and Youghiogheny Reservoirs.

Table 1. Regulation changes needed for Conowingo Reservoir, 2006.

Outdated Pennsylvania Regulations Change to Maryland Regulations

Northern Pike - minimum size 24 inches Change to minimum size 30 inches

Striped bass and striped bass hybrid - minimum Change to 18 inches, creel of 2 per day, only size 20 inches, creel of 2 per day one of which may be over 30 inches

Sunfish and crappie – no minimum size and no Change to creel limit of 15 daily, 30 daily creel possession, in aggregate

Carp - no minimum size and no daily creel Change to creel limit of 15 daily, 30 possession

Suckers - no minimum size and no daily creel Change to 30 daily, 60 possession

Change to 5 daily, 10 possession, no limit for Channel catfish – no minimum size and no other catfish species ( enacted to encourage the daily creel removal of nuisance catfish species) Madtoms used as bait – limit of 35 in Baitfish – no minimum size and no daily creel possession

American eel – no minimum size and no daily Change to minimum size 6 inches, creel limit creel daily and possession of 25

A28

Study I. Fisheries Information Resources

Literature Cited

Duda, M.D. et al. 2004. Public opinion on fish and wildlife management issues and the reputation and credibility of fish and wildlife agencies in the Northeast United States: Maryland. Conducted for the Northeast Conservation and Education Association by the Responsive Management National Office. Harrisonburg, VA.

Fedler, A.J. 1989. An examination of Maryland angler characteristics, behaviors, and economic values. Contract report submitted to the Tidal Fisheries Program, Tidewater Administration, Maryland Department of Natural Resources, Annapolis, Maryland.

Fedler, A.J. 1989. Trout fishing in Maryland: an examination of angler characteristics, behaviors, and economic values. Contract report submitted to the Coldwater Fisheries Program, Tidewater Administration, Maryland Department of Natural Resources, Annapolis, Maryland.

Rivers, S.E. 1985. A mail survey of Maryland’s trout fishermen – 1981. Federal Aid in Fish Restoration Project F-36-R, Job IV Final Report. Maryland Department of Natural Resources. Annapolis, MD.

Rivers, S.E. 2004. Angler Preference Survey, USFWS Federal Aid Grant F-48-R-14, Study I, Job 2. MD DNR Fisheries Service, Annapolis, MD.

U. S. Department of the Interior. 2003. 2001 National Survey of Fishing, Hunting, and Wildlife-Associated Recreation. Publication FHW/01-MD Rev. March 2003. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, U.S. Department of Commerce and U.S. Census Bureau.

A29

ANNUAL PERFORMANCE REPORT 2005

Maryland Department of Natural Resources Fisheries Service Inland Fisheries Management Program

SURVEY AND MANAGEMENT OF FRESHWATER FISHERIES RESOURCES

Management of Freshwater Impoundments

USFWS Federal Aid Grant F-48-R-15

Study II

By:

Brett Coakley Don Cosden Edward Enamait Charles Gougeon Letha Grimes Mary Groves Tim Groves Todd Heerd Jody Johnson Alan Klotz John Mullican Kenneth Pavol Rick Schaefer Mark Staley Jerry Stivers Mark Toms Ross Williams

B1

Table of Contents Management of Freshwater Impoundments

Survey and Inventory...... B3 Conowingo Reservoir...... B3 Lake Needwood ...... B8

Administer Rodeo Pond Program ...... B14

Monitor Trends in Fish Populations ...... B17 Adkins Mill Pond...... B21 Big Pool...... B23 Blairs Valley Lake ...... B27 Centennial Lake...... B35 Clopper Lake...... B43 Cosca Lake...... B50 Cunningham Falls Reservoir...... B56 Deep Creek Lake...... B63 Greenbrier Lake...... B76 Jennings Randolph Lake...... B81 Johnsons Pond...... B92 Lake Artemesia...... B98 Lake Habeeb...... B105 Leonards Mill Pond...... B108 Liberty Reservoir...... B111 Loch Raven Reservoir...... B118 Little Seneca Lake...... B125 Piney Run Reservoir ...... B133 Prettyboy Reservoir ...... B140 Rocky Gorge Reservoir...... B145 Smithville Lake...... B155 Stemmers Run Reservoir ...... B160 Tuckahoe Lake...... B165 Unicorn Lake...... B169 Urieville Lake...... B173 Wye Mills Lake...... B178

Literature Cited ...... B183

B2

State: Maryland Project Number: F-48-R-15 Study No.: II Job No.: 1

Project Title: Survey and Management of Freshwater Fisheries Resources

Study Title: Management of Maryland's Freshwater Impoundments

Job Title: Survey and Inventory

Introduction

The objective of this job was to obtain baseline physical, chemical, and fish species information to describe a new or existing impoundment with limited or no survey history. This included: identifying and describing new fisheries resources and management opportunities; monitoring and evaluating the impact of increasing white perch populations in reservoirs; and documenting and evaluating the effects of changing aquatic habitat, fishing pressure, and management programs.

Methods

Monitoring studies were conducted on Conowingo Reservoir and Needwood Lake. Procedures followed are cited in each regional section only if different than those described for Study II Job 3. Conowingo Reservoir

Introduction

Conowingo Reservoir is a 4000 acre impoundment of the Susquehanna River. The River and subsequent impoundment create a border between Harford and Cecil Counties in Northern Maryland. It was created in 1928 as a source of hydroelectric power for the Philadelphia Electric Company (PECO). Ownership of the reservoir is shared by; PECO (now Exelon); the Maryland Department of Natural Resources Fisheries Service, Inland Fisheries Management Division; and the Pennsylvania Fish and Boat Commission. The latter two owners cooperatively manage the sport fish populations.

The Reservoir supports a variety of warm and cool water fisheries, however the black bass fisheries are the most popular. Stocking of fingerling walleye and tiger muskie was conducted by both Natural Resources agencies to provide additional angling opportunities. Sampling efforts were made in the fall of 1996 to assess the black bass populations, and the summer of 2000 to collect bass for a study of mercury levels in Maryland largemouth bass. Both aforementioned surveys were very brief, and were not very successful in assessing the fisheries resources within the Reservoir. The Commonwealth of Pennsylvania has not studied the Reservoir. The lack of recent management activities initiated a comprehensive fisheries survey.

B3

Methods

A night-time electrofishing survey using two SR-18 electrofishing boats was completed on October 27-28, 2005. Twelve randomly selected starting points were chosen. All predatory game species ( largemouth bass, smallmouth bass, and walleye) were collected during each 600-second sample. Fish collected were identified to species, measured (mm TL), and weighed (g). Scale samples were collected for ageing (Carlander 1982). The scales were dried and pressed into thin slides of cellulose acetate using an Ann Arbor Roller PressTM. Biologists read the scale impressions to determine the age of each fish. Two stations were selected as “panfish stations” where all panfish species were collected and measured (mm TL) to estimate abundance and stock composition.

Population or community parameters that were addressed included: length (mm TL), weight (g), growth, relative abundance and size and age structure. Condition of the stock was determined by examining length-weight relationships such as relative weights (Wr) (Wege and Anderson 1978). Stock structure was addressed by computing the index of proportional stock density (PSD) and relative stock density (RSD) (Weithman et al. 1979). Relative abundance was determined by calculating the catch per-unit-effort statistic (CPUE) and reported as fish per hour.

Results and Discussion

Results of the 2005 electrofishing survey were compiled. The most abundant gamefish encountered were walleye. Almost 94% of the walleye collected were small, young-of-year, ranging in length from 165-300mm (Figure 1). No walleye older than 2+ were collected. All walleye were in excellent physical condition, and displayed rapid growth. It is widely reported that walleye grow faster in warmer, more marginal waters, providing there is adequate forage and habitat. Growth rates far exceeded Maryland’s Potomac River and Deep Creek Lake (Enamait 2004; MD DNR 2004).

Both largemouth and smallmouth bass are present in Conowingo Reservoir, however largemouth bass were encountered much more frequently. A total of 227 largemouth bass were collected, ranging in length from 112-503mm . Peak abundance occurred between 200 and 300mm, which largely included age 1+ bass (Figure 2). A secondary, but much lower peak occurred in the 400-425mm length range. CPUE for largemouth bass >300mm was 30±16 bass/hour, and PSD was 31%±7. Thirty-three smallmouth bass were collected, and their lengths were evenly distributed from 200- 400mm (Figure 3). Age structure was similar, age 0+ through age 5+ were present in nearly equal numbers. CPUE for smallmouth bass >300mm was 6±5 bass/hour, and PSD was 45%±21. Relative weight (Wr) for all bass collected (smallmouth and largemouth) was excellent. One young-of-year brown trout was collected while sampling. Several Susquehanna River tributaries contain wild brown trout populations.

B4

There are a variety of “panfish” present in Conowingo Reservoir. The most abundant species was the green sunfish. Almost all green sunfish encountered were less than 125mm. Next in order of abundance were young bluegill sunfish, however larger adults were present (Figure 4). A small number of black and white crappie were collected, including several large specimens exceeding 300mm. A very small number of rock bass and redbreast sunfish were also encountered.

The predominant forage species encountered during the survey were alewife and gizzard shad. Other species such as common and golden shiners were present, but not nearly as abundant. Overall, forage abundance was excellent.

Conclusions

Conowingo Reservoir is one of the most diverse freshwater fisheries in Maryland. The overwhelming amount of forage in the reservoir is likely responsible for the remarkable growth of young walleye, and the excellent condition of all gamefish. The presence of alewife in addition to gizzard shad is of particular importance, since they do not usually “out-grow” the predator species as do gizzard shad. The young walleyes present are expected to reach legal size by their second year of life, and provide excellent angling. These fish should successfully reproduce in the coming years and further enhance the walleye fishery. However, the data suggest that the walleye populations are highly variable, which may indicate some habitat restriction. Although their numbers were not particularly high, the bass populations appear to be very healthy. Both species showed size and age structure that was very balanced, indicating stable recruitment over the last few years.

Management Recommendations

• Re-sample Conowingo Reservoir with electrofishing gear, and conduct experimental surveys using other gear types during Fall 2007.

B5

140 120

100

80 60

Frequency 40 20 0

10 50 90

130 170 210 250 290 330 370 410 450 490 Total length by 10mm interval

Figure 1. Length-frequency distribution of walleye collected during electrofishing surveys from Conowingo Reservoir, Fall 2005.

70

60

50

40

30

Frequency 20 10

0 5 5 5 5 5 2 7 25 75 125 17 2 275 32 3 425 47 525 Total length by 25 mm interval

Figure 2. Length-frequency distribution of largemouth bass collected during electrofishing surveys from Conowingo Reservoir, Fall 2005.

B6

6

5

4

3

2 Frequency 1

0 5 5 25 75 75 75 125 1 225 275 32 37 425 4 Total length by 25mm interval

Figure 3. Length-frequency distribution of smallmouth bass collected during electrofishing surveys from Conowingo Reservoir, Fall 2005.

18 16

14

12 10 8 6 Frequency 4

2

0

10 30 50 70 90 110 130 150 170 190 210 230 250 Total length by 10mm interval

Figure 4. Length-frequency distribution of bluegill sunfish collected during electrofishing surveys from Conowingo Reservoir, Fall 2005.

B7

Lake Needwood

Introduction

Lake Needwood is a 30-hectare impoundment of Rock Creek in Montgomery County, Maryland. Maryland National Capital Park and Planning Commission (MNCPPC) owns the lake and the surrounding property, which is part of Rock Creek Regional Park. The objective of this survey was to obtain baseline physical, chemical, and fish species information to describe an existing impoundment with limited survey history. The focus of the survey was the largemouth bass population and its structure

Methods

Seining methods were those described in the Study II Job 3 Methods section with several exceptions. A 4.5-meter seine with 64mm mesh was used for the survey. A single haul was conducted along nine meters of shoreline. Abundant aquatic vegetation dictated a relatively short seine and haul length. Three to five sites were seined in various sections of the lake. Largemouth bass and sunfish young-of-year were counted, other species were noted and the results were recorded. Mean number of largemouth bass young of year per seine haul was reported in addition to calculating the seining index.

Composite sampling, described in the Methods section, was used to electrofish the lake. The reverse gear in the electrofishing boat stopped working at the end of the first electrofishing run. The loss of reverse limited the mobility of the boat and the ability of the crew to capture fish at normal efficiency. The electrofishing surveys were during daylight hours.

Results Seining Survey

A shoreline seining survey was conducted annually to assess largemouth bass reproductive success. Largemouth bass recruitment has been sporadic in Lake Needwood (Table 1). Electrofishing Surveys

A composite electrofishing survey was conducted on 26 October 2004. The survey consisted of 5 runs totaling 47.91 minutes of electrofishing time. A fish community sample was collected by electrofishing on 13 May 2004.

The largemouth bass population is dominated by fish under 300mm in total length (Figure 1). Data collected by electrofishing and verified by scale reading shows there was a 2004 year class of largemouth bass (Figures 1 and 2). The seining survey did not document any largemouth bass young of the year (Table 1). These findings may indicate

B8 the need for more seining sites or that fall electrofishing is more efficient at capturing young of year largemouth bass.

The population parameters measured for this study reveal a low to moderate density largemouth bass population with a relatively low proportion of large (>300mm) bass (Table 2). The length frequency histogram shows a decline in fish numbers >300mm, this could indicate angler harvest is high in this lake. The lake is near an urban area and receives much use by anglers. The proportional stock density (PSD) was 28 and fell under the recommended range of 40-60 for largemouth bass in a balanced population (Reynolds and Babb 1978).. Relative weight (Wr) is less than optimal (95- 100) for most size classes of largemouth bass in the lake (Figure 3) (Wege and Anderson 1978). Less than optimal relative weights for Lake Needwood bass are puzzling considering the diversity of forage fish available (Table 3). The frequent rainfall in 2004 and associated turbidity in the lake may have limited efficient feeding by largemouth bass. Age and growth data for largemouth bass are presented in Figure 2. Growth is comparable to nearby impoundments (Figure 4).

The fish community sample data shows the bluegill PSD to be in the desirable 20- 50 range (Table 4) (Weithman et al. 1979). The bluegill sample size is small and may be biased. Table 4 contains a list of fish species observed in Lake Needwood. The lake has a good diversity of cyprinids, which may reflect its eutrophic state. The presence of diverse and large cyprinids has encouraged MD DNR to stock tiger muskie fingerlings into the lake. Tiger muskies have been stocked regularly since 1995 averaging 400/ year. The fish are obtained from the Pennsylvania Fish Commission. Densities are low for tiger muskie in the lake but the growth potential is excellent.

Discussion

Survey efforts on Lake Needwood are focused on the largemouth bass population. The largemouth bass population is maintaining itself at a moderate density with an unknown amount of harvest.

Management Recommendations

• Electrofishing surveys to assess largemouth bass, panfish, and tiger muskellunge population structures. • Seining survey to assess reproductive success of largemouth bass. • Stock put-and-take trout in spring and fall to retain diverse angling opportunities. • Maintain tiger muskie fingerling stocking rate at 400/year >250mm in total length.

B9

Table 1. Lake Needwood largemouth bass young of year data collected by MD DNR 1999-2005.

Year YOY/30.5m of shoreline Mean YOY/haul

1999 7.7 2.5

2000 2.2 0.7

2001 ------2002 13.3 4 2003 1.1 0.3 2004 0 0 2005 6.7 2

Table 2. Lake Needwood largemouth bass population data collected by MD DNR Fall 2004.

Total Total Total PSD (95% Total Number RSD38 Substock Stock Quality C.I.) CPUEHr CPUEHr CPUEHr CPUEHr 127 28 (14-42) 7 84 75 21 159 Mean 84 76 21 160 Geometric 72 18 147 Mean 73

B10

Table 3. Relative abundance of fish species collected by MD DNR in Lake Needwood in 2004.

Common Name Scientific Name Relative Abundance Largemouth bass Micropterus salmoides A Bluegill Lepomis machrochirus A Redear sunfish Lepomis microlophus S Black crappie Pomoxis nigromaculatus S White perch Morone americana R Tiger muskie Esox lucius X masquinongy S Brown bullhead Ameirus nebulosus S Bluntnose minnow Pimephales notatus S Spotfin shiner Cyprinella spiloptera S Spottail shiner Notropis hudsonius C Golden shiner Notemigonus crysoleucas S Common carp Cyprinus carpio S White sucker Catastomus commersoni S Relative Abundance: A= Abundant; C= Common; S= Scarce; R= Rare

Table 4. Fish community sample collected by MD DNR. A single 114 second electrofishing run on Lake Needwood during Spring 2004.

Species Number PSD Substock Stock Quality Total CPUEHr CPUEHr CPUEHr CPUEHr White sucker 1 ------32 Black crappie 2 -- -- 63 -- 63 Bluegill 32 27 63 947 252 1010 Largemouth bass 5 50 95 63 32 158

B11

20 18 16 14 12 10 N=127 8 6 Percent Frequency 4 2 0

0 0 5 00 0 50 00 50 1 150 20 2 300 350 4 4 500 Total Length by 25 mm Interval

Figure 1. Length frequency distribution of largemouth bass collected by MD DNR in Lake Needwood, Fall 2004.

600

500

400

300

200 y = 43.517x + 102.65 Total Length (mm) R2 = 0.9202 100

0 0246810 Age (years)

Figure 2. Length at age growth curve for largemouth bass collected by MD DNR in Lake Needwood, Fall 2004. (N=61).

B12

110 100 90 80 70 60 50 40 30

Mean Relative Weight 20 10 0 150 175 200 225 250 275 300 325 350 375 400 425 450 475 500 Total Length by 25 mm Interval

Figure 3. Mean relative weight (Wr) of largemouth bass collected by MD DNR in Lake Needwood, Fall 2004.

500 450 400 350 300 Lsen03 n=86 250 Cloppr04 n=113 200 Needwd04 n=61 150 100 Mean Total Length (mm) Length Mean Total 50 0 123456789 Age (Years)

Figure 4. Largemouth bass length at age for three Montgomery County, Maryland impoundments, Fall 2003 & 2004.

B13

State: Maryland Project Number: F-48-R-15 Study No.: II Job No.: 2

Project Title: Survey and Management of Freshwater Fisheries Resources

Study Title: Management of Maryland's Freshwater Impoundments

Job Title: Administer Rodeo Pond Program

Introduction

The purpose of this job was to provide a positive recreational fishing experience for youth interested in the activity of fishing. Participants are a very diverse group, ranging from age 3 to age 16 and from novice to experienced angler.

Methods

In 2005, early plans called for the cessation of the Rodeo Program. Hatcheries where hybrid sunfish were held had stocked out their remaining fish and no money was available for purchasing channel catfish. As a result, existing fish populations were supplemented with hatchery reared adult rainbow, brown or golden trout only. Trout were obtained from the Maryland facilities at Albert M. Powell Trout Hatchery, Mettiki and Bear Creek Rearing Station. Rodeos in Garrett and Allegany Counties included holdover trout.

Results and Discussion

The rodeo fish program supported approximately 41 fishing rodeo events in 2005 (Table 1). All events were stocked with trout. For the first time, a few golden trout (a genetic variant of rainbows) was stocked to gauge acceptance of the species.

The number of rodeos was down from past years due to the fact that only trout species were available for use. Many of the summer rodeos did not occur due to water temperatures out of the recommended range for trout species. The rodeo program was resurrected as a result of public comment and results found in the 2003 mail angler preference survey, the results of which are contained in Study I of this report.

Conclusions

Numerous requests for rodeos were denied as a result of lack of warmwater fish species. If the program is continued, warmwater species will be needed to meet the requests of the public.

B14

Staff has reviewed the Rodeo Pond Program study and has concluded that it fits more appropriately under the Population Management job of the “F-53-D Maryland Inland Fisheries Resource Conservation” grant. Therefore, paperwork will be prepared and submitted to request amending both grants to remove the Rodeo Program Study from F-48-R and transfer it to the F-53-D grant.

B15

Table 1. Fish stocked by MD DNR for 2005 rodeo events. County Location/Pond # of trout * Allegany Barrellville 530 RB Battie Mixon 430 RB Cumberland Outdoor 530 RB Dan’s Mountain 530 RB Dogwood Flats 380 RB Evitts Creek Ponds 830 RB 200 BN Flintstone 200 RB Frostburg 530 RB Midland (Patch Pd) 530 RB Baltimore Baltimore Block event 500 RB Balt. Rod & Gun 350 RB Hillcrest Pond 250 RB Lutherville Park Ponds 400 RB Patterson Park 250 RB 25 GOL Carroll Westminster Pond 300 RB Cecil Rising Sun 750 RB Frederick Camp Airy 1000 RB 2 events Catoctin Fish & Game 500 RB Fountain Rock Park 300 RB Merryland Park 300 RB Middletown Pond 500 RB Prospect Park 400 RB Garrett Accident Pond 325 RB Glades Park Pond 215 RB Herrington Manor 1030 RB Misc. rodeos 916 RB New Germany 250 RB Youghiogheny MTN 530 RB Harford John Carroll HS 300 RB Montgomery M.L. King Pond 250 RB Olney Park Pond 300 RB Prince George’s Indian Head 250 RB Washington Boonsboro Park 600 RB Elks Picnic Grounds 600 Izaak Walton Pond 1000 (2 events) North American Rod & Gun 400 RB Pangborn Pond 1200 RB Sharpsburg 400 RB Tonoloway Rod & Gun 600 RB * RB=Rainbow trout, BN=Brown trout,GOL=Golden trout

B16

State: Maryland Project Number: F-48-R-15 Study No.: II Job No.: 3

Project Title: Survey and Management of Freshwater Fisheries Resources

Study Title: Management of Maryland's Freshwater Impoundments

Job Title: Monitor Trends in Fish Populations

Introduction

The objectives of this job were to (1) obtain fish population information on previously surveyed impoundments to monitor for changes that may require immediate or future corrective fish management action; and (2) collect aquatic habitat information for evaluation relative to changes in fish populations.

Methods

Procedures followed are cited in each regional section report only if different from those described in this Methods section. Monitoring studies were conducted on Adkins Mill Pond, Big Pool, Blairs Valley Lake, Centennial Lake, Clopper Lake, Cosca Lake, Cunningham Falls Reservoir, Deep Creek Lake, Jennings Randolph Lake, Greenbrier Lake, Johnsons Pond, Lake Artemesia, Lake Habeeb, Leonards Mill Pond, Liberty Reservoir, Loch Raven Reservoir, Little Seneca Lake, Piney Run Reservoir, Prettyboy Reservoir, Rocky Gorge Reservoir, Smithville Lake, Stemmers Run Reservoir, Tuckahoe Lake, Unicorn Lake, Urieville Lake and Wye Mills Lake.

IMPOUNDMENT METHODS

The wide range of target species and impoundment morphology across Maryland required a variety of gears and methods to achieve project goals. In addition, new electrofishing methods, introduced in 2002, were employed and evaluated in some but not all impoundments this year. Within Job II, these new methods were referred to as ‘Random Site Electrofishing,’ all others were referred to as ‘Single Sample Electrofishing.’ Individual reports cite which of these methods were used and then describe variation from or additional protocols in detail.

B17

A. General Electrofishing Procedures

Field Procedures

These were procedures common to both electrofishing methods described below. Sampling was conducted with 16 or 18-foot Smith-Root electrofishing boats equipped with 5.0 kilowatt gasoline generators. Crews consisted of one driver and two netters. Target species were netted and held in a live-well until a site was completed or the live- well capacity was reached. Fish were measured for total length (TL) by pressing the mouth shut against the end of the measuring board or cradle and depressing the tail to determine the greatest possible length. Weights were measured or converted to grams. Scales for ageing were taken from the left side after the pectoral fin and below the lateral line.

Analytical Procedures

Catch rate, standardized to fish per hour (CPUEHr), was calculated as an index of relative abundance. CPUEHr was further calculated for various length categories as proposed by Gabelhouse (1984).

Proportional and relative stock densities (PSD and RSD), the percentages of fish sampled within each of these length categories were used to describe population size structure in terms of species balance and angling quality.

Relative weights (Wr) were estimated for various species and size groups. Relative weight was developed by Wege and Anderson (1978) as a method to determine fish condition. This index of relative weight is:

Wr = W/Ws X 100

Where: Wr = Relative weight of a fish W = Actual weight of a fish Ws = Standard weight for a fish of same length (from table)

B. Random Site Electrofishing

Field Procedures

The shoreline was divided into 400-meter sites. This was done with maps or with Global Positioning System (GPS) units prior to the start of sampling. When an impoundment was too large to sample every site, a sub-set of sites was randomly chosen. Unless noted otherwise, site selections were based upon the systematic method of allocation (Nielsen and Johnson 1983; Snedecor and Cochran 1968; Miranda et al. 1996).

B18

The sample size was determined and then sites were numbered to provide consecutively numbered groups equal to the desired number of samples. A random choice was made from the range of consecutive numbers and that site was sampled within each group. Electrofishing started at the first station coordinate reached and continued for 600 seconds. Actual start/stop waypoints were entered and uploaded to a PC to accurately determine linear sample distance. All size groups of largemouth bass and other game species of moderate or low density were targeted for collection during the 600-second samples (see reports for target species list). A subset of these stations was randomly chosen for full species community sampling. All species and sizes were collected during the first 100 seconds of electrofishing at these stations.

Analytical Procedures

Relative abundance indices were estimated as the mean of CPUEHr across all sites. Both arithmetic and geometric mean estimates were made. Geometric means were based on the natural log of CPUE +1. Log-transformation served to stabilize the variance and provide more precise indices.

C. Composite Site Electrofishing

Field Procedures

Sampling was conducted around the perimeter of the impoundment but did not include the entire shoreline. Instead it focused on areas of habitat suitable for black bass. When the livewell was full, sampling was halted, individual fish data were recorded and the fish were released. Sampling then resumed until the lake had been circumnavigated or the sample size was determined to be sufficient. In small impoundments a high percentage of the shoreline is actually sampled but on larger bodies as little as 5% may sampled. The location of samples, although not specifically predetermined, has generally remained constant unless changes in habitat or water levels required a change in location. This most closely resembled a fixed site strategy.

Analytical Procedures

Analyses were as described under the ‘Random Site Electrofishing’ except that all parameters were estimated from the pooled samples. This did not allow the calculation of variance; therefore confidence intervals were determined and tests for significant differences were conducted.

Seining

Shoreline sites were sampled for young-of-year (YOY) black bass species using a 9.1m x 1.2m, 3.2mm mesh beach seine. Site locations were generally fixed but have varied with changes in shoreline or bottom habitats or due to water level variation. Initial

B19 selections were made to facilitate gear effectiveness and to sample representative habitat. A seining index was used to quantify YOY abundance based on the number of YOY collected from 30.5m of shoreline (three hauls):

Number of YOY Seining Index Per 30.5m of shoreline 0 - 0.50 Poor 0.51 - 2.50 Fair 2.51 - 5.50 Good 5.51 + Excellent

B20

Adkins Mill Pond

Introduction

Adkins Mill Pond is an approximately 4 acre impoundment in south central Wicomico County. The State Highway Administration owns the dam and the Maryland Department of Natural Resources Fisheries Service, Inland Fisheries Division has been solicited by Wicomico County to provide management advice on the impoundment. Fiscal resources for this work are derived from fishing license sales and the Federal Aid and Restoration Fund (Dingell-Johnson Act). The lake was created by impounding a small cypress swamp and stream typical of Maryland’s lower eastern shore. As a result, the pond is a very shallow, silted, tannic system. The watershed is highly agricultural. Intensive row crop and chicken farming dominate the landscape, adding excess nutrients to the watershed. Surveys collected from the pond showed temperature-dissolved oxygen profiles having critically low oxygen levels in all but the top two feet of water. Past electrofishing surveys suggest there was very little successful bass and bluegill recruitment in Adkins Mill Pond, likely due to a soft bottom composed of loosely packed silt and detritus. Intensive fish stocking has been conducted for several years and has yielded few positive results. Past surveys indicate that the pond’s poor water quality and lack of suitable spawning substrate likely are the limiting factors to maintaining a sustainable fishery. Assessments of the fisheries resources in Adkins Mill Pond were conducted on May 10, 2001; prior to being drained to half-pool for dam and bridge repairs, and the addition of a fish ladder later in the fall.

Methods

Population or community parameters that were addressed included: length (mm TL), weight (g), growth, size structure, and relative abundance. Condition of the stock was determined by examining length-weight relationships. Stock structure was addressed by computing the index of proportional stock density (PSD). Relative abundance was determined by calculating the catch per unit of effort statistic (CPUE).

A boat electrofishing sample totaling 1,562 seconds was collected along the periphery of the lake. All largemouth bass were collected, measured (mm TL), and weighed (g). All black crappie and chain pickerel were collected and measured (mm TL). A representative subsample of bluegill was collected and measured (mm TL). Data were recorded for statistical analysis.

Results

Thirteen species of fish were collected from Adkins Mill Pond. While this constitutes a broad range of species present, overall abundance in numbers and biomass was low. Catch per unit of effort (CPUE) was 27 bass/hour. This was higher than a 1998 survey (22 bass/hour), but very low relative to other impoundments. Bluegill sunfish

B21

were rarely encountered (N=20). The data for bass and bluegill were not robust enough for statistical analysis.

Conclusions / Management Recommendations

Fish populations in Adkins Mill Pond have not responded to recent management efforts. Over the last three years, suitable numbers of fingerling bluegill, and adult and fingerling bass have been stocked in an attempt to create a self-sustaining warm-water fishery. Results from the 2001 survey support previous findings that water quality and habitat hamper even intense fisheries management (stocking) efforts. Until the limiting factors of habitat and water quality are addressed, it appears that stocking fish in Adkins Mill Pond could be an exercise in futility.

In order to establish a quality fishery the following management actions should be taken:

• Limit stocking of fish into Adkins Mill Pond until habitat and water quality are improved.

• Suggest Adkins Mill Pond for a reclamation project to the Watershed Restoration Action Strategy Team when the Pocomoke watershed is discussed.

B22

Big Pool

Introduction

Big Pool is a 36 ha eutrophic lake in Washington County. Formed by a natural depression, Big Pool was part of the Chesapeake and Ohio Canal system and is under the authority of the National Park Service. Neighboring Fort Frederick State Park maintains a boat ramp and boat rental concession. The Maryland Department of Natural Resources, Inland Fisheries Division manages Big Pool as a warmwater fishery for largemouth bass and pan fish species; adult rainbow trout are stocked during the spring and fall to provide a seasonal put-and-take fishery. Wind induced turbidity caused by the lakes East-West orientation and silt bottom have prevented the growth of submerged aquatic vegetation. In addition, water levels can vary from year to year depending on precipitation, a situation made worse by occasional sinkholes. During low water years when the shoreline brush is exposed, very little cover exists and much of the littoral zone is less than 1 meter in depth.

Fishery surveys have been conducted annually, as water levels permit, to monitor the status of the fishery. Fish trapping efforts were employed in 2004 in order to examine sunfish populations. The purpose of the 2005 survey was to evaluate the current fishery with the following objectives:

• Determine the relative abundance, size structure, and physical condition of largemouth bass.

• Compile summer temperature and oxygen profile data.

Methods Electrofishing

A commercially built electrofishing boat manufactured by Smith-Root was used to collect fish species. Timed runs (600 sec.) were conducted around the impoundment perimeter in areas less than a depth of 3.1m to sample largemouth bass. Electrofishing was accomplished using pulsed (60pps) DC current; voltage was adjusted for maximum shocking efficiency; shocking time was automatically recorded.

Relative Weight (Wr) - Lengths and weights of collected bass were compared to standard weights in order to obtain relative weight, a method of determining fish condition as described by Wege and Anderson (1978).

Proportional Stock Density (PSD), a method of describing the size structure of a fish population (Anderson 1980) was calculated using the formula:

PSD = (Number of fish > quality size / Number of fish > stock size) X 100

B23

where: largemouth bass stock size = 20cm + largemouth bass quality size = 30cm + largemouth bass preferred size = 38cm + largemouth bass memorable size = 50cm +

Confidence intervals (95%) for PSD were calculated using the method described by Gustafson (1988).

Catch-per-Unit-Effort (CPUE) - a measure of relative abundance expressed as the number of fish collected per hour of actual electrofishing time.

Trapping

Refer to methods section of 2004 Big Pool Progress report.

Profile Data

A Yellow Springs Instruments Model 57 temperature/oxygen meter was used to collected profile data every .5 meters from the surface to the bottom near the reservoirs deepest point.

Results & Discussion

Electrofishing

A total of four daylight electrofishing runs were completed on 26 October 2005. The CPUEHR for stock size bass ranged from 30 to 206 with an arithmetic mean of 96 (CV% - 79) and a geometric mean of 74. The CPUEHR for quality size bass ranged from 0 to 44 with an arithmetic mean of 24 (CV% - 76) and a geometric mean of 14. Confidence intervals were extremely wide because of the small number of samples and high variability. Longer runs may help to reduce variability among runs by including more representative habitat in each run. Catch rates for quality size and larger fish appear to be declining after reaching record high levels in 2003 (Table 1). Caution should be used in comparing the 2004 electrofishing CPUEs. The second recorder malfunctioned resulting in electrofishing time being measured by dividing total sampling time by one half.

The 2005 CPUEHR for YOY largemouth bass ranged from 20 to 67, considered high. Total length ranged from 82mm to 118mm. Future reproductive success will be monitored using this method because there are limited shoreline areas suitable for seining.

B24

The largemouth bass PSD was 27% ±13 (95% CI), just below the 30 to 70 percent proposed by Weithman, et al. (1979) for a predator species in a balanced population. During the 1990’s, PSD values for Big Pool generally fell between 14 and 21%. Although more recent values have been higher, they appear to have declined over the study period of 2003 - 2005. The 2005 RSD38 of nine falls below the 10 to 25 percent suggested by Anderson (1980) for a balanced largemouth bass population. Though PSD and RSD values fell below recommended levels, the difference was not significant at the 95% CI. The mean total length of stock size largemouth bass in the 2005 collection was 275mm ±17 (95% CI).

The mean Wr for largemouth bass was determined to be 86 ±3 (95% CI). Flickinger and Bulow (1993) describe fish with Wr values less than 85 as being underweight. Stock size bass have consistently been near or below this Wr since 1998. The Wr for largemouth bass < 300mm in 2005 was 83 ±5. The high abundance of black crappie and yellow perch increased competition for forage and may have contributed to the poor condition of these smaller bass.

Trapping

Results of the sunfish trapping effort were presented in the 2004 Big Pool Federal Aid Progress report. Trap data indicated strong bluegill and pumpkinseed sunfish populations in Big Pool. The largemouth bass population has kept the sunfish population in check resulting in a large percentage of quality size or larger sunfish. These sunfish are providing additional fishing opportunities and are an important part of the Big Pool sport fishery.

Profile

A limnology profile of Big Pool was conducted on 13 July 2005 (Figure 1). Sufficient levels of dissolved oxygen needed for fish activity appear to diminish below two and one half meters in depth. Limiting fish activity to such a small area throughout the summer months may impact all fish populations. The shallow oxycline should be considered when placing fish habitat structures.

Management Recommendations

• Continue electrofishing surveys of the largemouth bass population to remain up- to-date on their status and observe trends. Data should include reproductive success, size structure, condition, and catch rates.

• Conduct projects aimed at improving fish habitat in offshore areas to provide cover during low water years.

B25

Table 1. Largemouth bass population data collected by electrofishing, Big Pool, 2003, 2004,2005. (95% CI). MDDNR

Population Parameter 2003 2004 2005

CPUE (stock) 115 ± 126 73 ± 25 96 ± 121

CPUE (quality) 61 25 24

CPUE (preferred) 19 4 9

PSD 53±15 34±14 27±13

RSD38 3±5 5±7 9±9

Mean Wr 85±2 85±6 86±3

30 10 9 25 8 20 7 6 15 5 4 10

Temperature (C) 3 2 5 Dissolved Oxygen (mg/l) 1 0 0 0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4 4.5 Depth (meters)

Temperature (C) Dissolved Oxygen

Figure 1. Limnology profile of Big Pool, 10:45 a.m., 13, July 2005. MDDNR.

B26

Blairs Valley Lake

Introduction

Blairs Valley Lake is a 10-hectare eutrophic impoundment located within the Indian Springs Wildlife Management Area near Clear Spring, Washington County. Water quality is slightly basic (pH 8), soft (hardness 51 mg/l CaCO3), and has little buffering capacity (alkalinity 34 mg/l CaCO3). Submerged aquatic vegetation (Najas minor, Potamogeton spp.) frequently reaches nuisance levels by late summer. Hydrilla (Hydrilla verticullata) was discovered in 2003 and has increased in abundance each year. The lake is managed for warmwater fish species with largemouth bass (Micropterus salmoides) the principal sport fish and predator species. Fingerling tiger muskie (Esox lucius X Esox masquinongy) are stocked annually and adult rainbow trout are stocked each spring and fall to provide a seasonal put-and-take fishery.

Electrofishing surveys have been conducted annually to monitor the status of the popular largemouth bass fishery. Trapping surveys are conducted every five years to assess panfish populations. The purpose of these surveys was to evaluate the overall fishery with the following objectives:

• Document largemouth bass year class strength and trends.

• Obtain largemouth bass population data and monitor trends in relative abundance, size structure, growth rates and physical condition.

• Obtain relative abundance and size structure data for panfish species.

• Compile temperature – dissolved oxygen profile data.

Methods

Seining

Shoreline sites were sampled for young-of-year (YOY) fish species using a 9.1m x 1.2m, 3.2mm mesh haul seine at seinable locations throughout the impoundment. Locations were chosen with the objective of sampling representative habitat. Relative abundance of largemouth bass YOY was expressed as mean YOY/seine haul.

Electrofishing

A commercially built electrofishing boat manufactured by Smith-Root was used to collect fish species. Timed runs (600 sec.) were conducted around the impoundment perimeter in areas less than a depth of 3.1m to sample largemouth bass following the protocol of Washington State (Bonar et al. 2000). Electrofishing was accomplished using

B27

pulsed (60pps) DC current; voltage was adjusted for maximum shocking efficiency; shocking time was automatically recorded. Sampling was discontinued once the entire shoreline had been covered.

Catch rate, standardized to fish per hour (CPUEHr), was calculated as an index of relative abundance. Relative weight of collected bass was calculated as described by Wege and Anderson (1978). Proportional Stock Density (PSD) was calculated as described by Anderson (1980) and PSD confidence intervals (95%) were calculated using the method described by Gustafson (1988).

Sunfish Trapping

A total of ten D-traps (L-150cm, W-61cm, H-61cm, 2.54cm mesh) and five collapsible fish traps (L-109cm, W-64cm, H-64cm, 2.54cm mesh) were used during 2002 to capture bluegill and black crappie to obtain size structure and physical condition data. Both traps had double funnel designs; the D-traps had two funnels in series while the collapsible traps had two opposing funnels. Traps were placed at various depths and locations around the lake on 15 September (10:00am) checked daily, and removed on 17 September (8:00am). Traps were set again on 18 November (1:00pm), checked daily, and pulled on 21 November (10:00am). Black crappie were measured to the nearest millimeter, weighed to the nearest gram, three scales were removed for age analysis and released. Bluegills were recorded according to size class (stock, quality, preferred) and released. Abundance was expressed as fish/trap hour.

Profile Data Collection

A Yellow Springs Instruments Model 57 temperature/oxygen meter was used to collect profile data every 0.5 meters from the surface to the bottom adjacent to the dam near the reservoir’s deepest point.

Results and Discussion

Seining

Relative abundance of YOY largemouth bass has generally been very high, but quite variable (Table 1). A particularly large yearclass was produced in 2003 resulting in a geometric mean YOY/haul more than twice the next highest year. The geometric mean YOY/haul 2001 – 2005 was 9. Even the poorest year classes are thought to be more than adequate to support an abundant adult population.

Reproduction of bluegill, black crappie, redear sunfish, banded killifish, bluntnose minnows, brown bullhead, and yellow perch has been consistent during the past five years. However, reproduction of yellow perch has been low and this species has not become overpopulated as feared. Redear sunfish are now self-sustaining and have

B28

become an important component to the sunfish fishery. Habitat manipulation efforts (Blairs Valley Lake 2004 Federal Aid Progress Report) have had some success in improving golden shiner reproduction.

Electrofishing

Largemouth bass relative abundance has remained fairly stable based on the CPUEHr of stock-size bass (Table 2). However, the 95% confidence intervals are extremely wide owing to high variability among runs and small sample size. CPUE coefficient of variation values ranged from 65% in 2002 to 11% in 2005. This is an inherent problem when sampling small impoundments. Flickinger and Bulow (1993) suggest that CPUEHR values over 100 indicate a dense bass population. In spite of consistently high reproduction, the CPUEHr of stock-size and greater bass has ranged from 64 to 76 during the past five years. This level of abundance should provide anglers with good fishing as well as good bass growth and condition.

Nevertheless, the size structure of the largemouth bass population continues to decline and current PSD values fall well below the recommended 30 to 70 percent proposed by Weithman et al. (1979) (Table 2). Anderson (1980) suggested that a balanced largemouth bass population should have an RSD38 from 10 to 25 percent. For the first time during the last five-year period, the 2005 RSD38 fell below this level. The data show a clear trend toward a population dominated by stock-size fish, however the mean length of stock-size and greater bass has not changed significantly (Table 3.) due to the persistence of a few very large individuals in the samples. The largest bass collected during 2005 measured 521mm (20.5”) in total length and weighed 2.13kg (4.7 lbs).

The slot limit regulations currently in effect appear to be doing little to shape the largemouth bass size structure (Figure 1). The relative abundance of bass drops precipitously around 280mm, the beginning of the protected slot. A length at age graph for Blairs Valley Lake largemouth bass was produced in 2004 based on scale analysis (Figure 2). The age data revealed that the drop in abundance is occurring between the ages of three and four. Year class strength has also done little to change this pattern.

Largemouth bass physical condition continues to fall below desirable levels (Table 3). Target Wr values for largemouth bass during the fall for populations in good habitat are 95 to 100 (Wege and Anderson 1978). Flickinger and Bulow (1993) describe fish with Wr values less than 85 as being underweight. From 1999 through 2002, mean Wr values for stock-size and greater bass ranged from 91 to 96; from 2003 through 2005 Wr values ranged from 85 to 89. The mean Wr of stock bass (2005, 86 ± 4) is generally lower than quality bass (2005, 94 ± 4), but the difference is not statistically significant at the 95 % confidence level. An extended drawdown and seeding of the exposed shorelines took place during 2004 with the objective of increasing bass predation during the winter and improving spawning success of golden shiners in the spring of 2005 when rewatered. These actions were expected to restore largemouth bass physical condition to

B29

desirable levels. Whereas adult golden shiners were commonly observed during the fall 2005 electrofishing survey, largemouth bass physical condition has yet to improve.

Sunfish Trapping

Results of the 2002 trapping effort were reported in the 2002 Federal Aid Progress Report. Bluegill PSD was similar, 52% and 59%, for the September and November samples, respectively. No preferred-length or larger bluegills were caught in either trapping effort. Crappie PSD was 53% and the RSD25 was six percent indicating a size structure that should be attractive to anglers

Profile Data

Blairs Valley is a very fertile lake with a shallow oxycline. Temperature and dissolved oxygen profile data has been collected annually during the summer seining surveys. Profile data collected on July 13, 2005, is typical of summer stratification in Blairs Valley (Figure 3). Dissolved oxygen plummets from 5 ppm at 1.5m (4.9’) to 0.2 ppm at 2m (6.5’). In the top 1.5 meters of the water column, the only area with suitable dissolved oxygen for most gamefish, temperatures ranged from 29.8°C (85.6°F) to 26.6°C (80°F). As a result, gamefish species are crowded into an extremely small, warm portion of the upper water column. Compounding an already stressful situation is the heavy growth of aquatic vegetation, which may also be reducing largemouth bass foraging ability. Poor summer water quality may be a substantial, overriding factor responsible for limiting fishery quality.

Habitat Projects

A habitat improvement project was undertaken in 2005 to improve angler success by providing cover and concentrating fish during times of the year when vegetation is not available. A total of seventeen pallet structures and four brush piles were placed in the littoral zone in water less than eight feet deep. A local Boy Scout troop provided construction labor.

B30

Management Recommendations

The Blairs Valley Lake largemouth bass population continues to fall below recommended parameters. Poor summer water quality may be largely responsible. Even so, management efforts should aim to improve the physical condition of largemouth bass by improving the golden shiner forage base. With improved condition and growth, the proportion of quality and preferred-length bass should also improve. Specific recommendations include:

• Work with the staff at Indian Springs Wildlife Management Area to improve habitat with the primary objective of producing large year classes of golden shiners. Projects should include annual drawdowns of approximately 1.5m beginning October 1 to establish winter wheat on the upper exposed lake bottom and concentrate predator and prey species to increase predation; the lake should not reach full pool prior to May 15 to reduce yellow perch spawning habitat. Brush piles constructed of discarded Christmas trees, cedar trees and/or pallet structures should be constructed as needed to maintain quality habitat.

• Create a prolonged (full season) drawdown every five years to concentrate prey species for better predation and to establish terrestrial vegetation on the exposed lake bottom to provide spawning habitat for golden shiners and to reduce aquatic vegetation growth.

• Research the feasibility and cost of an aeration system to destratify the lake and improve water quality.

• Continue annual electrofishing surveys as time and staff permit to document the status of fish populations, monitor the effects of the habitat manipulations and stay abreast of trends. Data should include largemouth bass reproductive success, relative abundance, size structure, growth, and physical condition as well as age, growth, and physical condition of collected tiger muskie.

• Monitor the reproduction of largemouth bass by CPUEHr of YOY during the fall electrofishing survey

• Continue to stock 150 (10.6/ha) fingerling tiger muskie (20cm +) annually to provide anglers with an opportunity to catch a trophy fish and provide an additional predator on small carp, white suckers, black crappie and yellow perch.

• Post informational signs at fishing access areas and the boat ramp to urge lake users to use care in preventing the spread of hydrilla.

B31

Table 1. Relative abundance (geometric mean YOY/haul) of largemouth bass collected by seining in Blairs Valley Lake 1998 - 2005. MD DNR

Year 2005 2004 2003 2002 2001 2000 1999 1998 # hauls 4 5 6 6 6 7 7 5 # YOY 31 84 223 106 74 21 66 53 GMean 6 16 34 16 8 3 6 9 YOY/haul 1998 - 2005 Geometric Mean = 9

Table 2. Summary of Blairs Valley Lake largemouth bass population data collected by electrofishing 2002 - 2005. 95% Confidence Level. MD DNR.

Mean Stock Year N PSD RSD38 RSD51 CPUEHr 2005 28 18 ± 15 7 ± 14 4 76 ± 78 2004 25 20 ± 17 16 ± 20 4 64 ± 46 2003 39 23 ± 14 15 ± 14 0 75 ± 103 2002 64 31 ± 12 20 ± 12 0 70 ± 112 Geometric Mean = 71

Table 3. Mean length and relative weight of stock-size and greater of Blairs Valley Lake largemouth bass collected by electrofishing 2001 – 2005. 95% Confidence Level. MD DNR.

Mean CV CV Year N Length % Wr % 2005 28 271 ± 30 29 88 ± 4 11 2004 25 285 ± 40 34 89 ± 4 10 2003 39 273 ± 23 26 85 ± 2 7 2002 64 297 ± 23 31 90 ± 4 16

B32

25.0

20.0 Protected Slot

Hr 15.0

CPUE 10.0

5.0

0.0 219 259 299 339 379 419 459 499 >520 Total Length by 2cm Length Group

2005 2004 2003

Figure 1. Length frequency of Blairs Valley Lake largemouth bass collected by MD DNR during electrofishing surveys 2003 – 2005. (2005 N = 28, 2004 N = 25, 2003 N = 39).

700 600 500 400

300 y = 43.137x + 140.18 2 200 R = 0.9389

100 Length (mm) Total 0 024681012

Age in Years

Figure 2. Length at age of Blairs Valley Lake and Cunningham Falls largemouth bass collected by MD DNR electrofishing surveys during 2004 and aged by scale analysis. (N = 21).

B33

35 14 12 30 10 25 8

20 6 4

Temperature (°C) 15 2 Dissolved Oxygen (ppm) 10 0 012345 Depth (m)

Temperature Dissolved Oxygen

Figure 3. Blairs Valley Lake temperature and dissolved oxygen profile data collected by MD DNR on 13 July, 2005.

B34

Centennial Lake

Introduction

Centennial Lake is an 18 hectare (45 acre) impoundment on the Centennial Branch of the Little Patuxent River near Columbia, Maryland. The lake is within Centennial Park, which is managed by the Howard County Parks Department. Centennial Lake was impounded in 1985.

Prior to 1988, Centennial Lake was managed with statewide largemouth bass regulations allowing harvest of 5 bass/day with a 12 inch minimum size. In 1988, the management strategy was changed to Catch and Release for largemouth bass. It has been managed under Trophy Bass regulations since 1989. Trophy Bass regulations allow the harvest of five bass less than 11 inches or four bass less than 11 inches and one bass greater than 15 inches. Bass measuring 11 inches up to but not including 15 inches in length are protected from harvest.

Methods

Seining methods are those described in the Methods section with several exceptions. A 4.5-meter seine with 64mm mesh is used for the survey. A single haul is conducted along nine meters of shoreline. Abundant aquatic vegetation (Hydrilla and Spiny Naiad) dictates a relatively short seine and haul length. Three to five sites are seined in various sections of the lake. Largemouth bass and sunfish young-of-year are counted, other species are noted and the results are recorded. Mean number of largemouth bass young of year / seine haul was reported in addition to calculating the seining index.

Composite site electrofishing, described in the Methods section, was used to sample fish populations in the lake. A 600 second fish community sample was collected instead of the100 second sample noted in the Methods section.

Results

Stocking

Centennial Lake is stocked annually with a total of 3000 adult rainbow trout as part of the Put-and-Take trout stocking program. Two thousand and five hundred rainbow trout are stocked in the spring and 500 rainbow trout are stocked in the fall. A total of 6,825 tiger muskie fingerlings were stocked into Centennial Lake in the 2001- 2005 period. Two hundred seventy-five were stocked in 2001 and 6,550 were stocked in 2003. The tiger muskie fingerlings were obtained from the Pennsylvania Fish Commission. Four hundred-fifty adult channel catfish were stocked into the lake in

B35

2001. The source was Baltimore RESCO, a cooperative fish rearing facility in Baltimore City.

Reproduction Survey

A shoreline seining survey was conducted to assess largemouth bass reproductive success in 2005. Three sites surveyed on 15 July 2005 revealed excellent largemouth bass reproduction. Seine hauls along 30.5 meter of shoreline averaged 20 YOY in Centennial Lake. Sunfish YOY were present in normal numbers throughout the lake. Historically, largemouth bass recruitment has been excellent in Centennial Lake (Table 1).

Electrofishing Survey

The annual fall electrofishing survey was conducted on the night of 17 October 2005. The survey consisted of two runs totaling 40.43 minutes of electrofishing time. The entire perimeter of the lake was sampled.

A total of 241 largemouth bass were collected and ranged from 87 to 491mm (Figure1). The proportional stock density (PSD) was 41 and fell just within the recommended range of 40-60 for largemouth bass in a balanced population (Reynolds and Babb 1978). The catch-per-unit-effort (CPUE60) for stock size bass (>200mm) was 256 fish/hour (Table 2). The CPUE60 for quality size (>300mm) was 105 fish/hour. Relative weight (Wr) is less than optimal (95-100) for most size classes of largemouth bass in the lake (Figure 2) (Wege and Anderson 1978). Age and growth data for largemouth bass is presented in Figure 3.

Table 3 contains fish community electrofishing sample results from Centennial Lake during 2005. Table 4 contains a list of fish species observed in the lake and their relative abundance in the years 2001-2005.

Discussion

Survey efforts on Centennial Lake are focused on the largemouth bass population. Recruitment was high in 2005 and has been consistently high in the past (Table 1). Stable water levels and abundant aquatic vegetation are favorable conditions for largemouth bass spawning and survival. Centennial Lake maintains a full pool consistently and has abundant aquatic vegetation.

The largemouth bass population in Centennial Lake is maintaining a size structure that is desirable to anglers. The largemouth bass PSD has not changed at the 95% significance level for the past five years (Table 2). The PSD hovers at the low end of the recommended 40-60 range. This phenomenon is most likely a result of the strong year classes of YOY that are recruited to the population each year. High numbers of small

B36

stock-size fish drive the PSD downward. The population of quality size bass (>300mm) is high (Table 2). Less than optimal relative weights for Centennial Lake bass are consistent with data from past years. Low relative weight is most likely correlated to the dense bass population and intense competition for prey (Wege and Anderson 1978).

Sunfish populations in Centennial Lake are diverse with four species present in the lake (Table 5). The fish community sample quantifies the relative abundance of all the sunfish species in Centennial Lake (Table 3). Proportional Stock Densities (PSDs) for all sunfish in Centennial Lake are lower than the recommended range of 20-50 (Table 5) (Weithman et al. 1979). Bluegill PSDs have declined significantly since 2001, inversely, stock size (80mm) abundance has increased since 2001. Pumpkinseed sunfish have experienced a drastic population decline since 2001. They were co-dominant with bluegill in 2001 and 2002 and provided an excellent fishery. Inter-specific competition among pumpkinseed and redear sunfish (both molluscivores) has been documented and usually results in population reductions for the pumpkinseed (Fisher-Huckins et al. 1999). Redear sunfish densities have not increased dramatically since 2002, but bluegill densities have nearly doubled. The increased bluegill density may be a cause or effect of the pumpkinseed decline; most likely pumpkinseeds could not compete effectively with redears for mollusks and with bluegills for invertebrates.

Centennial Lake is an intensively managed impoundment located in the urban/suburban landscape of the Baltimore/Washington corridor. It is being managed for a variety of user groups (trout, bass, tiger muskie, panfish, and catfish). All target species appear to be responding well to applied management and regulations, resulting in high quality, diverse angling opportunities. The lake is highly visible, has excellent public access and since it is in the midst of an urban/suburban area it sustains heavy use. The Howard County Parks Department has shown continued commitment to maintaining a close working relationship with DNR Freshwater Fisheries, which is imperative to balance such a diverse population of user groups.

Management Recommendations

• Conduct electrofishing surveys to assess largemouth bass, panfish, and tiger muskellunge population structures.

• Conduct seining survey to assess reproductive success of largemouth bass.

• Stock put-and-take trout in spring and fall to retain diverse angling opportunities.

• Maintain tiger muskie fingerling stocking rate at 250/year >250mm in total length.

B37

Table 1. Centennial Lake largemouth bass recruitment index 2001-2005.

Year YOY/30.5m of shoreline

2001 18 2002 30 2003 24 2004 Not sampled 2005 20

Table 2. Centennial Lake largemouth bass population parameters 2001-2005.

Year PSD (95% C.I.) RSD38 Stock CPUE60

2001 41 (31-51) 11 393

2002 36 (27-45) 6 347 2003 38 (28-48) 9 248

2004 No survey in 2004 2005 41 (31-51) 10 256

Table 3. Fish community sample collected by MD DNR. A single 600 second electrofishing run on Centennial Lake during 2005.

Species Number PSD Substock Stock Quality Total CPUEHr CPUEHr CPUEHr CPUEHr Rainbow Trout 2 ------12 Pumpkinseed 2 0 -- 12 -- 12 Black Crappie 5 20 -- 30 6 30 Redear Sunfish 20 11 65 53 6 119 Green Sunfish 26 0 89 65 -- 154 Largemouth Bass 54 38 131 190 71 320 Bluegill 391 14 895 1423 196 2319

B38

Table 4. Centennial Lake sunfish population indices 2001-2005.

Year 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 Bluegill PSD (95 % C.I.) 68 (51-85) 39 (29-49) NS NS 14 (7-21) Stock size CPUE (fish/hr) 80 798 NS NS 1423 Pumpkinseed PSD (95 % C.I.) 77 (63-91) 65 (54-76) NS NS 0 Stock size CPUE (fish/hr) 192 432 NS NS 12 Redear PSD (95 % C.I.) 100 45 NS NS 11 Stock size CPUE (fish/hr) 21 49 NS NS 53 NS= Not Sampled

Table 5. Fish species and relative abundance in Centennial Lake 2001-2005.

Relative Abundance Common Name Scientific Name 2001 2002 2003 2005 Largemouth bass Micropterus salmoides A A A A Bluegill Lepomis machrochirus A A A A Pumpkinseed Lepomis gibbosus C A C S Redear sunfish Lepomis microlophus S S S C Green sunfish Lepomis cyanellus S S S C Black crappie Pomoxis nigromaculatus C S S S White crappie Pomoxis annularis R ------Tiger muskie Esox lucius X masquinongy S S S -- Koi Cyprinus carpio -- -- R R Common carp Cyprinus carpio -- R -- -- White sucker Catastomus commersoni -- -- S S Channel catfish Ictalurus punctatus -- -- R -- Rainbow trout Oncorhynchus mychiss -- C -- C Relative Abundance: A= Abundant; C= Common; S= Scarce; R= Rare

B39

25

20

15

N=241 10 Percent Frequency Percent 5

0

0 50 00 50 50 0 100 150 2 2 300 350 400 4 50 Total Length by 25 mm interval

Figure 1. Length Frequency Distribution of Largemouth Bass collected by MD DNR in Centennial Lake Fall 2005.

B40

100

80

60

40

20 Mean Relative Weight (Wr) Weight Relative Mean

0

0 0 0 50 50 00 50 1 20 2 300 35 4 450 50 5 Total Length by 25 mm interval

Figure 2. Mean relative weight (Wr) of largemouth bass collected by MD DNR in Centennial Lake Fall 2003.

B41

600 550 500 450 400 350 300 250 200 y = 37.714x + 124.07 Total Length (mm) 150 R2 = 0.8755 100 50 0 0246810 Age (Year)

Figure 3. Length at Age Growth Curve for Largemouth Bass in Centennial Lake Fall 2003.

B42

Clopper Lake

Introduction

Clopper Lake is a 36-hectare impoundment on Long Draught Branch of Great Seneca Creek near Germantown, Maryland. The lake is within Seneca Creek State Park and is managed by the Maryland Park Service. Maryland Department of Natural Resources Fisheries Service has monitored fish populations in Clopper Lake since 1980. The objective of this survey was to obtain fish population information on a previously surveyed impoundment to monitor for changes that may require immediate or future corrective fish management action.

Methods

Seining methods were like those described in the Methods section with several exceptions. A 4.5-meter seine with 64mm mesh is used for the survey. A single haul is conducted along nine meters of shoreline. Abundant aquatic vegetation (Hydrilla and Spiny Naiad) dictates a relatively short seine and haul length. Three to five sites are seined in various sections of the lake. Largemouth bass and sunfish young-of-year are counted, other species are noted and the results are recorded. Mean number of largemouth bass young of year / seine haul was reported in addition to calculating the seining index.

Random site electrofishing, described in the Methods section, was used to sample fish populations in the lake for the first time in 2004. Previous year’s electrofishing surveys were most like the composite electrofishing method. A 600 second fish community sample was collected in 2005 instead of the100 second sample noted in the Methods section.

Results

Seining Survey

A shoreline seining survey was conducted annually to assess largemouth bass reproductive success. Two or three sites were sampled. Largemouth bass reproduction was excellent in 2005 based upon the seining index described in the Methods section. Bluegill YOY were present in normal numbers. Banded killifish and mosquitofish were present in low numbers. Historically, largemouth bass recruitment has been excellent in Clopper Lake (Table 1).

B43

Electrofishing Survey

A random site electrofishing survey was conducted on 22 September 2005. The survey consisted of 5 runs totaling 50.57 minutes. A fish community sample was collected during one of the 600 second runs.

The largemouth bass population is maintaining a desirable size structure with all size and age classes represented (Figure 1). The Proportional Stock Density (PSD) value of 39 (Table 2) is just below the recommended range of 40-60 for largemouth bass in a balanced population (Reynolds and Babb 1978). The pooled catch-per-unit-effort (CPUE) values for stock size (>200mm total length) largemouth bass indicate a high- density population. Relative weights for largemouth bass were below the optimal range (95-100) for Clopper Lake (Figure 2) (Wege and Anderson 1978). Age and growth data for Clopper Lake largemouth bass is presented in Figure 3. Clopper Lake largemouth bass are reaching harvestable size (305mm) by their 5th year, which is comparable to nearby impoundments (Figure 4).

Fish community samples from 2004 and 2005 show similar species (Tables 3 & 4). The bluegill population structure is dominated by sub-stock (< 80mm total length) size fish (Table 5). The PSD of 0 is below the desirable 20-50 range (Table 3) (Weithman et al. 1979). The bluegill sample size for PSD was sufficient to calculate confidence intervals if any quality size fish had been captured. The relative abundance of fish species found in Clopper Lake is presented in Table 6.

Discussion

Survey efforts on Clopper Lake are focused on the largemouth bass population. The largemouth bass population is maintaining a desirable size structure and density. Largemouth bass PSDs and CPUEs for 2004 and 2005 are not significantly different at the 95 % confidence level. The 2001 data, although not directly comparable due to differences in sampling methods, shows similar PSDs and CPUEs. The sunfish populations in Clopper Lake are not maintaining desirable size structures, especially for anglers. Data collected during this survey cycle shows a lack of large bluegill or redear sunfish in Clopper Lake. The bluegill PSDs for 2001, 2004, and 2005 were 5, 4, and 0 respectively. Redear sunfish may be declining in Clopper Lake based on data reflected in the fish community samples and the relative abundance table (Table 6).

Management Recommendations

• Conduct electrofishing survey to assess largemouth bass and panfish population structures. • Conduct seining survey to assess largemouth bass reproductive success.

B44

Table 1. Clopper Lake largemouth bass recruitment index 2001-2005.

Year YOY/30.5m of shoreline Mean fish/haul

2001 46 13.6 2002 34 10.3 2003 0 0 2004 5.5 2.5 2005 14.4 4.3

Table 2. Clopper Lake largemouth bass population indices 2001-2005.

Stock Year PSD (95 % C. I.) RSD38 CPUE 2001 56 (44-68) 6 130 2002 NS NS NS 2003 NS NS NS 2004 50 (39-61) 12 125 2005 39 (26-52) 7 86

Table 3. Fish community sample collected by MD DNR. A single 100 second electrofishing run on Clopper Lake in 2004.

Species Number PSD Substock Stock Quality Total CPUEHr CPUEHr CPUEHr CPUEHr Redear sunfish 1 -- 38 -- -- 38 Black crappie 2 -- 38 38 -- 75 Bluegill 106 -- 3638 338 -- 3975 Largemouth bass 6 -- 225 -- -- 225

B45

Table 4. Fish community sample collected by MD DNR. A single 600 second electrofishing run on Clopper Lake in 2005.

Species Number PSD Substock Stock Quality Total CPUEHr CPUEHr CPUEHr CPUEHr Black crappie 3 0 -- 18 -- 18 Bluegill 189 0 853 266 -- 1119 Largemouth bass 16 43 53 41 18 95

Table 5. Largemouth bass and bluegill population parameters collected by MD DNR. Five 600 sec electrofishing runs, Clopper Lake, Fall 2004 & 2005.

Species Number PSD RSD Total Total Total Total (95% 38 Substock Stock Quality CPUEHr C.I.) CPUEHr CPUEHr CPUEHr Bluegill 2004 49 4 -- 288 12 -- 2005 189 0 853 266 0 1119

Largemouth bass 50 2004 164 12 70 125 62 195 (39-61) Mean 70 125 62 195

(95% C.I.) (17-123) (101-149) (47-77) (161-229) Geometric Mean 59 124 61 194 39 2005 160 7 104 86 33 190 (26-52) Mean 104 86 33 190

(95% C.I.) (52-156) (33-139) (12-54) (108-272) Geometric Mean 97 78 30 179

B46

Table 6. Relative Abundance of Fish Species Collected by MD DNR in Clopper Lake, Montgomery Co., MD 2001-2005.

Relative Abundance Common Name Scientific Name 2001 2004 2005 Largemouth bass Micropterus salmoides A A A Bluegill Lepomis machrochirus A A A Redear sunfish Lepomis microlophus C S -- Black crappie Pomoxis nigromaculatus C C S Brown bullhead Ameirus nebulosus -- S S Channel catfish Ictalurus punctatus R S R Golden shiner Notemigonus crysoleucas -- S S Common carp Cyprinus carpio -- S R Banded killifish Fundulus diaphanus R S S Eastern mosquitofish Gambusia holbrooki -- S S Relative Abundance: A= Abundant; C= Common; S= Scarce; R= Rare

40 35 30 25

20 N=160 15

Percent Frequency 10 5 0

0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5 00 50 00 10 15 2 250 30 3 4 45 50 Total Length by 25 mm interval

Figure 1. Clopper Lake largemouth bass length frequency histogram for fish collected by MD DNR during Fall 2005.

B47

105

100

95

90

85

80 Mean Relative Weight (Wr) Weight Relative Mean

75 150 175 200 225 250 275 300 325 350 375 400 425 450 475 500 Total Length by 25 mm interval

Figure 2. Clopper Lake largemouth bass relative weights for fish collected by MD DNR during Fall 2005.

600

500

400

300

200 y = 41.896x + 101.48 (mm) Length Total 2 100 R = 0.9497

0

0246802468110 Age (years)

Figure 3. Clopper Lake largemouth bass length at age for fish collected by MD DNR during Fall 2004. (N=113).

B48

500 450 400 350 300 Lsen03 n=86 250 Cloppr04 n=113 200 Needwd04 n=61 150 100 Mean Total Length (mm)Mean 50 0 123456789 Age (Years)

Figure 4. Largemouth bass length at age for fish collected by MD DNR in three Montgomery County, Maryland impoundments, fall 2003 & 2004.

B49

Cosca Lake

Introduction

Cosca Lake is a 4.2 hectare (11 acre), impoundment located within Louis B. Cosca Regional Park in Prince Georges County, Maryland. The Maryland-National Capital Park and Planning Commission manages the watershed for recreational purposes. Fishing is permitted with a Maryland freshwater fishing license. Cosca Lake is also a popular site for anglers participating in Maryland's Put-and-Take trout stocking program.

Water levels were lowered in Cosca Lake in 2000 and 2004 for shoreline maintenance and dredging projects. Sufficient water remained in the lake during this time to assure survival of the aquatic community. Monitoring of Cosca Lake was conducted in 2000 and 2005 in order to characterize the gamefish population. An inventory of fish collected and their abundance is listed in Table 1.

Methods

A fall electrofishing survey was conducted on November 18, 2005. Largemouth bass and other gamefish species were targeted for collection during two 600-second samples. Within these samples, two stations were chosen for a full species community sample of 100 seconds each. All fish within the subsample were weighed (g) and measured (mm TL). Due to its small size, the study area in Cosca Lake covered much of the fishable shoreline of the lake. Water surface temperature was 11° C. Actual sample times ranged from 552 to 578 seconds. Sampling procedures followed the general methods described for Study II Job 3. Current indices were compared with data collected in 2001.

Results and Discussion

600 Second Samples

One hundred fifty-six largemouth bass were collected during two 600-second samples. Lengths ranged from 111 to 476mm TL. The arithmetic mean CPUEhr of 500 for stock size fish and greater (Table 2 ) indicated a dense population as described by Flickner and Bulow (1993). This was considerably higher than the mean calculated in 2001 (CPUE of 167 fish/ hour). The coefficient of variation (CV) of the arithmetic mean was 43%, which was above the optimal level of 20% as proposed by King (1995) for the 2005 data, but still good for surveys of this type.

Proportional stock density (PSD) for largemouth bass is shown in Table 3. The PSD of 43% for 2005 was within the 40-60% suggested by Reynolds and Babb (1978) for small impoundments. Length and age frequencies with the highest abundance occurred between 100 and 175mm and accounted for 70% of the population (Figures 1 &

B50

2). This abundance of small fish was absent in 2001. Fish greater than 381mm represented only 2.6% of the total population. Length at age indices, with the exception of age 0 fish, were below the average observed by Elser (1962) (Figure 3). Mean relative weights were good for largemouth bass of all size groups (Wr >90%) and were considered in balance with their food supply by Flickinger and Bulow (1993) (Figure 4). This was an improvement over the fish found in the 2001 sample when all length groups below 300mm were considered underweight.

Twenty-three redear sunfish were collected. Mean total length was 118mm. The arithmetic mean (AM) CPUEhr was 44 (+230). Although the PSD (60, + 48) was higher than the recommended range of 20-50% proposed by Weithman et al. (1979) for prey species, substock fish comprised 56% of the population and should advance to the stock size range in subsequent years bringing the PSD to an acceptable level.

Other species collected are listed in Table 1. Insufficient numbers of these species were collected to calculate indices or make statements about the population.

Species from 100-second samples

CPUEhr of species collected during the 100-second samples were calculated and are listed in Table 2. Bluegill and pumpkinseed sunfish had a CPUEhr of 360 and 126, respectively. Both bluegill and pumpkinseed PSD were below the recommended range of 20-50% as proposed by Weithman et al. (1979) for prey species (Table 3) indicating poor representation of quality size fish.

Conclusions

Cosca Lake receives significant angling pressure and experiences heavy SAV coverage in the summer. Both play an important role in the health and balance of the fish community in the lake.

Although Cosca Lake has experienced two severe draw downs in the last 5 years, healthy fish communities continue to thrive in the lake. Largemouth bass were the dominant species in the lake and PSDs and relative weight indices indicate a relatively stable population containing adequate forage.

Bluegill were the most abundant sunfish with lower numbers of both redear and pumpkinseed occurring in the lake. Substock size fish dominated both the redear and bluegill population with few reaching the stock size category. Bluegill data was collected during two subsamples. In those samples only one quality size (>150mm) bluegill was found. During the remainder of the lake sample, large bluegill were noted but not collected. While few quality sized bluegill appeared in the subsample, electrofishing observations for the entire survey documented larger bluegill exist in Cosca Lake.

B51

Management Recommendations

• Continue biannual monitoring of fish population. Sample design may need to be altered to accommodate the small size of the impoundment. Increasing the number of samples by decreasing sample duration will also allow for more precision in statistical analysis of indices. More total community samples are needed to assess status of sunfish population.

• Monitor reproduction of fish species through seining or back- pack electrofishing, particularly bluegill, redear sunfish, pumpkinseed and black crappie.

Table 1. Fish species and relative abundance in Cosca Lake 2005.

Common Name Scientific Name Relative Abundance Largemouth bass Micropterus salmoides Abundant Redear sunfish Lepomis microlophus Common Bluegill Lepomis macrochirus Common Pumpkinseed Lepomis gibbosus Common Warmouth Lepomis gulosus Common Brown bullhead Ictalurus nebulosus Rare Black crappie Pomoxis nigromaculatus Rare White perch Morone americanus Rare Rainbow trout Oncorhynchus mykiss Common White sucker Catostomus commersoni Common Golden shiner Notemigonus crysoleucas Rare

B52

Table 2. Catch per unit effort (CPUE/hr) summary statistics for fish species collected during electrofishing samples including number of fish, size range, arithmetic mean (AM) with 95% confidence interval, and geometric mean (GM) with 95% confidence limit. Means are fish per hour.

Species # of fish Size Range AM CI+ GM CL Largemouth bass 156 78-525 500 1927 478 9-25265 Black crappie 2 250-275 3 10 1.7 .2-4.3 Warmouth 20 105-182 15 25 18 2.6-160 Redear 23 45-182 44 230 41 .19-9085 Bluegill 20 37-182 360 0 361 361 Pumpkinseed 7 47-132 126 229 126 21-771

Table 3. Number of fish (n), CPUE (fish/hour) of sub-stock, stock and quality size groups. With total CPUE, and PSD for fish caught in 2005.

Species n Substock Stocka Qualityb Total PSD Largemouth bass 156 112 25 19 497 43 Black crappie 2 0 0 2 6 100 Bluegill 20 10 9 1 360 10 Redear sunfish 23 13 4 6 32 60 Pumpkinseed 7 2 5 0 126 0 *Warmouth 5 N/A N/A N/A 60 N/A a Stock sizes: largemouth > 200mm, black crappie >130mm, bluegill> 80mm, redear>100mm, pumpkinseed >80mm bQuality sizes : largemouth>300mm, black crappie>200mm, bluegill>150mm, redear>180mm, pumpkinseed >150mm *There were no parameters to determine warmouth PSDs

B53

25

20

15 2005 2001 10

% Frequency 5

0

0 0 0 0 0 0 5 0 50 0 5 0 5 1 1 200 250 300 350 4 4 5 5 Length (mm)

Figure 1. Length Frequency of Largemouth Bass from Cosca Lake fall electrofishing 2005 and 2001, 25mm length groups.

14

12

10

8

6

4 Fish of Number 2

0 012345678 Age

Figure 2. Age Frequency of largemouth bass from Cosca Lake electrofishing, 2005

B54

600

500

400

Cosca 300 Elser 200 Mean Length 100

0 012345678

Age

Figure 3. Mean length at age for largemouth bass in Cosca Lake, Fall 2005 compared to the statewide average as determined by Elser (1962).

120

100

80

60

40 Relative Weight 20

0 Substock Stock Quality All Sizes Length (mm)

2005 2001

Figure 4. Relative weights (weighted) for substock, stock, quality and all sizes of Largemouth bass for Cosca Lake 2005 and 2001.

B55

Cunningham Falls Reservoir

Introduction

Cunningham Falls Lake is a 17-hectare impoundment located in Cunningham Falls State Park, Frederick County. The lake was completed in 1974 and is managed as a warmwater fishery for largemouth bass and panfish species. Adult rainbow trout are stocked during the spring and fall to provide a seasonal put-and-take fishery. General statewide fishing regulations apply; anglers may harvest up to five bass per day with a minimum size of 305mm. Weed growth, primarily spiney naiad (Najas minor) with some pondweed (Potamogeton spp.), frequently reaches nuisance levels by late summer.

Largemouth bass population data has been collected annually by night electrofishing during the fall. Trapping efforts conducted at least once every five years monitors panfish populations; trapping was conducted at Cunningham Falls in 2003. The purpose of the surveys was to examine the sport fishery with the following objectives:

• Determine largemouth bass year class strength.

• Determine the relative abundance, size structure, physical condition, and age structure of the largemouth bass population.

• Determine the relative abundance, size and age structure, and physical condition of the bluegill and black crappie populations.

• Compile summer temperature and oxygen profile data.

Methods

Seining

Shoreline sites were sampled for young-of-year (YOY) fish species using a 9.1m x 1.2m, 3.2mm mesh haul seine at seinable locations throughout the impoundment. Locations were chosen to include representative habitat. Results were expressed as number of bass per seine haul.

Electrofishing

A commercially built electrofishing boat manufactured by Smith-Root was used to collect fish species. Timed 600-second runs were conducted around the perimeter of the impoundment in depths less than 3.1m, according to guidelines of Washington State (Bonar et al. 2000). Electrofishing was accomplished using pulsed (60pps) DC current;

B56 voltage was adjusted for maximum shocking efficiency; shocking time was automatically recorded.

Catch rate, standardized to fish per hour (CPUEHr), was calculated as an index of relative abundance. Relative weight of collected bass was calculated as described by Wege and Anderson (1978). Proportional Stock Density (PSD) was calculated as described by Anderson (1980) and PSD confidence intervals (95%) were calculated using the method described by Gustafson (1988).

Trapping

Trapping methods were presented in the 2003 Cunningham Falls Federal Aid Progress Report.

Profile Data Collection

A Yellow Springs Instruments Model 57 temperature/oxygen meter was used to collected profile data every 0.5 meters from the surface to the bottom adjacent to the dam near the reservoir’s deepest point.

Results and Discussion

Seining

Yearclass strength for largemouth bass has been consistent and fairly high during the past five years based on YOY abundance per seine haul (Table 1). Only one poor yearclass, 1999, has been documented by the seining surveys in the last eight years. This apparently poor yearclass, however, is not perceptible in 2005 length frequency graphs (Figures 1 & 2). This leads to speculation that even the weakest yearclasses may be sufficient to reach carrying capacity. Survival may also be improved for smaller yearclasses whereas competition and cannibalism may reduce strong yearclasses. Even so, largemouth bass reproduction at Cunningham Falls Reservoir is more than adequate to maintain an abundant population.

Electrofishing

The general consensus among biologists is that catch rates over 100 stock bass/hour is a dense population (Flickinger and Bulow 1993). During this five-year reporting period, mean CPUEHr for stock-size and greater bass has exceeded this benchmark every year surveyed (Table 2). The Cunningham Falls Reservoir Federal Aid Final Report 1996 – 2000 also documented catch rates for stock-size and greater bass in excess of 100 bass/hour each year.

B57

In spite of their high abundance, Cunningham Falls Reservoir largemouth bass exhibited an ideal size structure. Reynolds and Babb (1978) recommend a largemouth bass PSD of 40 to 60 percent for a balanced population. Anderson (1980) suggested that a balanced largemouth bass population should have an RSD38 from 10 to 25 percent. Population data from Cunningham Falls has consistently fallen within these suggested ranges (Table 2). PSD and RSD indices suggest an increase in the percentage of large bass in recent years. The Kolmogorov-Smirnov Test (10:00, 10-Dec-2005) indicated the 2005 and 2003 largemouth bass length frequency distributions were significantly different (95% CL, D = 0.2529, P = 0.008). The cumulative length frequency distributions for 2005 and 2003 are presented in Figure 1 and illustrate the increase in larger, older-age bass. The largest bass collected during 2005 measured 576mm (22.7”) and weighed 3.5kg (7.7 lbs).

The length frequency graph of largemouth bass collected during 2005 suggests that fish ranging in total length from 260mm to 300mm were underrepresented in the sample. Based on the length at age graph produced in 2004 from scale analysis, bass in this length range would have been primarily two to three years old and members of the 2003 and 2002 yearclasses (Figure 3). Yet, the relative abundance of YOY bass (YOY bass/haul) during those years suggested higher than average reproduction (Table 1).

Despite catch rates that were consistently and remarkably high, largemouth bass in Cunningham Falls Reservoir remained in good physical condition (Table 2). Wege and Anderson (1978) suggest target values of 95 to 100 for fall populations in good habitat. Under crowded conditions, competition is generally highest among stock bass. Accordingly, mean Wr for stock bass will be low. The mean Wr for stock largemouth bass (20cm – 30cm) collected during 2002, 2003, 2004 and 2005 was 93, 94, 96 and 93, respectively. Based on the physical condition indices, largemouth bass in Cunningham Falls are not crowded.

Panfish Trapping

Results of the 2003 panfish trapping efforts were reported in the 2003 Cunningham Falls Reservoir Federal Aid Progress Report. Cunningham Falls is supporting a highly desirable fishery for bluegill, redear sunfish and black crappie.

Profile Data

The temperature/dissolved oxygen profile data recorded on 5 July, 2005 is shown in Figure 4 and is representative of summer conditions in this impoundment. The thermocline becomes evident near 4m (13’) in depth. In Cunningham Reservoir, dissolved oxygen fell below 5 ppm at 8m (26.3’) on 5 July 2005. Dissolved oxygen levels are generally considered adequate for most fish species above 5 ppm. During most summers a small niche remains suitable for the survival of trout. Conditions within that

B58 niche, however, are marginal and there has been little or no survival of stocked trout to the fall.

Management Recommendations

Cunningham Falls Reservoir is supporting a highly desirable sport fishery for largemouth bass and sunfish and population indices have remained fairly stable. Bass are extremely abundant, in good physical condition and display a size structure that is sure to be attractive to anglers. Due to the stable nature of the fishery and staff limitations, some changes to sampling frequency and protocol are recommended. Specific recommendations include:

• Conduct fall electrofishing surveys every two to three years to assess the largemouth bass population.

• Assess largemouth bass yearclass strength through YOY CPUEHr values obtained during the fall electrofishing surveys.

• Continue to assess the panfish populations by trapping surveys conducted every five years, the next survey to be conducted in 2008.

B59

Table 1. Relative abundance of young-of-year largemouth bass collected by MD DNR seine survey of Cunningham Falls Reservoir, 1998 - 2005.

Year 2005 2004 2003 2002 2001 2000 1999 1998 # hauls 4 6 5 7 6 5 5 7 # YOY 32 59 57 69 30 19 9 27 GMean YOY/haul 6 8 9 8 4 3 2 3 Geometric mean 1998 – 2005 = 5

Table 2. Summary of stock-size and greater largemouth bass data from MD DNR fall electrofishing surveys, Cunningham Falls Reservoir, 2002 - 2005. 95% CI

Mean CPUEhr Year N PSD RSD38 RSD51 stock largemouth bass Wr 2005 71 58 ± 12 24 6 103 ± 70 93 ± 3 2004 105 59 ± 10 19 3 198 ± 132 96 ± 1 2003 98 45 ± 10 7 0 196 ± 135 94 ± 2 2002 109 48 ± 10 18 2 128 ± 125 93 ± 1 Geo. Mean 52 15 150

B60

100%

80%

60%

2005 N = 71 40% 2003 N = 98

Cumulative Percent 20%

0% 219 259 299 339 379 419 459 499 539 Length by 2 cm Group

2005 2003

Figure 1. Cumulative length-frequency distribution of stock-size largemouth bass collected from Cunningham Falls Reservoir during MD DNR’s fall 2005 and 2003 night electrofishing surveys.

20.0

18.0 16.0 14.0

12.0 Hr 10.0

CPUE 8.0

6.0 4.0 2.0

0.0 219 259 299 339 379 419 459 499 539 Total Length by 2 cm Grouping

Figure 2. Length frequency of Cunningham Falls Reservoir largemouth bass collected by MD DNR during the 2005 fall electrofishing survey (N = 68).

B61

600

500

400

300

200 y = 27.968x + 192.99 2 Total Length (mm) 100 R = 0.8576

0 02468101214 Age in Years

Figure 3. Length at age distribution from scale analysis of Cunningham Falls largemouth bass collected by MD DNR’s November 3, 2004 electrofishing survey (N = 93).

30 12

25 10

20 8

15 6

10 4

Temperature (°C) 5 2

0 0 Dissolved Oxygen (ppm)

rf 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 su Depth (m)

temperature Dissolved Oxygen

Figure 4. Cunningham Falls Reservoir temperature and oxygen profile data recorded by MD DNR on 5 July 2005, adjacent to the dam.

B62

Deep Creek Lake

Introduction

Deep Creek Lake (DCL), located in Garrett County, is Maryland’s largest freshwater impoundment with a surface area of 1,579 ha, an average depth of 9 m, a maximum depth of 22.8 m, and a surface elevation of 445m at full pool. It is relatively sterile with low acid neutralizing capacity (ANC), low nitrate levels, and an average pH of 6.3 (Castro et al. 2001). The lake stratifies in the summer and winter when dissolved oxygen concentrations approach zero ppm at depth > 10m, however, a zone of cold and oxygenated water sufficient to support two-story fishery management exists in all seasons. Deep Creek Lake supports at least eighteen fish species including diverse warm and coldwater fisheries. Largemouth bass (Micropterus salmoides), smallmouth bass (Micropterus dolomieu), and walleye (Sander vitreus) are the most popular sport fish. Annual stocking of adult brown trout (Salmo trutta) and rainbow trout (Oncorhynchus mykiss) provides put-and-take trout fishing opportunity. Warmwater gamefish, except walleye, are managed under Maryland’s statewide regulations (MD DNR 2004-2005). Walleye regulations include a closed season from 1 March through 15 April, a five-fish daily creel limit, and 15-inch (381mm) minimum size limit the remainder of the year. Trout fishing is managed under Put-and-Take regulations as described in the 2004-2005 Maryland Freshwater Sportfishing Guide (MD DNR 2004-2005).

The purpose of this study was to monitor age and size distributions, annual growth increments, fish condition, and year-class strength of DCL fish populations with special emphasis on largemouth bass, smallmouth bass, and walleye. Several factors contribute to the popularity of DCL as a fishing destination: it is the largest impoundment in MD, it permits the use of gasoline powered engines for boats, and it supports a variety of coldwater, coolwater, and warmwater fishing opportunities throughout the year, including through the ice in winter. The purpose of this study is to monitor the status of valuable gamefish and panfish populations in DCL for years 2001 through 2005 with the following objectives:

• Determine age and annual growth increments of largemouth and smallmouth bass.

• Determine proportional stock density (PSD), relative stock density (RSD) and relative weight (Wr) of largemouth and smallmouth bass.

• Estimate black bass reproductive success.

• Determine age and annual growth increments of walleye.

• Determine PSD, RSD, Wr, and reproductive success of walleye.

• Determine fish species composition and relative abundance.

B63

• Measure age, growth, and size indices of panfish species.

Methods

A Smith-Root SR 16 5.0 Kw, pulsed DC electrofishing boat was used to sample DCL fish populations during the spring and fall of each year during this study period. Fish were identified to species, measured for total length (TL) in mm, and weighed to the nearest gram. Scale samples were obtained from the left side of the fish below the lateral line near the tip of the pectoral fins. Scale samples were impressed on acetate slides and interpreted using a Micron Model 700-A microfiche reader. Daytime electrofishing was conducted in the spring and fall to obtain black bass population data. Adult walleye were sampled after dark during the spring, while night electrofishing was conducted in the fall to measure walleye young-of-year (YOY) abundance. Relative abundance of adult and YOY walleye was recorded as catch per unit of electrofishing effort (CPUEHr). General abundance occurrence was derived from CPUE values and fish were rated as abundant (>100 individuals), common (5-100 individuals), or scarce (< 5 individuals). Additional adult walleye data were obtained at open tournaments held in the spring. Walleye captured in open tournaments were held in a modified 300-gallon stock tank during tournament weigh-ins. The holding tank was supplied with oxygen at 20 psi and water was re-circulated at a rate of 18 gallons per minute using a gasoline powered water pump. Non-iodized salt was added to aid in restoring ionic balance in stressed fish. Walleye were held up to two hours and released back into DCL at the weigh-in site.

Growth histories were determined by back-calculation of length at annulus as described by Lagler (1956). Proportional stock density (PSD) and relative stock density (RSD) were calculated using methods described by Anderson (1980). Confidence intervals for proportional stock density and relative stock density were calculated using the formula described by Gustafson (1988). Relative weight (Wr), a measure of fish condition, was calculated using methods described by Anderson (1980).

A 15-meter fry net was used to collect YOY black bass at twenty established stations during the summer of each year of this study period. Abundance indices were reported as the number of YOY per 30.5m of shoreline. A qualitative value was assigned based on the shoreline-seining index described by Enamait (1999). Associated fish species collected in the seine hauls were also recorded.

Results

The list of common and scientific names of eighteen fish species collected in DCL during this study period can be found in Table 1. The eighteen species representing seven families are indicative of a coldwater/coolwater/warmwater fishery. Fish species composition in DCL was largely unchanged from that observed in 1984 by Pavol (1985).

B64

Largemouth bass

Summaries of largemouth bass population data for years 2001 through 2005 are contained in Table 2. A mean PSD value of 40 to 60% and RSD38 value of 10 to 25% was attained for the five-year period, indicating a population characterized by older, larger fish (Reynolds and Babb 1978). Mean Wr of stock, quality, and preferred-size bass for this study period were just below the 95 to100% suggested by Wege and Anderson (1978). Mean back-calculated total length (TL) at age for largemouth bass in DCL for this study period is presented in Table 3. Largemouth bass attained legal size (>305mm) by age 3+ and preferred size (> 380mm) between the ages of 5 and 6 years. Mean growth rates for largemouth bass have remained relatively unchanged since the 1996 through 2000 study period (Pavol and Klotz 2000). Mean growth rates of largemouth bass in DCL are considered normal for statewide and mountain populations in Maryland (Elser 1962). The mean YOY seining index for largemouth bass for this study period is considered excellent, although it is 50% less than the mean value observed for years 1996 to 2000 (Pavol and Klotz 2000).

Smallmouth bass

Summaries of smallmouth bass population data for this study period are contained in Table 4. The mean PSD value for smallmouth bass is well above the optimal range of 30 to 60 % suggested by Anderson and Weithman (1978) for the five-year study period. Mean RSD35 value also fell within the expected range for a balanced population. The mean Wr of stock, quality, and preferred size smallmouth bass are below the optimal range of 95 to100% suggested by Wege and Anderson (1978) for the five-year period. The mean YOY index value for smallmouth bass is considered fair, similar that that observed to the previous five-year period (Pavol and Klotz 2000). Mean back-calculated total length (TL) at age for smallmouth bass in DCL for years 2001 through 2005 is presented in Table 5. Smallmouth bass attained legal size (> 305mm) by age 5 while growth to preferred size (> 350mm) required 6+ years. Mean growth rates for smallmouth bass have remained relatively unchanged since the 1996 through 2000 study period (Pavol and Klotz 2000). Smallmouth bass growth rates in DCL were within the normal expected range for statewide populations and for mountain areas (Elser 1962).

Walleye

Deep Creek Lake walleye population data for years 2001 through 2005 are summarized in Table 6. The mean Wr for walleye collected in electrofishing samples were below the expected range recommended by Wege and Anderson (1978) for the five- year period. PSD values were calculated only for the years 2003 through 2005. The mean PSD value for the three-year period is well above the expected range of 30 to 60% described by Anderson and Weithman (1978). Mean size and weight of tournament walleye are presented in Table 7. Mean size and weight of electro-fished and tournament caught walleye for this five-year study period shows no significant difference for years 1996 through 2000 (t –test, α= 0.05) (Pavol and Klotz 2000). The number of walleye B65 captured during the tournaments has increased annually during this study period (Table 7). Walleye in DCL had greater spawning success during this study period compared to the 1996- 2000 study period. The mean YOY walleye CPUEhr has more than doubled during this five-year period compared to the previous five-year study (Pavol and Klotz 2000). Mean back-calculated total length (TL) at age for walleye during this study period is presented in Table 8. Walleye attained legal size (> 381mm) at age 4 and preferred size (> 510mm) between the ages of 7 and 8 years. The percentage of age 8+ fish has decreased since the 1996 through 2000 study period. Age 8+ fish made up 22% of the population for years 1996 through 2000 compared to 2% for years 2001 through 2005. This could be attributed to low YOY walleye abundance indices observed in 1997 through 1999. Deep Creek Lake walleye growth rates fall within the moderate to slow range for North American lakes and reservoirs according to Anderson and Weithman (1978). Yellow perch

Yellow perch population data for DCL for years 2001 through 2003 are summarized in Table 9. The mean PSD value for yellow perch for years was above the expected range of 30 to 50% suggested by Anderson and Weithman (1978). This value is indicative of a population comprised of older and larger individuals. Mean back- calculated total length (TL) at age for yellow perch in DCL for years 2001 through 2003 is presented in Table 10. Yellow perch reach quality size (> 200mm) in DCL by age 3+ and preferred size (> 250mm) between the ages of 4 and 5 years. Mean growth rates for yellow perch in DCL are considered “fast” for Maryland’s mountain populations (Elser 1962). Bluegill

Bluegill population data for the years 2001 through 2003 are summarized in Table 11. The mean PSD value was within the range of 20 to 40% suggested by Anderson and Weithman (1978). Mean back-calculated total length (TL) at age for bluegill for this study period is presented in Table 12. Bluegills in DCL reach quality size (> 150mm) by age 3+ and preferred size (> 200mm) between the ages of 4 and 5 years. Mean growth rates for bluegill in DCL were in the "normal growth" range for western Maryland populations (Elser 1962).

Pumpkinseed

Pumpkinseed population data for the years 2001 through 2003 are summarized in Table 13. The mean PSD value during this period is within the expected range suggested by Anderson and Weithman (1978); however sample size was small for all three years. Mean back-calculated total length (TL) at age for pumpkinseeds is presented in Table 14. Pumpkinseeds reach quality size (> 150mm) by age 3+ and preferred size (> 200mm) between the ages of 5 and 6 years. Although sample size was limited, mean growth rates for pumpkinseeds in DCL were within the “normal” range for Maryland mountain populations (Elser 1962).

B66

Rock bass

Rock bass population data for 2002 and 2003 are summarized in Table 15. The high mean PSD indicates a population containing many quality-size fish. Mean back- calculated (TL) at age for rock bass in DCL is presented in Table 16. Rock bass reach quality size (> 180mm) by age 5+ and preferred size (> 230mm) between the ages of 7 and 8 years. Mean growth rates for younger rock bass (< age 3) were considered "normal growth" and “fast” in older fish for Maryland mountain populations (Elser1962).

Chain pickerel

Chain pickerel population data for years 2002 and 2003 in DCL are summarized in Table 17. PSD and RSD51 values for 2003 are indicative of a population with a large proportion of quality-size fish. Mean back-calculated total length (TL) at age for chain pickerel in DCL is presented in Table 18. Chain pickerel reach quality size (> 380mm) between the ages of 3 and 4 years. The mean back calculated length at age show chain pickerel reaching preferred size (> 510mm) between the ages of 4 and 5 years.

Northern pike

Northern pike are relatively uncommon in DCL (Table 1). Mean back-calculated total length (TL) at age for northern pike in Deep Creek Lake for years 2002 and 2005 is presented in Table 19. Mean back calculated length at age show northern pike reaching quality size (> 530mm) by age 3+ and preferred size (> 710mm) between the ages of 4 and 5 years. Northern pike attain legal size (762mm) in MD by age 6.

Rainbow trout/Brown trout

About 11,000 adult trout were stocked annually in DCL during this five-year period. The majority of these fish were rainbows, while less than 10% were brown trout. Deep Creek Lake supports year-round survival of stocked trout, creating angler interest in all seasons.

Discussion

Largemouth and smallmouth bass are probably the most sought after gamefish species in DCL and support a quality fishery characterized by a large proportion of quality and preferred-sized fish. Current regulations continue to maintain sustainable harvest levels and adequate survival to older year-classes as evidenced by the diverse age and size structure of the black bass population. Natural reproduction is adequate to support both species’ population.

Deep Creek Lake also supports a popular walleye fishery. Regulation modifications first implemented in 1993 (increased the minimum size limit from 355mm

B67 to 381mm) and 1995 (established a closed season from March 1 through April 15) have resulted in an improved age and size structure of DCL walleye, characterized by an abundance of stock and quality-size fish. Natural reproduction indices during this study period were the highest observed to date in DCL. The walleye population in DCL continues to impress anglers, and the number of tournament-captured walleye increased annually during this five-year study period.

Deep Creek Lake’s panfish such as yellow perch, bluegills, and pumpkinseeds are abundant. Proportional stock densities for all three species show populations are balanced with a diverse age and size structure.

Brown and rainbow trout are stocked annually in DCL and provide a quality year- round fishery. Deep Creek Lake supports year-round survival of stocked trout, creating angler interest in all seasons.

Management Recommendations

• Conduct comprehensive fish population surveys annually to monitor the status of recreationally important fish species including surveys of relative abundance and age and size structure.

• Continue to monitor black bass population age and size structure and reproductive success.

• Continue to monitor walleye population age and size structure and reproductive success.

• Maintain trout stocking at current levels

B68

Table 1. Common and Scientific names and general occurrence of fish species collected in Deep Creek Lake for years 2001 through 2005 (Robbins et al. 1991).

Common Name Scientific Name General occurrence Common carp Cyprinus carpio Common Golden shiner Notemigonus crysoleucas Abundant White sucker Catostomus commersoni Common Yellow bullhead Ameiurus natalis Scarce Brown bullhead Ameiurus nebulosus Common Northern pike Esox lucius Scarce Chain pickerel Esox niger Abundant Rainbow trout Oncorhynchus mykiss Common Brown trout Salmo trutta Scarce Rock bass Ambloplites rupestris Common Pumpkinseed Lepomis gibbosus Common Bluegill Lepomis macrochirus Abundant Smallmouth bass Micropterus dolomieu Abundant Largemouth bass Micropterus salmoides Abundant Black crappie Pomoxis nigromaculatus Scarce Johnny darter Etheostoma nigrum Scarce Yellow perch Perca flavescens Abundant Walleye Sander vitreus Abundant

Table 2. Summary of largemouth bass size indices and YOY abundance, Deep Creek Lake, 2001 through 2005.

Year 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 Mean N= 40 42 86 74 60 60 CPUEHr * 37 29 33 36 34 PSD 93 + 11 95 + 9.5 94 + 6.3 95 + 6.5 93 + 8.3 94 + 3.1 RSD38 53 + 19 38 + 31 50 + 1.2 47 + 13 42 + 15 46 + 6.1 Wr, stock 99 99 88 90 92 94 Wr, >quality 95 91 89 91 94 92 Wr, preferred 97 95 92 89 91 93 MeanTL >305mm 388 370 381 389 374 380 Range = (306- 464) (310-500) (306-485) (318-540) (307-490) N = 37 40 81 70 56 Mean W (g) 887 752 789 854 756 808 Range = (381-1637) (377- 816) (338-1745) (426-2645) (341-665) N= 37 40 81 70 56 YOY seining 8.7/30.5m 9.6/30.5m 4.4/30.5m 3.6/30.5m 4.3/30.5m 6.1/30.5m index

B69

Table 3. Mean back- calculated total length (mm) at age for largemouth bass, Deep Creek Lake, 2001 through 2005.

Age 1 2 34567 8 9 2001 107 225 304 342 376 405 427 439 458 N= 105 105 103 92 58 39 30 14 1 2002 102 204 291 339 375 399 423 445 N= 38 38 38 27 15 8 3 2 2003 103 214 293 339 374 402 427 455 N= 73 73 72 65 43 16 6 3 2004 80 203 280 334 373 415 451 471 486 N= 61 61 61 61 42 14 9 5 2 2005 86 198 271 323 364 392 430 428 N= 49 49 49 45 29 8 3 1 Mean 96 209 288 335 372 403 432 448 472

Table 4. Summary of smallmouth bass size indices and YOY abundance, Deep Creek Lake, 2001 through 2005.

Population Year Parameter 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 Mean N= 67 48 85 71 45 63 CPUE Hr * 43 29 31 26 32 (adult/hr) PSD 78 + 12 63 + 21 44 + 12 76 + 11 77 + 15 68 + 5.7 RSD35 24 + 12 13 + 47 14 + 8.7 18 + 11 6.8 + 10 15 + 4.5 Wr, stock 83 88 86 90 87 87 Wr, > quality 86 80 80 88 79 83 Wr, preferred 88 87 76 82 82 83 Mean TL > 347 355 346 356 339 305mm (305-457) (305-480) (305-441) (305-470) (309-443) 349 Range = 41 14 23 38 20 N= Mean W (g) 529 599 490 554 469 Range = (336-1236) (283-1602) (321-956) (354-1129) (232-1031) 528 N= 41 14 23 38 20 YOY seining 4.1/30.5m 1.7/30.5m 0.0/30.5m 0.35/30.5m 0.39/30.5m 1.3/30.5m index

B70

Table 5. Mean back-calculated total length (mm) at age for smallmouth bass, Deep Creek Lake, 2001 through 2005.

Age 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 2001 60 137 209 269 313 345 376 406 436 459 N= 122 122 117 110 95 69 25 10 5 1 2002 54 131 202 263 303 341 N= 39 39 37 30 9 4 2003 55 126 194 253 304 351 353 N= 84 84 78 59 22 9 1 2004 93 156 214 266 305 344 371 402 424 439 460 N= 57 57 57 53 38 11 6 4 3 2 1 2005 118 167 222 268 296 333 349 409 N= 39 39 38 36 25 6 2 1 Mean 76 143 208 264 305 342 362 406 430 449 460

Table 6. Summary of electro-fished walleye size indices and YOY abundance, Deep Creek Lake, 2001 through 2005.

Year 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 Mean N= 45 103 111 84 103 89 CPUEHr 168 218 182 138 155 172 PSD * * 87 + 7.3 79 + 10 72 + 9.9 79 + 5 RSD51 * * 0.9 + 6.3 * 2 + 3.7 1.5 + 3.8 Wr, stock * * 79 84 80 81 Wr, > quality * * 78 80 75 78 Wr, preferred * * 104 * 82 93 Mean TL > 381mm 425 430 462 419 433 434 Range= (385 -520) (485-692) (384-740) (383-452) (381-723) N= 45 78 95 69 74 Mean W (g) 627 624 670 620 677 644 Range= (470-1107) (433-3657) (484-4883) (449-814) (393-3640) N= 45 78 95 69 74 YOY CPUE60 50 83 74 262 75 109 YOY/hr YOY Mean TL (mm) 166 163 164 167 190 170 Range= (137-195) (115-189) (127-200) (137-202) (170-212) N= 21 27 50 151 22

B71

Table 7. Mean size and weight of tournament-captured walleye, Deep Creek Lake, 2001 through 2005.

Year 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 Mean Mean TL > 381mm 420 431 424 NA 434 427 Range= (381-509) (381-580) (380-562) (389-635) N= 116 153 248 342* Mean W (g) 636 601 643 NA 650 632 Range= (432-1250) (365-1520) (401-1397) (407-2324) N= 116 153 248 342* * a portion was counted and not measured

Table 8. Mean back-calculated total length (mm) at age for walleye, Deep Creek Lake, 2001 through 2005.

Age 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 2001 134 274 341 382 409 449 479 515 N= 45 45 45 45 37 12 4 1 2002 151 265 334 375 409 447 446 643 670 N= 96 96 95 79 49 18 5 1 1 2003 178 286 347 382 411 440 470 542 697 711 N= 111 111 111 96 70 32 16 3 1 1 2004 249 318 360 389 410 432 442 N= 82 82 76 69 44 16 5 2005 148 270 336 379 415 439 484 616 635 658 623 N= 102 102 101 75 50 29 10 2 2 2 1 Mean 172 283 344 381 411 441 464 579 667 684 623

Table 9. Summary of yellow perch size indices, Deep Creek Lake, 2001 through 2003.

Year 2001 2002 2003 Mean N= 10 25 53 29 CPUEHr adult/hr * 25 18 22 PSD 90 + 30 82 + 21 79 + 13 84 + 9.3 RSD25 * * 53 + 15 53 + 15 Wr, stock * * 88 88 Wr, > quality * * 86 86 Wr, preferred * * 84 84

B72

Table 10. Mean back-calculated total length (mm) at age for yellow perch, Deep Creek Lake, 2001 through 2003.

Age 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 2001 56 117 173 215 265 N= 10 10 9 6 1 2002 60 114 179 239 290 312 345 N= 25 25 23 11 9 6 2 2003 60 122 182 231 279 307 314 N= 50 50 49 43 23 7 3 Mean 59 118 178 228 278 310 330

Table 11. Summary of bluegill size indices, Deep Creek Lake, 2001 through 2003.

Year 2001 2002 2003 Mean N= 15 39 44 33 CPUEHr adult/hr NA 40 15 28 PSD 53 + 33 100 + 2.6 93 + 10 82 + 8.9 RSD20 * * 59 + 17 59 + 17 Wr, stock * * 92 92 Wr, > quality * * 96 96 Wr, preferred * * 105 105

Table 12. Mean back-calculated total length (mm) at age for bluegill, Deep Creek Lake, 2001 through 2003.

Age 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 2001 20 65 134 170 197 N= 15 15 15 5 1 2002 41 77 133 178 210 228 244 N= 39 39 39 34 32 19 5 2003 20 60 121 170 203 229 241 N= 39 39 39 36 27 12 2 Mean 27 67 129 173 203 229 243

B73

Table 13. Summary of pumpkinseed size indices, Deep Creek Lake, 2001 through 2003.

Year Size Index Mean 2001 2002 2003 N= 7 6 7 7 CPUEHr adult/hr * 7 2 4.5 PSD 100 + 14 100 + 17 86 + 43 95 + 15 RSD20 * * 71 + 52 71 + 52 Wr, stock * * * * Wr, > quality * * * * Wr, preferred * * * *

Table 14. Mean back-calculated total length (mm) at age for pumpkinseed, Deep Creek Lake, 2001 through 2003.

Age 1 2 3 4 5 6 2001 31 83 136 172 194 208 N= 7 7 6 6 3 2 2002 27 82 145 185 210 222 N= 6 6 6 6 4 1 2003 32 91 148 175 197 218 N= 7 7 6 5 4 3 Mean 30 85 143 177 200 216

Table 15. Summary of rock bass size indices, Deep Creek Lake, 2002 and 2003.

Year Size Index Mean 2002 2003 N= 3 33 18 CPUEHr adult/hr 5 11 8 PSD 100 + 33 61 + 20 81 + 16 RSD23 * 9 + 13 9 + 13

B74

Table 16. Mean back-calculated total length (mm) at age for Rock bass, Deep Creek Lake, 2001-2005.

Age 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 2002 37 81 130 170 191 204 N= 2 2 2 2 2 2 2003 35 83 128 158 180 192 215 234 N= 26 26 25 19 12 9 2 1 Mean 36 82 129 164 186 198 215 234

Table 17. Summary of chain pickerel size indices, Deep Creek Lake, 2002 and 2003.

Size Index 2002 2003 N= 9 25 CPUEHr adult/hr 11 8 PSD * 72 + 22 RSD51 * 16 + 19

Table 18. Mean back-calculated total length (mm) at age for chain pickerel, Deep Creek Lake, 2001-2005.

Age 1 2 3 4 5 2002 179 305 387 440 580 N= 9 9 7 5 1 2003 125 280 357 411 489 N= 13 13 12 6 6 Mean 152 292 372 426 535

Table 19. Mean back-calculated total length (mm) at age for northern pike, Deep Creek Lake, 2001-2005.

Age 1 2 3 4 5 6 2002 185 306 468 560 732 830 N= 4 4 2 1 1 1 2005 181 328 534 645 N= 2 2 1 1 Mean 183 317 501 603 732 861

B75

Greenbrier Lake

Introduction

Greenbrier Lake is a 17-hectare impoundment located within Greenbrier State Park in Washington County. The lake is managed as a warm water fishery for largemouth bass and sunfish. Statewide fishing regulations apply (30.5cm - 12"- minimum size black bass, 5 bass/day creel, closed season March 1 through June 15). The bass fishery has been characterized as a high-density population dominated by stock- length fish. Preferred-length bass have made up only a fair percentage of the population. Adult rainbow trout are stocked during the spring and fall providing a put-and-take fishery. Submerged aquatic vegetation, primarily Najas minor with some Potamogeton spp, develop moderate stands by late summer.

Electrofishing surveys have been conducted each fall to monitor the status of this popular largemouth bass fishery. Panfish trapping surveys are conducted every five years with the last one completed in 2003. The purpose of the surveys was to evaluate the fishery with the following specific objectives:

• Determine largemouth bass year class strength.

• Determine the relative abundance, size structure, and physical condition of largemouth bass.

• Determine size structure, physical condition and growth rate for panfish populations

• Compile summer temperature and oxygen profile data.

Methods

Seining

Shoreline sites were sampled for young-of-year (YOY) fish species using a 9.1m x 1.2m, 3.2mm mesh haul seine at manageable locations throughout the impoundment. Locations were chosen with the objective of sampling representative habitat. Abundance was expressed as the number of YOY per haul.

Electrofishing

A commercially built electrofishing boat manufactured by Smith-Root was used to collect fish species. Timed 600-second runs were conducted around the impoundment perimeter and in areas shallower than 3.1 m. The arithmetic means of the stock density and CPUE values were calculated for each survey based on methods proposed by Bonar

B76 et al. (2000). Electrofishing was accomplished using pulsed (60pps) DC current; voltage was adjusted for maximum shocking efficiency; shocking time was automatically recorded.

Relative weight of collected bass was calculated as described by Wege and Anderson (1978). Proportional Stock Density (PSD) was calculated as described by Anderson (1980) and PSD confidence intervals (95%) were calculated using the method described by Gustafson (1988). Catch rate, standardized to fish per hour (CPUEHr), was calculated as an index of relative abundance.

Fish Trapping

D-traps (L-150cm, W-61cm, H-61cm, 2.54cm mesh) were used to capture panfish in order to obtain size structure, physical condition, and baseline CPUE data. The D-traps had two funnels in series. Traps were placed at various depths and locations around the lake and checked daily. Panfish were measured to the nearest millimeter, weighed to the nearest gram, three scales were removed for age analysis and the fish released.

Profile Data Collection

A Yellow Springs Instruments Model 57 temperature/oxygen meter was used to collected profile data every 0.5 meters from the surface to the bottom adjacent to the dam near the reservoir’s deepest point.

Results & Discussion

Seining

Natural reproduction of largemouth bass at Greenbrier Lake has been less than other central Maryland impoundments of similar size. The geometric mean YOY largemouth bass collected per seine haul from 1998 – 2005 was nine, five, and two for Blairs Valley, Cunningham Falls, and Greenbrier Lakes, respectively. Larger year classes were produced in Greenbrier Lake during 2000 and 2001(Table 1) that are currently influencing the adult size structure. Largemouth bass reproduction has been consistent and sufficient to produce an abundant population. The seining surveys have also documented natural reproduction of bluegill, redear sunfish, black crappie, banded killifish, bluntnose minnows, and spotfin shiners.

Electrofishing

Largemouth bass are considered to be very abundant in Greenbrier Lake. Typically, CPUEHR values for stock bass over 100 indicate a dense population as suggested by Flickinger and Bulow (1993). The geometric mean CPUE of stock bass collected 1998 – 2005 was 123. Although sampling conditions and timing have been consistent from year

B77 to year, the geometric mean CPUE has ranged from 218 in 2004 to 51 in 2005. Fluctuations in capture efficiency are thought to have caused the variation rather than dramatic fluctuations in abundance.

The largemouth bass PSD in 2005 was well above average and the highest ever recorded (Table 2). The 2005 PSD of 71 ± 17 (95%CI) is well above the 40 to 60 percent recommended by Reynolds and Babb (1978) if good bass fishing is the management objective. The majority of these fish fell into the 320 to 339mm total length size range (Figure 1) and are believed to be from the large 2000 and 2001 year classes. Proportional stock density is expected to decline as the strong 2004 year class becomes stock size during 2006 and 2007.

The mean Wr for stock size largemouth bass 2001 through 2005 was 89, below the target range of 95 to100 for fall populations in good habitat suggested by Wege and Anderson (1978). Flickinger and Bulow (1993) describe fish with Wr values less than 85 as being underweight. Generally, there has been little variation between the Wr of stock and quality size bass or between stock bass among years.

Sunfish Trapping

Greenbrier Lake is supporting a quality fishery for bluegill and redear sunfish, one that anglers should find attractive. Results of the trapping efforts were reported in the 2003 Greenbrier Lake Federal Aid Progress Report.

Profile Data

Temperature and dissolved oxygen profile data were recorded on 5 July 2005 (Figure 2). The 2005 data shows a larger than normal niche for trout, approximately three meters of the water column. Nevertheless, there is no evidence that an appreciable number of trout survive from one year to the next. Most years, the niche for trout during July is one meter or less.

Management Recommendations

• Continue to monitor the status of the largemouth bass population by fall electrofishing to assess adult abundance, size structure and condition. Sampling can be reduced to every other year because of the relative stability of the fishery and limited manpower.

• Discontinue annual seining survey in favor of young-of-year CPUEHr electrofishing data to monitor largemouth bass year class strength.

• Consider the introduction of golden shiners to provide an additional forage species.

B78

Table 1. Relative abundance (Geometric mean) of young-of-year largemouth bass collected by MD DNR seine survey of Greenbrier, 1998 - 2005.

Year 2005 2004 2003 2002 2001 2000 1999 1998 # hauls 4 5 5 7 7 6 6 7 # YOY 5 26 15 5 53 49 4 13 Mean YOY/haul 1 5 3 1 8 8 1 2 1998 – 2005 Geometric Mean = 2.4

Table 2. Summary of stock-size and greater largemouth bass data from MD DNR fall electrofishing surveys, Greenbrier Lake, 2001 - 2005. Arithmetic mean 95% CI

GeoMean CPUEhr Year N PSD RSD38 RSD51 stock largemouth bass Wr 2005 31 71 ± 17 10 ± 14 0 51 88 ± 2 2004 91 54 ± 10 9 ± 7 3 218 90 ± 2 2003 74 35 ± 11 11 ± 9 3 217 87 ± 1 2002 52 42 ± 14 0 0 83 85± 3 2001 87 45 ± 11 2 ± 4 0 138 94± 1 Geometric Mean 48 123 89

B79

25

20

Hr 15

CPUE 10

5

0 210 250 290 330 370 410 450 490 Total Length by 2 cm Grouping

Figure 1. Length frequency of stock size and greater largemouth bass collected from Greenbrier Lake by electrofishing, 2005. MD DNR. N = 31

30 12

25 10

20 8

15 6

10 4 Temperature (°C) Temperature

5 2 Dissolved Oxygen (ppm)

0 0 0123456789101112 Depth (m)

Temp D.O.

Figure 2. Greenbrier Lake temperature and dissolved oxygen profile data collected at 1:00 pm on 5 July 2005 adjacent to the dam. MD DNR.

B80

Jennings Randolph Lake

Introduction

Jennings Randolph Lake (JRL) is a 385 ha (952 acre) impoundment on the North Branch Potomac River (NBPR) that straddles the Maryland/West Virginia state line in Garrett County, Maryland, and Mineral County, West Virginia. Originally named Bloomington Reservoir, it was renamed Jennings Randolph Lake in May 1997 in honor of the former West Virginia senator who was instrumental in the authorization of the project. The reservoir is owned and operated by the US Army Corps of Engineers (ACOE) with the following legislated purposes: flood control, water supply, water quality control, and recreation, in that order of priority. Water quality control is achieved by releasing stored water through a multiple port release tower with five intake ports located at 50' depth intervals. Water supply is a function typically required under drought conditions and is accomplished via flow augmentation for downstream users. JRL was completed in 1981 and drains a 425 square kilometer watershed, about 20% of the NBPR basin. Maximum depth is 86m at full conservation pool (447m surface elevation). Maximum surface elevation at full flood storage is 458m, the top of the emergency floodgates. Surface lake elevation typically varies over a range of about 15m annually with conservation pool elevation (1,466') reached by April. Minimum pool elevation usually occurs in February (Pavol 2004).

Water quality in JRL is affected by numerous sources of acid mine drainage (AMD) pollution in the watershed. Although AMD mitigation projects in both Maryland and West Virginia have reduced the degree of AMD pollution in the NBPR watershed upstream of JRL (Morgan 1997), the lake continues to receive water of less than optimal quality. AMD remediation activities in the NBPR watershed have improved alkalinity in JRL (Janicki et al. 1995), but concentrations of essential nutrients, particularly phosphorous, remain at low levels, further limiting the development of fish populations and sport fishing opportunities.

In general, JRL is steep sided with limited littoral zone, oligotrophic, somewhat sterile, and sub-optimal habitat for nest-building warm-water fish species (Davis and Pavol 1985; Morgan 1997). Although the lake becomes thermally stratified, it is well oxygenated at all depths throughout the year, offering the opportunity for year-round management with stocked salmonids. JRL currently supports a sport fishery for smallmouth bass (Micropterus dolomieu), walleye (Sander vitreus), rainbow trout (Oncorhynchus mykiss), channel catfish (Ictalurus punctatus), bluegills (Lepomis macrochirus), and rock bass (Ambloplites rupestris). MD DNR Fisheries Service stocks about 5,000 catchable size rainbow trout annually in JRL. Warm water gamefish are managed under Maryland’s statewide regulations (MD DNR 2004-2005). Trout fishing is managed under Put and Take regulations as described in the 2004-2005 Maryland Sportfishing Guide (MD DNR 2004-2005).

B81

The purpose of this study was to describe the status of fish population within JRL for years 2001 through 2005. The objectives included:

• Determine fish species composition and relative abundance.

• Measure age, growth, and size indices of gamefish and panfish species.

• Estimate black bass young of the year abundance.

Methods

Fish samples were collected using timed electro-fishing effort with a Smith/Root 5K pulsed DC electrofishing boat in the spring and fall during this study period. On 12 May 2005, 600 seconds of power-on electrofishing effort was used to sample for walleye at each of four randomly selected shoreline sampling stations 0.8km in length each. On 2 October 2005 six randomly chosen sampling stations were electrofished for gamefish. Additional black bass data was collected on 21 May 2005 during an open tournament. Black bass captured during the open tournament were held in a modified 300-gallon stock tank during tournament weigh-ins. The holding tank was supplied with oxygen at 20 psi and water was re-circulated at a rate of 18 gallons per minute using a gasoline powered water pump. Non-iodized salt was added to aid in restoring ionic balance in stressed fish. Black bass were held up to two hours and released back into JRL at the weigh–in site.

Relative abundance of fish species was reported as catch per hour of electrofishing effort (CPUEHr). General abundance occurrence was derived from CPUE values and fish were rated as abundant (>100 individuals), common (5-100 individuals), or scarce (< 5 individuals). Captured fish were identified to species, measured for total length (TL) in mm, and weighed to nearest gram. Scale samples were obtained from the left side of the fish below the lateral line near the tip of the pectoral fin. Scales were impressed on acetate slides and interpreted using a Micron Model 700-A microfiche reader. Growth histories were determined by back-calculation of length at annulus as described by Lagler (1956).

Proportional stock density (PSD) and relative stock density (RSD) were calculated using the methods described by Anderson (1980). Confidence intervals for proportional stock density and relative stock density were calculated using the formula described by Gustafson (1988). Relative weight (Wr), a measure of fish condition, was calculated using the methods described by Anderson (1980).

A 15m fry net was used to collect YOY black bass at 10 randomly chosen stations

B82 during 2004 and 2005. Abundance indices were reported as the number of YOY per 30.5m of shoreline. A qualitative value was assigned based on the shoreline-seining index described by Enamait (1999). Associated fish species collected in the seine hauls were also recorded.

Results

A list of common and scientific names and general occurrence of sixteen fish species collected in Jennings Randolph Lake during the five-year study period is presented in Table 1. Fish species representing six families were indicative of coldwater, coolwater, and warmwater fish community.

Smallmouth bass

Summaries of smallmouth bass population data for this study period are contained in Table 2. The mean smallmouth bass PSD for the study period is well above the optimal range of 30 to 60 % suggested by Anderson and Weithman (1978). The mean RSD35 value is within the expected range of 10 to 20% for a balanced bass population (Anderson 1980). The mean Wr of stock, quality, and preferred size smallmouth bass is below the optimal range of 95 to 100% suggested by Wege and Anderson (1978). Reproduction was considered excellent in 2004 and 2005 (Table 2). Mean back- calculated total length (TL) at age for smallmouth bass is presented in Table 3. Smallmouth bass attained legal size (> 305mm) by age 5 while growth to preferred size (> 350mm) required 6+ years. Smallmouth bass mean growth rates in JRL are within the normal expected range for statewide populations and for mountain areas (Elser 1962).

An open bass tournament on JRL was held on 21 May 2005. Twenty-six boats with two anglers per boat captured 102 legal size (> 305mm) smallmouth bass (Table 4). The tournament was given a special exemption during the closure period by MD DNR, however future exemptions will not be considered. A high percentage of the tournament- captured fish were in the preferred-size. Memorable-size smallmouth bass were also captured (Table 4). Only two largemouth bass were captured in the tournament.

Largemouth bass

Largemouth bass are less common than smallmouth bass in JRL (Table 1). The littoral zone in JRL is minimal due to the steep, rocky shoreline that characterizes all but a small proportion of the lake, limiting typical largemouth bass habitat and population size. Sample size was insufficient to perform reliable population size structure and condition analysis during this study period. However, during 2002 ten adult largemouth bass were collected during sampling efforts, and five were of legal size ranging from 322mm to 430mm TL. Growth rates of largemouth bass are considered to be slow (Elser 1962), attaining legal size by age 5+ (Pavol 2002). Reproduction for largemouth bass was considered fair for years 2004 and 2005. The mean YOY seining index was 1.9 for both years. B83

Walleye

Walleye size indices for 2005 are presented in Table 5. The PSD value is less than the 30 to 60% range suggested by Anderson and Weithman (1978). Wr of stock and quality-size fish were less than the 95 to 100% suggested by Wege and Anderson (1978). Mean back-calculated total length (TL) at age for walleye is presented in Table 6. No legal-size walleye were collected in 2005; however walleye reach harvestable-size (> 381mm) by age 5 in JRL (Pavol 2002). Supplemental walleye fingerling stocking continued in JRL during this study period. Spring fingerling walleye were stocked in May of 2001 (number unavailable); 2003 (60,000); and 2005 (20,000).

Rock bass

Rock bass were the most abundant panfish species collected in JRL during this study period (Table 1). A summary of rock bass population data for this study period is contained in Table 7. The mean PSD value for rock bass in JRL is indicative of a population containing a high proportion of quality-size (> 180mm) individuals. Mean back-calculated total length at age for rock bass in JRL for this study period is presented in Table 8. Rock bass reached quality size (>180mm) by age 5+, which is within the normal range for mountain populations in Maryland (Elser 1962).

Bluegill

A summary of bluegill population data is presented in Table 9. Bluegill population data in 2005 was not calculated due to small sample size. The mean PSD value for bluegill in JRL for years 2002 and 2004 was well above the expected range of 20-40% described by Anderson (1980). The RSD20 value during 2002 was within the 5 to 20% suggested by Anderson (1980). Wr for bluegill was estimated for only one year during this five-year study period. Wr for stock-size fish in 2004 was slightly below, while Wr for quality-size fish was slightly above the 95 to 100% range suggested by Wege and Anderson (1978). Mean back-calculated total length (TL) at age for bluegill in JRL for years 2002 and 2004 is contained in Table 10. Bluegill reached quality-size (> 150mm) in JRL by age 4+ and preferred size (> 200mm) by age 6+. Growth rates of bluegill in JRL are considered slow for mountain populations in Maryland (Elser 1962).

Rainbow trout

About 5,000 adult rainbow trout, produced at the Mettiki Cooperative Trout Rearing Station, were stocked in JRL in spring of each year during this study period. The presence of adult rainbow trout during fall sampling efforts indicate that JRL maintains a cold and oxygenated zone sufficient to support rainbow trout throughout the summer months.

B84

Discussion

Pavol (2004) reports that after JRL was completed and filled in 1982, water quality was marginal, although considerably better than anticipated, due to the many sources of acid mine drainage (AMD) pollution in the watershed. Prior to filling, the ACOE expected poor water quality to limit the ability of the new reservoir to support fish life. Metal components in the release tower and floodgates were fabricated from stainless steel in anticipation of contact with highly corrosive, acidic waters. Then Secretary of the Maryland Department of Natural Resources, James B. Coulter, accurately predicted that JRL would exhibit at least fair water quality and would sustain fish populations. During the first year of impoundment, pH in JRL ranged from 4.9 to 6.5, with little variation with depth. Alkalinity was < 4 ppm CaC03 during the same period (unpublished ACOE data). Modest fish populations developed quickly, supporting some recreational fishing opportunity within one year of impoundment (Davis and Pavol 1985). Water quality improved gradually as abandoned mine reclamation activities proceeded in the watershed, and improved significantly with the implementation of an AMD remediation project in the NBPR watershed by MD DNR in 1993 (Morgan 1997). The project featured the use of “lime dosing” to increase pH, precipitate metals, and improve water quality sufficiently to support fish and invertebrate populations in the North Branch upstream of JRL. Lake pH has been maintained at > 6.0 since 1993. Alkalinity currently ranges between 11 and 14 ppm CaCO3 (unpublished ACOE data), within the expected range given the geology of the NBPR watershed (Janicki et al. 1995).

Efforts were made to establish smallmouth bass in JRL shortly after it was impounded. MD DNR Fisheries Service stocked about 12,850 smallmouth bass fingerlings in 1983, but no survival to adult status was documented (Davis and Pavol 1985). Smallmouth bass are sensitive to pH less than 6.0 (Bulkey 1975) and associated low alkalinity levels, both of which characterized water quality in JRL prior to lime dosing efforts on the watershed implemented in 1993. AMD remediation on the NBPR watershed improved conditions for the survival, growth, and reproduction of smallmouth bass in JRL adequately to support another introduction effort. Smallmouth bass fingerlings stocked in JRL by WV DNR Fisheries Division in July 1993, at a rate of 8.5/ha, survived and became the foundation for the current smallmouth bass population. Sampling efforts in both 2002 and 2001 indicated that harvest may be limiting the potential of the smallmouth bass population in JRL in terms of size and abundance (Pavol 2002). Results in 2004 were similar to 2001 and 2002, in that quality and preferred size smallmouth bass were more abundant within the buoyed area restricted to boat traffic. The buoy line that delineates the restricted area does not restrict fish movement in or out of the zone. PSD and CPUE of stock size, quality size, and preferred size smallmouth bass captured within the restricted area were at least 2 times greater than outside the area in 2001, 2002, and 2004, even though smallmouth bass within the restricted area are not blocked from recruiting to the unrestricted area of JRL (Pavol 2004). Effective 1 January 2003, a black bass catch and release season (1 March to 15 April) was implemented on

B85

JRL by MD DNR Fisheries Service, and adopted by WV DNR in 2005. Smallmouth bass population parameters should eventually improve in JRL as harvest is eliminated during the vulnerable spawning season. Spawning success of smallmouth bass was considered excellent in 2004 and 2005. The ACOE reduced the size of the restricted buoyed line area in 2005, providing more angling opportunities in the dam breast and Elk Lick Cove areas.

Efforts to establish walleye in JRL were successful soon after the lake was impounded. The population peaked in 1989 and declined sharply over the next three years (Pavol 2002), probably the result of walleye predation reducing available forage. A similar pattern of initial high population levels and decline was observed when walleye were first established in Deep Creek Lake, where an unexploited yellow perch forage base existed but was quickly reduced by walleye predation (Pavol and Klotz 2001). As was the case in Deep Creek Lake, walleye in JRL are currently less abundant than in the peak year of 1989, but are probably at a population level consistent with available forage. Legal size walleye (> 381mm) were uncommon during the 2005 sampling efforts. Introduction of yellow perch in JRL is being considered to help improve walleye forage. Studies show walleye in Deep Creek Lake for years 1975 and 1976 preferred yellow perch to any other available forage. Yellow perch accounted for 31.4% of the food eaten and 61.4% of the volume collected during stomach analysis (Davis 1978). Davis (1978) also reported that yellow perch in Deep Creek Lake feed on cladocerans, dipterans, small crustaceans, mollusks, decapods, and fish. He documented that fish were not a part of the yellow perch diet until reaching 150mm TL, and did not constitute a major portion of their diet until they reached 240mm TL. Natural reproduction of walleye has been documented in JRL, although fry and fingerling stocking has been conducted to supplement the population. Beginning in 1983, WV DNR Fisheries surveys reported successful walleye reproduction each year through 1992 and again in 1996 (Lewis 2002). Walleye fry/fingerlings have been stocked in JRL in 1983 through 1987, again in 1996, from 1998 through 2001, 2003 and 2005 through a cooperative stocking effort between MD DNR Fisheries Service and WV DNR Fisheries Division. JRL has demonstrated the potential to produce trophy walleye. The current MD state record walleye, 14 lbs 4 oz, was caught in JRL in 1998.

JRL supports a variety of panfish species including bluegills, rock bass, green sunfish, yellow bullhead, and channel catfish. The more common rock bass and bluegills probably support the most angling opportunity. JRL supports a trophy fishery for channel catfish. West Virginia DNR has issued 50 trophy fish citations for channel catfish caught in JRL between 1990 and 2000 (Lewis 2001).

Management Recommendations

• Conduct annual comprehensive fish population surveys to document fish species composition, relative abundance, reproductive success, and age and size structure of gamefish and panfish species in JRL.

B86

• Conduct a spring electrofishing survey document walleye relative abundance and age and size structure. Conduct a fall electro-fishing survey to evaluate walleye reproductive success. Investigate the implications of introducing yellow perch in JRL to improve forage for predatory species, especially walleye.

• Maintain rainbow trout stocking at current levels of 5,000 adults annually.

B87

Table 1. Common and scientific names and general occurrence of fish species collected in Jennings Randolph Lake for years 2001 through 2005 (Robbins et al. 1991).

Common name Scientific name General occurrence American eel Anguilla rostrata Scarce Gizzard shad Dorosoma cepedianum Scarce Central stoneroller Campostoma anomalum Scarce Spotfin shiner Cyprinella spiloptera Scarce Emerald shiner Notropis atherinoides Common Creek chub Semotilus atromaculatus Scarce Yellow bullhead Ameiurus natalis Common Channel catfish Ictalurus punctatus Common Rainbow trout Oncorhynchus mykiss Common Rock bass Ambloplites rupestris Abundant Green sunfish Lepomis cyanellus Common Pumpkinseed Lepomis gibbosus Scarce Bluegill Lepomis macrochirus Common Smallmouth bass Micropterus dolomieu Abundant Largemouth bass Micropterus salmoides Common Walleye Sander vitreus Common

Table 2. Summary of smallmouth bass size indices and YOY abundance, Jennings Randolph Lake, 2002, 2004, and 2005.

Size/Population Year Mean Index 2001 2002 2004 2005 CPUE adult/hr * 46 64 61 57 PSD 22 43 + 16 68 + 20 38 + 15 44 + 9.8 RSD35 * 6 + 10 32 + 20 5.5 + 80 15 + 7.2 Wr, stock * 84 88 82 85 Wr, > quality * 81 82 78 80 Wr, preferred * 79 82 77 79 Mean TL > 305mm * 349 352 346 349 Range= (310-515) (310-420) (305-515) N= 24 17 111 Mean W (g) * 539 519 486 515 Range= (364-1752) (289-902) (293-2084) N= 24 17 111 YOY seining index * * 7.2/30.5m 4.1/30.5m 5.7/30.5m

B88

Table 3. Mean back-calculated total length (TL) at age for smallmouth bass, Jennings Randolph Lake, 2002, 2004, and 2005.

Age 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 2002 69 137 198 259 300 337 336 N= 61 61 46 33 15 5 5 2004 97 161 220 269 313 341 359 N= 23 21 17 14 7 5 1 2005 105 170 236 282 324 361 395 450 N= 121 120 114 108 53 23 10 4 Mean 90 156 218 270 312 346 363 450

Table 4. Summary of smallmouth bass tournament data in Jennings Randolph Lake, 21 May 2005.

Mean TL (mm) with range (N=102) 347 (298-515) Mean W(g) with range (N=102) 489 (301-2084) % preferred (> 350mm) 40% % memorable(> 430mm) 4% No. of boats/anglers 26/52 Catch rate 0.25 fish per angler/hr

Table 5. Summary of walleye size indices and relative abundance, Jennings Randolph Lake, 2005.

CPUE adult/hr 31 PSD 19 + 18 RSD51 0.0 Wr, stock 68 Wr, > quality 65 Wr, preferred 0.0 Mean TL > 381 393 Range= (372-457) N= 3 Mean W (g) 405 Range= (372-457) N= 3

B89

Table 6. Mean back-calculated total length (TL) at age for walleye, Jennings Randolph Lake, 2005.

Age N TL 1 2 3 4 2+ 9 305 199 268 3+ 17 334 205 268 315 4+ 5 379 223 291 329 362 Mean= 207 272 318 362 N= 31 31 22 5

Table 7. Summary of rock bass size indices and relative abundance, Jennings Randolph Lake, 2002, 2004 and 2005.

Year 2002 2004 2005 Mean CPUE adult/hr 25 104 80 70 PSD 28 + 16 71 + 12 50 + 35 50 + 9.7 RSD23 0.0 4 + 0.6 0.0 *

Table 8. Mean back-calculated total length (TL) at age for rock bass, Jennings Randolph Lake, 2002, 2004 and 2005.

Age 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 2002 39 83 113 144 178 192 N= 23 23 20 13 6 2 2004 44 80 120 153 176 192 N= 12 12 12 11 10 3 2005 44 74 107 133 154 168 177 190 N= 9 9 8 8 7 3 2 1 Mean 42 79 113 143 169 184 177 190

B90

Table 9. Summary of bluegill size indices and relative abundance, Jennings Randolph Lake, 2002 and 2004.

Year Mean 2002 2004 CPUE adult/hr 17 26 22 PSD 50 + 23 69 + 34 60 + 18 RSD20 7 + 13 0.0 * Wr, stock * 93 * Wr, > quality * 107 * Wr, preferred * * *

Table 10. Mean back-calculated total length (TL) at age for bluegill, Jennings Randolph Lake, 2002 and 2004.

Age 1 2 3 4 5 6 2002 20 70 98 129 163 198 N= 18 18 16 13 5 1 2004 27 60 93 136 150 184 N= 11 11 11 11 5 1 Mean 24 65 96 133 157 191

B91

Johnsons Pond

Introduction

Johnsons Pond is one of the largest impoundments on Maryland’s Eastern Shore. Maximum depth of the pond is approximately three meters. Multiple tributaries feed into Johnsons Pond, the two principle tributaries form the lake’s north and east forks. These forks form a lower “main pool” which embodies the balance of the lake. The east fork is relatively shallow and featureless with the exception of rooted aquatic vegetation and a small amount of submerged timber. The north fork has better depth and quality habitat including trees, stumps, docks and rooted aquatic vegetation. The eastern shore of the lower main pool has steep banks with many trees in the water, however most of the habitat in the lower third of the pond exists on the western shore. This habitat consists of trees, brush and limbs. Numerous private docks located throughout the pond provide excellent fish habitat.

Since 1990, the pond has been under “Trophy Bass Regulations”, which allows anglers to creel five bass under 11 inches and one bass greater than 15 inches. Assessments of the fisheries resources in Johnsons Pond were conducted each year from 1996-2001 to determine the effects of the regulation. Over the six-year span, results from surveys indicated that the new regulations were causing an overall increase in the abundance of bass, particularly in the 11-15 inch protected slot (Figure 1). According to the surveys, the trophy regulation appeared to be working nicely by delaying fishing mortality and providing a catch and release fishery for quality sized fish. Johnsons Pond also supports excellent fisheries for chain pickerel, black crappie and bluegill. The proximity of the lake to tidal water has allowed the introduction of many tidal-fresh species such as white perch, blueback herring, yellow perch and gizzard shad. Some species could be remnant populations prior to lake construction, while others could be a result of human and or avian introductions. These species frequently cause balance problems in impoundments by adding available forage and upsetting predator-prey relationships.

From 1996-2001 Johnsons Pond has supported one of the best-balanced fisheries on the eastern shore of Maryland. However, a major change took place in September of 2003. City engineers opened the water control structure in an effort to prevent flooding from a tropical storm system that was predicted to deliver 10-20 inches of rainfall throughout the area. The hurricane never produced the predicted amounts of rainfall, and the valves were not closed to restore water loss. Reports indicate that the lake volume was reduced to the original stream channel. Soon after, anglers reported poor fishing, prompting the Fisheries Service to perform a comprehensive electrofishing survey.

B92

Methods

Assessments of the fisheries resources in Johnsons Pond were conducted on September 18, 2001 and June 22, 2004. Using SR-18 AND SR-16 Smith-Root boat mounted electrofishing units, efforts encompassing the entire periphery of the lower two thirds of the lake were completed. In 2001 total electrofishing time was 4,179 seconds, and in 2004 was 4,141 seconds. The electrofishing units were set at high to deliver 30 pulses-per-second at 80% of range. Extreme upper areas of the lake were not sampled due to the abundance of woody debris and shallow depth. All adult largemouth bass were collected, measured (mm TL), and weighed (g). Young of year bass (<100mm) were so frequently encountered in 2004 that collections were stopped to avoid excessive handling mortality. Scale samples were collected from bass behind the left pectoral fin, and below the lateral line for ageing (Carlander 1982). The scales were dried and pressed into thin slides of cellulose acetate using an Ann Arbor Roller Press TM. Biologists read scale impressions to determine the age of each fish.

Population or community parameters that were addressed included: length (mm TL), weight (g), growth, relative abundance and size and age structure. Condition of the stock was determined by examining length-weight relationships such as relative weight (Wr) (Wege and Anderson 1978). Stock structure was addressed by computing the index of proportional stock density (PSD) and relative stock density (RSD) (Weithman et al. 1979). Confidence intervals (95%) for PSD values were computed using the tables developed by Gustafson (1988). Relative abundance for bass was determined by calculating the catch per unit of effort statistic (CPUE) and reported as bass (>200mm TL) per hour.

A representative subsample of bluegill were collected and measured (mm TL). Chain pickerel and black crappie were collected and measured (mm TL). Population specific data were recorded for fundamental analysis of bass and bluegill stocks. Relative abundance of all other species encountered were recorded and listed in Table 1.

Results and Discussion

A total of 86 bass were collected during the 2004 electrofishing effort, however not all young-of-year (YOY) bass were collected due to their abundance. A subsample of the hundreds of individuals encountered was collected to verify age. Only 26 adult bass (>200mm) were collected, which yielded a CPUE of 22.6 bass/hr, much lower than any previous survey (Figure 2). Bass size structure had changed greatly from 2001, (Figure 3). Mean relative weight of bass by 25mm length groups was above acceptable levels of 95%, but sample size was very small (Wege and Anderson 1978). Largemouth bass population structure, as measured by PSD, was 84% (±18), identical to the 2000 and 2001 values (Figure 1).

B93

The desirable range of PSD for prey is 20 to 50% where the management objective is good bass fishing from impoundments containing mainly largemouth bass and bluegills (Weithman et al. 1979). From 1998-2000, mean bluegill PSD was 55%, slightly above the targeted range. The 2001 bluegill PSD decreased considerably to 33%, and into the targeted range. Bluegill PSD in 2004 was 11% (±9), since few quality-sized bluegills were encountered (Figure 4).

Based on sampling with electrofishing gear, chain pickerel abundance was lower in 2004 (N=15) than in the 2001 (N=37) survey. Chain pickerel ranged in size from 152mm to 602mm. Very few black crappie were collected during either sampling effort.

Conclusions

There is little doubt that the 2003 draining event had a negative impact on the abundance of all fish species within Johnsons Pond, however quality sized bass and bluegill were most affected. Bass CPUEs since 1999 have consistently been in excess of 100 bass/hour (Figure 2). Bass PSD remained unchanged from previous years, but this value is particularly misleading since the number of adult bass collected was so small. It would be unwise to base any conclusions on this value. Bass and bluegill populations have undertaken a major shift in size and age structure, from populations including an abundance of all cohorts, to one of few older adults and many young fish. The best indication of this is the drop in percent of bass collected from within the protected slot length, which had been quite stable from 1998-2001 (Figure 1). There are still a few quality-sized bass available to anglers, but it will take several years for the fish populations in Johnsons Pond to recover.

Management Recommendations

In order to maintain the current quality fishery, Johnsons Pond should be resampled in 2006 for bass/bluegill populations.

B94

Table 1. Common and scientific names and general occurrence of species sampled by electrofishing from Johnsons Pond, Wicomico County, Fall 2001 and Spring 2004.

Relative Relative Common Name Scientific Name Abundance Abundance Fall 2001 Spring 2004 Largemouth bass Micropterus salmoides Common Common Bluegill Lepomis macrochirus Common Common Chain pickerel Esox niger Common Scarce Yellow perch Perca flavescens Common Common White perch Morone americana Common Common Creek chubsucker Erimyzon oblongus Scarce Scarce Gizzard shad Dorosoma cepedianum Abundant Abundant Common carp Cyprinus carpio Abundant Abundant American eel Anguilla rostrata Scarce Scarce Yellow bullhead Ictalurus natalis Scarce Absent Blueback herring Alosa aestivalis Scarce Absent Golden shiner Notemigonus crysoleucas Abundant Common Tesselated darter Etheostoma nigrum Common Absent Brown bullhead Ictalurus nebulosus Scarce Scarce

B95

100 Bass within protected slot RSD 380 PSD 80

60

40 Percent 20

0 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2004 Year

Figure 1. Percent of largemouth bass within the 279mm to 380mm protected slot limit, percent of bass greater than 380mm, and proportional stock density (PSD), of largemouth bass collected by electrofishing Johnson’s Pond, Wicomico County, Maryland, 1997-2004.

250

200

150

100

50

CPUE bass >200 mm/hr 0 1998 1999 2000 2001 2004 Year

Figure 2. Catch-per-unit-effort (CPUE) of bass greater than 200mm collected during electrofishing surveys conducted from 1998-2004 in Johnsons Pond, Wicomico County Maryland.

B96

50 40

30

20 Frequency 10

0 25 75 125 175 225 275 325 375 425 475 525 Total length by 25 mm interval

2001 2004

Figure 3. Length-frequency distributions of largemouth bass collected during electrofishing surveys of Johnsons Pond, Wicomico County, Maryland, 2001 (N=189) and 2004 (N=85).

35 30 25 20 15

Frequency 10 5 0

0 0 0 0 1 3 50 70 90 10 30 5 7 1 1 1 1 190 210 Total length by 10mm interval

2001 2004

Figure 4. Length-frequency distribution of bluegill sunfish collected during electrofishing surveys conducted in 2001 (N=159) and 2004 (N=106) from Johnsons Pond, Wicomico County, Maryland.

B97

Lake Artemesia

Introduction

Lake Artemesia is a 38-acre impoundment located in the Berwyn Heights area of Prince Georges County and is managed by the Maryland National Capital Park and Planning Commission (MNCPPC) for recreational purposes. It is comprised of two basins of roughly equal size connected by a shallow channel. Nearly 100% of the shoreline is heavily vegetated with submerged aquatic vegetation (SAV) and emergents.

Lake Artemesia is currently managed as a Limited Harvest Fishing Area and Put- and-Take Trout Fishing Area. Limited Harvest regulations were enacted in 1994 to prevent the over-harvest of quality size largemouth bass and other species. This regulation allows for the harvest of up to 10 fish/day, only one of which can be a largemouth bass less than 15 inches in length. No largemouth bass over 15 inches may be creeled.

Fisheries personnel monitored gamefish populations at Lake Artemesia for relative abundance, stock structure, and condition. Population indices are used to assess the effects of regulations and other management activities on the goals of maintaining a healthy ecosystem, creating balance between species and enhancing sport fishing opportunities.

This report concludes a 5-year study period from 2000 to 2005. Electrofishing surveys were conducted every other year during this time. Population indices, determined mainly from electrofishing and seine haul samples are used to assess the effects of regulations and other management activities.

Methods

Management activities at Lake Artemesia during 2005 included, put-and-take trout stocking of rainbow trout, electrofishing for adult stock assessment, and juvenile seine hauls.

An electrofishing survey was performed on 11-15-05 at dusk/night, which corresponded with the timing of previous annual surveys. Sampling followed the general methods described for Study II Job 3. Predator samples of 600 seconds were performed around the accessible shoreline. Eight sample segments were chosen to complete the entire lake. In addition, four subsamples of 100 seconds were performed in order to calculate CPUEHr for sunfish species. Crappies were collected from each of the samples in the same manner described for bass. All species observed were documented for relative abundance. Size structure, growth, and overall condition were also estimated from the electrofishing samples. Pulse rate was set at 120 pulses per second and the

B98 voltage range was set to DC (50 to 500 volts). Each sample start/stop points were recorded using a Garmin GPSmap76.

Scales were not collected in 2005 because major changes in age structure were not expected since the last sampling in 2003. In the 2003 age analysis, scale margins were not included as an annulus therefore ages were not promoted. Relative weight (Wr) and proportional stock density (PSD) were also determined. Confidence intervals for PSD were estimated using the methods of Gustafson (1988).

A juvenile recruitment survey for largemouth bass was conducted on 7-27-05 using a 9.1m seine with 6.4mm mesh. Only one site could be seined because of extremely dense vegetation around the lake. The number of largemouth bass per 30.5 meter of shoreline was calculated and applied to the Maryland Bass Seining Index (Enamait 1985).

Results

Water quality measurements were taken on 7-27-05. Conductivity was recorded as 140 μmhos, pH was 7.5, and Secchi depth >200cm. A DO/temperature profile indicated good DO down to 2m depth. A thermocline was not found. SAV covered 100% of the shoreline and consisted of hydrilla (Hydrilla), water shield (Brasenia), American lotus (Nelumbo), spatterdock (Nuphar), pondweed (Potamogeton), water clover (Marsilea), and various algae.

The 7-27-05 shoreline seining survey for juvenile bass resulted in a 3.3 fish/30.5m shoreline index and is considered in the “good” range on the Maryland Bass Reproduction Index.

The relative abundance of each fish species collected in the survey is listed in Table 1. Some species were observed, but not collected, and are noted in the table. Largemouth bass and bluegill had the highest abundance.

Flickner and Bulow (1993), suggest that largemouth bass CPUE above100 fish/hr for stock size (≥ 200mm) is considered dense. The CPUE for stock size largemouth bass in Artemesia indicated a dense population each year (Table 2). Due to a change in methods, a confidence interval and summary statistics were calculated for 2003 and 2005 CPUEs but not for earlier samples. The confidence interval for CPUE of stock size bass was fairly wide (±108) in 2003 for six predator samples, and a little narrower in 2005 with eight (±79, Table 2). Quality CPUE (≥300mm) was similar to previous years with an overlap of confidence intervals (Table 2).

PSD for bass was 21% (C.I. 15 – 27) in 2005. This is well below the 40 to 60 % target range of Reynolds and Babb (1978) for the management objective of providing

B99 good bass fishing in a largemouth bass/bluegill lake. RSD15 has ranged from 2% to 3% from 2001 to 2005 indicating a low density of the largest, most desirable bass.

The largemouth bass CPUE histogram (Figure 1) indicates 3 modes of high abundance at approximately 130, 230, and 290mm. Comparing these modes to length-at- age (Table 3) shows that they likely correspond to age 0, age 2, and age 3 fish. Few fish collected in samples were beyond age 3.

The weighted mean of the Wr index for 250–400mm bass was 83. Below 85 is considered underweight for a small impoundment (Flickner and Bulow 1993). The length group of poorest relative weight for Lake Artemesia was 320-350mm, Wr=78. Size groups with Wr of 90 or above were the smallest and largest bass (< 210mm, >400mm).

The CPUEs for black crappie shown in Table 2 indicate an expanding population. The CPUE for crappie has increased each year since their initial stocking in 1996 and 1997. The PSD for 2005 was near the upper limit of the desirable range of 30 to 70% described by Weithman (1979). The weighted mean of the Wr index for crappie was 92 in 2005 and improved from 87 in 2003. Catch rates for crappie were lower than bass or sunfishes (Table 2).

Data from 2003 and 2005 show very strong CPUE of stock size bluegill and sub- stock bluegill. PSD has declined over the 5-year period. Redear sunfish show no major trend over the period. The years 2003 and 2005 show similar results for redear abundance and PSD. Few sub-stock size redear were collected the samples. (Table 2).

Discussion

The methods for sampling changed in 2003 and 2005 from earlier years due to the implementation of standardized survey procedures as described by Bonar (2000). This was done in order to improve statistical confidence and variance among the samples. The 2005 survey included 8 samples of 600 seconds for predator species and 4 subsamples of 100 seconds for sunfish species. This provided a better confidence interval than previous surveys determined.

CPUE for stock size largemouth bass indicated a high-density population at Lake Artemesia. This has resulted in slower growth and a poor condition index especially for the middle size range of 250-370mm. Mean-length-at-age for approximately the same size range as shown in Table 3 indicates growth was below normal compared to the statewide average (Elser 1962). Largemouth growth, condition, and size structure would likely improve if the number of fish in this size range could be reduced. Management recommendations should address this problem.

B100

The sample of black crappie indicated a good PSD and Wr index for 2005. Although the trend of CPUE values indicated that the population is expanding, the catch rate for crappie was lower than that for the bass or sunfishes.

Electrofishing samples showed high CPUE for sub-stock and stock size bluegill in 2003 and 2005. Small bluegills are the dominant forage, as no other prey was collected. Fisheries personnel have attempted to improve bass condition by stocking golden shiners in Artemesia. Previous attempts to stock large quantities of golden shiners seem to have provided only immediate forage rather than a sustainable population. Further stocking of golden shiners would be based upon availability.

Maryland Fisheries Service annually stocks Lake Artemesia with adult hatchery trout as part of the statewide put-and-take trout stocking program. The trout are a popular addition to the sport fish available to anglers. Prior to this 5-year study segment, some trout had survived into the summer because a thermocline had formed. Since 2001 the SAV has expanded causing water clarity to increase and has likely prevented a thermocline from forming.

Small numbers of tiger muskie were stocked in 1998 and 1999 as a management tool to reduce the number of small bass. Survival was considered negligible and only one tiger muskie was collected in later surveys.

Management Recommendations

Several options for fisheries management at Lake Artemesia may help to improve the bass population. One is to change the regulations to increase harvest of small size bass. Currently the Limited Harvest regulation restricts the taking of largemouth bass to one per day. Increased harvest of small bass would help improve condition, growth and survival of the population. The most favorable regulation currently in use in Maryland for a dense bass population would be the Trophy Bass Regulations which allows the harvest of bass (5 fish/day) under 179mm (11inches) and protects bass in a slot-length limit of 279-381mm (11 to 15 inches). Any regulation change would require some discussion with park management staff at Lake Artemesia and include a public hearing, before a change in regulation would occur.

Another option would be to improve the habitat for bass. At present, aquatic vegetation is very dense, which greatly enhances the survival of large numbers of small bass. It was recommended that vegetation be reduced in the impoundment in 2001 (Groves 2001). In 2003, MNCPPC mangers followed the recommendation and purchased an electric vegetation cutter, which was used in the lake briefly. The operation of the device was reported as being difficult and further cutting was not attempted. The idea of cutting the vegetation in paths that run from deep to shallow water was presented in Unmuth et al. (1999). In this study, the vegetation was cut in 2-meter wide strips in a radial pattern around the circumference of a Wisconsin lake and resulted with improved

B101 size structure of both bass and bluegill. Further attempts at using this technique are recommended for Artemesia.

B102

Table 1. Relative abundance of fish species collected in Lake Artemesia 2005.

Scientific Name Common Name Abundance1 Lepomis macrochirus Bluegill abundant Micropterous salmoides Largemouth bass abundant Pomoxis nigromaculatus Black crappie common Lepomis microlophus Redear sunfish common Oncorhynchus mykiss Rainbow trout rare Anguilla rostrata2 American eel rare Erimyzon oblongus Creek chubsucker rare 1 Abundance key: rare 1-5 individuals, common 5-100 individuals, abundant >100 individuals (Standardized to 900 seconds electrofishing) 2Seen but not collected

Table 2. CPUE (fish/hour) by length category with arithmetic mean confidence intervals (AM CI) in parenthesis, PSD, and RSD15 from fall electrofishing surveys at Lake Artemesia.

CPUE (fish/hr) Species Date a b Substock Stock (AM CI) Quality (AM PSD CI) Largemouth bass 10/2/2001 48 131 50 38% 11/4/2003 93 239 (131 - 347) 49 (21 - 75) 20% (±6) 11/15/2005 98 190 (111-269) 40 (22 – 59) 21% (±6)

Black crappie 10/2/2001 1 16 10 64% 11/4/2003 1 59 (9 - 108) 54 (5 - 102) 92% (±9) 69% 11/15/2005 2 84 (33 – 135) 58(25 – 90) (±10)

Bluegill 10/2/2001 -- 73 41 56% 43% 11/4/2003 726 299 128 (±28) 28% 11/15/2005 135 585 (402 – 768) 162 (-28 – 352) (±13)

Redear sunfish 10/2/2001 4 110 41 37% 11/4/2003 0 270 114 42%(±30) 11/15/2005 18 243 (54 – 432) 117 (62 – 172)48%(±24) a stock sizes: largemouth ≥200mm, bluegill ≥80mm, redear ≥100mm, black crappie ≥130 bquality sizes: largemouth ≥300mm, bluegill ≥150mm, redear ≥180mm, black crappie ≥200

B103

Table 3. Mean-length-at-age of largemouth bass from Lake Artemesia showing numbers of fish aged.

Age Year 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 11/04/2003 131(n=11) 181(n=7) 252(n=15) 308(n=8) 357(n=7) 391(n=5) 514(n=2) 506 Statewide1 119 244 315 381 432 472 1 from Elser (1962)

30

25 n=369 20

15

10

CPUE (fish/hr) 5 0

90 130 170 210 250 290 330 370 410 450 490 530 570 Total Length (mm)

Figure 1. Length frequency of largemouth bass from Lake Artemesia fall electrofishing, 2005.

B104

Lake Habeeb

Introduction

Lake Habeeb was impounded in the spring of 1969. It is surrounded by Rocky Gap State Park, which opened in 1974. Located in north central Allegany County, the lake is 98 hectares (243 surface acres), has a maximum depth of 22.5m (74'), and its shoreline spans 15.1km (9.4 miles). There are two boat ramps available for launching, one for campers (no fee) and one general public ramp (small fee) located in the upper SE corner of the lake. Gasoline motors are prohibited; only electric motors are allowed on the lake. There are three beach areas, one is located along the large campground located on the upper NE shoreline. Rocky Gap Lodge and golf course are located near the lake’s lower southern shoreline. Boats, canoes and kayaks are available for rental. Fishing is permitted 24 hours a day, seven days a week, year around, including ice fishing “at your own risk”. Lake Habeeb offers a variety of recreational fish species for anglers to pursue.

Methods

Shoreline seining to evaluate natural reproduction of fish species was conducted with a 9.1m long by 1.2m deep seine with 3mm square mesh. Ten hauls were made at fixed stations. A seining index was calculated based upon the number of young-of-year (YOY) collected from 30.5m of shoreline. A seine 15m long by 1.9m deep, with 6mm square mesh was used at night to capture emerald shiners. The following index was utilized for categorizing the reproductive success of black bass:

Number of YOY per 30.5m (100 ft) of shoreline Seining Index 0 to 0.50 Poor 0.51 to 2.50 Fair 2.51 to 5.50 Good 5.51 and greater Excellent

Results

A final report for Lake Habeeb was submitted in the USFWS Federal Aid Grant F-48-R-14, Study II (Enamait 2004).

Natural reproduction of largemouth bass has been excellent over the past 5 years (Table 1). A total of 12 fish species were collected during the seining efforts (Table 2). A night seining in 2002 resulted in the collection of one emerald shiner. Although only one fish was collected, it was determined to be a naturally reproduced fish, and not one from a prior stocking. Channel catfish are also present, however, young were never collected by seining, lending to speculation that they are not being recruited naturally. Adult channel catfish, rainbow and brown trout are regularly stocked into the lake.

B105

Although golden shiners have reproduced naturally in the lake, their numbers are relatively low. A total of 18 golden shiners were collected in the 2005 seining effort and is the first time golden shiners have been collected with seines since 2000. Electrofishing surveys in 2004 resulted in a golden shiner CPUE60 of 4.4.

Discussion

Rooted aquatic vegetation is expected to remain abundant in Lake Habeeb into the near future, due in part to the recent invasion of Eurasian milfoil. Redear sunfish now contribute to a wide variety of recreational fish species in the lake. Their continued presence, or at least future abundance, will depend upon their ability to successfully reproduce and expand in the lake. There is good potential that golden shiner will continue to add to the lake’s forage fish base. Emerald shiners have apparently contributed little to this forage base, but may do so in the future. Largemouth bass relative weights have been less than desirable in recent collections (86 in 2002, and 81 in 2004). Consistent and significant natural reproduction by bluegill and forage species discussed herein, will be critical to maintaining healthy and balanced predator populations into the future in Lake Habeeb.

B106

Table 1. Lake Habeeb Young-of-Year Largemouth Bass Data Collected by MD DNR

Year Seining Mean Size (mm) Index at Capture 2005 15.0 49 2004 5.0 54 2003 10.3 - 2002 5.4 45 2001 12.0 -

Table 2. Common and scientific names and general occurrence of species collected by seine hauls by MD-DNR, Lake Habeeb, 2001-2005.

Common Name Scientific Name Abundance1 Spotfin shiner Cyprinella spiloptera Abundant Golden shiner Notemigonus crysoleucus Common Emerald shiner Notropis atherinoides Rare Bluntnose minnow Pimephales notatus Abundant Yellow bullhead Ameiurus natalis Rare Green sunfish Lepomis cyanellus Rare Pumpkinseed Lepomis gibbosus Common Bluegill Lepomis macrochirus Abundant Redear sunfish Lepomis micropterus Common Smallmouth bass Micropterus dolomieui Common Largemouth bass Micropterus salmoides Abundant Black crappie Pomoxis nigromaculatus Rare 1Abundance key: rare 1-5 individuals, common 5-100 individuals, abundant >100 individuals

B107

Leonards Mill Pond

Introduction

Leonards Mill Pond is a county owned 12.1 hectare impoundment in north central Wicomico County. The pond has been managed under “Trophy Bass Regulations” since 1990. The regulation prohibits the harvest of bass between 11 and 15 inches (279- 381mm) in total length, and allows five bass less than 279mm, and one greater than 381mm to be harvested. Historically, Leonards Mill Pond has been one of the best bluegill fisheries on the eastern shore of Maryland. High bluegill and bass PSDs were noted in the 1998 and 2000 survey reports, which indicated quality bluegill angling. In this condition, the fishery could risk falling out of balance if bluegill reproduction faltered suddenly. Winter drawdown of the pond has been commonly practiced to help control the abundant aquatic vegetation. A direct cause and effect relationship has been drawn between drawdown and poor bluegill recruitment in previous reports. The pond was subjected to an extended drawdown between the fall of 2003 and the summer of 2004 while bridge repairs were being conducted on MD Route 13. Electrofishing surveys to assess the fisheries resources within Leonards Mill Pond were completed on October 10, 2002 and November 11, 2004.

Methods

Using a SR-18 boat mounted electrofishing unit adjusted to deliver DC current at 30 pulses-per-second, a 3639 second effort that encompassed the entire periphery of the lower two thirds of the pond was completed. Extreme upper areas of the pond were not sampled due to the abundance of aquatic vegetation and shallow depth. All largemouth bass were collected, measured (mm TL), and weighed (g). Young of year bass (<120mm) were so frequently encountered that collections of YOY bass were stopped to avoid excess handing mortality, although a running count was taken to determine their relative abundance. Scale samples were collected from bass behind the left pectoral fin, and below the lateral line for ageing (Carlander 1982). The scales were dried and pressed into thin slides of cellulose acetate using an Ann Arbor Roller PressTM . Biologists read the scale impressions to determine the age of each fish.

Population or community parameters that were addressed included: length (mm TL), weight (g), growth, relative abundance and size and age structure. Condition of the stock was determined by examining relative weight (Wr) (Wege and Anderson 1978). Stock structure was addressed by computing the index of proportional stock density (PSD) (Weithman et al. 1979). Confidence intervals (95%) for PSD values were computed using the tables developed by Gustafson (1988). Relative abundance was determined by calculating the catch per unit of effort statistic (CPUE) and reported as fish per hour.

B108

A representative subsample of bluegill was collected and measured (mm TL); chain pickerel and black crappie were also collected and measured (mm TL). Population specific data were recorded for fundamental analysis of bass and bluegill stocks. Relative abundance of all other species encountered were recorded and listed in Table 1.

Results and Discussion

In 2002, catch per-unit-effort of quality-sized bass was 68 bass/hour. Largemouth bass population structure, as measured by PSD, was 67% (±14). This was found to exceed the targeted range of 40% to 60% (Weithman et al. 1979.), but lower than 87% (±8) as calculated in 2002

The desirable range of PSD for prey is 20 to 50% where the management objective is good bass fishing from waters containing mainly largemouth bass and bluegills (Weithman et al. 1979). Leonards Mill Pond bluegill PSD was 50% (±11) in 2004, which was not significantly different than 55% (±8) calculated in 2002.

Results from surveys using electrofishing gear showed chain pickerel and black crappie were not abundant sportfish in Leonards Mill Pond. In 2002, only four chain pickerel and six black crappie were observed in the entire sampling effort, and only seven chain pickerel and six black crappie were observed in the 2004 sampling effort. There is indication that chain pickerel simply avoid the gear, as they were observed fleeing from the electrical field during the surveys.

Conclusions/Management Recommendations

Leonards Mill Pond continues to support a quality fishery for both largemouth bass and bluegill. However, larger (and older) bluegill and bass were encountered less frequently in 2004 than in 2002. Larger individuals may have experienced higher mortality rates during the drawdown period. It appears that recruitment of largemouth bass in 2004 was excellent (Figure 1). A balanced condition for fish in Leonards Mill Pond is highly reliant on bluegill reproduction. As multiple spawners, bluegill can withstand the effects of nature, however the effects of man can be devastating. Small bluegills were rarely encountered, and their absence may explain the poor condition of bass. Continued stocking of bluegill will help to correct any lack of reproduction.

To maintain the current quality fishery, the following management actions should be taken:

• Resample Leonards Mill Pond in 2006 for bass/bluegill populations.

• Stock 10,000 golden shiners into Leonards Mill Pond in 2006 to increase forage for largemouth bass.

B109

Table 1. Common and scientific names and general occurrence of species collected during electrofishing surveys of Leonards Mill Pond, Wicomico County, Fall 2004.

Common Name Scientific Name 2004 Abundance Largemouth bass Micropterus salmoides Common Bluegill Lepomis macrochirus Common Chain pickerel Esox niger Scarce Creek chubsucker Erimyzon oblongus Common Common carp Cyprinus carpio Scarce Pumkinseed Lepomis gibbosus Common Golden shiner Notemigonus crysoleucas Common

50 45

40

35 30

25

20 Frequency 15 10

5 0 01234567

Age

2002 2004

Figure 1. Age-frequency distribution of largemouth bass collected during electrofishing surveys of Leonards Mill Pond, Wicomico County, 2002 and 2004 (N=59).

B110

Liberty Reservoir

Introduction

Liberty Reservoir, a 1,225 hectare impoundment, lies on the boundary between Carroll and Baltimore Counties in the Piedmont region of central Maryland. The reservoir is owned and maintained by the City of Baltimore Department of Public Works. A variety of sport fish species provide fishing opportunities. Fishing is permitted from the shoreline and boats that possess a seasonal Liberty and Prettyboy boat permit (available from the Reservoir Natural Resources Office). Boat propulsion is limited to rowing, paddling, or battery powered motors. Boat moorings and two boat ramps are located just north of Route 26 on the west side of the reservoir. Additional watershed usage regulations may be found in an annual publication by the City of Baltimore Department of Public Works entitled “Pocket Guide to Boating and Fishing: Reservoirs.”

Methods

Sampling methods and data analysis used are those described in USFWS Federal Aid Grant F-48-R-15 Study II. Additionally, striped bass were collected using multi- paneled gill nets that were 45.4m long by 2.4m deep, with one repeated section characterized by square mesh sizes of 64mm, 76mm, and 89mm. Nets were set overnight on points in water depths ranging from 3 to 12m. Gill net sampling was conducted during the month of November.

Water quality data was obtained using a HACH Water Ecology Kit (Model AB- 36A), a YSI Oxygen Meter (model 57), Solu Bridge Conductivity meter (Type RB-5), and an Orion Research digital pH Meter (Model 211).

Shoreline seining to evaluate natural reproduction of largemouth and smallmouth bass was performed utilizing a 9.1m x 1.2m seine with 3mm square mesh. On average, 10-12 sites were randomly selected each year from fixed sites. A seining index was calculated based upon the number of young-of-year (YOY) collected from 30.5m of shoreline. The following index was utilized for categorizing the reproductive success of black bass.

Number of YOY per Seining Index 30.5m (100 ft) of shoreline 0 to 0.50 Poor 0.51 to 2.50 Fair 2.51 to 5.50 Good 5.51 and greater Excellent

B111

Results/Discussion

Physical and chemical data

Liberty Reservoir is fed primarily by the North Branch Patapsco River. Other tributaries include Beaver Run, Keyser’s Run, Prugh Run, Morgan Run, Locust Run, and Cook’s Branch. Reservoir length is 18km with a shoreline length at full pool of 131km. Average depth is 18m with a maximum depth of 44m.

Liberty Reservoir is best described as a steep-sided, oligotrophic impoundment. Water is slightly basic and relatively soft; water conductivity was consistent in the 160- 165 mhos/cm (Table 1). Aquatic vegetation is scarce in the reservoir. Only three species were found between 2001-2005, spiney naiad (Najas minor), and two potamogeton species (potamogeton sp).

Fish Species

A total of 24 fish species were collected during the period of 2001-2005 (Table 2). Smallmouth bass, followed closely by largemouth bass, are the most abundant game fish. Striped bass, walleye, and white perch are well established in the reservoir. The most common panfish is bluegill followed by black crappie. The most common small forage fish are spotfin shiner and bluntnose minnow. Some changes have occurred since the last 5 year report. Three fish were found previously, but were not recovered in the past five years; these include central stoneroller, northern hog sucker and the tessellated darter. A new fish species, the banded killifish, was recovered by seine every year from 2001 to 2005 and was added to the reservoir’s species list.

Largemouth bass

Reproduction of largemouth bass has been fair or good over the past five years (Table 3). Although natural reproduction was low in 2004, fall electrofishing efforts during 2004 recovered good numbers of YOY largemouth bass.

The spring electrofishing catch-per-unit-effort rates (CPUE60) for largemouth bass has ranged from 13 to 38 (Table 4). The proportional stock density (PSD) for largemouth this year was 96. This is the highest PSD recorded over the past 5 years (Table 4) and significantly higher then the recommended range of 30-70 (Weithman 1979) for a predator species in a balanced population. Largemouth bass from the spring electrofishing surveys exhibited good condition as evidenced by high Wr (Table 4).

Smallmouth bass

Natural reproduction of smallmouth bass over the past five years has ranged from poor to excellent (Table 3). Many young smallmouth bass were observed during 2004

B112 night electrofishing indicating there was a good hatch although no smallmouth were collected by seine.

The spring electrofishing CPUE60 for smallmouth bass has ranged from 5 to 36 (Table 5). The PSD for smallmouth this year was 89. This is the highest PSD recorded over the past 5 years (Table 5) and significantly higher then the recommended range of 30-70 (Weithman 1979) for a predator species in a balanced population. Smallmouth bass from the 2005 spring electrofishing survey exhibited better condition than in 2001 as evidence by a relative weight of 94 (Table 5).

Walleye

Only one YOY walleye was collected during the 2005 night electrofishing survey, resulting in a CPUE60 of 1. A CPUE60 of 6.8 was recorded in 2001; no young walleye were collected between 2002 and 2004. A total of 29 walleye were collected as a by- catch of spring electrofishing and fall gillnet sampling. These fish ranged from 446 to 744mm in TL and had a mean Wr of 88.

Striped bass

Four striped bass YOY were collected during the 2005 night electrofishing effort, resulting in a CPUE60 of 4. Eleven striped bass were collected during the fall gill netting effort. The effort recorded 0.17 striped bass per net per day. These fish ranged from 675mm to 1000mm in TL and represented six year classes (1998 through 2003). The overall condition of striped bass appears to be good. The mean relative weight for fall collected striped bass was 81, similar to the past five years. As in the past, striped bass under 914mm (36”) have a lower mean Wr (Table 6).

Discussion

The largemouth and smallmouth bass PSDs indicate high numbers of quality bass, however there is some concern with the low number of stock to quality size bass, despite good to excellent natural reproduction. The reservoir is predator heavy with little habitat which could result in heavy predation on the young and yearling bass.

On April 20, 2005 an angler found a striped bass floating dead. Maryland fisheries personnel were on the reservoir at the time and were able to collected data from this fish. The fish was 1220mm (48”) in TL and weighed 27.73kg (57.18 lbs) which exceeded the current state record held by Bob Bruce by 10 lbs,1 oz. The striper was aged at 15 years old.

White perch have been present in the reservoir for 10 years. Although this fishery is providing a good fishery, life history information suggest that this species will over populate and cause stunting (Scott and Crossman 1973). The catch rates during spring

B113 and fall night electrofishing efforts remain consistent showing no signs of stunting to date. White perch could be both beneficial in providing a prey base for large stripers and detrimental as larvae striped bass are a prey species of white perch (Monteleone and Houde 1992). Examination of white perch stomach in 2001 and 2002 provided no evidence of direct predation upon striped bass fry; however, their food preference is similar to that of young striped bass (Grimes 1995).

Although channel catfish are not targeted in sampling efforts, gill net surveys during 2004 and 2005 collected a total of 38 channel catfish. These fish were in excellent condition and ranged up to 4.92kg (10.8 lbs).

Management Recommendations

• Conduct annual seining surveys to monitor natural reproduction of sport and forage fish.

• Conduct bi-annual surveys utilizing multi-panel gill net sets during the fall to monitor the striped bass population.

• Determine size structure and growth rates for Liberty Reservoir black bass.

• Stock walleye fry and fingerlings (if available) for the next three years until surveys show an improvement in natural recruitment. Re-evaluate after three consecutive years of stocking.

B114

Table 1. Water quality parameters collected by MD DNR during seining surveys, Liberty Reservoir, 2001-2005.

Date Temp (C) D.O. pH Alkalinity Hardness Conductivity 8/6/2001 - - 8.2 34.2 34.2 160 7/10/2002 25.5 9.9 8.0 51.3 68.4 - 8/5/2003 27.0 8.1 7.5 59 85.5 - 8/18/2004 26.6 10.1 9.0 51.3 85.5 - 7/13/2005 28.5 8.1 8.0 34 79.6 163

Table 2. Common and scientific names and general occurrence of species sampled by seine and electrofishing surveys, Liberty Reservoir, 2001-2005.

Common Name Scientific Name Occurrence American eel Anguilla rostrata Rare Spotfin shiner Cyprinus spiloptera Abundant Common carp Cyprinus carpio Abundant Spottail shiner Notropis hudsonius Rare Golden shiner Notemigonus crysoleucas Common Bluntnose minnow Pimephales notatus Common White sucker Catostomus commersoni Common Yellow bullhead Ameiurus natalis Common Channel catfish Ictalurus punctatus Common Rainbow trout Oncorhynchus mykiss Common (stocked) Banded killifish Fundulus diaphanus Rare White perch Morone americana Abundant Striped bass Morone saxatilis Common Rock bass Ambloplites rupestris Rare Redbreast sunfish Lepomis auritus Common Green sunfish Lepomis cyanellus Common Pumpkinseed Lepomis gibbosus Common Bluegill Lepomis macrochirus Abundant Smallmouth bass Micropterus dolomieui Common Largemouth bass Micropterus salmoides Common White crappie Pomoxis annularis Common Black crappie Pomoxis nigromaculatus Common Yellow perch Perca flavescens Abundant Walleye Sander vitreus Common

B115

Table 3. Seining Indices (SI) for young of year largemouth and smallmouth bass collected by MD DNR seine hauls, Liberty Reservoir, 2001-2005.

Year LMB SI SMB SI 2001 1.8 1.0 2002 4.2 3.5 2003 4.2 6.4 2004 0.2 0 2005 4.6 0.6

Table 4. Summary of largemouth bass data collected by MD DNR electrofishing surveys, Liberty Reservoir.

Largemouth Bass 2001 2002 2003 2005

CPUE60 (stock) 37 38 13 23

CPUE60 (quality) 27 18 11 22

CPUE60 (preferred) 21 11 5 19 Pooled PSD % 72 47 82 96

Pooled RSD38 % 56 30 38 80 Mean Wr 97 - - 98

Table 5. Summary of largemouth bass data collected by MD DNR electrofishing surveys, Liberty Reservoir.

Smallmouth Bass 2001 2002 2003 2005

CPUE60 (stock) 5 36 7 16

CPUE60 (quality) 4 30 5 14

CPUE60 (preferred) - 20.5 4 10 Pooled PSD % 76 84 74 89

Pooled RSD38 % - 37 53 65 Mean Wr 86 - - 94

B116

Table 6. Relative weight data (Wr) for striped bass collected by MD DNR surveys, Liberty Reservoir, 2001-2005.

Under 36" Over 36" All Fish Year # of Fish Wr # of Fish Wr Overall Wr 2001 16 78.1 0 0 78.1 2002 19 82.5 4 101 85.8 2003 6 90 0 - 90 2004 17 85 0 - 85 2005 10 77 2 98 81

B117

Loch Raven Reservoir

Introduction

Loch Raven is a 972 ha (2,400 acre) impoundment located in Baltimore County. The reservoir is owned and maintained by the City of Baltimore Office of Public Works. It is operated primarily as a public water supply however recreational boating and fishing is permitted, subject to City of Baltimore restrictions. Noteworthy requirements and restrictions include the use of electric motors only, a specific boating season, possession of a valid boating permit, and special requirements for the use of live bait. The Department of Recreation and Parks, Baltimore County, operates the Loch Raven Fishing Center, located at the reservoir’s only boat ramp. This facility issues boating permits, rents fishing boats, and electric boat motors. Loch Raven was monitored for natural reproduction of fish species and electrofished during the spring to assess the bass, northern pike, and pickerel populations. A small number of largemouth bass were necropsied for a statewide mercury study and largemouth bass virus testing.

Methods

Sampling methods used were the same as previously described in Federal Aid Grant F-48-R-15, Study II. In addition, largemouth bass were collected in 2001 and 2002 and bluegill in 2001 for mercury testing. The fish collected were divided into three size groups. The largemouth bass cm groupings were: 30.5-35.5, 35.6-40.5, and ≥40.6. The cm groups for bluegill were 12.7-15.0, 15.1-20.2, and ≥20.3. All fish were sent to the Chesapeake Biological Lab (CBL) for analysis. Personnel from the U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service, Fish Health Center, Lamar PA visited Loch Raven Reservoir on 25 July 2002 and took tissue samples from various sized largemouth bass to test for the presence of largemouth bass virus.

Results Physical and Chemical

Loch Raven Reservoir has historically had a summer and fall infestation of various macrophytes, with southern naiad (Najas guadalupensis) being the most abundant species. Seven additional types of submerged rooted aquatic vegetation were observed during seining efforts conducted between 2001 and 2005. They included: spiny naiad (Najas minor), leafy pondweed (Potamogeton sp.), coontail (Ceratophyllum demersum), Sago grass (Potamogeton pectinatus), slender pondweed (Potamogeton pusillus), muskgrass (Chara sp.), and hydrilla (hydrilla verticillata). Hydrilla fragments as a means of reproduction. Fisheries personnel first observed hydrilla in Loch Raven on 13 August 2003.

The reservoir is considered an eutrophic impoundment. The water is relatively hard (86 to 102 mg/L CaCO2) with moderate conductivity (213 to 222 micohms).

B118

Temperature/D.O. profiles show whenever the dissolved oxygen levels exceeded 5ppm, water temperatures were near or above 19oC, demonstrating the presence of an extremely marginal niche for coldwater fish species (Figures 1 & 2).

Fish

A total of 24 fish species were collected in the reservoir between 2001 and 2005 (Table 1). Largemouth bass were the most numerous gamefish species followed by chain pickerel, and bluegills were the most abundant forage fish.

Largemouth bass

Largemouth bass reproduction from 2001 through 2005 has been excellent with the exception of 2003, which showed a good hatch (Table 2). Consistent natural reproduction of largemouth bass has culminated in an excellent and diverse bass fishery. (Figure 3).

Examination of bass scales indicated that on average, Loch Raven largemouth reach legal size (30.5cm) during their 4th year of life, and reach 38.1cm (15”) during their 6th year of life. The oldest largemouth bass collected was in its 10th year of life and measured 52.6cm in length, and weighed 1,655g.

A total of 16 largemouth bass ranging from 30.5 to 45.5cm TL were collected in 2001 and 2002 and shipped to the CBL to be examined for mercury content. Information concerning the fish advisory for Loch Raven Reservoir is available on the MDE website at www.mde.state.md.us.

An electrofishing effort on 25 July 2002 collected 46 largemouth bass ranging in size from 180 to 526mm in TL that were tested for the largemouth bass virus. There was no evidence of the largemouth bass virus found in the Loch Raven bass (pers. comm. Trish Barbash, U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service). Recent electrofishing data is presented in Table 3.

Smallmouth bass

Smallmouth bass are much less numerous than largemouth. Natural reproduction has been limited (Table 2). There were not enough smallmouth collected for data analysis. Only 5 smallmouth bass were collected in 2004 by electrofishing and ranged in length from 258 to 367 in TL.

Chain pickerel

Sixty-one chain pickerel were collected during 2002, the mean CPUE60 was 47 (95% CI + 18). The mean PSD was 92 (95% CI + 9). The fish ranged in size from 25.2

B119 to 62.0cm TL (Figure 4). A total of 82 chain pickerel were collected in 2004 resulting in a CPUE60 of 45. Relative weights of chain pickerel were not computed, however, observations were that they were in fair condition.

Bluegill

Natural reproduction of bluegill has been excellent over the last five years. Electrofishing surveys conducted during 2004 resulted in a CPUE60 of 527. The population appears to be in balance, abundant, and stable.

Ten bluegill sunfish, ranging in length from 13.0 to 17.9cm TL were collected in 2001 and shipped to CBL to be examined for mercury content. Information concerning the fish advisory for Loch Raven Reservoir fish is available on the MDE website at www.mde.state.md.us.

Northern pike

Northern Pike are present in low numbers. Only 5 pike were collected in 2004. The fish ranged in length from 61.8 to 97.2cm in TL and represented 3 year classes. While no YOY were collected between 2001 and 2005, the variation in sizes and year classes indicate natural reproduction is occurring.

White perch

Spring collections of white perch indicate that the mean size of the spawning population has increased over the past 5 years (Table 4). They continue to be abundant in the reservoir, as evidenced by a recent high electrofishing CPUE60 of 533.

Discussion

The fish population in Loch Raven Reservoir is dominated by predatory species. Fish populations appear to be stable and are providing good recreational fishing (per comm. w/ Kevin McComas, Fishing Center Manager). Anglers may target a variety of species including white perch, which are showing no sign of stunting, despite their high abundance in the reservoir. As is typical for most Maryland impoundments, it is suggested that most reservoir anglers target the excellent population of largemouth bass.

The discovery of Hydrilla prompted fisheries personnel to document the existing fishery during 2004. A baseline fish assessment will later allow biologists to determine any impacts to the fishery as the hydrilla establishes in the reservoir.

Future management plans are to continue shoreline seining to document natural reproduction of target fish species; monitor the expansion of hydrilla; and conduct electrofishing surveys bi-annually to assess fish populations.

B120

Table 1. Common, scientific names, and general occurrence of fish species collected by seine and electrofishing in Loch Raven Reservoir, 2001-2005.

Common Name Scientific Name Occurrence Spotfin shiner Cyprinella spiloptera Common Common carp Cyprinus carpio Common Golden shiner Notemgonus crysoleucas Common Bluntnose minnow Pimephales notatus Common Fathead minnow Pimephales promelas Scarce White sucker Catostomus commersoni Common Yellow bullhead Ameiurus natalis Scarce Brown bullhead Ameiurus nebulosus Common Brown trout Salmo trutta Scarce Northern pike Esox lucius Scarce Chain pickerel Esox niger Abundant Banded killifish Fundulus diaphanus Common Mummichog Fundulus heteroclitus Scarce Eastern mosquitofish Gambusia holbrooki Common White perch Morone americana Abundant Redbreast sunfish Lepomis auritus Common Green sunfish Lepomis auritus Common Pumpkinseed sunfish Lepomis gibbosus Common Bluegill Lepomis macrochirus Abundant Smallmouth bass Micropterus dolomieui Common Largemouth bass Micropterus salmoides Abundant Black crappie Pomoxis nigromaculatus Common Tessellated darter Etheostoma olmstedi Common Yellow perch Perca flavescens Common

B121

Table. 2. Seining Indices (SI) for YOY Largemouth bass and Smallmouth bass collected by MD DNR in Loch Raven Reservoir, 2001-2005.

Species 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005

Largemouth Bass 7.0 10.5 3 11 15

Smallmouth Bass 1 1.7 0 0 .5

Table 3. Summary of largemouth bass data collected by MD DNR electrofishing surveys, Loch Raven Reservoir, 2002 and 2004.

Survey/Population Index 2002 2004

CPUE60 (stock) 94 90

CPUE60 (quality) 68 50

CPUE60 (preferred) 31 32 Pooled PSD % 72 56 (+8)

Pooled RSD38 % 33 36 (+7) Mean Wr 93 (+3) 93 (+1)

Table 4. Summary of size ranges and mean size of White Perch collected by MD DNR during Spring electrofishing surveys, 2000 and 2004.

Year Number of fish Range (mm) Mean (mm) 2000 109 110 – 260 180 2004 176 204 - 293 240

B122

14 30 12 25 10 20 8 15 6 10 D.O. (ppm) 4 2 5 Temperature (c) 0 0 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 Depth (m)

D.O. (ppm) Temperature (c)

Figure 1. Loch Raven Reservoir Dissolved Oxygen/Temperature Profile, Picnic/Golf Course site, August 19, 2003.

10 25 8 20 6 15 4 10

D.O. (ppm) 2 5 Temperature (c) 0 0 0 3.1 6.1 9.2 12.2 15.3 Depth (m)

D.O. (ppm) Temperature (c)

Figure 2. Loch Raven Reservoir Dissolved Oxygen/Temperature Profile, Picnic/Golf Course Site, September 23, 2003.

B123

Percent of Frequency 18 16 2002 = 172 14 2004 = 179 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 210 230 250 270290310330350 37039041 430450 0 470 490 510 530

Total length in 20 mm groupings

2002 2004

Figure 3. Length Frequency for Largemouth bass collected by MD DNR electrofishing survey from Loch Raven Reservoir, Spring 2002 and Spring 2004.

20

N=61 15

10 Percent 5

0 250 290 330 370 410 450 490 530 570 610 Total Length (mm) by 20 mm intervals

Figure 4. Length Frequency for Chain Pickerel collected by MD DNR electrofishing survey, Loch Raven Reservoir, Spring 2002.

B124

Little Seneca Lake

Introduction

Little Seneca Lake is a 204-hectare (505 acre) impoundment on Little Seneca Creek located within Black Hill Regional Park near Boyds, Maryland. The park and lake are administered by the Maryland National Capital Park and Planning Commission and the dam and water releases are controlled by the Washington Suburban Sanitary Commission. Gamefish populations in Little Seneca Lake have been managed and monitored by Maryland Department of Natural Resources Fisheries Service since the impoundment of the lake in 1984.

The largemouth bass population is the primary focus of sampling efforts and management. Electrofishing and seining surveys are conducted each year to assess the population structure of largemouth bass and other gamefish. The objective of this survey was to obtain fish population information on a previously surveyed impoundment to monitor for changes that may require immediate or future corrective fish management action.

Methods

Seining methods were like those described in the Methods section with several exceptions. A 4.5-meter seine with 64mm mesh was used for the survey. A single haul was conducted along nine meters of shoreline. Abundant aquatic vegetation (Hydrilla and Spiny Naiad) dictated a relatively short seine and haul length. Three to five sites were seined in various sections of the lake. Largemouth bass and sunfish young-of-year were counted, other species were noted and the results were recorded. Mean number of largemouth bass young of year / seine haul was reported in addition to calculating the seining index.

Random site electrofishing, described in the Methods section, was used to sample fish populations in the lake for the first time in 2004. Previous years’ electrofishing surveys were most like the composite electrofishing method. A 600 second fish community sample was collected in 2005 instead of the100 second sample noted in the Methods section

Results

Reproduction Survey

A shoreline seining survey was conducted on 17 August to assess largemouth bass reproductive success. Four seine hauls resulted in an average of 3 largemouth bass young-of-year (YOY)/30.5 meter of shoreline (Table 1). Largemouth bass reproduction was considered good based upon the seining index described in the Methods section.

B125

Stocking

Tiger muskie fingerlings were stocked annually in Little Seneca Lake during the years 2001-2005 except 2004. Tiger muskie fingerlings have been stocked in Little Seneca Lake since 1992, averaging 2000 fish/year.

Electrofishing Surveys

The fall electrofishing survey was conducted over two nights on 19 & 20 September 2005. Nine electrofishing stations were completed totaling 93.28 minutes. A single 600 second fish community sample was taken within the nine samples. The largemouth bass population and panfish were the focus of the survey. Water temperatures have historically been within the recommended range of 16-22° C in Little Seneca Lake during this survey (Betross and Willis 1988). The water temperature during the 2005 sample was 28° C. Hydrilla growth was noted as very dense in the 2005 survey.

The largemouth bass population is maintaining a desirable size structure with all size and age classes represented (Figure 1). The proportional stock density (PSD) value of 51 (Table 2) was within the recommended range of 40-60 for largemouth bass in a balanced population (Reynolds and Babb 1978). The pooled catch-per-unit-effort (CPUE) values for stock size (>200mm total length) largemouth bass were significantly lower than in past years (Table 3). Relative weights for largemouth bass were within the optimal range (95-100) for Little Seneca Lake (Figure 2) (Wege and Anderson 1978). Largemouth bass growth rates are comparable to nearby impoundments (Figure 3). Population indices appear in Table 2. Population data from previous years samples in Table 3 shows comparable values (pre-and post-random sampling).

The bluegill PSD of 22 is within the range of 20 to 50 % recommended for a prey species (Weithman, et al. 1979). Results of the fish community samples are presented in Tables 4 & 5. A similar number of species were captured in the fish community samples in 2004 and 2005. Redbreast and green sunfish populations may be expanding in the lake. The 2004 community samples did not capture green or redbreast sunfish. It should be noted that the 2005 sample was 600 seconds and the 2004 sample was only 200 seconds. No tiger muskies were captured during the fall survey. Tiger muskies are difficult to capture and exist at a low density in the lake. Other species observed during the survey are described in Table 6.

Discussion

Largemouth bass size distribution is desirable for anglers in Little Seneca Lake. The PSD results from the past three years are not significantly different at the 95% confidence level (Table 3). The CPUE data for 2005 is significantly lower than the 2004 data (Tables 2 & 7). Two factors may have biased the 2005 samples, warmer than normal water temperatures and extensive hydrilla coverage. Warm water temperatures

B126 are usually associated with lower fish densities available to electrofishing gear and the dense hydrilla made thorough fish collection a difficult task.

The sunfish community is diverse in Little Seneca Lake. Redbreast and green sunfish seem to be expanding in the lake. No large individuals of either species were captured during the survey. It may take several years to observe redbreast or green sunfish large enough to interest anglers. The bluegill population is providing an adequate fishery in Little Seneca Lake.

Management Recommendations

• Conduct electrofishing surveys to assess population structure of largemouth bass, panfish and tiger muskie populations.

• Assess largemouth bass reproductive success with seining survey.

• Stock 1,500-2,000 tiger muskie fingerlings per availability

B127

Table 1. Little Seneca Lake Largemouth Bass Recruitment Index, 2001-2005.

YOY/30.5 Mean Year m YOY/seine of shoreline haul

2001 16 4.6 2002 10 3.0 2003 8 2.5 2004 3 1.0 2005 7 2.0

Table 2. Largemouth Bass Pooled Population Parameters collected by MD DNR –Nine 600 sec electrofishing runs, Little Seneca Lake, Fall 2005.

Total Total Total PSD Total Species Number RSD 38 Substock Stock Quality (95% C.I.) CPUEHr CPUEHr CPUEHr CPUEHr Largemouth Bass 51 236 33 17 268 416 10 (35-67) Mean 236 33 17 269

(95% C.I.) (216-256) (8-58) (0-34) (242-296) Geometric Mean 235 23 24 267

Table 3. Little Seneca Lake Largemouth Bass Population Indices, 2001-2005.

Year PSD (95% C.I.) RSD38 Stock CPUE60

2001 68 (59-77) 6 169 2002 No Survey In 2002 2003 40 (30-50) 9 118 2004 42 (32-52) 7 170 2005 51 (35-67) 10 33

B128

Table 4. Fish community sampling by MD DNR Little Seneca Lake Fall 2004 – Two 100 second samples (AM=arithmetic mean, GM=geometric mean).

Substock Stock Quality Total Species N PSD CPUEHr GM CPUEHr GM CPUEHr GM CPUEHr GM AM AM AM AM Largemouth 20 25 301 298 76 66 19 38 375 367 bass Black 4 67 38 113 75 150 crappie Bluegill 123 1 526 955 1350 1244 19 38 4613 2232 Redear 3 -- -- 113 -- sunfish

Table 5. Fish community sampling by MD DNR Little Seneca Lake Fall 2005- A single 600 second sample.

Substock Stock Quality Total Species Number PSD CPUEHr CPUEHr CPUEHr CPUEHr Bluegill 194 22 564 600 132 1164 Largemouth bass 46 40 246 30 12 276 Green sunfish 19 15 36 78 12 114 Redbreast sunfish 12 0 18 54 0 72 Black crappie 1 0 6 0 0 6

B129

Table 6. List of fish species and relative abundance in Little Seneca Lake collected by MD DNR 2001- 2005.

Relative Common Name Scientific Name Abundance 2001 2003 2004 2005 Largemouth bass Micropterus salmoides A A A A Bluegill Lepomis machrochirus A A A A Redear sunfish Lepomis microlophus S S C S Green sunfish Lepomis cyanellus -- S S S Redbreast sunfish Lepomis auritus -- S S S Pumpkinseed Lepomis gibbosus -- R -- -- Black crappie Pomoxis nigromaculatus S A C S White crappie Pomoxis annularis -- R -- -- Tiger muskie Esox lucius X masquinongy S S S R Golden shiner Notemigonus crysoleucas -- S S S Koi Cyprinus carpio -- S -- S Bluntnose minnow Pimephales notatus -- R -- -- Eastern mosquitofish Gambusia affinis -- S -- -- Channel catfish Ictalurus punctatus R -- S -- Yellow bullhead Ameirus natalis S C C S Relative Abundance: A= Abundant; C= Common; S= Scarce; R= Rare

Table 7. Largemouth Bass and Bluegill Pooled Population Parameters collected by MD DNR –Ten 600 sec electrofishing runs, Little Seneca Lake, Fall 2004.

Total Total Total PSD RSD Total Species Number Substock Stock Quality (95% C.I.) 38 CPUEHr CPUEHr CPUEHr CPUEHr 10 Bluegill (Mean) 358 -- 1067 107 -- (4-16) Geometric Mean 980 105 42 Largemouth Bass 288 7 83 170 71 253 (32-52) Mean 83 169 70 252

(95% C.I.) (59-107) (130-208) (48-92) (214-290) Geometric Mean 77 162 63 247

B130

35

30

y 25

20 2004 15 2005

Percent Frequenc 10

5

0

0 50 50 0 0 100 150 200 2 30 350 400 45 500 Total Length by 25 mm interval

Figure 1. Length frequency distribution of largemouth bass collected by MD DNR in Little Seneca Lake, Fall 2004 & 2005.

100

80

60

40

20 Mean Relative Weight (Wr) Relative Weight Mean

0 150 175 200 225 250 275 300 325 350 375 400 425 450 475 500 Total Length by 25 mm interval

Figure 2. Mean relative weight (Wr) of largemouth Bass collected by MD DNR in Little Seneca Lake, Fall 2005.

B131

500 450 400 350 300 Lsen03 n=86 250 Cloppr04 n=113 200 Needwd04 n=61 150 100 Mean Total Length (mm) 50 0 123456789 Age (Years)

Figure 3. Largemouth bass length at age for fish collected by MD DNR in three Montgomery County, Maryland impoundments, Fall 2003 & 2004.

B132

Piney Run Reservoir

Introduction

Piney Run Reservoir is a 121-hectare impoundment located within Piney Run Park in Carroll County. It is owned and maintained by the Carroll County Department of Recreation and Parks. A good variety of sport fish species including striped bass and rainbow trout provide fishing opportunities. Boating is permitted, however boat propulsion is restricted to battery-powered electric motors. The lake has two boat ramps and several fishing docks.

Methods

Sampling methods and data analysis used were the same as previously described in Federal Aid Grant F-48-R-15, Study II. In addition, D-traps were set to target bluegill and redear sunfish. The D-traps measured 1.5m long, 0.6m wide and 0.6m high. The traps consist of enclosed 2.5cm octagon mesh with two throats 14cm in diameter leading to a catch or holding area. Thirteen traps were set overnight on 20, 21, and 22 August and 24, 25, and 26 Sept 2002. Largemouth bass and black crappie were collected in 2001 for mercury testing. The fish collected were divided into three size groups. The largemouth bass cm groupings were: 30.5-35.5, 35.6-40.5, and ≥40.6. The cm groups for black crappie were 15.2-20.0, 20.1-25.4, and ≥25.5. The fish were sent to the Chesapeake Biological Lab (CBL) for analysis. Largemouth bass >30.5cm were collected in 2005 and provided to the Maryland Department of Environment for tissue analysis pertaining to contaminants.

Results

Physical and Chemical

The primary tributary of the reservoir is Piney Run, a small feeder stream (mean width, 2m; mean depth, 0.2m). The shoreline extends approximately 6.3km, the average depth is 9m, and the maximum depth is 17m.

Piney Run contains various species of aquatic vegetation. The most abundant and troublesome is Hydrilla (Hydrilla verticillata), which was first documented in 1998. Other plants commonly found include spiny naiad (Najas minor), pondweed (Potamogeton spirillus), southern naiad (Najas guadalupensis), wild celery (Vallisneris american), common waterweed (Elodea Canadensis), water lilies (Nupar sp.), and duckweed (Lemna sp.)

B133

Fish

Twenty-four species of fish were collected from piney Run reservoir during the period 2001-2005 (Table 1). Largemouth bass were the dominant predator species followed by striped bass and tiger muskie. Bluegills remain the top forage fish. Yellow perch have become well established since their introduction in 1990. One smallmouth bass was observed during a fall electrofishing survey in 2002. This has been the only smallmouth bass recorded by fisheries personnel since 1985.

Largemouth bass

Natural reproduction of largemouth bass has been excellent during the period 2001-2005 (Table 2). Each summer, many largemouth YOY were collected, however, high mortalities were expected due to the high density of large predators in the reservoir.

Largemouth bass fall electrofishing CPUEs increased slightly over the five-year period (Table 3). The PSDs were all near or above the upper range of 30 to 70 preferred for predator fish species (Table 4) (Weithman 1979). A large percentage of the population was comprised of quality and preferred sized individuals (Figure 1). The mean relative weight (Wr) ranged from 98 to 100 indicting the fish were in great condition (Table 3). (Wege 1979). An electrofishing survey conducted on 10 Jun 2003 resulted in a higher CPUE, however the PSDs were similar to previous fall electrofishing efforts (Table 3).

Bluegill

Natural reproduction of bluegill has been described as fair over the past five years. Fall electrofishing catch rates have increased from 2001 to 2005 (Table 4). The PSDs remained unchanged at the upper end of the suggested range of 20-50 for a prey species, (Weithman ,1979) for a balanced population (Table 4).

Yellow perch

Yellow perch had an exceptional hatch this year with a mean of 200 YOY per seine haul. This is the largest hatch recorded since the discovery of yellow perch in 1990. The next largest hatch occurred in 1998 when an average of 48 YOY was recorded per seine haul. This species is undesirable in this reservoir because it is a predator species and tends to over-populate in small impoundments (Scott 1973). Natural hatches at this level have the potential to result in stunting or may compete with YOY largemouth bass. There has been no indication of stunting over the past years. In fact, the yellow perch have provided a quality fishing opportunity.

B134

Striped bass

No YOY striped bass were collected between 2001and 2005. The last documentation of natural reproduction was in 2000, when one YOY was collected. Interest from the Piney Run Park Manager to maintain the striped bass fishery will require stocking as required on an annual basis (Table 5).

Three striped bass (ranging in size from 555 to 787mm in TL) were collected during an early spring 2005 electrofishing survey. Scales taken from these fish and angler caught fish (9) were aged and were found to represent 5 year classes. The largest fish caught was 1016mm TL and weighed 12kg. The angler provided a single scale that was aged and estimated to be an 11-year-old fish. The fish was presumed naturally reproduced since there had been no stocking in 1995. The mean Wr of these fish was 82. This represented an improvement from a mean Wr of 77 recorded in 2000.

Tiger muskie

Tiger muskies were first stocked in Piney Run in 1996. Surplus muskies were stocked to exert predation upon the large 1996 year-class of yellow perch. A stocking of 1,200 fall fingerling tiger muskie, distributed by boat, took place in 2005 (Table 5). Most angler catches of tiger muskie are incidental while fishing for other species. Only one legal sized (914mm) muskie was reported caught by an angler in 2005 (per comm. w/J. Gronaw, Piney Run Park).

Redear sunfish

During the seining effort in 2003, a single redear sunfish was recovered in the seine haul, confirming natural reproduction in the reservoir. Adult sunfish collected at the end of their 1st through 3rd years of life have mean lengths of 88, 147, and 178mm TL, respectively. The D-trapping effort in 2002 for redear sunfish indicated good numbers, as evidenced by a CPUE of 1.6 per trap/day.

Discussion

The sampling bias caused by using electrofishing for sunfish populations gear is recognized (it tends to underestimate the number of smaller individuals in a population). This appears to have been the case with redear sunfish while attempting to estimate their relative abundance. A high density of rooted aquatic vegetation also hinders sunfish collection with electrofishing methods. The density of hydrilla was lower during the 2005 fall electrofishing, resulting in a higher catch rate of sunfish.

Fish stocking of adult rainbow trout, tiger muskie, and channel catfish should continue. Although these fish species have not been targeted by fish surveys, angler

B135 desire remains intense and catch of rainbow trout and channel catfish is high (per comm. w/J. Gronaw, Piney Run Park). Future stocking of striped bass will depend upon availability from state hatchery and/or commercial sources. Future tiger muskies will likely be available only as fall fingerlings averaging 20cm TL. Advanced fingerlings (72.5cm TL) acquired in 2001 and 2002, will no longer be available. A cooperative effort between Fisheries Service and Carroll County Government should continue in order to ensure annual stocking of advanced fingerling channel catfish. The prospects for obtaining fingerling striped bass appear limited, and may require Carroll County to purchase striped bass fingerlings.

On average, anglers caught eight striped bass per day during mid summer (per. comm. w/J. Gronaw, Piney Run Park). Angler caught fish ranged in length between 400 and 440mm in TL. The fish are thought to be the result of the 400,000 fry stocked in 2003 (Table 4). This year class should reach legal size (457mm TL) and provide a nice fishery for anglers in 2006.

Management Recommendations

• Mark or tag the striped bass that are stocked by MD DNR to determine the success of the stocked fish compared to those purchased by Carroll County.

• Fish various sized gillnets to sample the striped bass population.

• Conduct shoreline seining to assess natural reproduction of largemouth bass.

• Conduct bi-annual fall electrofishing surveys to assess largemouth bass and sunfish populations.

B136

Table 1. Common, scientific names, and general occurrence of fish species collected by MD DNR electrofishing and seining surveys, Piney Run Reservoir, 2001-2005.

Common Name Scientific Name Occurrence Central stoneroller Campostoma anomalum Common Common carp Cyprinus carpio Common Golden shiner Notemgonus crysoleucas Common Spottail shiner Notropis hudsonius Common Bluntnose minnow Pimephales notatus Common Creek chub Semotilus atromaculatus Common White sucker Catostomus commersoni Common Brown bullhead Ameiurus nebulosus Common Channel catfish Ictalurus punctatus Common Tiger muskie Exos masquinongy x Exos lucius Common Rainbow trout Oncorhynchus mykiss Common Banded killifish Fundulus diaphanus Common Eastern mosquitofish Gambusia holbrooki Rare Striped bass Morone Saxatilis Common Redbreast sunfish Lepomis auritus Common Green sunfish Lepomis auritus Common Pumpkinseed sunfish Lepomis gibbosus Common Bluegill Lepomis macrochirus Abundant Redear sunfish Lepomis micropterus Common Smallmouth bass Micropterus dolomieui Rare 2 Largemouth bass Micropterus salmoides Abundant Black crappie Pomoxis nigromaculatus Common Tessellated darter Etheostoma olmstedi Common Yellow perch Perca flavescens Abundant 1Abundance key: rare 1-5 individuals, common 5-100 individuals, abundant >100 individuals. 2only one fish observed (2002).

B137

Table. 2. Seining Indices (SI) for YOY Largemouth bass collected by MD DNR in Piney Run Reservoir, 2001-2005.

Year Seining Index 2001 7 2002 22 2003 27 2004 30 2005 6

Table 3. Summary of largemouth bass data collected by MD DNR electrofishing surveys, Piney Run Reservoir, 2001-2005.

Survey/Population 2001 2002 2003 2005 Index

CPUE60 (substock) 34 - 24 92

CPUE60 (stock) 47 54 115 62

CPUE60 (quality) 39 36 89 37 Pooled PSD 82(+11) 66 78 60(+14)

Pooled RSD38 31(+13) 37 53 42(+14) Mean Wr 100 99 - 98

Table 4. Summary of bluegill data collected by MD DNR fall electrofishing surveys, Piney Run Reservoir, 2001 and 2005.

Survey/Population 2001 2005 Index

CPUE60 (stock) 101 285

CPUE60 (quality) 58 145

CPUE60 (preferred) 13 27 Pooled PSD 50 51

B138

Table 5. Summary of fish stocked in Piney Run Reservoir by MD DNR, 2001 through 2005.

Year Striped Bass Tiger Musky Channel Catfish Redear Sunfish 2001 1,593 367 275 50,000 2002 2,091 340 1,000 0 2003 400,000 1,085 500 0 2004 5,500 0 944 0 2005 1,050 300 116 0

12 100% 90% 10 80% 8 70% 60% 6 50% 40% 4 30% 20%

Length Frequency 2 10% 0 0%

00 00 2 250 300 350 4 450 500

Total Length in 25 mm grouping

Figure 1. Length frequency of largemouth bass collected by MD DNR electrofishing survey, Piney Run Reservoir, 2005.

B139

Prettyboy Reservoir

Introduction

Prettyboy Reservoir, a 600 hectare (1,500 acre) impoundment, is located in the Piedmont region of central Maryland. The reservoir is owned and maintained by the City of Baltimore Department of Public Works. A variety of sport fish species provide angling opportunities. Fishing is permitted from the shoreline and only for boats that possess a seasonal Baltimore City Reservoir boat permit. Boat propulsion is limited to rowing, paddling, or battery powered motors. The only boat ramp facility and boat- mooring site on the reservoir is located on Spook Hill Road near Kidds Schoolhouse Road. Additional watershed regulations may be found in an annual publication produced by the City of Baltimore Department of Public Works entitled “Pocket Guide to Boating and Fishing: Reservoirs.”

Methods

Water quality data was obtained from surface water using a HACH Water Ecology Kit (Model FF-1A), YSI Oxygen Meter (Model 57) and a Solu Bridge conductivity meter (Type R8-5).

Shoreline seining, used to evaluate natural reproduction of fish species was accomplished with a 9.1m long by 1.2m deep seine with a 0.3cm square mesh. Seine hauls were made during the day. An average of 11 seining sites were selected annually from a number of fixed locations. A seining index was calculated based upon the number of young-of-year (YOY) collected from 30.5m (100 ft) of shoreline. The following index was utilized for categorizing the reproduction success of largemouth bass and smallmouth bass.

Number of YOY per 30.5m (100 ft) of Seining Index shoreline 0 to 0.50 Poor .51 to 2.50 Fair 2.51 to 5.50 Good 5.51 and greater Excellent

A 4.9m (16 ft) Smith-Root electrofishing boat equipped with a 5 Kw electrical generator was used for the electrofishing sampling. The electrical output was generally set between 8 and 12 amps, with a frequency of 60 pulses/second direct current. Electrofishing Catch-Per-Unit-Effort (CPUE60) rates were based upon actual shocking time. Survey sampling and data analysis methods are the same as previously described in USFWS Federal Aid Grant F-48-R-15, Study II.

B140

Results

Physical and Chemical

The Gunpowder Falls (mean width 18.4m [50 ft]) is the primary tributary of Prettyboy Reservoir. The lake shoreline extends approximately 74km (46 mi), the average depth is 9.3m (30.6 ft), and the maximum depth is 39.3m (129 ft). Water quality parameters have remained consistent over the last 5 years (Table 1).

Five types of rooted submerged aquatic vegetation were observed between 2001 and 2005. They include: Southern naiad (Najas quadalupensis), Spiny naiad (Najas minor), Slender naiad (Najas sp.), curly pondweed (Potamogeton crispus), and an unidentified pondweed (Potamogeton sp.).

Fish

MD DNR personnel collected sixteen fish species between 2001-2005 (Table 2). Largemouth bass were the most dominant predator species. Other common predatory species found included smallmouth bass and white perch. The most abundant panfish species was the bluegill.

Black bass

Largemouth bass reproduction has been considered good or excellent over the five-year period (2001 – 2005), with one exception, 2004 (Table 3). Smallmouth bass reproduction has been poor to fair over the past 5 years (Table 3).

Relative weight (Wr) was determined for largemouth bass collected during 2002 and 2003. A pooled Wr of 93, indicated the fish were in good condition. The Wr was similar to that recorded in 1998. The smallmouth bass Wr was lower in 2005 (86), however quality size smallmouth bass (>280mm) showed a Wr of 93, showing larger smallmouth bass are in good condition.

Walleye

Spring electrofishing efforts in 2003 and 2005 resulted in the collection of four and five fish, respectively. Fish collected in 2003 ranged from 475 to 568mm in TL and had a Wr of 83. Fish collected in 2005 ranged in size from 528 to 558mm in TL and had a Wr of 87.

Initial stocking of walleye fry and fingerlings have showed little success. Recent stocking was conducted using pre-spawned adult fish captured from Liberty Reservoir

B141

(Table 4). A three-night electrofishing survey in the fall of 2003 failed to recover any YOY walleye, indicating little or no natural reproduction.

White perch

Spring electrofishing surveys of white perch indicated no signs of stunting and that the mean size of the spawning population has remained uniform (Table 5). White perch continue to be abundant in the reservoir as evidenced by a 2004 electrofishing CPUE60 of 585.

Discussion

Due to limited resources, Fisheries personnel did not have an opportunity to survey the black bass in Prettyboy reservoir in the fall of 2004 to confirm the poor hatch indicated by the seining index (Table 3). Several variables could have explained the absence of bass during the seine haul effort. Reservoir levels were elevated creating many woody debris obstacles. Also, an injured biologist was replaced with an inexperienced volunteer for the seining survey.

Walleye sampling efforts in 2004 and 2005 were insufficient to accurately determine successful reproduction. Although stocking efforts have yet to establish a self- sustaining walleye population, there are some indications that additional stocking efforts should continue. The walleye collected in past surveys exhibited good physical condition.

Management Recommendations

• Conduct spring and fall electrofishing surveys in 2006 to evaluate the walleye population.

• Consider stocking walleye fingerlings if available. Conduct an assessment in 2007.

• Conduct spring and fall electrofishing surveys to evaluate black bass populations.

B142

Table 1. Water quality parameters collected by MD DNR during seining surveys, Prettyboy Reservoir, 2001-2005.

Date Temp (C) D.O. pH Alkalinity Hardness Conductivity 8/9/2001 8.2 34.2 59.8 152 7/1/2002 30.5 8.1 8.0 34.2 68.4 - 8/11/2003 28.1 8.1 8.0 51.3 68.4 139 8/19/2004 29.4 8.8 - - - - 8/7/2005 31.7 10.2 9.0 34.2 59.8 145

Table 2. Common and scientific names and general occurrence of species collected by MD-DNR seine hauls and electrofishing surveys, Prettyboy Reservoir, 2001- 2005.

Common Name Scientific Name Abundance1 Spotfin shiner Cyprinella spiloptera Abundant Common carp Cyprinus carpio Common Spottail shiner Notropis hudsonius Abundant Bluntnose minnow Pimephales notatus Abundant White sucker Catostomus commersoni Common Northern hog sucker Hypentelium nigricans Common Channel catfish Ictalurus punctatus Rare White perch Morone Americana Abundant Redbreast sunfish Lepomis auritus Common Green sunfish Lepomis cyanellus Rare Bluegill Lepomis macrochirus Abundant Smallmouth bass Micropterus dolomieui Common Largemouth bass Micropterus salmoides Abundant Black crappie Pomoxis nigromaculatus Common Yellow perch Perca flavescens Common Walleye Sander vitreum Common 1Abundance key: rare 1-5 individuals, common 5-100 individuals, abundant >100 individuals

B143

Table 3. Seining index (SI) for young of year largemouth and smallmouth bass collected by MD DNR seine hauls, Prettyboy Reservoir, 2001-2005.

Largemouth Bass Smallmouth Bass Year SI SI 2001 7.2 0.9 2002 11.8 1.2 2003 8.1 0.2 2004 0 0 2005 4.3 1.0

Table 4. Summary of walleye stocked by MD DNR, Prettyboy Reservoir, 1997-2001.

Year Number stocked Size of walleye 1997 9,300 fingerling 1998 8,500 fingerling 1998 97 pre-spawn adults 1999 49 pre-spawn adults 2001 148 pre-spawn adults

Table 5. Summary of Prettyboy Reservoir white perch size ranges and mean sizes collected by MD DNR electrofishing surveys, 1997- 1999 and 2004.

Length Range Year Number of Fish Mean TL (mm) (mm) 1997 579 147 - 257 202 1998 154 167 – 266 228 1999 492 155 – 260 217 2004 158 183 - 245 218

B144

Rocky Gorge Reservoir

Introduction

Rocky Gorge Reservoir is an 800 acre impoundment managed by Washington Suburban Sanitary Commission (WSSC) as a drinking water supply for the Washington Metropolitan Area. Recreational fishing is encouraged but requires a permit in addition to a current Maryland freshwater fishing license. Boats are permitted, however, gasoline- powered motors are prohibited on the lake.

Gamefish species present include largemouth bass, smallmouth bass, walleye, northern pike, tiger muskie, channel catfish, striped bass, yellow and white perch, and black and white crappie. Forage species, in order of observed abundance, include various sunfish species, gizzard shad, spottail shiner, white and redhorse suckers. Brown and yellow bullhead catfish, redear sunfish, green sunfish, banded killifish and tessellated darters have also been noted in samples. Regurgitated white perch, gizzard shad and crayfish are frequently found in live tanks after holding gamefish. In recent years an increase in suckers has been noted. These fish may be an important forage species for the tiger muskie and northern pike that are widely believed to prefer fusiforme prey species (Margenau, Rasmussen and Kampa 1996). Maryland Department of Natural Resources augments gamefish populations with periodic stocking of hatchery fish.

Fall nighttime electrofishing surveys are typically used to assess adult finfish populations. Effective electrofisher settings at Rocky Gorge have been 60 or 90 pulses per second and a range of 250 to 1000 volts, DC. Additional sampling has occurred in the spring when walleye brood are collected for hatchery propagation and then returned to Rocky Gorge. Young of year seine hauls have been conducted in the summer to document natural reproduction of black bass.

Methods

Sampling was based on methods proposed by Bonar et al. (2000). Catch per unit effort (CPUEhr= fish/hour), size structure, growth and condition were estimated from samples. Surveys were scheduled to occur after water temperatures dropped below 15oC to preserve continuity with previous annual surveys. Sample site selection was based upon a systematic method of site allocation (Nielsen and Johnson 1983; Snedecor and Cochran 1968; Miranda et al. 1996). The shoreline was divided into 109 stations (400m in length) using Garmin desktop mapping software. Sites were consecutively numbered 1 through 4 within each of 109 sampling units. A number between 1 and 4 was then randomly picked to determine the station to be sampled within each unit. A sample size of 27 was chosen as a reasonable amount of effort that could be completed in a 2-3 night survey. Station coordinates were downloaded to Garmin Map 76 handheld units to determine location on the water. Sampling started at the first station coordinate

B145 reached and continued for 600 seconds. Actual start/stop waypoints were entered and uploaded to a PC to accurately determine linear sample distance. All size groups of largemouth bass and other game species of moderate or low density were targeted for collection during the 600 second samples. Eleven stations were randomly chosen for full species community sampling. All species and sizes were collected during the first 100 seconds of electrofishing at these stations. In previous surveys white perch and gizzard shad were poorly represented in the sub samples so they were also targeted in some of the full 600 second samples.

Relative abundance indices were the means of CPUEhr across all stations. Both arithmetic and geometric mean estimates were made. Geometric means were based on the natural log of CPUEhr +1. Log-transformation served to stabilize the variance and provide more precise indices. Mean CPUEhr was further calculated for various length categories as proposed by Andersen (1980). Length frequencies of 25mm (TL) length groups were compared to previous studies. Proportional stock densities (PSD) with 95% confidence intervals (Gustafson 1988) were used to describe population size structure in terms of angling quality.

Results and Discussion

No fish were stocked in Rocky Gorge in 2005 due to unavailability of species requested. A list of gamefish stocked since 2001 appear in Table 1.

Fall sampling was conducted on the evenings of November 1, 2, and November 8. Water levels in Rocky Gorge were 12-14 feet below full pool, which reduced the number of sites that could be completed from twenty-seven to twenty five. Very little submerged aquatic vegetation (SAV) was present in the lake in the summer and none was observed in the fall. Due to high sample variance or lack of representation of some species in past surveys, 100-second samples were increased from six in 2003 to eleven in 2005.

Largemouth Bass

A total of 443 largemouth bass were collected during the three night survey. Lengths ranged from 64 - 533mm. Total CPUEhr rebounded in 2005 from the previous two surveys (Table 2) and was significantly higher than 2003 (P=0.00004). Catch rates for all size groups showed a similar increase. The coefficient of variation (CV) for the arithmetic mean was 58%. This was good for surveys of this type but CVs of 20% or less are desirable for optimum sensitivity to detecting changes in indices (King 1995).

Length frequency of fish collected was similar to previous years for most length groups but showed a marked decrease in fish below 100mm in length and a slight increase in fish greater than 400mm (Figure 1).

B146

Proportional stock density (PSD) for largemouth bass in 2005 was 59% (CI ± 6%, Table 3). Based on the overlap of confidence intervals, this was not significantly different from either the 2001 or 2003. Since 1991, PSD values have been within the 30- 70 percent guidelines proposed by Weithman et al. (1979) as desirable for predator species.

Relative weight (Wr) was calculated for bass in 25mm length groups. Mean weighted Wr was 93%, just slightly below the optimal criteria of 95 – 100% set by Wege & Anderson (1978), but well above the underweight value of 85% suggested by Kohler and Hubert (1993).

Northern Pike and Tiger Muskie

Catch rates for both northern pike and tiger muskie using current gear and methods have varied from year to year. Nineteen northern pike and two tiger muskie were collected during the fall 2005 survey. This produced an overall CPUEhr for northern pike of 5 and 0.5 for tiger muskie. PSD for northern pike was 84 (CI ± 24). High PSD values have been fairly consistent in Rocky Gorge with the exception of 2003 when smaller pike were found in the grass beds. Although PSD for tiger muskie was 50% (CI ± 136) this figure was based on the only 2 fish collected

Black and White crappie

A total of 148 black crappie between 95-222mm in length were collected in 2005. Catch rates for black crappie have fluctuated greatly over the years (Table 2). Water temperature, reservoir level, fish behavior and electrofishing gear may all play a part in sampling success for these fish. Although the 2005 sample showed a significant decline in total CPUEhr from 2003(P=0.0004), catch rates were still significantly higher than in 2001 (P=0.005). Substock size fish (<130mm) dominated the 2003 survey while stock size fish (>130mm) were more common in 2005. Age analysis confirmed the strong presence of the 2003 cohort in the 2005 survey. The reason for wide fluctuations in small crappie CPUEhr is not clear, but McClane (1965) suggests that black crappie seek vegetated areas. 2003 saw large grass beds in the coves and many small black crappie. No grass beds were observed during the fall 2005 sample and few substock black crappie were collected. McClane also states that crappie are very cyclic and will show several years of good recruitment followed by the same number of years with depressed numbers. Future surveys will have to address whether the fluctuations are due to a mechanical response or natural factors .

Interestingly, white crappie were more common in the 2005 fall sample. One hundred and eighty eight fish were collected for the highest total CPUEhr recorded for white crappie. In previous surveys, low numbers of stock size fish (>130mm) were reflected in high PSD values. In 2005, this size group was the most abundant. As a result, PSD fell to within the recommended range for the first time since 1991.

B147

White and Yellow Perch

White perch CPUEhr increased slightly from 2003 and significantly (P=0.01) from 2001. No quality white perch (>200mm) were found in the 2003 survey but the fall 2005 sample showed good number of larger fish. White perch PSD for 2005 was 38% (CI ±13) (Table 4), and fell within the recommended range of 20-50% (Wege & Anderson 1978).

Although the total CPUEhr for yellow perch appeared to increase significantly from the 2003 survey (P=0.02), the number of samples for perch in 2005 almost doubled allowing for the inclusion of fish over a wider range of habitats than in 2003. No significant increase in catch rates from 2001 was noted (P=0.12). Yellow perch PSD was 43% (CI ±14). Previous surveys showed quality perch were consistent enough in Rocky Gorge to keep PSD within the recommended range of 20-50% (Weithman et al. 1979).

Bluegill

Total CPUEhr for bluegill sunfish in 2005 was similar to 2003 (Table 2). Catch rates for both 2003 and 2005 were significantly higher than 2001 (P=0.004, 0.001). This was probably due to low sample numbers in 2001. Only 2 samples for bluegill were conducted in 2001. Eleven were completed in 2005. The increase in number of samples allowed sampling to occur over many different habitat types. For the last two surveys, PSD values have remained below the recommended range of 20-50% as described by Weithman et al. (1979) and stock size fish have dominated the population. Although the high number of stock size fish in 2003 should have translated into more quality fish in subsequent surveys only a slight increase in larger fish was noted in 2005. Overall relative weight of bluegill in Rocky Gorge was 97%.

Miscellaneous species from the 100 second samples

Gizzard shad was the most numerous forage fish in 2005 sample with a total CPUEhr of 124 (CI ±126). Sampling in 2001 and 2003 did not target gizzard shad, so indices were not comparable. The majority of fish were stock size (180-280mm), a convenient length for consumption by top predators.

Spottail shiner ranged in length from 41 - 111mm and had a total CPUEhr of 85 (CI ±109). Other species collected were channel catfish, brown bullhead, carp, green sunfish and redear sunfish.

Redear and green sunfish were present but not numerous in fall samples. Average length of redear collected was 145mm. Average length of green sunfish was 103mm. No quality green sunfish were found in 2005.

B148

Smallmouth Bass and Walleye

Although smallmouth bass were stocked in Rocky Gorge as recently as 2004, few show up in fall surveys. Only three smallmouth bass were collected in 2005. All three fish were over 400mm in length and weighed more than 400g each.

No walleye were collected in the fall of 2005 and only one was collected in 2003. Many walleye were collected in the spring of 2001, the result of several samples that specifically targeted walleye. Spring collection of brood walleye for hatchery propagation in 2005 resulted in 9 walleye. Water temperatures fluctuated greatly in late March and early April making prediction of spawning times, and collection, difficult.

Natural Reproduction of Bass

Seven sites were sampled using a 9m haul seine in July 2005 to assess the presence of young-of-year bass. Natural reproduction was considered excellent, averaging 13.5 fish per 3.5m of shoreline. No young-of-year smallmouth bass were collected in seine hauls. Other species noted during the seine survey were bluegill, redear, green sunfish and banded killifish. Very little submerged aquatic vegetation was noted, only small amounts around Scotts Cove and near the dam.

Conclusions

Water level, status of SAV and water temperature all play a role in the effectiveness of population assessments in Rocky Gorge. In the fall of 2003 Rocky Gorge was at full pool and many coves with shallow habitat contained thick hydrilla beds. Juvenile fish of some species, such as bluegill and black crappie, were more prevalent in surveys when these conditions existed. Other species appeared to be more susceptible to electrofishing gear when water levels were low such as largemouth bass, yellow perch and white crappie.

Current sampling techniques for several target species produced sufficient information to compare indices between years. Coefficient of variation for largemouth bass, northern pike, bluegill, and even white perch were not at the optimal level of 20% but variances were low enough to suggest that these species were being fairly represented in samples. Coefficient of variations for other species such as crappie, yellow perch and gizzard shad remained high even though sample numbers increased in 2005.

Alternative sampling techniques should be applied when collecting data on striped bass, northern pike and tiger muskie. Current sample design produced few fish of each species making an accurate analysis of their abundance and distribution unreliable. Walleye collection in the fall has also been difficult. Sampling for walleye in the spring

B149 appears to be more efficient since fish congregate in higher numbers for pre and post spawn activities on shallow points.

Although some gamefish were poorly represented in fall surveys, tiger muskie, walleye, smallmouth bass, largemouth bass, crappie, perch and striped bass, anglers still target these species successfully. Several smallmouth bass over 4 lbs in weight were caught by angers and reported to reservoir personnel in August as part of an ongoing angling tournament conducted by WSSC. Several large walleye, striped bass and tiger muskie were also recorded. Smaller fish are not included in the tournament so the record only verifies citation fish caught.

B150

Table 1. Species stocked in Rocky Gorge Reservoir, 2001-2005. Numbers are combined for all years and include both fingerling and fry.

Species Number Fish Northern pike 12,000 Smallmouth bass 15,500 Striped bass 1,033,700 Tiger muskie 22,250 Walleye 150,000

B151

Table 2. Number of fish, CPUE (#fish/hour) of sub-stock, stock and quality size groups with total CPUE and PSD for fish caught in Rocky Gorge Reservoir during electrofishing surveys, 2001-2005 Samples were pooled by year.

Year Na Substock Stockb Qualityc Totald PSD Largemouth bass 2001 366 14 52 34 66 65 2003 218 15 31 16 46 52 2005 443 25 89 53 114 59 Smallmouth bass 2001 7 0.2 1.1 0.5 1.3 50 2003 0 - - - - - 2005 0 - - - - - Bluegill 2001 80 10 63 14 73 22 2003 291 126 1628 54 1746 3 2005 495 0 1620 151 1620 10 Walleye (spring) 2001 101 0.1 14 10 14 73 (fall) 2003 1 6 0 0 6 0 (fall) 2005 ------Northern pike 2001 21 0 3.6 2.7 3.6 76 2003 15 1 2.5 1 3.5 36 2005 19 - 5 4 5 84 Tiger muskie 2001 9 1.1 0.4 0.4 1.5 2003 9 1 .6 .2 1.8 33 2005 2 - .25 .25 .5 Black crappie 2001 11 1.2 .7 .4 1.9 50 2003 59 264 90 0 354 0 2005 148 5 32 3 42 8 White crappie 2001 11 0 1.9 1.9 1.9 100 2003 6 12 24 18 36 75 2004 188 2 32 16 61 33 Yellow perch 2001 85 57 13 3 70 23 2003 7 24 18 6 42 33 2005 112 321 46 20 367 43 White perch 2001 11 0 2 1.3 2 65 2003 8 108 180 0 288 0 2005 90 3.6 42 17 59 38 Na = Total number of fish collected Stockb = Largemouth >200mm, Smallmouth >180mm, Bluegill >80mm, Walleye >250mm, Northern Pike >350mm, Crappie and Perch >130mm Qualityc = Largemouth >300mm, Smallmouth >280mm, Bluegill >150mm, Walleye >380mm, Northern Pike >530mm, Crappie and Perch >200mm Totald = Avg. CPUE/site for all size groups

B152

Table 3. Number of fish (N), size range, PSD with 95% confidence interval, arithmetic mean (AM) of sample CPUE and geometric means (GM) of CPUEhr with 95% confidence intervals (CI) and coefficient of variation (CV) of the AM for species collected in 25 600-second electrofishing samples in Rocky Gorge Reservoir, 2005.

Size Species N PSD% CI + AM CI + CV % GM CL Range Largemouth bass 443 64-533 59 6 114 27 58 99 79-124 Smallmouth bass 3 418-460 100 - .7 .8 276 1.3 1-2 Northern pike 19 357-691 84 24 5 28 29 2.9 2-5 Black crappie 148 95-222 8 5 42 33 188 11 5-24 White crappie 188 70-338 33 7 61 32 148 23 12-44

Table 4. Number of fish (N), size range, PSD with 95% confidence interval, arithmetic mean (AM) sample CPUE and geometric means (GM) of CPUEhr with 95% confidence intervals (CI) and coefficient of variation (CV) of the AM for species collected in eleven 100-second electrofishing samples in Rocky Gorge Reservoir, 2005.

Size PSD Species N CI + AM CI + CV % GM CL Range % Bluegill 100 30-188 10 3 1620 825 76 1264 763-2094 White perch 90 87-245 38 13 58 29 99 35 19-67 Yellow perch 118 70-315 43 14 364 335 136 163 47-568 Gizzard shad 179 125-358 10 6 124 136 213 21 7-69 Spottail shiner 2 150 0 12 19.5 3 0.5-24

B153

25

2001 2003 2005 20

15

10

Frequency (%)

5

0

Figure100 1. Length 150 frequency 200 of Largemouth 250 bass 300in 50 mm 350length groups, 400 450 500 550 Rocky Gorge 2001-2005. Length (mm)

Figure 1. Length frequency of largemouth bass in 50mm length groups, Rocky Gorge 2001 – 2005.

B154

Smithville Lake

Introduction

Smithville Lake is a 43 acre Fishery Management Area (FMA) located in southeastern Caroline County, Maryland. As an FMA, the opportunity to manage the impoundment exclusively for fishing exists, thus eliminating conflicts that often occur in multi-use situations. Purchased in 1955 from the Smithville Farm Machinery Company, the lake was created by impounding the water of a tributary to Marshyhope creek. The Maryland Department of Natural Resources (DNR), Fisheries Service, Inland Fisheries Division, owns and manages the lake to provide a public angling resource. Fiscal resources for this work and maintenance of the grounds come from fishing license sales and the Federal Aid and Restoration Fund (Dingell-Johnson Act).

Due to its long narrow shape, Smithville Lake does not appear as large as the 43 surface acres it measures. Smithville’s maximum depth is 3m, while the average is roughly 1m. The upper third of the lake is quite shallow with gradual drop-offs, while the lower two thirds of the lake has steeper banks with sharp drop-offs, particularly the western shoreline. The lower two-thirds of Smithville Lake contains outstanding fish habitat. A severe ice storm in the early 1990's snapped off treetops that fell into the lake, providing excellent fish habitat. Fish also inhabit the abundant rooted aquatic vegetation.

Methods

An assessment of the fisheries resources in Smithville Lake was conducted on October 4, 2001. Using a SR-18 Smith-Root boat mounted electrofishing unit, a 3437 second effort was completed which encompassed the entire periphery of the lower two thirds of the lake. Extreme upper areas of the lake were unable to be sampled due to the abundance of filamentous algae and shallow depth. All largemouth bass were collected, measured (mm TL), and weighed (g). Mean lengths and weights were calculated using only adult fish >150mm (Reynolds and Babb 1978). Scale samples were collected from bass behind the left pectoral fin, and below the lateral line for ageing (Carlander 1982). The scales were dried and pressed into thin slides of cellulose acetate using a Ann Arbor Roller PressTM. Biologists read scale impressions to determine the age of each fish.

Population or community parameters that were addressed included: length (mm TL), weight (g), growth, relative abundance and size and age structure. Condition of the stock was determined by examining length-weight relationships such as relative weight (Wr) (Wege and Anderson 1978). Stock structure was addressed by computing the index of proportional stock density (PSD) and relative stock density (RSD) (Weithman et al. 1979). Relative abundance was determined by calculating the catch per unit of effort statistic (CPUE) and reported as fish per hour. Largemouth bass mean total lengths from 1998 and 2001 were statistically compared using a two-tailed T-test for significance. Confidence limits were set at 95% and significance was denoted by a P-value of < 0.05.

B155

A representative subsample of bluegill was collected and measured (mm TL). Chain pickerel and black crappie were collected and measured (mm TL). Population specific data were recorded for fundamental analysis of bass and bluegill stocks. Relative abundance of all other species encountered were recorded and reported in Table 1.

Results

In 2001, a total of 130 bass were collected during the electrofishing effort. Young-of-year (YOY) bass comprised 11.5% of the total sample (Figure 1). The most abundant cohorts in the collection were 2+ and 3+ fish (Figure 1). Catch per-unit-effort for largemouth bass was 136 bass/hour. The two-tailed T-test showed a significant difference (P=0.02) in mean total lengths between the samples from 1998 and 2001. Mean relative weights for 25mm length groups were above 95% (Wege and Anderson 1978). Largemouth bass population structure, as measured by PSD was 66%±7, not significantly different than 74%±4 reported in 1998.

The desirable range of PSD for prey is 20 to 50% where the management objective is good bass fishing from waters containing mainly largemouth bass and bluegills (Weithman et al. 1979). In 1998, mean bluegill PSD was 70%, well above the targeted range. In 2001, the bluegill PSD decreased to 65%. Several bluegill of “preferred” length (> 200mm) were collected in the 2001 sample (Figure 2).

Based on sampling with electrofishing gear, chain pickerel were very abundant in Smithville Lake. Thirty-one chain pickerel ranging in size from 143mm to 600mm were encountered in the sampling effort. Chain pickerel were frequently seen escaping the electrical field however, which indicates that this may not be the best gear for sampling this species. Many black crappie were collected (mean TL 250mm), however no small crappie (<90mm) were collected. Ninety-seven percent of crappie collected were of “quality” (>200mm) size (Wege and Anderson 1978).

Conclusions/Management Recommendations

Smithville Lake is supporting a high quality fishery for largemouth bass, bluegill and black crappie. In 1998, the data suggested that the lake was moving towards an out of balance phase by having a high abundance of bass and low abundance of stock sized bluegills. It appears that the corrective stocking of bluegill from 1998-2001 increased the forage base, and prevented serious balance problems. Smithville Lake is currently the best overall impoundment fishery in the eastern region of Maryland. Bass in the lake have a balanced age and size structure that should result in good quantity and quality of bass caught by anglers. However, Smithville Lake’s clear water (secchi depth >2.5m) and abundant aquatics make angling difficult during certain times of year. Coupled with its “remote” location, these factors likely keep fishing mortality for bass lower than other public impoundments. In the near future this should be verified through a creel census

B156 project of eastern region impoundments. The abundant age 1+, 2+ and 3+ fish should ensure good fishing for the future as long as the forage base doesn’t become depleted. In addition, outstanding numbers of quality-sized bluegill and black crappie are readily available to panfish anglers.

To maintain the current quality fishery the following management actions should be taken in Fall 2006.

• Monitor largemouth bass population numbers, condition, and bluegill and bass population structure by boat electrofishing.

• Stock 10,000 bluegill sunfish fingerlings if needed.

B157

Table 1. Common and scientific names and general occurrence of species sampled in Smithville Lake, Caroline County, 2001.

Common Name Scientific Name 2001 Occurrence Largemouth bass Micropterus salmoides Common Bluegill Lepomis macrochirus Common Chain pickerel Esox niger Common Creek chubsucker Erimyzon oblongus Scarce Redear sunfish Lepomis microlophus Scarce Black crappie Pomoxis nigromaculatus Common American eel Anguilla rostrata Scarce Tessellated darter Etheostoma nigrum Common

B158

35

30

25

20

15

Frequency 10

5

0

0123456789 Age

Figure 1. Age-frequency distribution of largemouth bass collected from Smithville Lake, Caroline County, 2001.

50

40

30

20 Frequency

10

0 25 50 75 100 125 150 175 200 225 250 Total length (mm) by 25 mm interval

Figure 2. Length-frequency distribution of bluegill sunfish collected from Smithville Lake, Caroline County, 2001.

B159

Stemmers Run Reservoir

Introduction

Stemmers Run Reservoir, also known as Pearce Creek, is a 90 acre impoundment located in Cecil County. The lake is part of the Chesapeake and Delaware Canal Lands. The Department of the Army has granted the use of the site to the Maryland Department of Natural Resources since 1968 and until 2018. The Maryland Department of Natural Resources (DNR), Fisheries Service, Inland Fisheries Division, manages the lake to provide a public angling resource. Fiscal resources for this work and maintenance of the grounds come from fishing license sales and the Federal Aid and Restoration Fund (Dingell-Johnson Act).

The lake can be characterized as broad, shallow and turbid. The maximum depth is only two meters and almost half of the shoreline is covered in Phragmites communis, an exotic invasive species of reed that is frequently found in the Chesapeake Bay wetlands. Fish habitat is limited, little submerged aquatic vegetation is present and there is nominal woody debris. Areas where cover is present are usually too shallow to support large concentrations of fish. Over the past five years, in an effort to enhance habitat, several fish structures have been placed throughout the middle section of the reservoir, where depths are adequate. The quality of the bluegill-bass fishery in Stemmers Run has been quite variable over time. Highly variable recruitment of both species was noted in all previous reports, which makes management difficult. Intensive supplemental stocking of bass, bluegill, channel catfish and fathead minnows have been completed in the past.

Methods

An assessment of the fisheries resources in Stemmers Run Reservoir was conducted on September 9, 2001. Using a SR-18 Smith-Root boat mounted electrofishing unit, a 2227 second effort was completed which encompassed the entire periphery of the middle lake. Another assessment was completed on October 17, 2005. This assessment encompassed the entire middle lake, but did so using five 600 second samples to allow for confidence limits on bass abundance estimates. Upper and lower areas of the lake were unable to be sampled due to shallow water depth. All largemouth bass were collected, measured (mm TL), and weighed (g). Mean lengths and weights were calculated using only adult fish >150mm (Reynolds and Babb 1978). Scale samples were collected from bass behind the left pectoral fin, and below the lateral line for ageing (Carlander 1982). The scales were dried and pressed into thin slides of cellulose acetate using a Ann Arbor Roller PressTM. Biologists read the scale impressions to determine the age of each fish.

A representative subsample of bluegill was collected and measured (mm TL). Chain pickerel and crappie (black and white) were collected and measured (mm TL).

B160

Population specific data were recorded for fundamental analysis of bass and bluegill stocks.

Population or community parameters that were addressed included: length (mm TL), weight (g), growth, relative abundance and size and age structure. Condition of the stock was determined by examining length-weight relationships such as relative weight (Wr) (Wege and Anderson 1978). Stock structure was addressed by computing the index of proportional stock density (PSD) and relative stock density (RSD) (Weithman et al. 1979). Relative abundance was determined by calculating the catch per-unit-effort statistic (CPUE) and reported as fish per hour.

Results and Discussion

The results for both surveys were different, but very good. Largemouth bass PSD did not significantly change (83%±9 in 2001 and 85%±12 in 2005), nor did the CPUE >300mm (75 bass/hr in 2001 and 72±19 bass/hr in 2005). Peak abundance of bass shifted towards larger numbers over the four-year period (Figure 1). Several bass collected in 2001 were in poor condition. In 2005, all were found to be in excellent condition. Young-of-year bass comprised 21% of the total catch in 2001, but only 4% in 2005. Inconsistent largemouth bass reproduction has been noted in previous reports, and may be the reason for low numbers of small bass caught in 2005.

The desirable range of PSD for prey is 20 to 50% where the management objective is good bass fishing from impoundments containing mainly largemouth bass and bluegills (Weithman et al. 1979). PSD for bluegill in 2001 was 2%±1 and 1%±1 in 2005. Although no larger bluegills were collected, several larger individuals were seen in the survey, after the bluegill samples were collected.

Stemmers Run continues to support a good crappie fishery, and the populations have changed little over the four-year period. The crappie population is evenly divided in number between white and black crappie. Both collections had larger white crappie than black crappie (Figures 2 and 3).

Conclusions/Management Recommendations

At the current time, Stemmers Run is supporting an outstanding bass and crappie fishery. It has a tremendous number of large bass and crappies available to anglers. Unlike the 2001 survey, the bass collected in 2005 were in excellent physical condition, quelling the fear that the forage base was inadequate. It appears the bass population has experienced poor recruitment over the past few years. Stocking of fingerling bass will likely be needed in 2006 to help preserve the future of this fishery.

Stemmers Run has historically supported an outstanding crappie fishery. In fact, past managers instituted “trophy crappie regulations”, which created a minimum legal

B161 size for crappie (black and white) of 10 inches (250mm). The regulations have been removed, since there was no data suggesting that the regulation resulted in improved angling for crappies. Removing all black crappie collected from the Reservoir and stocking them elsewhere may benefit the white crappie population structure and growth potential. The data suggest that white crappie seem to be growing very well. It is widely documented that white crappie tend to grow better and out-compete black crappie in highly turbid waters (Rohde et al. 1994).

In order to understand the status of the current fishery and attempt to enhance it, the following management actions should be taken during Spring 2006.

• Stock 10,000 largemouth bass fingerlings.

• Consider the introduction of a rooted aquatic plant such as Potamogeton sp. in order to utilize excess nutrients, reduce turbidity and provide habitat.

B162 18 16

14 12

10 8

Frequency 6 4 2

0

25 75 125 175 225 275 325 375 425 475 525

Total length by 25 mm interval

2005 2001

Figure 1. Length-frequency distribution of largemouth bass collected from electrofishing surveys in 2001 and 2005 from Stemmers Run Reservoir, Cecil County, 2001 and 2004.

16 14

12

10

8 6

Frequency 4

2 0

5 5 5 5 2 75 25 75 75 1 1 225 27 32 3 42 Total length by 25 mm interval

Black White

Figure 2. Length-frequency distribution of black and white crappie collected from electrofishing surveys from Stemmers Run Reservoir, Cecil County, 2001.

B163

25

20

15

10 Frequency 5

0

5 5 5 5 5 5 25 7 12 175 22 275 32 37 42 Total length by 25 mm interval

Black White

Figure 3. Length-frequency distribution of black and white crappie collected from electrofishing surveys from Stemmers Run Reservoir, Cecil County, 2005.

B164

Tuckahoe Lake

Introduction

Tuckahoe Lake is a 35 acre impoundment on the borders of Queen Anne and Caroline Counties. The impoundment and surrounding land area is owned by the State of Maryland and managed by Maryland Department of Natural Resources Forest and Park Service. The fisheries resources in the lake are managed by Inland Fisheries. Maximum depth is 7 feet near the dam with the remainder of the lake being a rather consistent 5 to 6 feet. The banks of the lake drop off quickly to the bottom and then the depth remains constant. The upper portion of Tuckahoe Lake is a vast channelized flooded woodland, where boating becomes extremely difficult due to woody debris. Remaining stumps, “root balls” and undercut banks are the common habitats utilized by bass, bluegill, black crappie and chain pickerel. The remainder of the lake has limited rooted aquatic vegetation near the shoreline, providing additional littoral habitat; particularly for juveniles.

The watershed is primarily agricultural, mostly row crops with some scattered chicken farms. Many of the former tributary streams have been channelized (or “ditched”) to allow better drainage of the surrounding lands. The increased drainage carries excess nutrients and sediment into the impoundment (Primrose 1997). Despite these issues, water quality problems have not been noted in the previous Fisheries reports. Results of the 2000 electrofishing survey indicated that Tuckahoe Lake was supporting a good bass-bluegill fishery.

Methods

Assessments of the fisheries resources in Tuckahoe Lake were conducted on August 23, 2001 and October 18, 2005. In 2001, a 1,671 second effort was completed around the entire periphery of the lake with a SR-18 Smith-Root boat mounted electrofishing unit. In 2005, three 600 second samples were conducted around the entire periphery of the lake. Upper areas of the lake were not sampled due to the abundance of woody debris and rooted vegetation. All largemouth bass were collected, measured (mm TL), and weighed (g). Mean lengths and weights were calculated using only adult fish >150mm (Reynolds and Babb 1978). Scale samples were collected from bass behind the left pectoral fin, and below the lateral line for ageing (Carlander 1982). The scales were dried and pressed into thin slides of cellulose acetate using an Ann Arbor Roller PressTM. Biologists read scale impressions to determine the age of each fish.

A representative subsample of bluegill was collected and measured in 2001(mm TL). In 2005, all bluegill encountered during the first 600 second sample were collected and measured. Chain pickerel and black crappie were collected and measured (mm TL). Population specific data were recorded for fundamental analysis of bass and bluegill stocks.

B165

Population or community parameters that were addressed included: length (mm TL), weight (g), growth, relative abundance and size and age structure. Condition of the stock was determined by examining relative weight (Wr) (Wege and Anderson 1978). Stock structure was addressed by computing the index of proportional stock density (PSD) and relative stock density (RSD) (Weithman et al. 1979). Relative abundance was determined by calculating the catch per unit of effort statistic (CPUE) and reported as fish per hour.

Results and Discussion

In 2001, a total of 53 bass were collected during the electrofishing effort. Young- of-year (YOY) bass comprised 13% of the total sample. In 2005, a total of 143 bass were collected, but the overall size and age structure of the bass population was not much different than 2001 (Figures 1 and 2). Bass CPUE >305mm rose considerably from 58 bass/hr in 2001 to 129 ±49 bass/hr in 2005. Mean relative weight for all 25mm length groups was above acceptable levels of 95%, with few exceptions (Wege and Anderson 1978). Other condition indices were also within normal ranges (Carlander 1977; Wege and Anderson 1978). Bass population structure, as measured by PSD was not significantly different between years (2001 PSD 65%±15 and 2005 PSD 64% ±9).

The desirable range of PSD for prey is 20 to 50% where the management objective is good bass fishing from waters containing mainly largemouth bass and bluegill (Weithman et al. 1979). Bluegill sunfish PSDs were not significantly different between years. PSD was 35±9% in 2001, and 39±17% in 2005. External anomalies (lesions) were noted on some (7/136, 5%) bluegill collected in 2001. No anomalies were seen in 2005.

Based on sampling with electrofishing gear, chain pickerel were fairly abundant both years in Tuckahoe Lake. Chain pickerel ranging in length from 106mm to 540mm were encountered in the sampling efforts.

Twenty-eight black crappie were collected in 2001, 54 were collected in 2005. No small crappie (<90mm) were collected. Over 80% of crappie collected were of “quality” (>200mm) size (Wege and Anderson 1978).

In 2005, four redear sunfish were collected. Redear sunfish were stocked in 2001 to provide additional angling opportunities and bolster forage populations. Although few in number, the fish collected ranged from 170-270mm in length.

Conclusions/Management Recommendations

Tuckahoe Lake is one of the most heavily fished impoundments in Maryland. Its close proximity to urban areas, ample shoreline access and location within a State Park

B166 are what make it so popular. In spite of heavy use, Tuckahoe Lake is supporting a good, balanced fishery for largemouth bass and bluegill. Bass size and age structure is well distributed for both years, likely a result of stable reproduction and acceptable mortality rates. Although CPUE was considerably higher in 2005, the timing of the survey was later in the fall, when one would expect better catch rates. Nevertheless, bass fishing should be excellent in Tuckahoe Lake. There are quality bluegill available to anglers, and the large redear should be a welcome bonus. More redear should be stocked in the future to fully maximize their niche; specifically, 10,000 redear sunfish should be stocked into Tuckahoe Lake during 2006.

B167

25

20

15 Frequency 10

5

0 25 50 75 100 125 150 175 200 225 250 275 300 325 350 375 400 425 450 475 500 525 550 Total length by 25 mm interval

2005 2001

Figure 1. Length-frequency distribution of largemouth bass collected from Tuckahoe Lake, 2001 and 2005.

20

18

16

14

12

10 Frequency 8

6

4

2

0 012345678 Age

2005 2001

Figure 2. Age-frequency distribution of largemouth bass collected from Tuckahoe Lake, 2001 and 2005.

B168

Unicorn Lake

Introduction

Unicorn Lake is a 45 acre Fishery Management Area (FMA) located in northeastern Queen Anne’s County, Maryland. As an FMA, the opportunity to manage the impoundment exclusively for fishing exists, thus eliminating conflicts that often occur in multi-use situations. The lake has existed for more than 145 years and was formed when a dam was constructed for a woolen mill circa 1860. Unicorn Lake has a maximum depth of eight feet and a mean depth of roughly four feet. The upper third of the lake is extremely shallow, where the mean depth is less than one foot. Unicorn Branch is the major tributary to the lake and provides coldwater year round. The tributary supports a small brown trout population. The shoreline is about 70% forested and provides some woody debris that serves as excellent fish habitat in the lake. Fish attractors constructed with discarded Christmas trees have been placed in the lower half of the lake near the dam breast to augment existing habitat. Some aquatic vegetation is present in the form of lilies and spatterdock during late spring and summer. A fish ladder was installed at the dam to allow the passage of anadromous fish species, principally alosids, into 14.5 miles of habitat upstream of the lake.

Methods

Comprehensive fisheries assessments of Unicorn Lake were completed in 2001, 2004 and 2005 using a SR-18 boat mounted electrofishing unit set to deliver DC current at 30 pulses-per-second. In 2005, a series of two 600 second samples were completed, rather than one large effort, in accordance to new sampling protocols described in the general methods section. Extreme upper areas of the pond were not sampled due to the abundance of aquatic vegetation and shallow depth. All largemouth bass were collected, measured (mm TL), and weighed (g). Scale samples were taken from bass behind the left pectoral fin, and below the lateral line for ageing (Carlander 1982). The scales were dried and pressed into thin slides of cellulose acetate using an Ann Arbor Roller PressTM. Biologists read the scale impressions to determine the age of each fish.

Population or community parameters that were addressed included: length (mm TL), weight (g), growth, relative abundance and size and age structure. Condition of the stock was determined by examining relative weight (Wr) (Wege and Anderson 1978). Stock structure was addressed by computing the index of proportional stock density (PSD) (Weithman et al. 1979). Confidence intervals (95%) for PSD values were computed using the tables developed by Gustafson (1988). Relative abundance was determined by calculating the catch per unit of effort statistic (CPUE) and reported as fish per hour.

A representative subsample of bluegill was collected and measured (mm TL). In 2005, all bluegill encountered during the first 600 second electrofishing sample were

B169 collected and measured. Chain pickerel and black crappie were collected and measured (mm TL). Population specific data were recorded for fundamental analysis of bass and bluegill stocks.

Results and Discussion

Overall results of the 2001 and 2004 electrofishing survey were very poor. Very few bass were collected, many of which were young-of-year (YOY). Bass proportional stock density (PSD) and mean relative weight (Wr) were not calculated due to the extremely small sample size of adult bass. The 2005 sample was quite different. Over twice the number of bass were collected, and CPUE more than doubled. Quality-sized bass (>380mm) and YOY bass were most abundant (Figure 1). Several bass exceeded 500mm and 2kg in weight.

The desirable range of PSD for prey is 20 to 50% where the management objective is good bass fishing from waters containing mainly largemouth bass and bluegills (Weithman et al. 1979). PSDs for bluegills over the five-year period have been over 80%, well above the targeted range. YOY bluegills were frequently observed in all sample years. Quality-sized (>160mm) bluegills were commonly encountered.

Results using electrofishing gear showed chain pickerel are an abundant sportfish in Unicorn Lake. Each year, chain pickerel with lengths of 300-400mm were found to be abundant during each sampling effort. Limited numbers of black crappie were collected during the 2001 and 2004 surveys, but none were collected in 2005.

Conclusions/Management Recommendations

It would have been unwise to base major management decisions on the limited number of fish caught in 2001 or 2004. Very clear (secchi depths of >2.5 m) lake conditions made daytime electrofishing very unproductive and subsequently resulted in very poor samples. A night electrofishing survey was conducted very late in November 2005 (water temperature 13.5 Cº) that resulted in better numbers of adult bass that were not observed in earlier surveys. The bass-bluegill populations appear to be fairly balanced, however the lack of intermediate bluegills is cause for concern. Although bluegill reproduction has generally been very good, stocking bluegills over the five-year period has failed to improve the numbers of intermediate sized bluegills. Establishing a golden shiner population could be very beneficial by providing bass with a large forage species. A shift in the forage base may allow for better recruitment of bluegill into the intermediate range. Migratory alosids appear to have had little impact on resident species.

To maintain the current quality fishery the following management actions should be taken:

B170

• Resample Unicorn Lake in 2008 at night for bass/bluegill populations.

• Stock 10,000 golden shiners annually (if available) until a reproducing population becomes established.

B171

10

9

8

7

6

5 Frequency 4

3

2

1

0 25 50 75 100 125 150 175 200 225 250 275 300 325 350 375 400 425 450 475 500 525 550 575 Total length by 25mm interval

Figure 1. Length-frequency distribution of largemouth bass collected during electrofishing surveys of Unicorn Lake, Queen Annes County, Fall 2005 (N=23).

B172

Urieville Lake

Introduction

Urieville Lake is a shallow, eutrophic 14.2 hectare impoundment in Kent County. The lake was initially built in colonial times when two tributaries to Morgan Creek were impounded. When first created, Urieville Lake had fairly steep bottom topography, with two distinct, flooded creek channels that were 2-3m deep in some places. Over its existence, intense agricultural practices, deforestation, and development in its watershed have caused excess sediment and nutrient loading into the lake. Over time, the lake had silted-in so badly that the channels were virtually non-existent, and most of the lake had become extremely shallow. The abundant nitrogen and phosphorus inputs into the shallow lake created excellent conditions for aquatic plant growth. The aquatic vegetation has become so abundant, that by June, most of the lake is covered with some sort of plant growth. Extensive aquatic vegetative growth has impaired both angling and management activities. Mechanical harvesting and application of herbicides were performed in the early 1990’s with limited benefits. It was then realized that a new approach would be needed to restore the lake.

In 1996, a comprehensive “Urieville Lake Diagnostic Study” was completed to examine current resources and problems and to investigate possible restoration alternatives. The report concluded that nutrient and sediment loading was limiting the fisheries potential of the lake. The study suggested alternatives to help address the problems concerning sediment, nutrients and aquatic plants, however, budget limitations prohibited implementation of any of the proposed actions. In the end, the consensus of many agencies supported draining the lake as the most cost effective option.

In the fall of 1998, there was an attempt to drain Urieville Lake. The reclamation plan was to drain the lake, allow bottom sediments to freeze, dry out and be reseeded with rye in the spring. The objective was to allow for natural compaction of the sediments that would retard new aquatic plant growth when refilled. The lake draining process was halted when it was discovered that over 2000 cubic yards of sediment had been discharged into the stream below the dam. Officials then issued an order to pump the sediment from below the dam back over the spillway and into the lake. Subsequent to this action, the lake remains in a degraded state and has experienced sporadic fish kills attributed to low dissolved oxygen, over the last three years. Since the 1998 reclamation attempt, Urieville Lake has been re-stocked with bass and bluegill to augment the lackluster fish populations.

Methods

An assessment of the fisheries resources in Urieville Lake was conducted on April 9 2002. Using a SR-16 Smith-Root boat mounted electrofishing unit, a 1,500 second effort was completed which encompassed the entire periphery of the lower two

B173 thirds of the pond. Extreme upper areas of the pond were not sampled due to the abundance of aquatic weeds and shallow depth. All largemouth bass were collected, measured (mm TL), and weighed (g). Mean lengths and weights were calculated using only adult fish >150mm (Reynolds and Babb 1978). Scale samples were collected from bass behind the left pectoral fin, and below the lateral line for ageing (Carlander 1982). The scales were dried and pressed into thin slides of cellulose acetate using a Ann Arbor Roller PressTM. Biologists read the scale impressions to determine the age of each fish.

Population or community parameters that were addressed included: length (mm TL), weight (g), growth, relative abundance and size and age structure. Condition of the stock was determined by examining length-weight relationships such as relative weight (Wr) (Wege and Anderson 1978). Stock structure was addressed by computing the index of proportional stock density (PSD) and relative stock density (RSD) (Weithman et al. 1979). Relative abundance was determined by calculating the catch per unit of effort statistic (CPUE) and reported as fish per hour.

A representative subsample of bluegill was collected and measured (mm TL). Chain pickerel and black crappie were collected and measured (mm TL). Population specific data were recorded for fundamental analysis of bass and bluegill stocks. Relative abundance of all other species encountered were recorded and listed in Table 1.

Results

In 2002, a total of 16 bass were collected during the electrofishing effort. Age 1+ bass comprised 12.5% of the total sample, which either indicates successful reproduction the previous year, or survival of some of the fingerling bass stocked in 2001. The most abundant cohort in the collection was three-year-old fish (Figure 1). Catch per unit effort of bass was 38 bass/hr, much lower than similar impoundments on the Eastern Shore that routinely exceed 100 bass/hr. Mean relative weight for all 25mm length groups were above acceptable levels of 95%, with one exception (Wege and Anderson 1978).

The desirable range of PSD for prey is 20 to 50% where the management objective is good bass fishing from water containing mainly largemouth bass and bluegills (Weithman et al. 1979). Bluegill PSD was 35%±15, within the targeted range, however overall abundance appeared to be fairly low. In contrast, chain pickerel were commonly encountered (N=15), apparently thriving in the weed-choked conditions found in Urieville Lake.

Conclusions/Management Recommendations

Urieville Lake is supporting a limited fishery for largemouth bass and a fair fishery for bluegill. There are small numbers of quality sized bass (>300m) and bluegill (>150mm) available to anglers willing to fish in the tough, weedy conditions (Figures 2 and 3). Additionally, there is a good chance anglers will encounter large chain pickerel

B174 while fishing for bass or bluegill. A lake of this size should produce bass and bluegill in greater numbers and size. Undoubtedly the 1998 reclamation activities caused a major drop in fish abundance in the lake. Recent stocking has helped to re-establish fishable bass and bluegill populations. However, Urieville’s water quality and habitat issues continue to limit overall fish abundance. Unless the nutrient and sediment problems are solved, this impoundment will continue to produce limited fishing opportunities.

To understand the status of the current fishery and attempt to enhance it , the importance of a major restoration project on Urieville Lake should be stressed to the Chester River Watershed Restoration Action Strategy Team.

B175

Table 1. Common and scientific names, and general occurrence of species sampled in Urieville Lake, Spring 2002.

Common Name Scientific Name General Occurrence Largemouth bass Micropterus salmoides Common Bluegill Lepomis macrochirus Common Black crappie Pomoxis nigromaculatus Scarce Yellow perch Perca flavescens Scarce Creek chubsucker Erimyzon oblongus Common Chain pickerel Esox niger Abundant Pumpkinseed sunfish Lepomis gibbosus Common American eel Anguilla rostrata Scarce Brown bullhead Ameiurus nebulosus Scarce Tessellated darter Etheostoma olmstedi Scarce

10

8

6

4

Frequency 2

0

1+ 2+ 3+ 4+ 5+ 6+

Age (years)

Figure 1. Age-frequency distribution of largemouth bass collected from Urieville Lake, 2002.

B176

5

4

3

2

Frequency 1

0

50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450

Total Length by 25 mm Interval

Figure 2. Length-frequency distribution of largemouth bass collected from Urieville Lake, 2002.

25

20

15

10

Frequency 5

0

25 50 75 100 125 150 175 200 225 250

Total Length by 25 mm Interval

Figure 3. Length-frequency distribution of bluegill sunfish collected from Urieville Lake, 2002.

B177

Wye Mills Lake

Introduction

Wye Mills Lake is one of the largest impoundments on the Eastern Shore. Maximum depth is 8 ft, mean depth is 4 ft and it covers roughly 50 surface acres. The upper third of the lake is quite shallow with gradual drop-offs, the lower two thirds of the lake has steeper banks with sharp drop-offs. The lower two thirds of Wye Mills Lake contains outstanding fish habitat such as downed trees and undercut roots on the shorelines. Sinking Christmas tree “fish attractors” along the concrete dam breast augmented fish habitat to provide fishing opportunities from shore. Fiscal resources for maintenance of the grounds and fish management derive from fishing license sales and the Federal Aid and Restoration Fund (Dingell-Johnson Act).

The lake’s outflow is consistent with the uppermost tidal portion of the Wye River. Undesirable fish species such as gizzard shad and carp have been introduced into the lake by anglers and have become quite abundant. Their presence in this impoundment has been noted in previous reports as detrimental to maintaining a balanced bluegill-bass fishery. Excessive siltation resulting from years of extensive agriculture and recently constructed housing developments in the watershed is also impacting fish management efforts. An expanding resident waterfowl flock has increased nutrient input as well. The combination of excess nutrients and abundant fish biomass has caused fish kills in past years. A major fish kill resulting from low dissolved oxygen occurred from September 23 to September 27, 2004. Follow-up assessments were conducted in November 2004 and October 2005 to determine the kill’s effects, and status of sportfish populations.

Methods

Comprehensive fisheries assessments of Wye Mills Lake were completed on August 23 and November 8, 2004, and September 29 and October 4, 2005. Using a SR- 18 boat mounted electrofishing unit set to deliver DC current at 30 pulses-per-second, an electrofishing survey of the entire periphery of the lower two thirds of the pond was conducted. Extreme upper areas of the pond were not sampled due to the abundance of aquatic vegetation and shallow depth. In 2005, the lake was sampled using multiple 600- second stations in order to calculate confidence limits. All largemouth bass were collected, measured (mm TL), and weighed (g). Scale samples were collected from bass behind the left pectoral fin, and below the lateral line for ageing (Carlander 1982). The scales were dried and pressed into thin slides of cellulose acetate using an Ann Arbor Roller PressTM. Biologists read scale impressions to determine the age of each fish.

Population or community parameters that were addressed included: length (mm TL), weight (g), growth, relative abundance and size and age structure. Relative

B178 abundance was determined by calculating the catch per unit of effort statistic (CPUE) and reported as fish per hour. Differences in bass size structure were analyzed using a K-S test (http://www.physics.csbsju.edu/stats/KS-test, 2/15/05). Significant differences were determined using a P-value of 0.05.

A representative subsample of 100 bluegill was collected in 2004 and measured (mm TL). All bluegill encountered in the first 600 second sample were collected and measured (mm TL) in 2005. All chain pickerel and black crappie encountered were collected and measured (mm TL). Population specific data were recorded for fundamental analysis of bass and bluegill stocks.

Results and Discussion

Species collected during surveys pre and post fish kill from Wye Mills Lake are shown in Table 1.

Results of the summer survey in 2004 indicated a balanced bass bluegill fishery. Historically, Wye Mills Lake has produced higher than average numbers of large bass, and 2004 was no exception (Figure 1). Several bass exceeding 2000g (4.4 pounds) were collected, however, small young-of year (YOY) bass were most frequently encountered (Figure 1). Data collected after the fish kill suggests that the kill affected the entire bass population evenly. There were no significant changes in the length-frequency distributions (P=0.80), however, many of the larger bass observed in the summer survey were absent in the fall survey. This was expected, since larger fish are more sensitive to low dissolved oxygen events. Oddly, CPUE for bass >200mm only dropped from 56 to 54 bass per hour in 2004. This may be explained by the abbreviated electrofishing effort undertaken in the post-kill survey. The survey was not as intense, and may have skipped areas with poor bass habitat, thereby influencing catch rates. Therefore, 2005 CPUE for bass >200mm of 41±12 bass/hour may better represent bass abundance. Relatively even numbers of bass ages 0-3 were present, while lower numbers of older bass (and subsequently larger) were represented (Figure 2).

The bluegill sunfish population reacted similarly to the mortality event in 2004. Frequency of larger individuals decreased in the post-kill survey, but overall, there was no significant change in bluegill length-frequency distributions (p=0.62) (Figure 3). Although scales were not taken from bluegill in 2005 and age verified, it appears that the abundant YOY bluegill observed in 2004 are growing quickly. One positive result of the kill was the dramatic decrease in the abundance of gizzard shad in the lake. Their overabundance likely played a major role in the fish kill and has continually hindered effective fisheries management in the lake to date.

B179

Conclusions/Management Recommendations

The reduction in fisheries resources of Wye Mills Lake following the fish kill is expected to be short lived. Many small bass and bluegill survived the event, and should grow quickly, given the current conditions. Additional stocking of largemouth bass should be completed if they are available. To enhance the quality of the fishery, 5,000 fingerling largemouth bass should be stocked during Summer 2006.

B180

Table 1. Common and scientific names and general occurrence of species collected during surveys pre and post fish kill from Wye Mills Lake, Queen Annes County, 2004.

Common Name Scientific Name Pre Kill Post Kill Largemouth bass Micropterus salmoides Abundant Common Bluegill Lepomis macrochirus Abundant Common Black crappie Pomoxis nigromaculatus Common Rare American eel Anguilla rostrata Common Common White perch Morone americana Rare Absent Gizzard shad Dorosoma cepedianum Abundant Absent Common carp Cyprinus carpio Common Common Pumpkinseed Lepomis gibbosus Rare Rare Golden shiner Notemigonus crysoleucas Abundant Common

30 25 20 15 10 Frequency 5 0

5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 25 75 12 17 22 27 32 37 42 47 52 Total length by 25 mm interval

Pre Kill Post Kill

Figure 1. Length-frequency distribution of largemouth bass collected from electrofishing surveys pre (N=96) and post (N=36) fish kill from Wye Mills Lake, Queen Annes County, 2004.

B181

7

6

5

4

3

Frequency 2

1

0

01234567

Age

Figure 2. Age-frequency distribution of largemouth bass collected from from electrofishing surveys (N=24) Wye Mills Lake, Queen Annes County, 2005.

25 20 15 10

Frequency 5 0

0 0 0 0 10 30 50 70 90 1 3 50 70 90 1 3 1 1 1 1 1 2 2 Total length by 25 mm interval

Pre Kill Post Kill

Figure 3. Length-frequency distribution of bluegill sunfish collected from electrofishing surveys pre (N=122) and post (N=74) fish kill from Wye Mills Lake, Queen Annes County, 2004.

B182

Study II. Management of Freshwater Impoundments

Literature Cited

Anderson, R.O. 1980. Proportional Stock Density (PSD) and Relative Weight (Wr): interpretive indices for fish populations and communities. Pages 27-33 in S. Gloss and B. Shupp, editors. Practical Fisheries Management: more with less in the 1980’s. Proceedings of the 1st Annual Workshop of the New York Chapter American Fisheries Society. New York Cooperative Fishery Research Unit, Ithaca, New York, USA.

Anderson, R.O. and A.S. Weithman. 1978. The concept of balance for coolwater fish populations. Pages 371-381 in R.L. Kendall, editor. Selected coolwater fishes of North America, Special Publication 11, North American Fisheries Society Bethesda, Maryland, USA.

Betross, E.A. and D.W. Willis. 1988. Seasonal patterns in sampling data for largemouth bass and bluegills in a northern Great Plains impoundment. Prairie Naturalist 20, 193-202.

Bonar, Scott A., B.D. Bolding, M. Divens. 2000. Standard Fish Sampling Guidelines for Washington State Ponds and Lakes. Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife Fish Program.

Bulkey, R. V. 1975. Chemical and physical effects on the centrarchid basses. Pp 286 -295 In Black Bass Biology and Management, R. H. Stroud and H. Clepper Eds. Sport Fishing Institute, Wash. DC.

Carlander, K.D. 1977. Handbook of Freshwater Fishery Biology, Vol.2. The Iowa State University Press, Ames, Iowa. 431 pp.

Carlander, K. D. 1982. Standard intercepts for calculating lengths from scale measurements for some Centrarchid and Percid fishes. Transactions of the American Fisheries Society. 111:332-336.

Castro, M.S., E.N. McLaughlin, S.L. Davis, and R.P. Morgan II. 2001. Total mercury concentrations in lakes and fish of western Maryland, USA. Appalachian Laboratory, Univ. of MD Center for Environmental Science, Frostburg, MD.

Davis R.M. 1978. F-28-R. Life History and Management of Walleye and Yellow Perch of Deep Creek Lake, Maryland. Maryland Department of Natural Resources, Annapolis, MD.

B183

Davis R.M. and Pavol K.W. 1985. Bloomington Lake Fisheries Management Plan, Maryland Department of Natural Resources, Tidewater Administration, Annapolis, MD, 29pp.

Elser, H.J., 1962 Growth Rates of Maryland Freshwater Fish. Natural Resources Institute, University of Maryland, Ref. No. 63-13, 39 pp.

Enamait, E. 1985. Management of Maryland’s major rivers and streams. Federal Aid Project, 48-R, Maryland Department of Natural Resources, Annapolis, MD.

Enamait, E. 1999. Management of Maryland’s major rivers and streams. Federal Aid Project, 48-R-9, Maryland Department of Natural Resources, Annapolis, MD.

Enamait, E. 2004. Survey and Management of Maryland’s Freshwater Resources, Management of Maryland’s Impoundment Fisheries. USFWS Federal Aid Grant F-48-R-14, Study II. Maryland Department of Natural Resources, Annapolis, MD. Pages B78-91.

Fisher-Huckins, C.J., C.W. Osenburg, and G.G. Mittelbach. 1999. Species introductions and their ecological consequences: an example with cogeneric sunfish. Ecological Applications: Vol. 10, No. 2, pp.612-625.

Flickinger, S.A. and F. J. Bulow. 1993. Small Impoundments. in C.C. Kohler and W. A. Hubert, Editors, Inland Fisheries Management in North America. American Fisheries Society, Bethesda, Maryland.

Grimes, L.L. 1995. Observations on the growth and prey selection of striped bass inhabiting Piney Run Reservoir, a small Maryland impoundment without clupeids. Presented at the 51st Annual NEAFWA Conference, Ocean City, MD.

Groves, T. 2001. Survey and Management of Maryland’s Fishery Resources, Management of Maryland’s Impoundment Fisheries. Federal Aid Project F-48-R- 11. Maryland Department of Natural Resources, Annapolis, MD.

Gustafson, K. A. 1988. Approximating Confidence Intervals for Indicies of Fish Population Size Structure. North American Journal of Fisheries Management 8:139- 141.

Janicki, A.D. Wade, H. Wilson, D. Heinbuch, H. Sverdrup, and P. Warfvinge. 1995. Maryland critical loads study. Vol. 1. Critical loads assessment for Maryland Streams. Prepared for: State of Maryland, Department of Natural Resources, Tidewater Administration, Chesapeake Bay Research and Monitoring Division, Annapolis. MD.

B184

King, M. 1995 Fisheries Biology, Assessment and Management. Fishing News Books, Malden, MA, USA. 341 pages.

Kohler, Christopher C. and Hubert, Wayne A. 1993. Inland Fisheries Management in North America. AFS, Bethesda, MD., U.S.A., pages 485-486.

Kolmogorov-Smirnov Test - http://www.physics.csbsju.edu/stats/KS-test.html 13:12 on 9 February, 2005.

Lagler, K.F. 1956. Freshwater Fishery Biology. Wm. C. Brown Co., Dubuque, Iowa. 360 pp.

Lewis, G. 2001. Monitoring Studies, Federal Aid Project F-11-R-39, I-II Jennings Randolph Lake Study. West Virginia Department of Natural Resources, Elkins, West Virginia.

______2002. Monitoring Studies, Federal Aid Project F-11-R-39, I-II Jennings Randolph Lake Study. West Virginia Department of Natural Resources, Elkins, West Virginia.

McClane, A. J. 1965. McClane’s Standard Encyclopedia and International Angling Guide; Holt, Rinehart and Winston Inc., Page 112.

Margenau, T.L., Rasmussen, P.W., Kampa, J.M. 1996. Factors Affecting Growth of Northern Pike in Small Northern Wisconsin Lakes. North American Journal of Fisheries Management. Vol. 18, No. 3, pp. 625-639.

Maryland Department of Natural Resources. 2004-2005. Maryland freshwater sportfishing guide. State of Maryland, Department of Natural Resources, Fisheries Service.Annapolis MD.

MD DNR. 2004. Annual Progress Report, Fed. Aid Project: F-48-R-14, Survey, Inventory, and Management of Maryland’s Freshwater Fisheries Resources, Management of Maryland’s Impoundments. MDNR Fisheries Service, Annapolis, MD.

Miranda, L. E., W. D. Hubbard, S. Sangara, T. Holman. 1996. Optimizing Electrofishing sample duration for estimating relative abundance of largemouth bass in reservoirs. North American Journal of Fisheries Management 16: 324 – 331.

Monteleone, D.M. and E.D. Houde. 1992. Vulnerability of striped bass Morone saxatilis Waldbrum eggs and larvae to predation by juvenile white perch Morone Americana Gmelin. J.Exp. Mar. Biol. Ecol., Amsterdam; vol. 158, no. 1, pp. 93-104.

B185

Morgan, R.P. 1997. Analysis of Jennings Randolph Lake Fisheries Potential. Prepared for the Maryland Department of Natural Resources, Fisheries Service, Tawes State Office Building, Annapolis, MD. 29 pp.

Nielsen L.A., and D.L. Johnson.1983. Sampling Considerations. Pages 1-21 in L.A. Nielsen and D.L. Johnson, editors. Fisheries Techniques, 1st edition. American Fisheries Society, Bethesda, Maryland

Pavol, K.W. 1985. Deep Creek Lake fisheries survey and management plan. Maryland Department of Natural Resources - Fisheries Administration, Annapolis, MD.

Pavol K. W. 2002. Jennings Randolph Lake Fish population Monitoring Study, Annual Progress Report, Fed. Aid Project: F-48-R-11, Survey, Inventory, and Management of Maryland’s Freshwater Fisheries Resources, Management of Maryland’s Impoundments. MDNR Fisheries Service, Annapolis, MD.

Pavol K. W. 2004. Jennings Randolph Lake Fish population Monitoring Study, Annual Progress Report, Fed. Aid Project: F-48-R-14, Survey, Inventory, and Management of Maryland’s Freshwater Fisheries Resources, Management of Maryland’s Impoundments. MDNR Fisheries Service, Annapolis, MD.

Pavol, K.W. and Klotz, A.W. 2000. Deep Creek Lake fisheries performance report 1996-2000. Department of Natural Resources-Inland Fisheries Administration, Annapolis, MD.

Pavol, K.W. and A.W. Klotz. 2001. Deep Creek Lake walleye monitoring study- final report, 1996-2000. federal Aid Report F-48-R-10, MD DNR Fisheries Service, Annapolis, MD.

Reynolds, J.B., and L.R. Babb. 1978. Structure and dynamics of largemouth bass populations. Pages 50-61 in G.D. Novinger and J.D. Dillard, editors, New Approaches to the Management of Small Impoundments. North Central Division, American Fisheries Society, Special Publication 5.

Rohde, F. C., R. G. Arndt, D. G. Lindquist, and J. F. Parnell. 1994. Freshwater fishes of the Carolinas, Virginia, Maryland and Delaware. The University of North Carolina Press, Chapel Hill, North Carolina

Scott, W.B. and E.J. Crossman. 1973. Freshwater Fishes of Canada. J.C. Stevenson editor. Bulletin 184. Fisheries Research Board of Canada, Ottawa.

Snedecor, G.W., and W. G. Cochran, 1968. Statistical Methods. 6th edition. Iowa State University Press, Ames.

B186

Unmuth, J.M.L.,M.J. Hansen, and T.D.Pellett. 1999. Largemouth Bass and Bluegill Populations in Fish Lake, Wisconsin. North American Journal of Fisheries Management 19:1089-1098

Wege, G. J. and R. O. Anderson. 1978. Relative Weight (Wr): a new index of condition for largemouth bass. in G. D. Novinger and J. D. Dillard, editors, New approaches to the Management of Small Impoundments. Special Pub. No. 5, North Cen. Div. Amer. Fish. Soc., Bethesda, MD. Pages 79-133.

Weithman, S. A., J. B. Reynold, and D. E. Simpson. 1979. Assessment of structure of largemouth bass stocks by sequential sampling. 33rd Proc. Ann. Conf. Southeast. Assoc.Fish Wildlife Agenc., pages 415-424.

B187

ANNUAL PERFORMANCE REPORT 2005

Maryland Department of Natural Resources Fisheries Service Inland Fisheries Management Program

SURVEY AND MANAGEMENT OF FRESHWATER FISHERIES RESOURCES

Management of Maryland's Coldwater Streams

USFWS Federal Aid Grant F-48-R-15

Study III

By:

Alan Klotz John Mullican Mark Toms Charles Gougeon Todd Heerd Rick Schaefer Brett Coakley Jerry Stivers Susan Rivers

C1

Table of Contents Coldwater Streams

Trout Population Statistics...... C3

Survey & Inventory of Fish Species and Habitat...... C11 Youghiogheny River Catch & Return Trout Fishing Area...... C11 Hoyes Run...... C24 Upper Savage River ...... C33 Savage River Tailwater...... C41 Beaver Creek...... C52 Warner Hollow Run ...... C65 Black Rock Creek ...... C67 Fishing Creek...... C74 Hunting Creek...... C77 Little Hunting Creek ...... C83 Little Beaver Creek...... C87 Owens Creek...... C90 Little Antietam Creek...... C93 Bee Tree Run ...... C97 Jabez Branch ...... C104 Morgan Run ...... C111 Paint Branch ...... C117 Patuxent River Catch and Return Area...... C127 Gunpowder Falls Tailwater ...... C134 Basin Run and Unnamed Tributary ...... C147 Mill Creek ...... C152 Rock Run...... C157 Unicorn Branch...... C167

Literature Cited ...... C172

C2

State: Maryland Project No.: F-48-R-15 Study No.: III Job No.: 1

Project Title: Survey and Management of Maryland's Fisheries Resources

Study Title: Management of Maryland's Coldwater Streams

Job Title: Trout Population Statistics

Introduction:

The objectives of this job were:

• Determine the distribution and abundance of trout.

• Identify physical, chemical and biological parameters affecting densities of trout for those waters of the state which are known to support natural trout populations, may have the potential to support natural trout populations, or may be utilized to provide public recreational trout fishing.

• Monitor environmental conditions in order to detect changes in environmental quality to prevent or reduce environmental degradation as well as to document any improvement in environmental quality.

• Provide data for the development of effective management plans. degree of protection for those streams that are within their jurisdiction.

Methods

Sampling stations were selected to include all the habitat types present in the stream reach to be surveyed (pool, riffle, run, etc.). The total length and width of the station were then measured to the nearest tenth of a meter. Stream surface area was computed and expressed in hectares. Fish populations were estimated using the three pass regression technique outlined by Zippin (1958). Fish were collected using dip nets and a Smith-Root backpack electrofishing unit (Model 12, Model 12-A POW) or a Smith-Root barge/bank mounted electrofishing unit (1.5KW or 2.5 GPP). Surveys began at the downstream end of the station and three electrofishing passes were made through the entire station. During each pass all the sportfish were collected and placed in a separate float box. The relative abundances of non-game species were observed and recorded. Relative abundance was expressed as rare, scarce, common or abundant. All

C3 sportfish were anesthetized with a 1:10 solution of clove oil and ethanol alcohol, identified to the species level, measured for total length to the nearest millimeter, weighed to the nearest gram, and returned alive to the stream at the end of the survey. Population estimates for each species collected are made using the MICROFISH 2.2 software package (VanDeventer and Platts 1985).

Results

Table 1 summarizes of the results of all trout population studies funded within Federal Aid Project F-48-R-15 during 2005. Population studies were conducted by Inland Fisheries personnel and the results are grouped by watersheds.

Conclusions/Management Recommendations

This table was prepared for distribution as needed to agencies of Federal, State, and local government with resource management, land use planning and environmental protection responsibilities as a quick reference to the status of coldwater fishery resources of the State. These agencies should be encouraged to provide the maximum degree of protection for those streams that are within their jurisdiction.

C4

Table 1. Results of trout population surveys in Maryland during 2005. Key: Bk = Brook trout; Bn = Brown trout; R = Rainbow trout; Ct = Cutthroat trout; n = naturally reproduced; a = stocked as adults; f = stocked as fingerlings. (Page 1 of 6)

Stream/ Species Adult Adult Adult 95% YOY/ YOY/ 95% Station /origin kg/ha trout/ha trout/km CI(%) ha km CI(%) Youghiogheny River Watershed Youghiogheny Bk-n <1 1 7 0 0 0 0 River: Bn-f,n 9 24 105 28.3 0 0 0 Hoyes R-f 4 24 164 15.4 0 0 0 Total 14 65 289 18.4 0 0 0 Bn-f,n 12 49 230 6.6 0 0 0 Deadman’s R-f 4 26 123 13.7 0 0 0 Total 17 76 361 7.5 0 0 0 Bn-f,n 5 17 57 25.7 0 0 0 Sang R-f 4 22 73 15.7 0 0 0 Total 9 43 140 21.0 0 0 0 Bk-n 3 111 47 29.4 67 28 100 Bn-n 4 111 47 29.4 444 187 2.5 Hoyes Run R-n 8 156 66 100 222 94 100 Total 15 378 159 6.7 733 309 1.1

C5

Table 1 (cont., pg. 2 of 6). Results of trout population surveys in Maryland during 2005.

Stream/ Species/ Adult Adult Adult 95% YOY/ YOY/ 95% Station origin kg/ha trout/ha trout/km CI(%) ha km CI(%) North Branch Potomac River Watershed Upper Savage River - Bk-n 23 314 282 16.9 505 453 132.2 Natural trout waters Bk-n 12 340 276 49.2 19 15 100 Delayed Bn-n 11 31 26 537.3 Harvest R-a 15 75 61 17.3 Area Total 39 434 352 30.5 Bk-n 1 10 8 100 0 0 0 P&T Area – R-a 17 79 60 22.7 Chapel Total 16 89 68 17.7 Savage River Bk-n 16 130 224 1 299 514 11.2 Tailwater – Bn-n 73 251 432 1.9 296 508 13.6 (SRT) R-a 3 10 16 38.1 0 0 0 Fly-Only Total 92 391 672 1.1 598 1028 8.9 Bk – n 11 106 175 3.7 93 153 4.8 SRT Aaron’s Bn – n 110 494 815 2.1 73 120 6.4 Run, R – a 5 23 38 4.3 0 0 0 Art/Fly Total 127 626 1033 1.9 166 273 3.8 Bk – n 2 30 44 8.6 33 49 31.5 SRT Mouth, Bn – n 46 177 262 2.6 22 33 16.1 Art/Fly R – a 16 85 126 9.7 0 0 0 Total 65 295 437 3.4 55 82 16.5 North Branch Bk – n 1 7 20 98.3 0 0 0 Potomac Bn – n 283 186 525 3.9 0 0 0 River R-a,f 8 30 85 8.3 0 0 0 (NBPR) – Ct, f 2 7 20 100 0 0 0 Tailrace Total 295 230 650 3.4 0 0 0 Bk – n <1 3 8 100 NBPR – Bn – n 6 18 59 4.3 Upper C&R R-a,f 32 159 527 7.4 Total 39 179 594 6.6 NBPR – Bn-n,a 4 11 33 9.4 0 0 0 P&T at R-f,a 4 67 203 3.9 0 0 0 Barnum Total 8 78 236 3.5 0 0 0 Bk – n <1 10 34 24.6 NBPR – Bn – n 5 14 48 20.1 Lower C&R R-a,f 4 48 163 8.9 Total 11 74 252 9.1

C6

Table 1 (cont., pg. 3 of 6). Results of trout population surveys in Maryland during 2005.

Stream/ Species/ Adult Adult Adult 95% YOY/ YOY/ 95% Station origin kg/ha trout/ha trout/km CI(%) ha km CI(%) Upper and Middle Potomac Watershed R-f,a 26 63 28 0 190 83 5.7 Beaver Creek Bn-n,f 47 222 97 14.8 0 0 0 P&T Total 69 286 125 9.6 190 83 5.7 R-f 29 78 48 11.7 0 0 0 Beaver Creek Bn-n,f 10 20 12 0 0 0 0 Upper Jackson Total 39 98 60 11.7 0 0 0 R-f 33 69 45 9.4 31 20 0 Beaver Creek Bn-n,f 30 145 96 5.6 0 0 0 Lower Jackson Total 57 214 141 4.6 31 20 0 Black Rock R-n,f 44 121 39 0 109 35 0 Creek Heaton Bn/? 2 12 4 0 0 0 0 Property Total 45 133 42 0 109 35 0 Fishing Creek Upper Right Bk-n 82 2631 868 2.3 408 135 24.3 Fork Fishing Creek Lower Right Bk-n 39 1239 409 3.5 1366 451 31.3 Fork Fishing Creek Upper Left Bk-n 59 2431 875 2.6 1975 711 7.2 Fork Fishing Creek Lower Left Bk-n 21 1032 485 11.1 696 327 3.9 Fork

Hunting Creek Bk-n 66 1092 360 1.1 501 165 4.0 Hemlock Bn-n 136 1911 631 1.1 2366 781 9.8 Bridge Total 202 3003 991 0.8 2844 938 6.9 Bk-n,a 148 571 274 0.6 71 34 24.6 Hunting Creek Bn-n 90 828 397 3.4 1070 514 4.2 Elbow Pool R-a 111 214 103 2.4 0 0 0 Total 349 1612 774 1.4 1142 548 4.1 Bk-n,a 36 129 57 15.0 37 16 0 Hunting Creek Bn-n 92 756 333 1.6 1511 665 8.6 Bear Branch R-a 53 111 49 0 0 0 0 Total 181 995 438 1.6 1548 681 8.2 Hunting Creek Bn-n 42 319 236 2.4 541 400 5.4 –Rt. 15

C7

Table 1 (cont., pg. 4 of 6). Results of trout population surveys in Maryland during 2005.

Stream/ Species/ Adult Adult Adult 95% YOY/ YOY/ 95% Station origin kg/ha trout/ha trout/km CI(%) ha km CI(%) Upper and Middle Potomac Watershed (continued) Little Antietam Bk-n 81 1524 472 4.4 1393 432 13.2 Creek Rt. 491 Little Antietam Creek R-n 94 1063 489 0.7 1032 475 2.8 Rowe Road Little Antietam Creek R-n 80 755 347 3.5 353 163 6.4 Gardenhour Road Little Bn-n 63 396 143 4.1 810 292 49.0 Beaver/Rt. 66 Little Hunting Bk-n 10 179 86 0 746 358 89.9 Creek Catoctin Bn-n 55 672 322 4.6 1224 587 24.8 Hollow Road Total 65 851 408 2.9 1970 946 31.5 Little Hunting Bk-n 4 80 60 0 227 170 10.6 Creek Manor Bn-n 37 453 340 3.3 960 720 21.5 Area Total 41 533 400 2.6 1187 890 15.6 Little Hunting Bk-n 2 50 33 0 266 178 11.7 Creek Catoctin Bn-n 49 481 323 5.92 415 278 36.0 Furnace Total 50 531 356 5.04 697 467 20.6 Bk-n 131 3778 1247 1.6 3534 1166 6.0 Owens Creek Bn-n 6 203 67 0 1137 375 6.6 Campground Total 145 3981 1314 1.4 4712 1555 5.0 Bk-n 32 618 179 2.7 4323 1254 9.7 Owens Creek Bn-n 7 65 19 0 130 38 0 Lower Park Total 43 683 198 2.3 5005 1451 6.3 Warner Bk/n 16 195 70 0 261 94 0 Hollow/Upper Lower Susquehanna River Watershed Deep Run Bn-n 9 70 39 0 70 39 253 Rock Run Bn-n 15 82 40 0 449 220 9.1 Patapsco River Watershed Unnamed tributary to Bn-n 9 49 22 0 115 50 33 Liberty Reservoir Stillwater Bk-n 30 529 118 9 824 184 15 Creek Patuxent River Watershed Patuxent River Bn-n 22 248 221 9 388 344 48

C8

Table 1(cont., pg. 5 of 6). Results of trout population surveys in Maryland during 2005.

Stream/ Species Adult Adult Adult 95% YOY/ YOY/ 95% Station /origin kg/ha trout/ha trout/km CI(%) ha km CI(%) Gunpowder Falls Watershed Bush Cabin Run Bk-n 18 192 47 30 3923 956 14 Corbett Rd. trib Bk-n 3 48 18 0 48 18 0 to Gunpowder Bn-n 31 333 123 15 1714 632 71 Falls Total 34 381 140 12 1667 614 57 Unnamed trib to Gunpowder Falls between Bn-n 4 77 11 0 9846 1428 12 York Rd and I- 83, north side Quail Creek- Bk-n 3 83 27 0 42 13 0 Below Phoenix Bn-n 0 0 0 0 42 13 0 Rd. Total 3 83 27 0 83 27 635 Unnamed trib to Gunpowder Falls-Below Bn-n 67 1100 134 0 2800 340 8 Prettyboy dam on south side Unnamed trib to Prettyboy Reservoir - Bk-n 12 115 18 0 0 0 0 enters reservoir NW of dam Unnamed trib to Prettyboy Reservoir Bk-n 14 500 149 17 808 241 46 downstream of Bull Sawmill Rd Left Fork Long Green Creek Bn-n 11 95 15 0 286 44 45 upstream of Hydes Rd. Deford Property – Boordy Bn-n 8 18 5 0 161 43 9 Vineyards

C9

Table 1 (cont., pg. 6 of 6). Results of trout population surveys in Maryland during 2005.

Stream/ Species/ Adult Adult Adult 95% YOY/ YOY/ 95% Station origin kg/ha trout/ha rout/km CI(%) ha km CI(%) Gunpowder Falls Watershed (continued) Gunpowder Falls Bn-n 234 1226 1969 19 289 464 225 Dam/Falls Rb-f 2 6 10 0 157 252 1465 Total 235 1226 1969 19 786 1262 593 Bn-n 140 826 1312 .9 558 887 8 Falls Road Rb-f 5 19 31 0 113 179 4 Total 145 845 1343 .9 665 1056 5 Bk-n 0 2 3 0 0 0 0 Bn-n 115 808 1039 .6 1284 1650 4 Masemore Road Rb-f 2 7 9 0 36 47 17 Total 117 818 1051 .6 1325 1703 4 Below Blue Mtn. Bn-n 38 284 588 2 634 1313 20 Rd. Glencoe Bn-n 23 199 342 7 356 612 42 Potomac-Washington Watershed Litle Seneca Bn-n 6 13 11 0 13 11 0 Creek – upstream R-f 0 0 0 0 139 120 23 of Clopper Road Little Seneca Creek – R-f 0 0 0 0 161 154 8 downstream of Clopper Road Good Hope tributary – Hobbs Bn-n 24 188 53 20 94 26 107 Drive Gum Springs - Bn-n 2 22 6 0 22 6 0 Mouth

C10

State: Maryland Project No.: F-48-R-15 Study No.: III Job No.: 2

Project Title: Survey and Management of Maryland's Fisheries Resources

Study Title: Management of Maryland's Coldwater Streams

Job Title: Survey and Inventory of Fish Species and Habitat

Youghiogheny River Catch and Return Trout Fishing Area

Introduction

The portion of the Youghiogheny River from the DCLPP tailrace downstream approximately 6.4km to the Sang Run bridge was designated a Catch and Release Trout Fishing Area (C&R TFA) in 1993. Regulations limit terminal tackle to artificial lures and flies. Fishing is permitted year-round. Prior to 1993, this portion of the river was managed under Maryland’s Designated Trout Stream regulations, which specify a two- fish daily creel limit with no minimum size or tackle restrictions.

The fishery in the C&R TFA is currently maintained through put-and-grow stocking of fall fingerling brown trout Salmo trutta and rainbow trout Oncorhynchus mykiss. Two sampling stations within the C&R TFA have been surveyed for trout populations annually since 1988. The Hoyes Station is located about 200m downstream of the DCLPP tailrace, and the Sang Run Station is located about 200m upstream of the Sang Run Bridge. Trout populations were sampled at a third location, known as the Deadman’s Station, about midway in the 6.4km C&R TFA beginning in 1999.

The current operating license for the DCLPP requires temperature control (maintenance of < 25° C in the Youghiogheny River measured at Sang Run), minimum flow maintenance (40 cfs in the Youghiogheny River measured upstream of the DCLPP tailrace outflow), and dissolved oxygen augmentation to meet State standards (> 6 ppm average, 5 ppm minimum in the DCLPP discharge) for downstream coldwater fisheries enhancement. These combined measures were implemented beginning in 1995 as part of an operating license renewal agreement with the Maryland Department of the Environment, Water Resource Administration -Deep Creek Lake Project - Permit No. GA92S009 (MDE 1994).

Objectives

The purpose of this study was to monitor trout population parameters of the very high quality catch and release brown and rainbow trout fishery developed since 1995. The objectives included:

C11

• Estimate adult trout population densities and standing crops annually in three established sampling stations.

• Calculate indices of physical condition of adult trout.

• Document associated fish species composition and abundance.

• Monitor temperatures in the Youghiogheny River with particular emphasis on critical mid-summer conditions and changes attributable to coldwater discharges from the Deep Creek Lake Power Plant.

Methods Fish Populations

Sampling stations were selected to include all the habitat types present in the stream reach to be surveyed (pool, riffle, run). The total length and width of the station were then measured to the nearest tenth of a meter. Stream surface area was computed and expressed in hectares. Trout populations were estimated using the three-pass regression technique described by Zippin (1958). Trout were collected using dip nets and a 2.5 GPP Smith-Root barge-mounted electro-fishing unit equipped with three anodes. The survey was initiated at the downstream end of the station and three electro-fishing passes were made through the entire station. During each pass all trout were collected and placed in live boxes. All trout were anesthetized with a 1:10 solution of clove oil and ethanol alcohol, identified to the species level, measured for total length (TL) to the nearest millimeter, weighed to the nearest gram, and returned alive to the stream at the end of the survey. Trout population estimates were calculated using the MICROFISH 2.2 software package (Van Deventer and Platts 1985). The coefficient of condition (K) described by Lagler (1952) was used as a measure of fish condition. Other associated fish species were collected on the third pass, identified to the species level, rated on their general abundance, and then released back to the river.

Temperature Enhancement

Onset StowAway® temperature loggers were deployed in the river at nine sites from Swallow Falls to Sang Run between June and September to assess the effectiveness of water temperature control by the DCLPP. The temperature monitors were programmed to record at thirty-minute intervals. One temperature logger was deployed at the DCLPP to record ambient air temperatures. Temperature data were forwarded to Versar, Inc., a MD DNR consultant, for analysis. Temperature enhancement and flow augmentation protocols for the DCLPP are described in the licensing agreement (MDE 1994).

C12

Results Fish Populations

A list of the common and scientific names of fishes collected in the Youghiogheny River within the C&R TFA during this study period is contained in Table 1. The fish species assemblage is indicative of a coldwater/coolwater fish community (Steiner 2000). The fish species composition and relative abundance are similar to that observed in the Youghiogheny River C&R TFA during the previous five-year study period (Pavol and Klotz 2001).

Catch and release regulations as well as minimum flow, water temperature and dissolved oxygen measures implemented at the DCLPP in 1995 have benefited coldwater management efforts in the Youghiogheny River C&R TFA. However, during 2005 there were a record number of temperature control non-compliance occurrences by the DCLPP that affected the trout population which will be discussed later in this report. Adult trout densities and standing crops (Figures 1 and 2) were significantly higher for the period 1995 through 2002 compared to pre-enhancement conditions from 1988 through 1994 (t- test, ∝ = 0.05). The mean adult trout density and standing crops increased by a factor of 2.3x and 2.4x respectively from 1988-1994 to 1995–2002. Trout population estimates were not conducted in 2003 due to high river flows during the scheduled sampling period. Also, 2004 trout population estimates were not made at the Hoyes and Deadman’s Station due to high river flows. The Sang Run Station was sampled during 2004, and the estimate fell within the range of the estimates made at Sang Run from 1995 through 2002. The 2005 mean trout population densities and standing crops were significantly lower than the years 1995–2002 (t-test, ∝ = 0.05). Adult trout densities showed a 3.1x decrease from 2002 to 2005, and standing crops decreased 2.6x during this time (Figures 1 and 2). During 2005, the management objective of 621 adult trout per km was not achieved (Figure 1).

The estimated number of quality-size trout (> 305mm) per kilometer in the Youghiogheny River C&R TFA from 1988 to 2005 is presented in Figure 3. The quality- size trout estimate is a useful descriptor of the population’s age and size structure. A significant increase in the number of quality-size trout (QST) has been observed since catch and release and coldwater enhancement measures were implemented (t-test, ∝ = 0.05). The mean number of QST for the post-coldwater enhancement period increased by a factor of 3.4x from the pre-enhancement period. However, during 2005 the number of QST was the lowest recorded in the post enhancement period (Figure 3). Brown trout comprised about 80% of all QST in the Youghiogheny River C&R TFA during the last five-year study period.

Average total length, weight, and condition factors for trout in the Youghiogheny River during this study period are contained in Tables 2 and 3. Condition factors were within the optimal range (0.90 -1.10) for both brown trout (Table 2) and rainbow trout (Table 3) during the last five-year study period. Brown trout attain a larger size

C13

(maximum TL = 682mm) than rainbow trout (maximum TL = 390mm) in the Youghiogheny River C&R TFA. Species composition of adult trout in the Youghiogheny River C&R TFA averaged 49% brown trout and 51% rainbow trout during this study period.

A record of fingerling trout stocking since 1988 is presented in Figure 4. The annual management objective number is 20,000 fall fingerlings (10,000 brown trout and 10,000 rainbow trout). This annual stocking rate achieves the management objective of 621 adult trout/km within the management area. During the last five year study period, the numbers of required fall fingerlings were below the recommended numbers during 2003 and 2005. The 2005 number consisted of only rainbow trout, and was about only half of the desired number of fingerlings The majority of the fingerling rainbow trout stocked in the Youghiogheny River C&R TFA are considered a “warmwater strain”, developed to be more tolerant of higher water temperatures than other strains of rainbow trout (Bob Pritts, Laurel Hill Trout Hatchery, Bedford, PA, personal communication). . An experimental stocking of 35,000 Shasta-strain rainbow trout fingerlings were stocked into the DCLPP Tailrace on 18 July 2005. However, operational changes at the DCLPP eliminated the 9 cfs constant flow in the tailrace, allowing for warm river water to enter the tailrace during July and August 2005. By September, none of these fingerlings were observed in the tailrace, nor were any collected within the Hoyes Station immediately downstream of the tailrace. About 750 Kamloops strain rainbow trout averaging 250mm were stocked at Hoyes and Sang Run during October 2005 to improve fishing opportunities after he significant decline in the adult trout population was documented. This strain of rainbow trout has been shown to have low survival rates (Pavol and Klotz 1998), and they are not expected to increase long-term trout densities and standing crops. Brown trout stocked in the river during 2001-2003 originated from eggs purchased from Spring Creek Hatchery in Lewiston, Montana. Brown trout stocked in the river in 2004 originated from eggs purchased from Paint Bank Hatchery, Virginia. All the eggs were hatched-out at the MD DNR Murley Spring Hatchery in Allegany County, MD.

Temperature Enhancement

A complete detailed report on the river temperature regimes, temperature enhancement releases, and flow augmentation results for the study period 1995 through 2004 are contained in Schreiner et al. (2005). Schreiner et al. (2005) report that the number of days when temperatures exceeded 25° C at Sang Run during this time period ranged from 3 (1996) to 23 (2002). The report also shows that without the temperature enhancement releases from the DCLPP, temperature exceeding 25°C at Sang Run would have ranged from 4 to 10 days in 1996 to between 27 to 44 days in 2002.

A summary of temperature enhancement measures at the DCLPP during 2001 - 2005 is contained in Table 4. MD DNR’s 2005 temperature data show that there were 24 dates when temperatures exceeded 25°C at Sang Run, the highest number of occurrences since temperature control measures were implemented. Table 5 shows that the number of

C14 longest duration of temperatures above 25°C also occurred in 2005. The highest river temperatures measured in the Youghiogheny River at Sang Run since the temperature enhancement plan was implemented occurred in 2005 (Table 6).

Discussion

Prior to 1995, Youghiogheny River temperature often exceeded 25° C in mid- summer and reached as high as 29° C in the C&R TFA, reducing available trout habitat to cool water refugia created by tributaries, spring seeps, groundwater flow interface, and shade (Pavol and Klotz 1991). Trout standing crops, adult trout densities, and numbers of quality size trout in the Youghiogheny River C&R TFA have increased since special fishing regulations and operational changes at the DCLPP were implemented. Maintenance of water temperature and flow volume within a range which brown and rainbow trout can tolerate has increased available habitat in the Youghiogheny River C&R TFA during critical mid-summer periods, increasing survival and supporting a larger population as well as a high quality fishery. Schreiner et al. (2005) concluded that the implementation of temperature enhancement protocol between 1995 and 2004 was very successful in maintaining lower temperatures in the Youghiogheny River C&R TFA. Based on historical flow and temperature data, Schreiner et al. (2005) estimated that temperature control releases from the DCLPP would be required on an average of 17 days annually in the Youghiogheny River to maintain water temperature less than 25°C. This equates to about 34 hours of power generation at the DCLPP each year.

The 2005 estimated trout population decreased significantly from previous post- temperature enhancement years. River temperatures during the summer of 2005 reached the critical thermal maxima or the temperature at which trout loses their ability to escape lethal conditions (Lee and Rinne 1980). The Maryland Department of the Environment issued a Notice of Violation of State Water Appropriation Permit to the operators of the DCLPP, Brascan Power. The notice charged the operators that Condition 16 of the permit was violated on six dates during June-August 2005 (MDE 2005). The DCLPP operators acknowledged the non-compliance occurrences, and reported they were caused by protocol problems and operator error (Becker 2005). Subsequent discussions with Brascan Power officials indicated that the problems were addressed and should not re- occur. Inland Fisheries Division strives to produce an adult trout population of 622/km (1,000/mile) throughout the Youghiogheny River C&R TFA to maintain a high-quality trout fishery. The number of quality size trout in the Youghiogheny River C&R TFA in the post-enhancement period is comparable to the very high quality trout population of the Savage River tailwater (Pavol and Klotz 2005). The current put-and-grow fingerling stocking management objective of 20,000 annually (10,000 brown, 10,000 rainbows) achieves the desired adult trout densities. Since no brown trout fingerlings were stocked during 2005, the result will be lower brown trout densities and standing crops in 2006. Lower survival of fingerlings stocked in the spring or summer as compared to fall fingerling stocking has been documented. Warmwater rainbow trout and brown trout

C15 stocked as fingerlings recruit to age 1+ at similar rates (Pavol and Klotz 2002). Condition factors for adult trout were within the optimal range for both brown and rainbow trout, indicating that food availability did not limit survival. Abundance of other fish species in the river indicates that trout stocking was having little effect on their populations. Barnhart and Engstrom-Heg (1984) concluded that put-and-grow management in larger rivers where recruitment is stable or controlled supported the best catch and release trout fisheries.

Management Recommendations

All project objectives were attained during this reporting period. It is recommended that this study be continued in order to monitor the status of the trout fishery in the Youghiogheny River C&R TFA in response to special regulation and coldwater enhancement protocols at the DCLPP.

In order to maintain the high quality trout fishery in the Youghiogheny, it is recommended that 10,000 fingerling brown trout and 10,000 warmwater-strain fingerling rainbow trout be float-stocked throughout the C&R TFA annually during the fall. An additional 10,000 brown trout fingerlings should be stocked in 2006 to make up for the unavailable numbers in 2005.

Monitoring of temperatures in the Youghiogheny River from Swallow Falls to Sang Run should be continued to evaluate the effectiveness of temperature enhancement measures from the Deep Creek Lake Power Plant.

C16

Table 1. List of common and scientific names and relative abundance of fish species collected in the Youghiogheny River Catch and Release Trout Fishing Area, 2001 - 2005.

Common Name Scientific Name General occurrence River chub Nocomis micropogon Abundant Blacknose dace Rhinichthys atratulus Scarce Longnose dace Rhinichthys cataractae Common White sucker Catostomus commersoni Abundant Northern hog sucker Hypentelium nigricans Common Chain pickerel Esox niger Scarce Brook trout Salvelinus fontinalis Scarce Rainbow trout Oncorhynchus mykiss Abundant Brown trout Salmo trutta Abundant Mottled sculpin Cottus bairdi Abundant Rock bass Ambloplites rupestris Common Smallmouth bass Micropterus dolomieu Common

Table 2. Mean total length, weight, and condition factor (K) with ranges for adult brown trout in the Youghiogheny River Catch and Release Trout Fishing Area, 2001 – 2005.

Year N TL(mm) W(g) K 2001 154 218(128-560) 162(23-1777) 0.99(0.72-1.24) 2002 167 257(115-622) 206(17-2348) 0.97(0.70-1.23) 2004* 22 314(142-600) 438(27-2116) 0.95(0.71-1.11) 2005 54 296(194-682) 300(70-3039) 0.94(0.74-1.29) * Sample from the Sang Run Station only.

C17

Table 3. Mean total length, weight, and condition factor (K) with ranges for adult rainbow trout in the Youghiogheny River Catch and Release Trout Fishing Area, 2001 – 2005.

Year N TL (mm) W (g) K 2001 231 209(130-390) 110(18-630) 1.00(.70 -1.25) 2002 167 240(185-355) 137(62-451) 0.95(0.65-1.24) 2004* 18 254(215-317) 153(95-252) 0.95(0.65-1.15) 2005 53 240(141-330) 139(31-346) 0.95(0.56-1.25) * Sample from the Sang Run Station only.

Table 4. Number of dates of river temperature exceeding 25° C in the Youghiogheny River at Sang Run, number of temperature control releases, and total days of flow bypass operation from the Deep Creek Lake Power Station, 2001 - 2005.

No. dates Temperature Number of days Year > 25°C control releases of flow bypass 2001 10 12 31 2002 23 26 46 2003 3 1 0 2004 7 2 2 2005 28 14 NA

C18

Table 5. Duration of temperature exceeding 25° C in the Youghiogheny River at Sang Run, 1995 – 2005.

Duration 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 (hrs) 0.1-1.0 6 1 3 4 6 1 6 11 1 1 12 1.1-2.0 5 1 7 2 3 1 1 5 1 3 1 2.1-3.0 3 0 1 4 4 0 1 0 2 2 1 3.1-4.0 2 0 0 0 1 0 1 1 1 1 3 4.1-5.0 0 1 0 0 0 1 1 2 0 1 1 5.1-6.0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 6.1-7.0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 7.1-8.0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 > 8.0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 5 Total 18 3 11 10 14 3 10 23 5 8 24

Table 6. Maximum temperature occurrences in the Youghiogheny River at Sang Run, 1995 – 2005.

Range 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 °C 25.1- 6 1 2 4 8 1 3 6 4 3 6 25.5 25.6- 5 1 6 3 5 0 5 3 1 1 3 26.0 26.1- 2 1 1 1 1 2 2 7 0 2 5 26.5 26.6- 3 0 2 2 0 0 0 2 0 2 4 27.0 27.1- 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 27.5 27.6- 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 0 0 2 28.6 >28.6 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 Total 18 3 11 10 14 3 10 23 5 8 24

C19

1200

1000

800

600

Adult trout per kilometer 400

200

0 1988 1989** 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996* 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003* 2004** 2005 C&R Temp Control Year ( * not sampled; ** insufficient sample)

Figure 1. Mean adult trout densities in the Youghiogheny River Catch and Release Trout Fishing Area, 1988 – 2005.

C20

45

40

35

30

25

20 Standing Crop (kg/ha) Crop Standing 15

10

5

0 1988 1989** 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996* 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003* 2004** 2005 C&R Temp Control Year (* not sampled, **insufficient data)

Figure 2. Adult trout standing crops in the Youghiogheny River Catch and Release Trout Fishing Area, 1988 – 2005.

C21

140

120

100

80

60 Quality size trout/ km

40

20

0 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996* 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003* 2004** 2005 C&R Temp Control Year (*not sampled, **insuficient data)

Figure 3. Estimated quality-size trout (> 305mm) in the Youghiogheny River Catch and Release Trout Fishing Area, 1988 – 2005.

C22

45000

40000

35000

30000

25000

20000 Nomber of trout

15000

10000

5000

0 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 Year

Figure 4. Fingerling trout stocking record for the Youghiogheny River Catch and Release Trout Fishing Area, 1988 – 2005.

C23

Hoyes Run

Introduction

Maryland Department of Natural Resources (MD DNR) Inland Fisheries Service personnel have observed periodic high turbidity levels and increased sediment loads in Hoyes Run beginning in 1998. Investigations by the MD Department of the Environment and MD DNR Inland Fisheries Division concluded that the sediment originated from sediment control ponds in an active limestone quarry located in the upper Hoyes Run watershed. The investigation also found that stream flow was infiltrating streambed fissures adjacent to the quarry, completely dewatering a 100m stream section of Hoyes Run under low flow conditions. Stream flow from Hoyes Run enters the quarry excavation through fractured rock and is pumped into a series of two sediment control ponds (Grgich et al. 2002). Water overflows the sediment ponds when quarry pumps are operated, resulting in pulses in flow volume in Hoyes Run. Water temperature increases in the sediment control ponds under typical summer conditions; influencing the temperature regime of Hoyes Run as the impounded water is returned. Further downstream, Hoyes Run flows through several hundred meters of open pasture with unrestricted livestock access, contributing to additional thermal impacts under summer conditions. Downstream of the pasture, the riparian zone of Hoyes Run is primarily forested for the remainder of its length, providing extensive overhead canopy. Subsequently wild trout populations in Hoyes Run have declined since 1998. Staff believe that the decline of the Hoyes Run trout population and poor reproductive success is directly related to increased sediment loads, increased water temperatures, and reduced base flow associated with the limestone quarry operation. A detailed description of the plan to improve water quality and physical habitat in Hoyes Run is contained in “The Hoyes Run Restoration Project” (Sherwood 2002).

The purpose of this study was to:

• Estimate adult and young of year trout population densities annually in the established sampling stations.

• Estimate adult trout standing crops annually.

• Document associated fish species composition and abundance.

• Calculate aquatic macroinvertebrate population indices within the streambed grouting area.

• Monitor stream temperatures upstream and downstream of the streambed grouting project site.

C24

Methods

Fish populations

Four stations were sampled for fish populations in Hoyes Run during this study period. Station locations are presented in Table 1. Sampling stations were selected to include all the habitat types present in the stream reach to be surveyed (pool, riffle, run, etc). The total length and width of each station was measured to the nearest 0.1 m. Stream surface area was computed and expressed in hectares. Trout populations were estimated using the three pass regression technique outlined by Zippin (1958). Fish were collected using a Smith-Root Model 12 backpack electro-fisher and dip nets. The survey was initiated at the downstream end of the station and three electrofishing passes were made through the entire station. In stations where few or no trout were collected on the first pass, only a single pass was used to characterize the fish population. Total electrofishing effort (seconds) was recorded to provide a measure of relative abundance. Relative abundance was reported as catch per unit of electrofishing effort per hour (CPUE 60). General abundance occurrence was derived from CPUE values and fish were rated as abundant (>100 individuals), common (5-100 individuals), or scarce (< 5 individuals). During each pass all trout were collected and placed in live boxes. All trout were anesthetized with a 1:10 solution of clove oil and ethanol alcohol, identified to the species level, measured for total length (TL) to the nearest millimeter, weighed to the nearest gram, and returned alive to the stream. Trout population estimates were calculated using the MICROFISH 2.2 software package (Van Deventer and Platts 1985).

Aquatic macroinvertebrates

Macroinvertebrates were collected using a D-Frame kick net for six consecutive 30- second kick samples within the streambed-grouting project site on 21 June 2004. The kick samples were collected from a variety of stream habitats, including riffle areas and pools. The samples were placed in a labeled sample bottle and preserved with 70% isopropyl alcohol. The preserved samples were then transferred back to the lab for further processing. In the lab, the samples were poured into a white tray and the macroinvertebrates were picked from the detritus and placed in a sample bottle containing 70% isopropyl alcohol. The macroinvertebrates were then identified to the lowest practical taxon and population indices were calculated using the methods described in Appendix I. MD DNR Macroinvertebrate Specialist Susan Rivers performed taxon identification and data calculations.

Stream Temperatures

Onset StowAway® temperature loggers were deployed in Hoyes Run at two sites, upstream of the streambed grouting project site, and downstream of the project site and the sediment control ponds outflow discharge during 2004. The temperature monitors were programmed to record at thirty-minute intervals.

C25

Results

Fish populations

A list of the nine fish species collected in Hoyes Run during this study period and their general occurrence by station is contained in Table 2. Blacknose dace and mottled sculpin populations were abundant in Station 010, and brown trout were found in low abundance (Table 2). Stations 020 and 030, which had been flowing in 2004 since streambed grouting was completed in November 2003, had the same fish species composition as Station 010; however blacknose dace and mottled sculpins were found in lower abundance (Table 2). By summer 2005 however, these stations were de-watered or had severely reduced stream flows. Hoyes Run continued to support naturally reproducing populations of brook, brown, and rainbow trout in the lower portion of the stream throughout this study period (Figure 1). Rainbow trout made up the majority of the adult trout densities, followed by equal numbers of brook and brown trout in Station 040 during the most recent survey (Table 3). Hoyes Run’s adult trout population density showed a 9% increase from 2001 to 2005 (Figure 1). Reproduction was poorest during 2002 and 2003, however the number of young of year (YOY) trout in 2004 and 2005 were the highest observed during the last six-year period (Figure 1). Stream flows were restored by streambed grouting during the brown trout and rainbow trout spawning periods November 2003 – March 2004, respectively. The relatively strong 2004 year- class for both brown and rainbow trout contributed to an 8% increase in adult trout densities in 2005. Reproduction in 2005 for brown and rainbow trout was considered good, while brook trout reproduction was consider poor (Table 3).

Aquatic macroinvertebrates

Aquatic macroinvertebrates quickly re-colonized the previously dewatered area of Hoyes Run. Table 4 lists the diverse and abundant aquatic macroinvertebrate community found within the streambed grouting project site during June 2004. Richness, EPT, and diversity values indicate a non-impacted system. The Hilsenhoff Biotic Index indicated minimal sediment or organic pollution impacts and the equitability value also indicated only minor degradation.

Stream Temperatures

Stream temperatures upstream of the streambed-grouting project were generally less than 20°C throughout the critical summer period (Figure 2), only exceeding this temperature on one occasion. However, stream temperatures exceeded 20°C (maximum 25°C) on 11 occasions between July 1 and September 1, 2004 downstream of the streambed grouting project site (Figure 3). Water temperatures recorded at this site were influenced by the sediment control pond discharge downstream of the project site.

C26

Discussion and Management Recommendations

After documenting the decline of trout populations in Hoyes Run, MD DNR Inland Fisheries Division partnered with several other governmental agencies, non-profit groups, private industries, and private landowners in a cooperative effort to correct water quality problems and restore trout populations to former levels. These agencies were instrumental in the November 2003 completion of Phase I of the streambed restoration project described in Klotz and Pavol (2004). This phase of the project had initially been successful in restoring base flows in Hoyes Run and made habitat conditions more favorable for viable coldwater stream biota. Natural reproduction of brown and rainbow trout in 2004 was the highest level observed in the last five-year period. The 2004 year- class reversed the declining trend in Hoyes Run adult trout populations in 2005.

The streambed restoration project plan included injecting a polyurethane grout in the Hoyes Run streambed to prevent stream flow from entering the quarry through limestone fractures. Polyurethane grout has been used to seal boreholes with large voids and cross-flows, and is United Laboratories-approved for use in conjunction with water and food storage areas (Sherwood 2001). Unfortunately, during the summers of 2004 and 2005, new loss zones developed in the streambed grouting project area, resulting in a de- watered streambed.

Phase II of the project, under the direction of MD DNR Power Plant Research Program and the Western Maryland Resource and Conservation Development Council, will utilize grout prepared from coal combustion products (Reeves 2004). After acquiring the appropriate permits from the Army Corps of Engineers and the Maryland Department of the Environment in late 2004, the construction season was over due to high stream flows. The work scheduled in 2005 was also cancelled due to high stream flows in the fall work period. Grouting will commence in 2006 as soon as flows are low enough to identify the loss zones. Isolating the Hoyes Run base flow from the cone of depression, caused by the pumping water out of the quarry, will help maintain near- normal flows in the stream. Grouting the Hoyes Run streambed will minimize the need to pump water out of the quarry, increase the effectiveness of the sediment control ponds, and reduce the amount of outflow. The reduction of outflow operation will allow for maintaining coldwater stream temperature regimes in Hoyes Run.

In a related water quality and habitat enhancement project, the owner of the livestock pasture downstream of the grouting project site improved the riparian zone along Hoyes Run during 2004. The landowner agreed to provide streamside fencing and limited livestock access on both sides of a 300-meter stream section. The Garrett County Soil Conservation District provided the design and funding for a geo-web limited stream access for livestock and a watering trough away from the stream. The Canaan Valley Institute has provided funding for materials for the landowner to erect the high-tensile strength fencing along the stream. The landowner conducted only a partial portion of the stream bank fencing project within a timely manner, and the remainder of the grant

C27 funding was re-allocated to another fencing project within the Youghiogheny River Watershed. However, these measures will reduce sediment and nutrients, moderate thermal impacts, and improve physical fish habitat in Hoyes Run.

Unfortunately new sources of sediment have affected Hoyes Run during 2005. The Maryland Department of Environment has been involved with investigating complaints, inspecting forest harvest projects, subdivision developments, ski slope construction, and recreational development projects within the watershed. Boylan (2005) reports that MDE has taken several enforcement actions and collected penalties on development projects within the watershed that were found to be in violation of sediment control. The violations included unauthorized development activities and failure to install or maintain adequate sediment controls. In each case MDE reports that corrections were completed in a timely manner and compliance was achieved.

The Hoyes Run Restoration Project is made possible by the partnerships formed by MD DNR, Western Maryland Resource Conservation and Development Council, Keystone Quarry, US Department of Energy, Garrett College, Sub-Technical, Inc., the Youghiogheny River Watershed Association, the Youghiogheny Chapter of Trout Unlimited, the Canaan Valley Institute, Maryland Department of the Environment, Garrett County Soil Conservation District, and the US Fish and Wildlife Service.

C28

Table 1. General locations of Hoyes Run sampling stations in 2001-2005.

Station General location Number 010 Beginning immediately above the grouting project site and ending about 100m upstream at the old access road culvert pipe. 020 Beginning 20 meters downstream of the grouting project site and ending about 80 meters upstream at the initial grouting site. 030 Beginning at the culvert crossing on the Savage Farm and ending 100m upstream. 040 Beginning 50 meters downstream with the confluence of Fork Run and ending 66 meters upstream.

Table 2. Common and scientific names and general occurrence (A = abundant: > 100 individuals, C = common: 5-100 individuals; S = scarce: < 5 individuals)) of fish collected in Hoyes Run, 2001-2005.

Common name Scientific name 010 020 030 040 Goldfish Carassius auratus S S Blacknose dace Rhinichthys atratulus A C C Longnose dace Rhinichthys cataractae S Rainbow trout Oncorhynchus mykiss C Brown trout Salmo trutta S S S C Brook trout Salvelinus fontinalis C Mottled sculpin Cottus bairdi A S S A Creek chub Semotilus atromaculatus S Pumpkinseed Lepomis gibbosus S Richness 5 3 4 6

Table 3. Trout population densities and standing crops in Hoyes Run – Station 040, 2005.

Density/Standing Crop Hoyes Run, Station 040 Combined adult trout/km 159 + 10 Adult brook trout/km 47 + 14 Adult brown trout/km 47 + 14 Adult rainbow trout/km 66 + 0 Combined adult trout kg/ha 15 + 1 Adult brook trout kg/ha 3+ 1 Adult brown trout kg/ha 4 + 1 Adult rainbow trout kg/ha 8 + 0 Combined YOY trout/km 309 + 3 YOY brook trout/km 28 + 0 YOY brown trout/km 187 + 4 YOY rainbow trout/km 94 + 0 C29

Table 4. List of aquatic macroinvertebrates and protocol data results for Hoyes Run, Station 020, 21 June 2004.

Order Genus N Ephemeroptera Paraleptophlebia sp 9 Baetis sp 95 Stenonema sp 2 Drunella sp 1 Ephemerella sp 5 Plecoptera Peltoperla sp 5 Leuctra sp 37 Amphinemura sp 19 Alloperla sp 11 Perlidae 6 Acroneuria sp 1 Trichoptera Hydropsyche sp 64 Dolophilodes sp 35 Potamyia sp 66 Glossosoma sp 2 Hydropsychidae pupae 4 Diptera Chironomidae – Tanypodinae 21 Orthocladiinae 1 Chironominae 4 Empididae 2 Tipulidae – Dicranota sp 2 Antocha sp 2 Odonata Calopteryx sp 1 Hemiptera Veliidae – Rhagovelia sp 2 Coleoptera Psephenidae – Ectopria sp 1 Elmidae – Stenelmis sp 31 Megaloptera Nigronia sp 6 Isopoda Asellus sp 4 Amphipoda Gammarus sp 59 Annelida 11 Decapoda Cambarinae 2 Cambarus sp 1 s = 32 N = 512 Protocol data Richness = 32 HBI = 4.17 very good Scraper filterer ratio = 0.22 EPT = # 362 taxa 16 EPT/C = 13.9 Dominant family = 26.2% Hydropsychidae CPOM = 0.12 Diversity = 3.82 Equitability = 0.6

C30

800

700 669

600

500

404 400

Trout/km 319 309 293 291 300

186 200 159 144 146 121 101 110 100 66

0 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 Year

Adult combined species YOY combined species

Figure 1. Adult and young –of- year (YOY) combined trout species densities in Hoyes Run, Station 040, 1998 – 2005.

C31

Figure 2. Stream temperatures recorded in Hoyes Run upstream of the grouting project site, 2004.

Figure 3. Stream temperatures recorded in Hoyes Run downstream of the grouting project site and limestone quarry sediment control ponds, 2004.

C32

Upper Savage River

Introduction

The Savage River has a long history of quality trout fishing. It has been managed under a variety of innovative regulations over the years including catch and release, fly fishing only, trophy trout regulations, wild trout management, and stocking for harvest (put and take). The Savage was first stocked on a regular basis with trout from the “new” Bear Creek Trout Rearing Station in the early 1930’s. Trout stocking continues today with about 10,000 adult rainbow trout stocked annually in the 7.2km (4.5 miles) Put and Take area from the Savage River Reservoir upstream to Poplar Lick. Put and Take regulations in effect for the area includes a five-trout daily creel limit, no tackle restrictions, and two closures seasonally for stocking.

Maryland DNR acquired approximately 1.6km (1 mile) of the mainstem upper Savage River from the confluence of Poplar Lick upstream to the Merrill’s Bridge in 2000. Prior to 2004, this area was managed under the Maryland Statewide trout regulation that included a two fish daily creel limit, no bait or tackle restrictions, and a year-round season. A Delayed Harvest Trout Management regulation scheme went into effect within this area effective 1 January 2004. Regulations include a catch and release season with artificial lures and flies only from October 1 through June 15. From June 16 through September 30 the daily creel limit is two trout with no special bait or tackle restrictions.

The purpose of this study was to monitor trends in wild trout numbers, species composition, growth rates, and reproductive success in the Savage River, upstream of the Savage River Reservoir. The study results will be used to evaluate the current trout regulation scheme, as well as serve as a basis for future trout management decisions.

Methods

Sampling stations were selected to include all trout management zones, as well as the habitat types present in the stream reach to be surveyed (pool, riffle, run, etc). The total length and width of each station was measured to the nearest 0.1 m. Stream surface area was computed and expressed in hectares. Trout populations were estimated in four upper Savage River sampling stations during this study period using the three-pass regression technique outlined by Zippin (1958). Fish were collected using dip nets and a Smith-Root Type VII backpack electro-fishing unit. The survey was initiated at the downstream end of the station and three electrofishing passes were made through the entire station. During each pass all trout were collected and placed in live boxes. All trout were anesthetized with a 1:10 solution of clove oil and ethanol alcohol, identified to the species level, measured for total length (TL) to the nearest millimeter, weighed to the nearest gram, and returned alive to the stream at the end of the survey. The coefficient of

C33 condition (K) described by Lagler (1952) was used as a measure of fish condition. Trout population estimates were calculated using the MICROFISH 2.2 software package (Van Deventer and Platts 1985).

Four sampling stations were established during this study period. Station 1 was located within the area of the upper Savage River classified as natural trout waters, Station 2 was located in the newly established Delayed Harvest Trout Management Area, and Stations 3 and 4 were within the Put and Take (P&T) Trout Management Area. GPS coordinates for each station are contained in Table 1.

Water temperatures in the upper Savage River were recorded on an hourly basis from June through September 2002 and 2004 using an Onset StowAway Tidbit temperature recorder. The temperature recorder was deployed in Station 2.

Results

A list of the common and scientific names of fish species collected in the upper Savage River during this study period is contained in Table 2. The river supports a diverse fish assemblage indicative of a coldwater/coolwater fish community (Steiner 2000). Twenty one species representing seven families were collected in the upper Savage River during this study period.

A reproducing brook trout population, characterized by multiple year-classes, was documented in the upper Savage River. Station 1, within the natural trout water area, had the highest estimated adult and YOY brook trout densities (Figures 1 and 2). This station also contained the most diverse brook trout age and size structure of the four sample stations (Figure 3). Both adult and YOY brook trout densities have increased since 2002. Only one adult rainbow trout of hatchery origin and two wild brown trout were collected within this natural trout water area during this study period.

The length frequency distribution of brook trout in Station 2 suggests that few brook trout survive past age 2+ (Figure 4) in this area of the river. Adult brook trout densities have shown an increase since 2002 (Figure 1), however YOY densities have remained low (Figure 2). Hatchery rainbow trout were found in the highest abundance within this station, however at a relatively low density during this study period. About 1,500 adult rainbow trout were stocked in the spring and an additional 50 to 500 rainbow trout were stocked in the fall in this Delayed Harvest Trout Management Area during 2004 and 2005. Wild brown trout are found in low densities in this area of the river (Table 2).

Both Stations 3 and 4, within the P&T area, had low brook trout densities during this study period. Adult brook trout densities in Station 3 during 2004 were only 24% of the densities observed in 2002, and this station was not sampled during 2005. Few YOY were collected in Station 3, and no YOY brook trout were collected in Station 4 during

C34 this study period. Low numbers of adult wild brown trout and hatchery rainbow trout were also collected in these stations. This area received about 10,000 adult hatchery rainbow trout (source – Bear Creek Rearing Station) during each spring of this study period.

Temperatures in the upper Savage River at Station 2 routinely exceeded the generally accepted thermal maximum of 20°C (68°F) for the maintenance of a viable reproducing brook trout population. Water temperatures peaked near 26°C (79°F) during late July on several consecutive days in July 2002. During 2004 water temperatures peaked near at 23°C (73.4°F) during July, and routinely exceeded 20°C throughout the month of July and late August 2004.

Discussion

The upper Savage River supports a native reproducing brook trout population throughout the area upstream of the Savage Reservoir, as evidenced by the presence of multiple year classes and young of the year (YOY). Brook trout abundance generally increases as distance upstream of the Savage River Reservoir increases. The most upstream sample station - Station 1 - was located in a completely forested area of the Savage River State Forest that provides total overhead canopy during summer. Stations 2, 3, and 4 were located in areas with varying degrees of riparian forest cover and a lesser relative proportion of overhead canopy. Water temperature regimes within the river may be the most significant limiting factor for brook trout in the upper Savage River. Managers generally regard 20°C as an upper limit for optimal conditions for wild brook trout management and attempt to limit temperature to a range < 20°C in the tailwater areas of dams where some form of temperature modification is possible. However, wild brook trout in the upper Savage River were exposed to water temperatures well in excess of 20°C on a daily basis throughout the summer period during 2004. Lee and Rinne (1980) determined the CTM (critical thermal maximum) for brook trout as 28°C, defined as the temperature at which the fish loses its ability to escape lethal conditions, or essentially its ability to maintain equilibrium and swim. He also found no difference between the upper water temperature tolerance levels for brown, rainbow, or brook trout in his determinations of CTM’s for those species. He also reported that about half the brook trout in his study tolerated water temperatures fluctuating from 22 to 28°C over a 96-hour period. The ability to sustain high water temperatures, routinely in excess of 20°C is the only explanation for the presence of wild brook trout in upper Savage River sampling stations during this study period.

The lowest brook trout abundance was documented within the Put and Take management area. The presence of hatchery trout is generally regarded as a limiting factor on wild trout populations due to displacement by hatchery trout and accompanying heavy fishing pressure (Vincent 1987). Brook trout populations however did not show a decline within the newly established Delayed Harvest Trout Management Area, and this area received a stocking of adult hatchery trout for the first time during 2004. Delayed C35

Harvest Trout Management actually provides more protection from harvest for brook trout, as a catch and release season encompasses the October 1 through June 15th time period. Also, natural bait is prohibited during this time period, which may also allow less mortality attributable to hooking injury. A daily creel limit two is in effect for the remainder of the year. Under natural trout water regulations, harvest of two trout per day is allowed year-round with no bait or tackle restrictions (MD DNR 2005). Staff did observe that there were few brook trout greater than 200mm in the Delayed Harvest and Put and Take Areas during this study period, suggesting that once brook trout reach this length they are vulnerable to harvest.

Management Recommendations

It is recommended that this study be continued in 2006 in order to monitor the status of trout populations in the upper Savage River and provide information with which to develop appropriate trout management strategies.

C36

Table 1. Savage River trout population sampling stations locations, upstream of the Savage River Reservoir, 2002 - 2005.

Station ID GPS coordinates start GPS coordinates stop 1 N39°35’827” W79°03’924” N39°35’768” W79°03’903” 2 N39°35’139” W79°05’180” N39°35’163” W79°05’129” 3 N39°34’216” W79°05’964” N39°34’279” W79°05’857” 4 N39°33’822” W79°06’555” N39°33’836” W79°06’514”

Table 2. List of common and scientific names, and general occurrence of fish collected in the Savage River in sample stations upstream of the Savage River Reservoir, 2002 - 2005. Occurrence rated as abundant (A), common (C), scarce (S), or absent (-).

Common Name Scientific Name 1 2 3 4 Central stoneroller Campostoma anomalum A A A A Rosyside dace Clinostomus funduloides C C C C Cutlips minnow Exoglossum maxillingua S S S S Common shiner Luxilus cornutus - - S S River chub Nocomis micropogon S - C C Blacknose dace Rhinichthys atratulus A A A A Longnose dace Rhinichthys cataractae A A A A Creek chub Semotilus atromaculatus C C - C White sucker Catostomus commersoni C A A A Northern hog sucker Hypentelium nigricans - - C C Yellow bullhead Ameiurus natalis - - S - Margined madtom Noturus insignis - - S S Rainbow trout Oncorhynchus mykiss S C C C Brown trout Salmo trutta S S S S Brook trout Salvelinus fontinalis C C C S Potomac sculpin Cottus girardi C C C C Blue Ridge sculpin Cottus caeruleomentum A A A A Rock bass Ambloplites rupestris - - C C Pumpkinseed Lepomis gibbosus S - - S Smallmouth bass Micropterus dolomieu - - - S Fantail darter Etheostoma flabellare A A A A Total species = 21 15 13 18 20

C37

350 328

300 282 276

250

200 Station 1 169 Station 2 173 Station 3 150 Station 4 Adulttrout/km

100 105 105 58

50 22 8 25 0 2002 2004 2005 Year

Figure 1. Adult brook trout densities in the upper Savage River, 2002 – 2005.

C38

500 453 450

400

350

300

Station 1 250 Station 2

YOY trout/km 200

141 150 104 100

39 38 50 15

0 2002 2004 2005 Year

Figure 2. Young of year brook trout densities in the upper Savage River, 2002 – 2005.

30

25

20

15 Number of trout

10

5

0 45 75 105 135 165 195 225 255 285 Mid-point of size class (mm)

Figure 3. Length frequency distribution of brook trout in the upper Savage River in Station 1, 2005.

C39

30

25

20

15 Number of trout

10

5

0 45 75 105 135 165 195 225 255 285 Mid-point of size class (mm)

Figure 4. Length frequency distribution of brook trout in the upper Savage River in Station 2, 2005.

C40

Savage River Tailwater

Introduction

The Savage River Tailwater (SRT) is a 7.9km stream reach of the Savage River between the Savage River Dam and its confluence with the North Branch Potomac River (NBPR). The SRT was managed entirely as a put and take trout fishery prior to 1987. After the completion of Jennings Randolph Reservoir on the NBPR upstream of the mouth of the Savage River in 1982, The Army Corp of Engineers (ACOE), operators of both reservoirs, coordinated flow management from the Savage Reservoir closely with that of Jennings Randolph Dam. The result was more flexibility in the management of the Savage River Dam, and increased potential for wild trout management downstream. By 1986, the ACOE had begun to implement flow and lake level management recommendations from the MD DNR Inland Fisheries Service designed to enhance coldwater fisheries management downstream of the Savage River Dam. The SRT is regulated under Trophy Trout regulations implemented in January 1987 and further modified in 1991. The current regulation strategy includes a Fly-fishing Only Trophy Trout Management Area located in the section of the river from the Savage River Reservoir downstream approximately 2.1km to the Allegany Bridge. A Trophy Trout Management Area, restricted to the use of single hook artificial lures or flies, is located between the Allegany Bridge and the mouth of the river, a distance of approximately 4.4km. Regulations for both Trophy Trout Management Areas include a year-round open season, a 305mm minimum size limit for brook trout (Salvelinus fontinalis), a 457mm minimum size limit for brown trout (Salmo trutta), and a two-trout daily creel limit. There is no minimum size limit on rainbow trout (Oncorhynchus mykiss) in either area. The stocking of hatchery trout in the SRT was discontinued after 1990. Today the Savage River tailwater area is arguably one of the premier wild trout fisheries in the Eastern US.

The purpose of this study was to monitor trout population parameters of the very high quality wild brook and brown trout fishery that has developed in the SRT since 1987. The objectives included:

• Estimate adult and young of year trout population densities annually in three established sampling stations.

• Estimate adult trout standing crops annually.

• Calculate indices of physical condition of adult trout.

Methods

Sampling stations were selected to include all the habitat types present in the stream reach to be surveyed (pool, riffle, run, etc). The total length and width of each station was measured to the nearest 0.1 m. Stream surface area was computed and

C41 expressed in hectares. Trout populations were estimated using the three pass regression technique outlined by Zippin (1958). Fish were collected using dip nets and a Smith- Root 2.5 GPP bank mounted electro-fishing unit equipped with two anodes. The survey was initiated at the downstream end of the station and three electrofishing passes were made through the entire station. During each pass all trout were collected and placed in live boxes. All trout were anesthetized with a 1:10 solution of clove oil and ethanol alcohol, identified to the species level, measured for total length (TL) to the nearest millimeter, weighed to the nearest gram, and returned alive to the stream at the completion of the survey.

The coefficient of condition (K) described by Lagler (1952) was used as a measure of fish condition. Trout population estimates were calculated using the MICROFISH 2.2 software package (Van Deventer and Platts 1985).

Trout populations were estimated at three stations in the SRT during 2001 - 2005. Station 1 was located in the 2.1km Fly Fishing Only section, while stations 2 and 3 were located in the 4.4km Artificial Lures/Flies section. GPS coordinates for each station are contained in Table 1.

Results

A list of fish species collected in the SRT during the last five-year study period is contained in Table 2. This fish species assemblage, consisting mainly of salmonids, cottids, and cyprinids, is indicative of a coldwater community (Steiner 2000).

Estimates of adult trout species standing crops (kg/ha) in the SRT from 2001 to 2005 are presented in Figure 1. Standing crops during the last five-year study period have been stable for the combined trout species estimate. The five-year mean standing crops for combined trout species increased by 17% over the previous five-year study period (Pavol and Klotz 2001). Brook trout standing crops in the SRT have remained relatively stable during the last five years (Figure 1), but were significantly greater than the previous five year study period (t-test, α = 0.05), showing a 42% increase. Brown trout standing crop was also relatively stable during the last five years (Figure 1), and was not significantly greater than the previous five year study (t-test, α = 0.05). Brown trout continue to make up the majority of the combined species standing crop, comprising about 80% of the total.

Figure 2 shows the adult trout species densities (trout per km) for the years 2001 through 2005. The management objective of 621 adult trout per km was exceeded for all years in this five-year period. Compared to the previous five-year study period, the current five-year mean showed an increase of 36% for adult brook trout and a 22% decrease for brown trout, for an overall increase of 12%. However, adult brook trout densities did show a 43% decrease from 2003 to 2005, primarily due to the poor year- class produced in 2003 (Figure 3). Adult brown trout maintained a relatively constant

C42 adult density, and continue to be the dominate salmonid species in the SRT (Figure 2), comprising about 70% of the total number of salmonids in 2005. Rainbow trout are found in low densities in the SRT, and are emigrants from the North Branch Potomac River or from the Savage River Reservoir, where they are stocked as part of the put and grow or put and take trout stocking program.

Young-of-year (YOY) trout densities for 2001 through 2005 are shown in Figure 3. During the current study period, weak brook trout year classes were observed in 2001, 2003, and 2005 when the estimated YOY brook trout density was less than 250/km. Brown trout YOY densities were less than brook trout for all years during this five-year study period. No natural reproduction of rainbow trout has been documented in the SRT, and the numbers presented on Figure 3 are the result of fingerlings stocked in the NBPR that emigrate into the SRT. The comparison of means of YOY densities between this five-year period and the previous five-year period shows no significant difference (t- test, α = 0.05).

The densities of quality-sized trout in the SRT for 2001 - 2005 are presented in Figure 4. The mean number of quality sized brown trout (> 305mm) per km during this five-year study period was significantly greater (t-test, α = 0.05) than the previous five- year period (Pavol and Klotz 2001), showing a 29% increase. Numbers of quality size brown trout supported by the strong 1997 year class, peaked in 2002 at age 5+, and have declined somewhat since. The mean number of quality-size brook trout (> 229mm) per km was stable during this study period, and was significantly greater than for the previous five-year study period (t-test, α = 0.05), showing a 30% increase.

Average size and condition of adult brook trout and brown trout in the SRT for this study period are contained in Tables 3 and 4. Condition factor (K) was in the optimal range (0.90-1.10) for brook and brown trout for all years. This is an indication that habitat and forage availability is sufficient to support current trout numbers. Average size and weight of trout was largely influenced by the number of yearlings in the adult population. Tables 3 and 4 show that both brook trout and brown trout reach the minimum trophy harvestable size (305mm and 457mm respectively), however trout of these sizes are uncommon in the SRT.

Discussion

Trophy trout regulations were first implemented on a limited basis in 1987, and then extended throughout the SRT in 1991. The stocking of hatchery rainbow trout was discontinued after 1990. The minimum size requirements for harvestable brook and brown trout in the SRT protect a high proportion of the wild trout population and the termination of stocking eliminated competition for space and forage between wild and hatchery trout. As a result, wild trout standing crops have steadily increased, reaching the highest levels observed to date during this study period. Initially, wild brook trout numbers increased quickly, exceeding the brown trout population in 1988. Since 1988,

C43 the wild trout population of the SRT has reflected the gradual domination of brown trout in terms of standing crop and density. The continuing increases in wild trout standing crop in the SRT have occurred as a result of steadily increasing brown trout abundance, while brook trout abundance indices have remained relatively stable at lower levels for 10 years. During this five-year study period, combined adult trout standing crops and densities reached record levels in the SRT.

Brown trout have increasingly dominated the SRT despite the clear advantage in reproductive success of brook trout. Other investigators have reported comparable findings in streams where brook and brown trout coexist (Waters 1983; Faush and White 1981; Kaeding 1980). Barnhart and Engstrom Heg (1984) reported that a similar pattern of brook and brown trout standing crops developed in the Batten Kill River subsequent to the implementation of restrictive harvest regulations. Various reasons are offered. Brown trout, often larger in size, displace brook trout to marginal habitat (Faush and White 1981; Dewald 1990). Brown trout are more aggressive than brook trout and compete more successfully for limited space (Waters 1983). Brown trout prey effectively on young-of-the-year brook trout while consuming few YOY brown trout (Alexander 1977).

Cooper (1952) observed that brook trout are more easily caught than brown trout. Maryland’s hooking mortality studies on the SRT support that observation (Pavol and Klotz 1996). However, harvest is a minimal component of total brook trout mortality in the SRT because the minimum size limit (> 305mm) protects all but a small proportion of the population. Population studies carried out on the Savage River Tailwater from 1991 to the present indicate that adult brook trout are more abundant in the portion of the SRT in the area restricted to fly-fishing than in the area where the use of artificial lures or flies is permitted. Brook trout experienced a significantly higher mortality rate than brown trout when captured on the same treble hook equipped artificial lures during a hooking mortality study conducted in the SRT (Pavol and Klotz 1996). The study concluded that brook trout were more vulnerable to capture with artificial lures than brown trout, and that relatively low levels of angler effort with treble hook equipped artificial lures produced a disproportionately higher mortality among brook trout. As a result, the regulation regarding treble hook lures was modified to require the use of artificial lures with a single hook point in the Artificial Lures and Flies Trophy Trout Management Area of the SRT effective January 1, 2004.

Rainbow trout have generally made up a small proportion of overall trout numbers in the SRT. Rainbow trout are not stocked in the SRT and reproduction by rainbow trout has not been documented in any year since this study was initiated in 1985. Rainbow trout are stocked as adults in the NBPR as part of put and take trout management and fingerling rainbow trout have been stocked in the NBPR since 2002 for put and grow management. Emigration into the SRT by stocked rainbow trout has been minimal in past years, and has generally consisted of low numbers of adults entering the SRT near its confluence with the NBPR. However during 2004, the mean density and

C44 biomass of adult rainbow trout equaled brook trout in the SRT. The majority of adult rainbow trout collected in the SRT during 2004 were yearlings that had apparently survived from fingerlings stocked in the NBPR in 2003. Because the primary management goal for the SRT is the maintenance of a wild trout population, the presence of substantial numbers of hatchery rainbow trout is contrary to management objectives. In order to minimize the number of rainbow trout in the SRT, fingerling trout stocking in the NBPR at the closest stocking site, about 0.5km upstream of the mouth of the SRT was discontinued in 2004. Fingerling rainbow trout stocking continues in the NBPR downstream of an impassable low dam located about 0.5km downstream of the mouth of the SRT.

The overall quality of the SRT fishery is truly extraordinary. No other trout fishery in Maryland provides a comparable level of wild trout abundance in such pristine surroundings. Although comprising a relatively small proportion of all trout in the SRT, wild brook trout dominate the remainder of the watershed, occupying many more stream miles than brown trout. Wild brown trout are present in less than 10% of streams supporting self-sustaining trout populations in the upper North Branch Potomac River watershed. The SRT, characterized by an abundance of wild brown trout including many quality-sized fish, offers a unique opportunity for anglers. However, the continued presence of a viable wild brook trout component in the SRT trout fishery is desirable from a management perspective. The continued maintenance of a significant wild brook trout component in the SRT is considered a key element of overall wild trout management in the SRT. Their presence demonstrates that brook trout, the only trout species native to Maryland streams, can maintain a viable population despite direct competition for available habitat with the non-native brown trout. Brook trout strike flies and lures aggressively and are relatively easier for anglers to catch than brown trout, thus contributing to the overall perception of fishing quality. Although brook trout made up only about 21% of all adult trout in the SRT during 2005, contacts with anglers indicated that brook trout were routinely caught there, including a large proportion of in the quality-size class.

Management Recommendations

All project work objectives for this study period were accomplished. However, further study will be required in order to continue to monitor the status of wild brook and brown trout in response to trophy trout management in the SRT

It is recommended that this study be continued in 2006.

C45

Table 1. GPS coordinates for Savage River Tailwater trout population estimate stations, 2001-2005.

Station No. Start Lat/Long End Lat/Long 1 - Above P. Dam N 39°30.103 /W 79°07.172 N 39°30.092 /W 79°07.302 2 - Aaron Run N 39°29.157 /W 79°05.004 N 39°29.149 /W 79°05.124 3 - Mouth N 39°28.878 /W 79°04.127 N 39°28.875 /W 79°04.265

Table 2. A list of common and scientific names and general occurrence of fish species collected in the Savage River Tailwater, 2001-2005.

Common Name Scientific Name General Occurrence Blacknose dace Rhinichthys atratulus Common Longnose dace Rhinichthys cataractae Common White sucker Catostomus commersoni Common Cutthroat trout Oncorhynchus clarki Scarce Rainbow trout Oncorhynchus mykiss Common Brown trout Salmo trutta Abundant Brook trout Salvelinus fontinalis Abundant Potomac sculpin Cottus girardi Abundant Blue Ridge sculpin Cottus caeruleomentum Abundant Rock bass Ambloplites rupestris Scarce

C46

Table 3. Mean size and condition of adult brook trout with ranges in parenthesis in the Savage River Tailwater, 2001 – 2005.

Year N Mean TL (mm) Mean W (g) Mean K factor 2001 142 198 (143-295) 85( 27-208) 1.02 (0.60-1.56) 2002 107 215 (110-298) 114 (10-309) 1.07 (0.66-1.31) 2003 137 197 (142-320) 84 (17-302) 1.01 (0.54-1.86) 2004 66 221 (165-285) 118 (20-257) 1.01 (0.42-1.28) 2005 81 215 (140-305) 114 (17-295) 1.07 (0.62-1.66)

Table 4. Mean size and condition of adult brown trout with ranges in parenthesis in the Savage River Tailwater, 2001 – 2005.

Year N Mean TL (mm) Mean W (g) Mean K 2001 263 287(152-400) 257 (38-682) 1.01(0.53-1.30) 2002 227 304 (198-490) 292(97-1122) 0.99(0.41-1.27) 2003 277 273 (152-420) 235 (24-803) 0.99 (0.40-1.72) 2004 251 286 (162-420) 261 (24-763) 0.99 (0.56-1.29) 2005 276 280 (168-407) 248 (43-663) 1.00 (0.38-1.28)

C47

120

97 100 94 95 92 92

79 80 75 75 76 73

60 Kg/ha

40

20 13 13 13 9 10

10 8 7 6 0 4 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 Year

Comb. Species Brook trout Brown trout Rainbow trout

Figure 1. Adult trout standing crops (Kg/ha) in the Savage River Tailwater, 2001 - 2005.

C48

900

807 807 800

703 714 700 660

600 523 503 483 500 459 416

400

Trout per kilometer per Trout 300 259 259

195 200 148 120122

100 60 60 42 22

0 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 Year

Comb. Species Brook trout Brown trout Rainbow trout

Figure 2. Adult trout densities (trout per kilometer) in the Savage River Tailwater, 2001 – 2005.

C49

1200

1013 1000 898

800

674

600 554

461 YOY trout/km

400 359

242246 242 268 239 221 220 200 195

93 38 18 0 00 0 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 Year

Comb. Species Brook trout Brown trout Rainbow trout

Figure 3. Young of year trout densities in the Savage River Tailwater, 2001 - 2005.

C50

300

250 239 242

220 206

200 188 m

150 Qualty size trout /k trout size Qualty 100

60 49 44 45 50 40

0 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 Year Brook trout Brown trout

Figure 4. Quality size trout (> 229mm brook trout and > 305mm brown trout) densities in the Savage River Tailwater, 2001 – 2005.

C51

Beaver Creek

Introduction

Beaver Creek is one of the largest limestone streams in Maryland. Originating as a freestone stream on the west slope of South Mountain, the majority of the flow during the summer months is influenced by the numerous springs in the Hagerstown Valley. The largest spring (~11,356 l/min) influencing Beaver Creek is used as the water supply for the Albert Powell Trout Hatchery. Upstream of the spring’s influence, Beaver Creek is considered a warm-water stream and flows underground much of the year due to local Karst geology. Intensive agricultural operations (dairy and row crop) within the Hagerstown Valley have severely impacted Beaver Creek throughout its length.

Beaver Creek has historically been managed as a put-and-take trout fishery with a five trout per day creel limit. Effective 1 January 2004, approximately one mile of Beaver Creek formerly under the control of the Antietam Fly Anglers was established as a catch-and-return/fly-fishing-only area open to the public. This area extends from the mouth of Black Rock Creek downstream to the upper boundary of the Perini property, approximately 161m above Beaver Creek Road. The special regulation area is entirely on private property. Due to favorable year-round water temperatures and some natural reproduction of brown trout, this area is now managed for wild trout.

Surveys have been conducted in the location of the current catch-and-release area since 2000 to monitor trout populations and water temperatures. Management activities were conducted to enhance and evaluate the coldwater fishery within the catch-and- release area with the following objectives:

• Obtain estimates of standing crop and abundance for adult and young-of-year (YOY) trout using the Zippin three-pass depletion method.

• Improve potential for natural reproduction by transplanting wild young-of-year brown trout from the Gunpowder tailwater to Beaver Creek.

• Stock Shasta strain fingerling rainbow trout and evaluate survival and reproductive potential of this strain.

• Determine relative abundance on non-salmonid fish species.

• Record summer stream temperatures.

C52

Methods

In order to collect more definitive population data, two fixed electrofishing stations were established within the C&R area in 2004; a third station in the P&T area was added in 2005. Sampling stations were selected to include all the habitat types present in the stream reach to be surveyed (pool, riffle, run, etc.). The total length and mean width of the station were measured to the nearest tenth of a meter. Stream surface area was computed and expressed in hectares. The survey was initiated at the downstream end of the station and three electrofishing passes were made through the entire station. During each pass all trout were collected and placed in float boxes. The relative abundances of non-game species were observed and recorded. Subjective relative abundance was expressed as rare, scarce, common or abundant. All trout were anesthetized with a 1:10 solution of clove oil and ethanol alcohol, identified to the species level, measured for total length to the nearest millimeter, weighed to the nearest gram, and returned alive to the stream at the end of the survey. Trout population estimates were derived using the depletion method (P < 0.05) described by Zippin (1958) using the MICROFISH 2.2 software package (VanDeventer and Platts 1985). Physical condition was evaluated using the coefficient of condition (K) as described by Lagler (1952). A Smith-Root Model 12 backpack electrofisher (DC 200 volts, 60 pps) was used to collect and identify fish species.

Prior surveys consisted of single-pass samples due to sparse trout populations and scattered habitat. Electrofishing seconds have been recorded since 2002 to obtain CPUEHr data. Trout collected during the sample were measured to the nearest mm and released downstream. The same 0.3km (0.8 mile) station was surveyed 2000 through 2003. This station was shortened considerably and another station added in 2004 when the three-pass depletion method was initiated.

Stream temperatures were monitored using StowAway TidBit thermographs manufactured by Onset Corp. and Boxcar Pro 4 software. Thermographs were placed at Route 70, Route 40, and Toms Road to monitor summer stream temperatures.

Results and Discussion

Electrofishing

Beaver Creek is providing anglers with an attractive trout fishery. Though sampling protocol was changed in 2004 to more accurately document the improving fishery, CPUEHr data continued to be recorded to allow some comparison with earlier samples (Table 1). The catch rate for adult brown trout was quite a bit higher in 2005 than first recorded in 2002. Trout population data for the two sites within the catch-and- release area were very similar in 2004 and indicated a high total standing crop of trout. Extensive habitat improvement work that required the original stream channel to be dewatered for several weeks during construction was done in the upper Jackson station

C53 during the fall of 2004. A decrease in the trout population was expected at this site in 2005 (Table 2). Both the standing crop and abundance of adult brown trout increased significantly (95% CL) at the lower Jackson station from 2004 to 2005 (Table 3) whereas rainbow numbers declined. However, the highest total trout (rainbow and brown combined), as well as brown trout, standing crop and abundance values recorded in 2005 were from the station within the put-and-take area (Table 4) (Figure 1). Excellent habitat is believed to be responsible for the higher numbers.

No brown trout YOY were collected or observed in Beaver Creek during 2005. This was disappointing, particularly in light of the excellent hatch produced in Little Beaver Creek. Little Beaver Creek is a small, spring-fed tributary to Beaver Creek with similar water quality. Recent habitat improvement projects within the catch-and-release area are expected to improve spawning sites in Beaver Creek.

Few rainbow trout fingerlings were collected in the C&R area in 2005 as a result of stocking Shasta strain fingerlings in September rather than May or June when the Kamloops strain has been stocked (Table 1). Extra time was needed to allow these fingerlings to reach a size suitable for marking (adipose fin clip) so that this strain can be identified during future surveys. The rainbow fingerlings collected during 2005 were the result of natural reproduction or escapees from the Albert Powell Trout Hatchery.

Beaver Creek trout grew quickly and generally displayed excellent physical condition. The mean condition factor K for adult brown and rainbow trout in 2005 was 1.03±0.08 and 1.04±0.05 (95% CL), respectively. A length frequency distribution of trout (brown and rainbow combined) collected by electrofishing in 2005 suggests that trout will reach nearly 500mm (20”) in total length after four years of growth (Figure 1). This growth rate has been verified using adipose fin-clipped brown YOY stocked in 2002 and 2004.

Fingerling Transplants

Wild brown trout YOY were collected from the Gunpowder tailwater in 2002, 2004 and 2005 and stocked into the Beaver Creek C&R area with the objective of increasing the potential for natural reproduction (Table 5). All of the YOY were marked by removing the adipose fin. A break down of marked fish collected in the 2005 is presented in Table 6. Overall, marked fish made up 43% of the total number of brown trout collected. The 2002 yearclass had a mean length of 450mm (17.7”) in their fourth year of growth. The largest marked brown trout measured 555mm (21.8”) and was collected from the put-and-take area.

Fish Species

The relative abundance of non-salmonid fish species collected during the electrofishing surveys is presented in Table 7. Warmwater species, such as largemouth

C54 bass and carp, are not common, but originate from a warmwater irrigation pond on Black Rock Creek, an upstream tributary. A large-scale stream restoration project scheduled for 2006 will eliminate the pond from the stream channel and is expected to improve the coldwater potential of this important Beaver Creek tributary.

Thermographs

Water temperatures were found to be excellent for the survival and growth of trout within the catch-and-release area (Figure 2) downstream to Toms Road. Temperatures generally remained below 20°C (68°F) except during run-off events. Even at Toms Road where stream temperatures were noticeably higher than Route 70 and Route 40, temperatures did not exceed 23°C (73°F).

Macroinvertebrate data collected during 2005 are presented in Appendix I. Macroinvertebrate data analysis protocols are presented in Appendix II.

Management Recommendations

Trout populations within the Beaver Creek Fly-Fishing-Only, Catch-and-Release Area are providing anglers with a popular sport fishery. Ongoing stream improvement projects are expected to ultimately improve carrying capacity and spawning habitat, but the disturbances have made it more difficult to evaluate the trout population response to the special regulations enacted in 2004. Currently, the excellent habitat within the put- and-take area is holding more fish than the recently disturbed catch-and-return area. Fast growth and excellent physical condition hint at the potential for Beaver Creek to produce trophy-sized trout under restrictive harvest regulations. Recent and planned habitat improvement projects should increase both the carrying capacity for adult trout as well as improve spawning habitat and nursery areas for young trout. Specific recommendations are:

• Allow brown trout to be stocked downstream of Route 40 only.

• Monitor fish populations within the catch-and-return area annually with emphasis on documenting natural reproduction of brown trout, evaluating survival, growth, and reproductive potential of the transplanted brown trout and the Shasta strain rainbow fingerlings.

• Continue to monitor Beaver Creek summer stream temperatures.

• Extend the Fly-Fishing-Only, Catch-and-Return Area upstream to Route 70 to allow this unique resource to reach its full potential.

C55

Table 1. Electrofishing catch rates (CPUEHr) for brown and rainbow trout collected from the current Beaver Creek catch-and-release area (established in 2004) 2002 – 2005 by the MD DNR.

2002 2003 2004 2005 Brown adults 7 33 21 38 Brown YOY 0 2 18 0 Rainbow adults 30 22 93 31 Rainbow YOY 63 152 66 7

Table 2. Beaver Creek trout population data collected by electrofishing at the upper Jackson property site in the catch-and-return area, 2004, 2005. MD DNR. (95% CL).

Total Brown Rainbow Population Parameter 2004 2005 2004 2005 2004 2005 Standing Crop (Kg/hectare) 59 ± 1 39 ± 3 16 10 43 ± 1 29 ± 3 Density – trout/hectare 187 ± 4 98 ± 8 36 20 151 ± 5 78 ± 9 YOY/hectare 92 ± 2 0 8 0 84 ± 3 0

Table 3. Beaver Creek trout population data collected by electrofishing at the lower Jackson property site in the catch-and-return area, 2004, 2005. MD DNR. (95% CL).

Total Brown Rainbow Population Parameter 2004 2005 2004 2005 2004 2005 Standing Crop (Kg/hectare) 65 ± 6 57± 3 14 ± 5 30 ± 2 51 ± 5 33 ± 3 Density -trout/hectare 168 ± 14 214 ± 10 30 ± 11 145± 8 138 ± 13 69 ± 7 YOY/hectare 236 ± 8 31 79 ± 3 0 158 ± 9 31

C56

Table 4. Beaver Creek trout population data collected by electrofishing within the Put- and-take area, 2005. MD DNR. (95% CL).

Put-and-Take Total Brown Rainbow Standing Crop 69 ± 7 47 ± 7 26 (Kg/hectare) Density – trout/hectare 286 ± 27 222 ± 33 63 YOY/hectare 12 ± .7 0 12 ± .7

Table 5. Beaver Creek fish stocking 2001 – 2005. MD DNR. * adipose fin clipped.

Date Species Size Number Stocking Location Source 6/11/2001 Rainbow trout 56/lb 1500 Rt 70 – Toms Rd APH 5/13/2002 Rainbow trout 69/lb 4000 Rt 70 –Roxbury Rd APH Brown trout Beaver Creek Gunpowder 10/23/2002 55 – 134mm 149 (wild)* Church Rd tailwater 5/ 6/2003 Rainbow trout 100/lb 7000 Rt 70 –Toms Rd APH 5/11/2004 Rainbow trout 60/lb 1500 Rt 70 –Toms Rd APH 9/21/2004 Brown trout 14/lb 750 Toms Rd –mouth Stickleys-LWC Brown trout Beaver Creek Gunpowder 11/1/2004 98 (wild) Church Rd tailwater Brown trout Beaver Creek Gunpowder 9/28/2005 155 (wild)* Church Rd tailwater Rainbow trout 6/ 2/2005 400/lb 4000 Rt 40 – Toms Rd APH (Shasta)* Rainbow trout Beaver Creek 9/ 7/2005 750 Fountain Rock (Shasta)* Church Rd

Table 6. Recapture data for adipose fin-clipped brown trout transplanted from the Gunpowder tailwater into Beaver Creek, MD DNR. A total of 35 brown trout were collected in 2005. 95% CL. * Range recorded in 2002.

Mean Percent Number Number in Length Year of 05 Mean Length (mm) in 05 Transplanted 05 sample (mm) at browns stocking* 2004 YOY 98 10 29% 123 ± 3 208 ± 10 2002 YOY 149 5 14% 55 – 134 450 ± 85

C57

Table 7. Fish species collected by electrofishing from Beaver Creek within the catch- and-release area, 2001 - 2005.

Relative Common Name Scientific Name Abundance Brown trout Salmo trutta common Rainbow trout Oncorhynchus mykiss abundant Common carp Cyprinus carpio scarce Pearl dace Magariscus margarita common Blacknose dace Rhinichthys atriculus abundant Longnose dace Rhinichthys cataractae common White sucker Catostomus commersoni common Potomac sculpin Cottus girardi abundant Blue Ridge sculpin Cottus caeruleomentum common Largemouth bass Micropterus salmoides scarce

C58

35 30 25 20 15 CPUEHr 10 5 0 119 159 199 239 279 319 359 399 439 479 >500 Total Length by 2 cm Grouping

C&R P&T

Figure 1. Length frequency of Beaver Creek trout collected by electrofishing during 2005, MD DNR. C&R N = 59, P&T N = 44.

26 24 22 20 18 16

Temperature (°C) 14 12 10 6/1/2005 6/21/2005 7/11/2005 7/31/2005 8/20/2005 9/9/2005 9/29/2005 Date

Rt 70 Rt 40 Toms Rd

Figure 2. Beaver Creek maximum daily temperatures recorded by MD DNR at Route 70, Route 40, and Toms Rd during the summer of 2005.

C59

Appendix 1– Macroinvertebrate data

Beaver Creek BC-3 below Black Rock Road Washington County May 2, 2005

Order Family/Genera Count Ephemeroptera Baetis sp 5 Ephemerella sp 15 Trichoptera Cheumatopsyche sp 48 Chimarra sp 4 Hydropsyche sp 34 Hydropsychidae Pupae 2 Diptera Chironomidae – Chironominae 34 Orthocladiinae 1 Tanypodinae 2 Empididae 3 Simuliidae – Simulium sp 9 Tipulidae – Antocha sp 1 Tipula sp 1 Coleoptera Elmidae – Stenelmis sp 10 Isopoda Lirceus sp 224 Amphipoda Gammarus sp 91 Turbellaria 1 Annelida 3 S=18 N=488

Protocol data Richness =180 HBI = 6.5 fair Scraper filterer ratio = 0.2 EPT = # 108 taxa = 6 EPT/C = 2.92 Dominant family = 45.9% Asellidae CPOM = 0.002 Diversity = 2.56 Equitability = 0.45 This station was located in an area where in-stream improvements were being installed.

C60

Beaver Creek below Beaver Creek Church Road, Washington County May 2, 2005

Order Family/Genera Count Ephemeroptera Baetis sp 12 Epeorus sp Ephemerella sp 20

Trichoptera Apatania sp 1 Cheumatopsyche sp 23 Chimarra sp 6 Hydropsyche sp 23 Hydropsychidae Pupae 10 Diptera Chironomidae – Chironominae 37 Orthocladiinae 8 Pupae 3 Simuliidae – Simulium sp 17 Tipulidae – Antocha sp 2 Isopoda Lirceus sp 3 Amphipoda Gammarus sp 19 Annelida 2 S=15 N=186 Protocol data Richness = 15 HBI = 4.97 good Scraper filterer ratio = 0.02 EPT = # 95 taxa = 7 EPT/C = 1.98 Dominant family = 30.1% Hydropsychidae CPOM = 0 Diversity = 3.42 Equitability = 1.02 This station was far enough removed from the area of stream restoration upstream that the invertebrate populations had improved.

C61

Appendix II. MACROINVERTEBRATE PROCEDURES AND ANALYSIS

Macroinvertebrates were sampled using a D-net aquatic kick net to collect 3-30 second kick samples from riffle areas. Samples were then sorted and identified taxonomically, and data calculations were conducted.

A number of calculations were used to evaluate sample data. Most of the measurements used to evaluate the data generated from the samples measured tolerance of organic pollution. Diversity and equitability are the exceptions; they measure the balance of the macroinvertebrate population. The following rating scales were used to evaluate the macroinvertebrate data.

Richness = number of species or taxa in sample Formula: s = richness = total number of taxa or species

The following scale is used to rate richness: greater than 26 - non-impacted 19 to 26 - slightly impacted 11 to 18 - moderately impacted less than 11 - severely impacted

HBI = Hilsenhoff Biotic Index, as modified in Bode (1988). Assigns tolerance values of each species, then compares it to the whole sample. The HBI formula calculates a rating value for the sample. s Formula: ∑ (nt *Tt) / N

Where s = taxa in sample; nt = number of specimens in each taxa; Tt= tolerance value for this specific taxa; N = total number of individuals in sample, or sample size

HBI values = 0.00 to 3.50 excellent 3.51 to 4.50 very good 4.51 to 5.50 good 5.51 to 6.50 fair 6.51 to 7.50 fairly poor 7.51 to 8.50 poor 8.50 to 10.00 very poor

Scraper filterer ratio = is useful in measuring trends from headwaters to mouth in a waterway. Scrapers consume unicellular algae by scraping from substrate, while filterers eat filamentous algae by filtering it out of the water column. Unicellular algae is found in more pristine, clean water, whereas filamentous algae is found in nutrient enriched water.

C62

This ratio should be a large number in the headwaters and decrease with downstream movement.

Formula: Sc/Fi EPT Index Number = number of specimens in orders Ephemeroptera, Plecoptera, and Trichoptera in sample.

EPT taxa = number of EPT taxa. To rate EPT Taxa: more than 10 - non-impacted 6 to 10 - slightly impacted 2 to 5 - moderately impacted 0 to 1 severely impacted EPT/C = number of EPT specimens divided by number of Chironomids. Chironomids are common in disturbed systems, so the larger the whole number the healthier the system. The smaller number, and numbers less than 1 indicate an impacted area,

Dominant family = percent contribution of the dominant family of the sample. The higher the percentage of dominance, the more disturbed and unbalanced the population.

CPOM = those organisms commonly referred to as shredders, processors of Coarse Particulate Organic Matter. Measurement is number compared to the whole sample. Since shredders tend to be more sensitive organisms, the higher the number, the better

Formula: Number of Shredders / N , where N is the total number of specimens in the sample.

Diversity = the dispersion of the specimens among species in the sample. Measured using the Shannon Weaver formula, where

d = 3.321928/N(NlogN- ∑(ni logni)); where N=total organisms, ni = organisms in each taxa. Values above 3.00 indicates undisturbed waters, while those less than 1.00 are severely degraded.

Equitability = comparison of theoretical number of species for each diversity to the actual value. Values greater than 0.6 indicate undisturbed water condition, 0.4 to 0.6 show moderate degradation, values below 0.4 show severe problems.

Formula: s’/s, where s’ is the theoretical richness of species expected with a given diversity; and, s is the actual richness of the sample.

C63

Analysis of the data was conducted through the Inland Fisheries Database. On the datasheet printouts, where parameters are missing from the list, this is caused by data creating a mathematical division problem where the number “0” is present in the numerator or denominator, creating a “0” or “undefined” reading. The database did not recognize either of these readings, so left that measurement field off the readout.

In some cases, percent abundance of key groups has also been provided. The groups used are Ephemeroptera (mayflies), Plecoptera (stoneflies), Trichoptera (caddisflies), Diptera (true flies), Coleoptera (beetles), and Other.

C64

Warner Hollow Run

Introduction

Warner Hollow Run is a small freestone headwater stream in Washington County. The stream flows through the protected Hagerstown City watershed providing a productive native brook trout population before entering Edgemont Reservoir (Water supply for Hagerstown). Fish sampling on Warner Hollow Run has been carried out at various stations and years since 1995.

Trout surveys were performed in 2001, 2003, 2004, and 2005. Fish management activities consisted of monitoring the status of the brook trout population with the following objectives:

• Obtain population estimates for adult and young-of-year brook trout.

• Determine relative abundance of fish species.

Methods

Adult and young-of-year (YOY) trout populations were sampled using a single Model 12 backpack electrofishing unit manufactured by Smith-Root. Sampling stations were selected to include all the habitat types present in the stream reach to be surveyed (pool, riffle, run, etc.). The total length and mean width of the station were measured to the nearest tenth of a meter. Stream surface area was computed and expressed in hectares. Surveys began at the downstream end of the station and three electrofishing passes were made through the entire station. During each pass all trout were collected and placed in float boxes. The relative abundances of non-game species was observed and recorded. Relative abundance was expressed as rare, scarce, common or abundant. All trout were anesthetized with a 1:10 solution of clove oil and ethanol alcohol, identified to the species level, measured for total length to the nearest millimeter, weighed to the nearest gram, and returned alive to the stream at the end of the survey. Trout population estimates were derived using the depletion method (P < 0.05) described by Zippin (1958) using the MICROFISH 2.2 software package (VanDeventer and Platts 1985). The coefficient of condition factor (K) as described by Lagler (1952) was used to assess physical condition.

Results and Discussion

Warner Hollow Run’s physical structure and steep gradient limits access for sampling. One fixed station was sampled within the stream’s upper reaches in 2003, 2004, and 2005. Periodically, a lower station was surveyed when time and conditions allowed. One survey was completed on the lower station in 2001. Confidence intervals for population estimates could not be determined using the method described by Zippin

C65 due to the collection of all brook trout on the first pass of the survey. Brook trout populations dropped significantly following the 2002 drought and poor recruitment in 2003 (Table 1). Combined years of poor recruitment can significantly impact short-lived species like the eastern brook trout. Improved recruitment during 2004 and 2005 has greatly improved the Warner Hollow population. Physical condition of adult brook trout continues to be good (K = 1.08). Blacknose dace and creek chub were the only other species present, in order of abundance.

Management Recommendation

• Monitor the status of the Warner Hollow Run brook trout population by electrofishing on a bi-annual basis.

Table 1. Adult and young-of-year brook trout population data collected by electrofishing from upper station, Warner Hollow Run. 2005, 2004, 2003. All fish collected on 1st Run. MDDNR.

StandingCrop Density YEAR YOYDensity(YOY/hec) (kg/hec) (trout/hec) 2005 16 195 261 2004 4 19 505 2003 21 282 0

C66

Black Rock Creek

Introduction

Black Rock Creek is a small (mean width 3.2 m) tributary to Beaver Creek in Washington County. Although originating as a freestone stream on the west slope of South Mountain, limestone springs influence the flow volume and water chemistry in the lower reaches. This influence begins just north of Route 70 and continues downstream to the junction with Beaver Creek.

Past efforts to establish a brook trout population in Black Rock Run have failed. A total of 53 wild young-of-year (YOY) brook trout were collected from a tributary of Clifford Branch (Frederick Co.) and relocated to Black Rock Creek in 2002. An electrofishing effort in 2003 failed to recover any brook trout.

Rainbow trout have been present for many years. Some of these fish were stocked as fingerlings and others migrated upstream from Beaver Creek. The abundance of trout in Black Rock Creek has been limited by degraded habitat resulting from over- grazing in the watershed. During 2002 and 2003, several of the landowners enrolled in the Conservation Reserve Enhancement Program (CREP), fencing cattle from the stream and allowing riparian areas to regenerate.

Single-pass electrofishing surveys to monitor trout populations occurred in 2001, 2003, 2004 and 2005. Summer stream temperatures have been monitored annually since 2001 above and below a shallow in-stream irrigation pond for the Beaver Creek Country Club. Past surveys failed to document trout downstream of this pond. Management efforts were conducted in 2005 to assess the trout population following the establishment of conservation programs with the following objectives:

• Determine relative abundance and size structure of the rainbow trout resource upstream of the golf course irrigation pond.

• Determine relative abundance of non-game fish species.

• Record summer stream temperatures upstream and downstream of the pond.

Methods

A single-pass electrofishing survey using a Smith-Root Model 12 backpack electrofisher (DC 200 volts, 60 pps) was conducted on the Heaton property upstream of the irrigation pond to collect and identify fish species. Trout were measured to the nearest mm and released. A single-pass survey was used because trout abundance has generally been too low to permit the use of the three-pass depletion method. Relative

C67 abundance was determined by Catch Per Unit Effort (CPUEHr), the number of trout collected per hour of electrofishing time (2003 – 2005).

Stream temperatures were recorded using StowAway TidBit thermographs manufactured by Onset Corp. and Boxcar Pro 4 software. Recorders were set to record temperature every hour continuously.

Results and Discussion

Electrofishing CPUE in 2001 could not be determined because of an equipment malfunction. While similar numbers of fingerlings were recovered annually from 2003 through 2005, adult populations increased significantly (Table 1). An electrofishing survey on 23 June 2005 found rainbow trout to be very abundant. A total of nine YOY rainbow trout and ten adult rainbow trout were collected during 689 seconds of electrofishing effort resulting in a catch rate of 47 and 53 trout/hour for YOY and adult trout, respectively. The single-pass survey in 2005 estimated the adult trout standing crop to be 41kg/ha, considered a high biomass. A total of 250 Shasta strain rainbow fingerlings were stocked in September, 2005 suggesting that the YOY collected during the June survey were the result of natural reproduction. The relative abundance of fish species collected from Black Rock Creek during this grant period is presented in Table 2.

Trout in spring creeks generally grow very rapidly due to an abundance of food and ideal year-round stream temperatures. It can be speculated from the length- frequency graph that rainbow trout in Black Rock Creek will average 320mm (12.6”) by July of their second year (Figure 1). The largest rainbow trout collected to date measured 464mm (18.3”) in total length and may have been only three years old. With a mean width of 3.2 meters and lack of deep pools, few large trout have been collected, most likely due to the trout outgrowing the stream and emigrating downstream to Beaver Creek.

A major stream restoration project to remove a shallow on-stream irrigation pond is scheduled to begin in 2006. The shallow pond has had a profound effect on downstream stream temperatures (Figure 2). After restoration, Black Rock Creek should support trout species from the spring influence downstream to its junction with Beaver Creek.

Macroinvertebrate data collected during 2005 is presented in Appendix I. Macroinvertebrate data analysis protocols are presented in Appendix II (page C62) .

Management Recommendations

The 2005 fishery data suggests that the rainbow trout population in Black Rock Creek has improved as landowners enrolled in the CREP program. There has been a noticeable increase in bank cover and stability, undercut banks, and cobble/gravel substrate. The

C68 potential for natural reproduction has increased and may have already occurred with the increase in clean gravel substrate. Management recommendations for Black Rock Creek include:

• Discontinue fingerling stocking to monitor natural reproduction.

• Monitor the status of the Black Rock Run rainbow trout populations on a bi- annual basis

• Encourage landowners throughout the watershed to take advantage of land stewardship programs such as CREP.

C69

Table 1. Relative abundance of adult and young-of-year rainbow trout collected by electrofishing Black Rock Creek, Heaton property. 2003, 2004, and 2005 MDDNR.

Year 2003 2004 2005 Sample time (hrs) .46 .26 .19 YOY/hr 41 58 47 Adult/hr 2 35 53

Table 2. Relative abundance of non-game fish species observed while electrofishing Black Rock Creek, Heaton property. 2001 - 2005. MDDNR.

Relative Common Name Scientific Name Abundance Brown trout Salmo trutta Scarce Rainbow trout Oncorhynchus mykiss Abundant Blacknose dace Rhinichthys atratulus Abundant Pearl dace Margariscus margarita Scarce White sucker Catostomus commersoni Common Blue Ridge sculpin Cottus caeruleomentum Abundant

C70

35 30 25 20 15

CPUEHr 10 5 0 110 150 190 230 270 310 350 390 430 470 Total Length by 20 mm Grouping

2005 2004 Figure 1. Length-frequency distribution of rainbow trout collected by electrofishing from Black Rock Creek, 2004, 2005. (2005 N = 19, 2004 N = 24). MDDNR

35

30

25

20 Temperature (°C) 15

10 6/1/2005 6/21/2005 7/11/2005 7/31/2005 8/20/2005 9/9/2005 9/29/2005 Date

Above Pond Below Pond

Figure 2. Maximum daily temperatures recorded above and below irrigation pond, Black Rock Creek – 2005. MD DNR.

C71

Appendix II – Macroinvertebrate Data

Black Rock Creek samples were collected by Susan Rivers if Inland Fisheries. Beaver Creek samples were collected by local groups involved with habitat improvements within the watershed.

Black Rock Creek, Black Rock Road Washington County June 23, 2005

Order Family/Genera Count Ephemeroptera Baetis sp 109 Epeorus sp 1 Ephemerella sp 18 Paraleptophlebia sp 3 Tricorythodes sp 10 Trichoptera Cheumatopsyche sp 24 Hydropsyche sp 23 Hydropsychidae Pupae 7 Pseudostenophylax sp 1 Diptera Chironomidae – Chironominae 49 Orthocladiinae 15 Simuliidae – Simulium sp 11 Tipulidae – Antocha sp 3 Hexatoma sp 1 Coleoptera Dytiscidae – Cybister sp 1 Elmidae – Stenelmis sp 46 Amphipoda Gammarus sp 127 Turbellaria Dugesia sp 13 Hydracarina 13 Annelida 6 S=20 N=481 Protocol data Richness = 20 HBI = 5.44 good Scraper filterer ratio = 0.81 EPT = # 196 taxa = 9 EPT/C = 3.63 Dominant family = 26.4% Gammaridae CPOM = 0.002 Diversity = 3.27 Equitability = 0.69

C72

Black Rock Creek, downstream of Rt 66 bridge - Washington County June 24, 2005

Order Family/Genera Count Ephemeroptera Baetis sp 22 Ephemerella sp 3 Pseudocloeon sp 3 Tricorythodes sp 1 Trichoptera Cheumatopsyche sp 60 Chimarra sp 1 Hydropsyche sp 28 Diptera Chironomidae – Chironominae 15 Orthocladiinae 5 Tipulidae – Antocha sp 1 Coleoptera Elmidae – Stenelmis sp 51 Isopoda Lirceus sp 6 Amphipoda Gammarus sp 2 Decapoda Cambarinae 3 Pelecypoda Corbiculidae – Corbicula sp 18 Annelida 1 Hydracarina 3 Turbellaria 3 S=18 N=226 Protocol data Richness = 18 HBI = 5.18 good Scraper filterer ratio = 0.48 EPT = # 118 taxa = 7 EPT/C = 5.9 Dominant family = 38.9% Hydropsychidae CPOM = 0 Diversity = 3.12 Equitability = 0.68

The two Black Rock Creek stations were very similar in the Protocol data. However, species composition was different between the two. There is a golf course pond upstream of Route 66 that is going to be rehabilitated back to a stream channel soon, but the pond was still impacting the stream in 2005. Species found downstream of the pond tended to be those that were tolerant of warmer water temperatures and more sediment. Also, a lack of vegetation below the golf course pond impacted the species found. Upstream of the pond, water cress and other aquatic plants provided habitat for amphipods and more ephemeropterans.

C73

Fishing Creek

Introduction

Fishing Creek is a small freestone headwater stream in Frederick County. Beginning on the east slope of Catoctin Mountain, this soft-water, low conductivity (17 mg/L CaCO3, <50 micromhos/cm) stream flows east until it becomes a direct tributary of the Monocacy River. Native brook trout inhabit both the right and the left fork of Fishing Creek upstream of the Frederick City water supply reservoir. In order to protect the native brook trout population and due to the stream’s small size (mean width 3.6m), stocking of put-and-take rainbow trout in the right fork ceased in 1990. The left fork continues to provide a spring put-and-take fishery and a total of 4,000 adult rainbow trout are stocked annually. A five trout per day creel limit applies to the left fork while a two trout per day creel is in effect on the right fork. The brook trout population is surveyed on a bi-annual basis at two established stations in both forks.

The brook trout population was surveyed in 2001, 2003, and 2005. During 2005, fish management activities consisted of monitoring the status of the brook trout population with the following objectives:

• Obtain population estimates for adult and young-of-year brook trout.

• Obtain physical condition data for adult brook trout.

• Obtain basic water quality data.

Methods

Adult and young-of-year (YOY) trout populations were sampled using a single Model 12 backpack electrofishing unit manufactured by Smith-Root. Sampling stations were selected to include all the habitat types present in the stream reach to be surveyed (pool, riffle, run, etc.). The total length and mean width of the station were measured to the nearest tenth of a meter. Stream surface area was computed and expressed in hectares. Surveys began at the downstream end of the station and three electrofishing passes were made through the entire station. During each pass all trout were collected and placed in float boxes. All trout were anesthetized with a 1:10 solution of clove oil and ethanol alcohol, identified to the species level, measured for total length to the nearest millimeter, weighed to the nearest gram, and returned alive to the stream at the end of the survey. Trout population estimates were derived using the depletion method (P < .05) described by Zippin (1958) using the MICROFISH 2.2 software package (VanDeventer and Platts 1985). The coefficient of condition factor (K) as described by Lagler (1952) was used to assess physical condition. Basic water quality was measured using a HACH Model FF- 1A Fish Farming Test Kit.

C74

Results & Discussion

The adult and young-of-year trout population data collected by electrofishing during 2001, 2003, and 2005 are summarized in Table 1. The upper Right Fork station was changed in 2005 because of in-stream obstructions. A new station was established, beginning at the end of the previous upper station. Overall brook trout populations continue to be consistent for both forks of Fishing Creek with standing crop and densities decreasing in a downstream progression. Lower Left Fork continues to provide the lowest standing crop for adult brook trout populations. Brook trout abundance at the upper Right Fork station was the highest ever recorded (2631 trout/ha ± 61) however; this could be a result of a new sampling station. Good to excellent reproduction has occurred even during drought and high water conditions. Although stocking of adult rainbow trout continues in Left Fork, none were collected. Overall fish condition is good in both forks, however, condition is generally lower in the left fork. This may be due to competition with adult rainbow trout in the spring as well as interrupted feeding habits due to angling pressure.

Basic water quality was collected at one site from each fork and is expressed in Table 2. Both forks are very similar in water quality with Left Fork possessing a slightly higher alkalinity and pH.

Management Recommendation

• Monitor the status of the Fishing Creek brook trout populations by electrofishing on a bi-annual basis.

C75

Table 1. Brook trout population data collected by electrofishing, Fishing Creek, 2001, 2003, and 2005. MDDNR (95% C.I.)

Station/ Population Parameter Year Right Fork Upper 2001 2003 2005 Standing Crop (kg/hectare) 63 ± 12 47 ± 4 82 ± 2 Density (trout/hectare) 2083 ± 406 1616 ± 147 2631 ± 61 YOY/hectare 1500 ± 797 441 ± 107 408 ± 99 Condition Factor K .81 .90 .95 Right Fork Lower Standing Crop (kg/hectare) 37 ± 2 33 ± 2 39 ± 1 Density (trout/hectare) 1227 ± 82 780 ± 36 1239 ± 43 YOY/hectare 1750 ± 159 550 ± 32 1366 ± 428 Condition Factor K .92 1.04 .89 Left Fork Upper Standing Crop (kg/hectare) 46 ± 4 43 ± 3 59 ± 2 Density (trout/hectare) 2711 ± 209 2692 ± 162 2431 ± 63 YOY/hectare 895 ± 52 1010 ± 101 1975 ± 142 Condition Factor K .84 .68 .90 Left Fork Lower Standing Crop (kg/hectare) 39 ± 5 15 ± 48 21 ± 2 Density (trout/hectare) 2179 ± 255 459 ± 15 1032 ± 114 YOY/hectare 1107 ± 143 162 ± 33 696 ± 27 Condition Factor K .76 1.02 .95

Table 2. Water quality collected from Right and Left Forks, Fishing Creek. July, 2005.

Parameter Right Fork Left Fork Temperature (°C) 17.8 17.8 Hardness (mg/l 17.1 17.1 CaCO3) Alkalinity (mg/l 17.1 34.2 CaCO3) pH 6.8 7.0

C76

Hunting Creek

Introduction

Hunting Creek is one of Maryland’s most popular and historic trout resources, enjoyed by a wide range of user groups including Presidents, wild trout anglers, fly- fishing enthusiasts and park visitors who come to see trout in a scenic natural setting. Originating on Catoctin Mountain, Hunting Creek flows easterly into Cunningham Falls Reservoir, a 17-hectare impoundment completed in 1972. A tailwater fishery exists downstream of Cunningham Falls Dam. Tailwater release guidelines established in 1984 have provided more flexibility to optimize water quality for trout. An excellent population of wild brown trout is found throughout the mainstem downstream to the town of Thurmont while native brook trout are limited to the headwaters upstream of Cunningham Falls Reservoir. Adult rainbow and brook trout, reared through the cooperative trout hatchery program, are stocked annually within the tailwater. A comprehensive management plan was formulated in 1993, which limits the annual stocking to a total of 1,000 hatchery trout. Hunting Creek was the first Maryland trout stream under special management regulations; catch-and-return, fly-fishing-only regulations currently apply within the boundaries of Catoctin Mountain National Park and Cunningham Falls State Park.

Sampling is completed at four stations annually. The Hemlock Bridge station is located upstream of the reservoir; the Elbow Pool and Bear Branch stations are located within the tailwater; the Route 15 station is located downstream of Frank Bentz Pond. The purpose of this study is to monitor population trends in the Hunting Creek trout resources with the following objectives:

• Obtain standing crop and abundance estimates for adult and young-of-year trout populations at four fixed stations.

• Obtain basic water quality.

• Monitor seasonal water temperatures within the tailwater.

• Obtain macro-invertebrate population data within the tailwater.

Methods

Adult and young-of-year (YOY) trout populations were sampled using a single Model 12 backpack electrofishing unit manufactured by Smith-Root. Sampling stations were selected to include all the habitat types present in the stream reach to be surveyed (pool, riffle, run, etc.). The total length and mean width of the station were measured to the nearest tenth of a meter. Stream surface area was computed and expressed in hectares. Surveys began at the downstream end of the station and three electrofishing passes were

C77 made through the entire station. During each pass all trout were collected and placed in float boxes. All trout were anesthetized with a 1:10 solution of clove oil and ethanol alcohol, identified to the species level, measured for total length to the nearest millimeter, weighed to the nearest gram, and returned alive to the stream at the end of the survey. Trout population estimates were derived using the depletion method (P < .05) described by Zippin (1958) using the MICROFISH 2.2 software package (VanDeventer and Platts 1985). The coefficient of condition factor (K) as described by Lagler (1952) was used to assess physical condition. Basic water quality was measured using a HACH Model FF- 1A Fish Farming test kit.

As specified by dam release guidelines, year-round stream temperatures were monitored hourly at the gauging station using a continuously recording thermograph (StowAway TidBit) manufactured by Onset Corp. and Boxcar Pro 4 software.

Results & Discussion

Hunting Creek continues to support a strong population of wild brown trout from the headwaters downstream to the town of Thurmont. In general, brown trout abundance decreased while mean length and weight increased in downstream progression (Table 1). Adult brown trout standing crop and abundance increased significantly at all four stations from 2004 to 2005 with the most dramatic increase occurring at the Hemlock Bridge station, 113% increase in standing crop and 183% increase in abundance (Table 2). Brown trout physical condition (mean K =0.92) was found to be within the optimal range. Natural reproduction in 2005 was considered excellent at all four stations, approaching record levels.

The adult native brook trout population at the Hemlock Bridge station showed considerable improvement during the last grant period (Table 3). From 2004 to 2005 standing crop and abundance increased 187% and 213%, respectively. The mean length of adult brook trout at the Hemlock Bridge station was 180mm ± 9 (95% CI) with a mean K of 0.92 ± 0.03 (95% CI) suggesting very good physical condition. Natural reproduction was considered excellent in 2005. However, brook trout YOY at the Hemlock Bridge station made up over half of the total YOY (brook + brown) collected during 2001-2002, decreased to a third in 2003-2004, and further decreased to 18% in 2005. Brook trout YOY were documented in the tailwater for the first time since 1998 with the collection of a single YOY at both the Elbow Pool and Bear Branch stations.

Water quality was measured at the Hemlock Bridge and Rt. 15 stations on Hunting Creek at the time of the electrofishing surveys (Table 4). A morning temperature of 22.8°C was recorded at the Hemlock Bridge station. Prolonged exposure to this temperature may stress brook trout. Drake and Taylor (1996) found that the highest sustainable temperature for brook trout in their natural habitat was estimated around 23°C. Temperature was found to be a limiting factor in the growth of juvenile brook trout and their abundance was negatively correlated with increased mean July

C78 stream temperatures; exposure to 24°C (75°F) temperatures for just a few hours is potentially lethal (Conservation Strategy Workgroup 2005). A tornado in 2004 that removed an extensive portion of forest canopy is suspected to have caused the high stream temperatures in this sensitive headwater area.

Summer stream temperatures recorded below Cunningham Falls Dam in the tailwater are presented in Figure 1. Two storm events during July resulted in spillover and short-term temperature spikes. Temperatures within the tailwater remained below 20°C (68°F) all summer except during spillover.

Management Recommendations

• Monitor the wild and stocked trout populations by annual electrofishing surveys at established stations to remain up-to-date on their current status and determine long-term trends.

• Survey an additional site between Cunningham Falls and the reservoir

• Monitor summer water temperatures above Cunningham Falls.

• Monitor summer water temperatures at the gauging station and work with the Cunningham Falls State Park personnel to smoothly make the transition to lower ports within the dam control tower as the water temperature at the gauging station approaches 18.3°C (65°F).

C79

Table 1. Mean size and condition of adult brown trout collected by electrofishing, Hunting Creek. 2005. (95% CI) MDDNR

Mean TL Mean K Station N Mean W (g) (mm) Factor Hemlock Br. 84 186 ± 11 71 ± 15 .86 ± 0.02 Elbow Pool 58 214 ± 13 109 ± 23 .93 ± 0.02 Bear Branch 41 224 ± 15 122 ± 24 .96 ± 0.02 Route 15 35 223 ± 24 135 ± 63 .83 ± 0.05

Table 2. Summary of adult and young-of-year brown trout population data collected by electrofishing, Hunting Creek, 2001-2005. (95% CI) MDDNR.

STATION 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 Hemlock Bridge Standing Crop (kg/ha) 151±3 75±1 100±4 64±0.5 136±2 Density – (trout/ha) 2041±41 958±13 1083±38 676±5 1911±22 YOY/ha 1562±63 1208±105 854±37 940±55 2366±232 Elbow Pool Standing Crop (kg/ha) 101±2 54±0.5 56±0.09 80±1 90±3 Density – (trout/ha) 847±20 600±5 516±0.82 485±9 828±28 YOY/ha 723±203 238±12 177±12 761±112 1070±45 Bear Branch Standing Crop (kg/ha) 87±4 31±2 49±2 62±3 92±2 Density – (trout/ha) 802±34 384±24 454±17 419±22 756±12 YOY/ha 535±76 233±53 23±148 384±26 1511±130 Route 15 Standing Crop (kg/ha) 32±2 16±0.4 51±7 29±2 42±1 Density – (trout/ha) 275±15 168±5 186±26 142±11 319±8 YOY/ha 133±17 71±18 0 248±55 541±29

C80

Table 3. Summary of adult and young-of-year brook trout population data collected by electrofishing, Hunting Creek, 2001-2005. (95% CL) MDDNR * Wild brook trout only at Hemlock Bridge, stocked brook trout at all other stations.

STATION 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 Hemlock Bridge* Standing Crop (kg/ha) 59±1 29±1 54±2 23±0.1 66±0.7 Density – (trout/ha) 1375±25 729±32 812±37 349±2 1092±12 YOY/ha 2041±218 1541±126 375±50 486±16 501±20 Elbow Pool Standing Crop (kg/ha) 86±0.8 50±2 97±1 127±2 148±0.9 Density – (trout/ha) 305±3 295±12 339±3 381±6 571±3 YOY/ha 0 0 0 0 71±18 Bear Branch Standing Crop (kg/ha) 27±2 8 13 0 36±5 Density – (trout/ha) 93±8 58 47 0 129±19 YOY/ha 0 0 0 0 37 Route 15 Standing Crop (kg/ha) 0 0 0 2 0 Density – (trout/ha) 0 0 0 9 0 YOY/ha 0 0 0 0 0

Table 4. Basic water quality measured at the furthest upstream (Hemlock) and the furthest downstream (Rt. 15) electrofishing stations. Hunting Creek, July 2005. MDDNR.

Parameter Hemlock Bridge Rt. 15 Temperature (°C) 22.8 20.0 Hardness (mg/l CaCO3) 68.4 51.3 Alkalinity (mg/l CaCO3) 42.75 34.2 pH 7.5 7.5

C81

24 22

20 Spillover 18 16 14 Temperature (°C) 12 10 6/2/2005 6/22/2005 7/12/2005 8/1/2005 8/21/2005 9/10/2005 9/30/2005 Date

Figure 1. Maximum daily steam temperature recorded in the Hunting Creek tailwater at the gauging station during 2005. MD DNR.

C82

Little Hunting Creek

Introduction

Little Hunting Creek has been managed for wild trout since 1994. Since that time, no hatchery trout have been stocked and anglers within the Cunningham Falls State Park Manor Area have been subject to catch-and-return regulations limited to artificial lures. Brown trout standing crop, abundance and reproduction improved substantially under the new management. Further, brook trout adults and young-of-year now maintain a small, but consistent percentage of the total trout population in the Manor Area (MA) where they were not found prior to 1994 (Mullican 1998). Based on the positive response of the wild trout to catch-and-return regulations, the Maryland Fisheries Service extended this special regulation area approximately 0.8km downstream effective January 1, 2002. An additional survey station (Catoctin Furnace - CF) was established within this new area to evaluate if the positive response shown by the wild trout in the Manor Area could be extended further downstream. The Catoctin Hollow Road (CHR) station is within private property with tightly controlled access and serves as a “control” site for evaluating changes in the other two stations. Annual surveys at each station are conducted to remain up-to-date on the current status of this important natural resource and to document population trends.

The trout population was surveyed annually during this five-year period. Fish management activities consisted of monitoring the status of the trout populations with the following objectives:

• Obtain population estimates for adult and young-of-year trout.

• Obtain physical condition data for adult trout.

• Obtain relative abundance of non-game species.

Methods

Adult and young-of-year (YOY) trout populations were sampled using a single Model 12 backpack electrofishing unit manufactured by Smith-Root. Sampling stations were selected to include all the habitat types present in the stream reach to be surveyed (pool, riffle, run, etc.). The total length and mean width of the station was measured to the nearest tenth of a meter. Stream surface area was computed and expressed in hectares. Surveys began at the downstream end of the station and three electrofishing passes were made through the entire station. During each pass all trout were collected and placed in float boxes. All trout were anesthetized with a 1:10 solution of clove oil and ethanol alcohol, identified to the species level, measured for total length to the nearest millimeter, weighed to the nearest gram, and returned alive to the stream at the end of the survey. Trout population estimates were derived using the depletion method (P < 0.05) described

C83 by Zippin (1958) using the MICROFISH 2.2 software package (VanDeventer and Platts 1985). The coefficient of condition factor (K) as described by Lagler (1952) was used to assess physical condition.

Results and Discussion

Little Hunting Creek is supporting strong populations of naturalized brown trout and native brook trout. Drought conditions in 2002 were followed by higher than average flows in 2003. This had a profound impact on adult and YOY trout populations in Little Hunting Creek, as it did in other streams in this region. Both standing crop and density decreased significantly at all stations for both brown and brook trout during this time period (Tables 1 and 2). The arithmetic mean total trout (brown and brook combined) standing crop since the no-kill area was extended (2002–2005) was 53 ± 20 (CV 23%), 43 ± 11 (CV – 16%), and 36 ± 41 (CV – 72%) at the Catoctin Hollow Road, Manor Area, and Catoctin Furnace sites, respectively. Although there was a great amount of variability, compounded by the 2002 drought, the difference in mean standing crop among sites during the last four years was not significant (95% CI). This suggests that the no-kill regulations have been successful in building trout populations that are now comparable to the control station. The largest trout collected was a brown trout from the Catoctin Furnace station in 2004 that measured 501mm (19.7”) in total length and weighed 1130g (2.5 lbs.).

The mean total length, weight, and condition factor K of brook and brown trout collected from Little Hunting Creek during 2005 are shown in Table 3. Overall, the condition factor (K) suggests that trout in Little Hunting Creek are in excellent physical condition.

Although 2003 produced the lowest recorded natural reproduction of trout species at all three stations, near-record reproduction in 2004 and 2005 is expected to significantly increase adult trout abundance over the next few years. The relative abundance of non-game fish species collected during the electrofishing surveys is presented in Table 4.

Management Recommendations

• Continue annual electrofishing surveys at the three established stations (CHR, MA, CF) to monitor the status of the wild brook and brown trout populations.

C84

Table 1. Adult and young-of-year brook trout population data, by station (Catoctin Hollow Rd, Manor Area, Catoctin Furnace), Little Hunting Creek, 2001-2005. (95% CI) MDDNR.

STATION POPULATION DATA Catoctin Hollow 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 Standing Crop (kg/hectare) 16±0.7 8±0.4 8±1 19±2 10 Density (trout/hectare) 355±15 296±15 217±18 292±28 179 YOY/hectare 696±116 355±37 72±17 356 746±670 Manor Area Standing Crop (kg/hectare) 6±0.2 4±0.3 1 11 4 Density (trout/hectare) 152±6 114±8 17 76 80 YOY/hectare 253±19 190±2 17 477±172 227±24 Catoctin Furnace Standing Crop (kg/hectare) 1 2±2 0 5 2 Density (trout/hectare) 31 56±60 0 80 50 YOY/hectare 295±207 74±36 13 80 266±31

Table 2. Adult and young-of-year brown trout population data, by station (Catoctin Hollow Rd, Manor Area, Catoctin Furnace), Little Hunting Creek, 2001-2005. (95% CI) MDDNR.

STATION POPULATION DATA Catoctin Hollow 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 Standing Crop (kg/hectare) 56±2 39±3 30±1 42± 2 55±2 Density (trout/hectare) 725±28 355±29 246±12 194±11 672±31 YOY/hectare 459±298 89 58±9 1571±127 1224±304 Manor Area Standing Crop (kg/hectare) 77±3 39±3 34 41±2 37±1 Density (trout/hectare) 912±36 519±38 18 248±12 453±15 YOY/hectare 722±283 127±7 17 1012±187 960±206 Catoctin Furnace Standing Crop (kg/hectare) 26±0.4 13±3 14 61±5 49±3 Density (trout/hectare) 450±8 167±34 118 214±16 481±29 YOY/hectare 434±85 574 0 429±57 415±149

C85

Table 3. Mean size and condition of adult brook and brown trout collected by electrofishing from Little Hunting Creek, 2005. 95% CI. MDDNR

Species n Mean TL (mm) Mean W (g) Mean K Factor Brook trout 21 171±15 50±13 .88±.02 Brown trout 109 192±10 87±20 .97±.01

Table 4. Relative abundance of non-game fish species collected by electrofishing, Little Hunting Creek, 2005. MDDNR

Species Station Relative Common Name Scientific Name CHR MA CF Abundance Blacknose dace Rhinichthys atratulus X X X abundant

Longnose dace Rhinichthys cataractae X X X common

Blue Ridge sculpin Cottus caeruleomentum X X X abundant

Fantail darter Etheostoma flabellare X X common

C86

Little Beaver Creek

Introduction

Little Beaver Creek is a small (mean width 3.6m) spring creek in Washington County. Originating from the overflow of Greenbrier Lake, Little Beaver Creek flows west picking up several springs before its junction with Beaver Creek. Sampling sites are limited due to access to private land and dense overhanging vegetation. One survey is typically completed upstream of Rt. 66. Restoration projects were implemented in this area in 2001 to improve problems with stream bank erosion because of over grazing and nutrient management issues. Historically, this area only supported a marginal population of adult trout and very little to no natural reproduction.

Brown trout population surveys were completed in 2002, 2004, and 2005. During 2005, fish management activities consisted of monitoring the status of the brown trout population with the following objectives:

• Obtain population estimates for adult and young-of-year brown trout.

• Obtain physical condition data for adult brown trout.

• Obtain relative abundance of non-game fish species.

Methods

Adult and young-of-year (YOY) trout populations were sampled using a single Model 12 backpack electrofishing unit manufactured by Smith-Root. Sampling stations were selected to include all the habitat types present in the stream reach to be surveyed (pool, riffle, run, etc.). The total length and mean width of the station were measured to the nearest tenth of a meter. Stream surface area was computed and expressed in hectares. Surveys began at the downstream end of the station and three electrofishing passes were made through the entire station. During each pass all trout were collected and placed in float boxes. All trout were anesthetized with a 1:10 solution of clove oil and ethanol alcohol, identified to the species level, measured for total length to the nearest millimeter, weighed to the nearest gram, and returned alive to the stream at the end of the survey. Trout population estimates were derived using the depletion method (P < 0.05) described by Zippin (1958) using the MICROFISH 2.2 software package (VanDeventer and Platts 1985). The coefficient of condition factor (K) as described by Lagler (1952) was used to assess physical condition. Basic water quality was measured using a HACH Model FF- 1A Fish Farming test kit.

C87

Results and Discussion

Little Beaver Creek upstream of Rt. 66 is currently supporting an excellent population of brown trout. All trout were collected during the first pass during the 2002 and 2004 surveys. Trout population estimates using the depletion method described could only be completed in 2005 and results are shown in Table 1. Single-pass trout population results completed in 2002 and 2004 are shown in comparison to 2005 results in Tables 2 and 3. Physical condition of adult brown trout populations continues to be excellent and within the 0.9 to 1.10 range suggested by Lagler. The collection of only four adult trout in 2004 can be attributed to poor recruitment of brown trout recorded in 2002 and assumed poor recruitment in 2003 as observed in other streams in the region. Recent fencing and bank stabilization projects have greatly improved spawning habitat. As a result, young-of-year abundance in 2005 was excellent. Noticeable improvements in stream bank stabilization and habitat from recent restoration efforts are expected to further improve this excellent self-sustaining brown trout population. Non-game fish species observed in order of relative abundance were blue ridge sculpin, blacknose dace, fantailed darter, and white sucker.

Management Recommendations

• Continue monitoring the brown trout population at the established station on a biannual basis.

C88

Table 1. Adult and young-of-year brown trout population data collected by electrofishing, Little Beaver Creek, Rt. 66. 2005. (95%CL). MDDNR.

StandingCrop Density YOYDensity YEAR (kg/ha) (trout/ha) (YOY/ha) 2005 63 ± 2.6 396 ± 16 810 ± 397

Table 2. Mean size and condition of adult brown trout collected by electrofishing from Little Beaver Creek, Rt. 66. 2002, 2004, and 2005. 95% CL. MDDNR.

Year n Mean TL (mm) Mean W (g) Mean K Factor 2002 16 233 ± 45 186 ± 146 1.07 ± 0.06 2004 4 293 ± 22 269 ± 92 1.06 ± 0.13 2005 23 243 ± 21 159 ± 44 1.0 ± 0.04

Table 3. Catch rates for adult and young-of-year brown trout collected by electrofishing from Little Beaver Creek, Rt. 66. 2002, 2004, and 2005. MDDNR.

Year Time (Hr.) CPUE(adult) CPUE(YOY) 2002 0.25 64 0 2004 0.10 40 120 2005 0.21 100 110

C89

Owens Creek

Introduction

Owens Creek has been one of the most intensively surveyed streams within the Middle Potomac Drainage. A small (mean width 4.4m) headwater stream, Owens Creek is nearly neutral (pH 7.5), soft (hardness 68 mg/l CaCO3) with little buffering capacity (alkalinity 68 mg/l CaCO3) and has very low conductivity (130 microhmos/cm). From the headwaters downstream to Raven Rock Road, Owens Creek is managed for wild trout. This area is almost entirely encompassed by Catoctin Mountain National Park. No stocking takes place in this area and anglers are limited to two trout/day. Trout population surveys are now conducted every other year at two established stations within the national park, the entrance to the Owens Creek Campground and at the lower park boundary.

The trout population was surveyed in 2002, 2003, and 2005. During 2005, fish management activities consisted of monitoring the status of the trout population with the following objectives:

• Obtain population estimates for adult and young-of-year trout.

• Obtain physical condition data for adult trout.

• Obtain relative abundance of non-game fish species.

Methods

Adult and young-of-year (YOY) trout populations were sampled using a single Model 12 backpack electrofishing unit manufactured by Smith-Root. Sampling stations were selected to include all the habitat types present in the stream reach to be surveyed (pool, riffle, run, etc.). The total length and mean width of the station were measured to the nearest tenth of a meter. Stream surface area was computed and expressed in hectares. Surveys began at the downstream end of the station and three electrofishing passes were made through the entire station. During each pass all trout were collected and placed in float boxes. All trout were anesthetized with a 1:10 solution of clove oil and ethanol alcohol, identified to the species level, measured for total length to the nearest millimeter, weighed to the nearest gram, and returned alive to the stream at the end of the survey. Trout population estimates were derived using the depletion method (P < .05) described by Zippin (1958) using the MICROFISH 2.2 software package (VanDeventer and Platts 1985). The coefficient of condition factor (K) as described by Lagler (1952) was used to assess physical condition.

C90

Results and Discussion

The bi-annual sampling schedule was altered to include 2003 so that the effects of the 2002 drought on the trout populations could be ascertained. The mean standing crop of brook trout at the Campground station, 1990 – 2000, was 33±14 at the 95% CL. Following the drought, the 2003 standing crop of brook trout at this site was significantly below the mean (Table 1). More recently, the 2005 brook trout abundance and standing crop have increased substantially at the campground station, 1294% and 773%, respectively. At the lower park station brook trout standing crop showed little change in 2005. However, abundance increased 71%. Large numbers of yearling size trout suggest excellent reproduction in 2004. Record numbers of brook trout YOY were observed in 2005. The combination of the two successive strong year classes is expected increase the brook trout population to carrying capacity.

Brown trout numbers appear to be rebounding at the Campground station after being absent from the 2002 and 2003 samples (Table 2). A total of 5 adult and 28 YOY brown trout were collected from the campground station in 2005. This was the first collection of YOY brown trout at the campground station since 1998. Although brown trout reproduction was excellent at the Campground Station in 2005, it was relatively poor at the Lower Park station. A list of relative abundance of non-salmonid fish species observed while electrofishing is expressed in Table 3.

Management Recommendations

Following the 2002 drought, trout populations showed their resiliency by producing exceptional yearclasses in 2004 and 2005. Though brown trout YOY made up only 24% of the YOY collected at the campground station, future surveys will document any changes occurring in the brook trout population resulting from the large brown trout yearclass.

In order to remain up-to-date on their status, bi-annual monitoring of the wild trout populations within the national park should be continued.

C91

Table 1. Brook trout population data collected by electrofishing, Owens Creek, 2002, 2003, and 2005. (95% C.I.) MDDNR.

STATION POPULATION DATA Campground 2002 2003 2005 Standing Crop (kg/hectare) 19 ± 2 15 ± 2 131 ± 2 Density (trout/hectare) 899 ± 77 271 ± 39 3778 ± 60 YOY/hectare 732 ± 69 517 ± 107 3534 ± 212 Condition Factor K - 1.02 ± .05 .91 ± .02 Lower Park Standing Crop (kg/hectare) 10 ± 0.2 31 ± 3 32 ± 0.8 Density (trout/hectare) 741 ± 14 361 ± 38 618 ± 17 YOY/hectare 410 ± 30 139 ± 41 4323 ± 410 Condition Factor K - 1.03 ± .10 1.0 ± .04

Table 2. Brown trout population data collected by electrofishing, Owens Creek, 2002, 2003, and 2005. (95% C.I.) MDDNR.

STATION POPULATION DATA Campground 2002 2003 2005 Standing Crop (kg/hectare) 0 0 6 Density (trout/hectare) 0 0 203 YOY/hectare 0 0 1137 ± 75 Condition Factor K - - .94 ± .06 Lower Park Standing Crop (kg/hectare) 8 3 7 Density (trout/hectare) 39 83 65 YOY/hectare 98 ± 65 0 130 Condition Factor K - .99 ± .15 .82 ± 1.0

Table 3. Relative abundance of non-game fish species observed during electrofishing, Owens Creek 2005. MDDNR

Relative Common Name Scientific Name Abundance Blacknose dace Rhinichthys atratulus abundant Longnose dace Rhinichthys cataractae common White sucker Catostomus commersoni scarce Blue Ridge sculpin Cottus caeruleomentum abundant Fantail darter Etheostoma flabellare Common

C92

Little Antietam Creek

Introduction

Little Antietam Creek may be one of the most diverse trout streams in Maryland. It begins as a freestone, brook trout headwater stream between South Mountain and Catoctin Mountain, referred to as Raven Rock Hollow. This section primarily flows through the city of Hagerstown watershed property and is intersected by the Appalachian Trail. Once receiving the overflow from Edgemont Reservoir the stream flows to the west. In the vicinity of Route 64, a limestone spring dominates the stream’s flow for approximately 2.4 kilometers before warmwater tributaries and a lack of riparian cover elevate stream temperatures. The spring-influenced area supports one of the few wild rainbow trout resources in Maryland. Little Antietam Creek eventually flows into Antietam Creek near Leitersburg. The rainbow trout population is surveyed on a bi- annual basis while the brook trout population is typically surveyed every three to five years.

Brook trout populations were surveyed in 2001, 2004, and 2005. The rainbow trout population was surveyed in 2001, 2003, and 2005. During 2005, fish management activities consisted of monitoring the status of the existing trout populations with the following objectives:

• Obtain population estimates for adult and young-of-year brook trout in the upper reaches.

• Obtain baseline fish data to evaluate the impact of dam removal and stream restoration in formerly de-watered channel.

• Obtain population estimates for adult and young-of-year rainbow trout in the lower reaches.

Methods

Adult and young-of-year (YOY) trout populations were sampled using a single Model 12 backpack electrofishing unit manufactured by Smith-Root. Sampling stations were selected to include all the habitat types present in the stream reach to be surveyed (pool, riffle, run, etc.). The total length and mean width of the station were measured to the nearest tenth of a meter. Stream surface area was computed and expressed in hectares. Surveys began at the downstream end of the station and three electrofishing passes were made through the entire station. During each pass all trout were collected and placed in float boxes. The relative abundance of nongame species was observed and recorded. Relative abundance was expressed as rare, scarce, common or abundant. All trout were anesthetized with a 1:10 solution of clove oil and ethanol alcohol, identified to the species level, measured for total length to the nearest millimeter, weighed to the nearest

C93 gram, and returned alive to the stream at the end of the survey. Trout population estimates were derived using the depletion method (P < .05) described by Zippin (1958) using the MICROFISH 2.2 software package (VanDeventer and Platts 1985). The coefficient of condition factor (K) as described by Lagler (1952) was used to assess physical condition.

Results & Discussion

An established electrofishing station adjacent to Rt. 491 was surveyed (2005) to assess the brook trout population. The standing crop of adult brook trout has increased since 2001 with density decreasing in 2004 (Table 1). The decline in trout abundance during 2004 was attributed to drought conditions in 2002. However, the 2004 survey documented the largest brook trout collected from this steam, 276mm in total length. Stable water levels during the past two years have resulted in strong year-classes and improved brook trout densities. Brook trout physical condition (K) has remained within the optimal range of 0.9–1.1 suggested by Lagler (1952). The mean condition factor recorded for brook trout collected during 2001, 2004 and 2005 was 0.91, 0.98, 1.06, respectively.

In order to document the re-establishment of brook trout in a formerly dewatered channel, an additional survey was conducted between the City of Hagerstown diversion dam and the Edgemont Reservoir overflow. A 344-second, single-pass electrofishing sample resulted in the collection of 14 young-of-year brook trout. No adult brook trout were collected. Other fish species encountered while sampling were blacknose dace and blue ridge sculpin, both common in abundance. Historically, this section of stream was completely dewatered during the summer months when the entire flow was diverted into Edgemont reservoir. The US Fish & Wildlife Service, Maryland Department of the Environment, and the City of Hagerstown have agreed upon the removal of the diversion dam and stream restoration at the dam location. A structure will be constructed beside the stream channel for water withdrawal. At the current time, MDE plans to require a minimum of 0.2 cfs bypass flow when water diversions occur. This will allow year round fish movement throughout approximately 1.2km of stream.

Rainbow trout populations were measured at two established stations, Rowe Road and Gardenhour Road. The established station at Gardenhour Rd. could not be sampled effectively in 2003 because of a large debris dam from recent flooding. No comparable site could be found because of the stream’s physical character. Obstructions were removed through additional high water events and the established station could once again be sampled in 2005. Adult standing crop and density increased significantly in 2005 at both sites suggesting excellent recruitment in 2004 (Tables 2 and 3). Near record reproduction in 2005 is expected to further increase wild rainbow trout abundance in this unique fishery.

C94

Management Recommendations

• Monitor the adult and young-of-year brook trout population by electrofishing.

• Monitor the re-colonization of fish species in the re-watered stream channel downstream of the Edgemont Reservoir diversion.

• Work with landowners to protect and enhance stream and riparian zone quality in lower reaches of Little Antietam Creek.

C95

Table 1. Adult and young-of-year brook trout population data collected by electrofishing, Little Antietam Creek, Rt. 491. 2001, 2004, 2005. (95%CI). MDDNR.

Standing Crop Density YOY Density Year (kg/ha) (trout/ha) (YOY/ha) 2005 81 ± 4 1524 ± 66 1393 ± 184 2004 56 ± 3 457 ± 23 297 ± 50 2001 49 ± 3 1528 ± 80 500 ± 48

Table 2. Adult and young-of-year rainbow trout population data collected by electrofishing, Rowe Road, Little Antietam Creek, 2001,2003,2005.(95%CI). MDDNR.

Standing Crop Density YOY Density Year (kg/hec) (trout/hec) YOY/hec) 2005 94 ± 0.7 1063 ± 8 1032 ± 29 2003 69 ± 4 442 ± 27 76 ± 33 2001 65 ± 3 416 ± 15 379 ± 74

Table 3. Adult and young-of-year rainbow trout population data collected by electrofishing, Gardenhour Road, Little Antietam Creek, 2001, 2005. (95%CI). MDDNR.

Standing Crop Density YOY Density Year (kg/hec) (trout/hec) (YOY/hec) 2005 80 ± 3 755 ± 26 353 ± 23 2001 27 ± 11 182 ± 76 142 ± 4

C96

Bee Tree Run

Introduction

Bee Tree Run is a small to medium size freestone stream located in the northeast corner of Baltimore County. Bee Tree Run supports a self-sustaining brown trout population. For several decades prior to 1 January 1989, Bee Tree Run was stocked annually with adult rainbow trout from Bee Tree Road downstream to the confluence with Little Falls and managed as put-and-take with a five trout per day limit and no bait restrictions. Stocking of hatchery trout was discontinued as of 1 January 1989 and Bee Tree Run has since been managed as a wild trout stream with a two trout per day limit and no size restrictions. The use of artificial flies, lures and bait are permitted in Bee Tree Run. A significant development from the Pennsylvania Fish and Boat Commission to help protect the quality of the headwaters of Bee Tree Run was brought to our attention in 2001. The headwaters of Bee Tree Run, which are in Pennsylvania, were surveyed by PA biologists and were found to contain only two non-game species of fish. After requesting fisheries data from MDDNR for Bee Tree Run, Pennsylvania biologists recommended to classify the headwaters of Bee Tree Run under the Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection as a high quality cold water fishery (HQ-CWF) in the Chapter 93 Water Quality Standards. The protective measure by Pennsylvania is designed to adequately protect Bee Tree Run from unnecessary disturbance as a result of development and other land uses. Protection in the headwaters where Maryland has no control is a significant benefit to the future of Bee Tree Run. The objectives of the fisheries activities in Bee Tree Run were: (1) to monitor the distribution and population characteristics of wild brown trout in the stream; (2) to evaluate management strategies aimed at maximizing recreational fishing opportunities; and (3) to monitor habitat and environmental conditions affecting the trout population dynamics in Bee Tree Run for the purpose of preventing or reducing environmental degradation and documenting any improvement in environmental quality. Multiple-pass electrofishing surveys were conducted in Bee Tree Run from 2001 through 2003.

Methods

Sampling stations were selected to include all the habitat types present in the stream reach to be surveyed (pool, riffle, run, etc.). The total length and width of the station were then measured in meters. Fish were collected using a Model XII Smith-Root backpack electrofishing unit and all fish were retrieved with dip nets. Surveys began at the downstream end of the station and three passes were made through the entire station. During each pass all the trout were collected and placed in a separate float box.

The captured fish were anesthetized with a 1:10 solution of clove oil and ethanol alcohol, identified to the species level, measured for total length (TL) to the nearest millimeter, weighed in grams, and returned alive to the stream at the end of the survey. Trout population estimates for each species collected were derived using the depletion

C97 method (P ≤ 0.05) described by Zippin (1958) using the MICROFISH 2.2 software package (Van Deventer and Platts 1985). The coefficient of condition factor (K) was used to assess physical condition for each collected trout species (Lagler 1956). The relative abundance of non-game species were observed and recorded, but these fish were not collected.

Three stations had been surveyed annually from 1987 through 1993. The three stations are located between Bentley Springs and Freeland, Maryland and are referred to as the lower, middle and upper stations. The upper and lower stations are approximately 2.4 kilometers apart and the middle station is 1.9 kilometers below the upper station. Beginning in 1994, the decision was made to rotate the three survey stations, sampling one of the three annually. The middle station was surveyed in 2003 along a measured reach of 165.2 meters. The 167.64-meter lower station below Bee Tree Road was surveyed in 2002 and the 204.5-meter upper station was surveyed in 2001. The upper station was shortened in 2001 from 371.3 meters. The shortened stream reach contained all the habitat types present in the original station.

Results and Discussion

The third worst drought of the twentieth century in Maryland persisted through the summer of 1999. Another record drought in Maryland began in the fall of 2001 and lasted through the fall of 2002. Ground water levels throughout central Maryland in 2002 were the lowest since ground water data were first collected in 1962 (www.md.water.usgs.gov). Maryland’s weather in 2003 was a complete turn around from the weather experienced in 1999 and late 2001 through late 2002. Heavy rains in October and November of 2002 restored the water table to near normal levels. Precipitation continued to fall throughout the entirety of 2003, which led to the wettest year on record in Central Maryland. Precipitation at Baltimore/Washington International Airport measured 62.66 inches in 2003. The previous record was 62.35 inches of precipitation in 1889 (Heerd 2003). As a result of the impact the record droughts had on the brown trout population during the early part of the five-year study, the central region of the Maryland Department of Natural Resources (MDDNR) Inland Fisheries Division decided to discontinue electrofishing surveys in Bee Tree Run in 2004 and 2005 to limit unnecessary stress to an already fragile population of brown trout. Record precipitation in 2003, followed by two normal rainfall years in 2004 and 2005, was expected to return the brown trout population back to historical levels.

Electrofishing Surveys

Results from the 30 July 2003 electrofishing survey in the middle station showed the adult brown trout population was negatively affected by the drought of 2001-2002 and had not recovered to the historical level found in previous surveys. The density and standing crop of adults in the middle station above Bee Tree Road in 2003 were the lowest since put-and-take regulations were discontinued in 1989 (Table 1). The density of

C98 young-of-the-year (YOY) brown trout was up 46 percent in the middle station since the last survey in 2000 (Table 2). The increase in stream flow and cooler stream temperatures following the drought had a positive effect on the surviving adult brown trout as the condition factor (K) of fourteen adult brown trout collected during the survey was at the upper end of the optimal range of 0.90–1.10 (Table 3).

The density and standing crop of brown trout adults in the lower station on 12 September 2002 were the lowest since put-and-take trout stocking was discontinued in 1989 (Table 1). The density of YOY brown trout was down 41 percent since the last survey in 1999 (Table 2). Survey results from September 2002 suggest the adult population was negatively affected by the drought of 2001-2002 and likely never recovered from the drought of 1999. Extremely low stream discharges (as low as 1.1 cubic feet/second on August 20-23, 2002) associated with the drought left adults more susceptible to predation and increased stream temperatures (Heerd 2002). The condition factor (K) of seven adult brown trout collected during the survey was below the optimal range of 0.90–1.10 and significantly less (P < 0.05) than the condition of adult brown trout collected during the wet or normal flow years (Table 3). Timing of the survey may have contributed to the poorer condition of the adult trout as the 2001 and 2003 surveys in Bee Tree Run were conducted in July. The adult brown trout were susceptible to warm summer temperatures and stress for a longer period when surveyed in September of 2002.

Results from the 13 July 2001 survey in the upper station resulted in a six percent increase in adult brown trout standing crop and a two percent decrease in adult density in the upper station since the last electrofishing survey in 1998 (Table 1). The drought of 1999 didn’t appear to affect the adult brown trout in the upper station. The trout bounced back quickly as a result of normal water years in 2000 and throughout the summer of 2001. The density of YOY brown trout in 2001 was down 55 percent since the 1998 survey and was the lowest since multiple-pass electrofishing surveys were conducted in the upper station (Table 2). The reduction in station length in the upper station most likely resulted in fewer YOY brown trout being collected. Most of the 166.8 meters no longer surveyed from the original station contained yearling and YOY habitat. Recruitment in Bee Tree Run has been the most consistent of any brown trout stream in the Central Region. It has been an excellent source for occasional transplants into streams with the potential to support a wild, naturally reproducing population of brown trout (Heerd 1998). The condition factor (K) of the thirty-two adult brown trout collected during the survey was at the upper end of the optimal range of 0.90–1.10 (Table 3). A list of all fish species observed during the electrofishing surveys from 2001 through 2003 can be found in Table 4.

Management Recommendations

It is recommended that this study be continued in 2006. An electrofishing survey on the upper station should be conducted in 2006 to determine standing crop and density of the wild brown trout population. Continued development in the watershed in Maryland is

C99 an increasing concern. Monitoring of the stream will ensure that the population dynamics of brown trout in Bee Tree Run remain current and available to Maryland DNR’s Environmental Review Unit and to local governmental agencies requiring biological assessment data for zoning applications.

C100

Table 1. Standing crops and densities (95% CI) of adult brown trout collected by MDDNR during multiple-pass electrofishing surveys in the upper, middle and lower stations of Bee Tree Run, 1989-2003.

Station Year kg/hectare trout/hectare trout/km Upper 2001 37±1 364±13 156±6 1998 35±1 368±7 152±3 1995 26±1 225±10 92±4 1993 37±.4 408±4 168±2 1992 27±.3 309±4 128±2 1991 32±.3 249±3 103±1 1990 46±1 408±7 168±3 1989 29±.3 237±2 98±1 Mean 34 321 133 Range 20 183 76 Middle 2003 17* 187 85 2000 41±1 413±13 188±6 1997 57±2 484±14 241±7 1994 80±1 798±13 396±6 1993 37±2 482±21 257±11 1992 40±3 447±30 214±14 1991 63±1 536±8 258±4 1990 54±1 598±11 287±5 1989 25±1 247±13 119±6 Mean 44 445 218 Range 55 551 277 Lower 2002 3±.5 66±10 42±6 1999 17* 146 83 1996 37±2 482±23 257±12 1993 26±1 316±18 169±9 1992 29±1 333±15 179±8 1991 36±.4 333±4 179±2 1990 29±.3 338±3 181±2 1989 20±8 165±64 89±35 Mean 25 272 147 Range 34 416 215 * Results without 95%CI as all adults were collected during the first pass

C101

Table 2. Densities (95%CI) of young-of-the-year (YOY) brown trout collected by MDDNR during multiple-pass electrofishing surveys in the upper, middle and lower stations of Bee Tree Run, 1989-2003.

Station Year YOY/hectare YOY/km Upper 2001 580±75 249±32 1998 1667±113 686±47 1995 1114±182 458±75 1993 751±65 309±27 1992 2695±38 1108±16 1991 2450±47 1008±19 1990 830±20 341±8 1989 976±19 401±8 Mean 1383 570 Range 2115 859 Middle 2003 373+221 169+100 2000 200+12 91+6 1997 1845+166 918+83 1994 963+39 479+20 1993 837+77 403+38 1992 1188+102 571+49 1991 1188+69 571+33 1990 240+22 116+11 1989 818+52 393+25 Mean 850 412 Range 1645 827 Lower 2002 387±84 245±53 1999 652±46 372±26 1996 363±23 194±12 1993 316±29 169±16 1992 1541±83 827±45 1991 692±31 371±17 1990 415±8 223±4 1989 254±8 136±4 Mean 578 317 Range 1287 691

C102

Table 3. Mean size, condition and confidence intervals (95%) for adult brown trout collected in Bee Tree Run during electrofishing surveys by MDDNR in 2001, 2002 and 2003.

Mean TL Mean W Mean K Station Date N (mm) (g) Factor Middle 07-30-03 14 192 ± 29 91 ± 56 1.01 ± .03 Lower 09-12-02 7 177 ± 15 49 ± 13 .86 ± .04 Upper 07-13-01 32 206 ± 14 103 ± 27 1.04 ± .02

Table 4. Species name and relative abundance of fishes observed during electrofishing surveys by MDDNR in Bee Tree Run in 2001-2003.

Relative Common Name Scientific Name Abundance* Brown trout Salmo trutta C Blacknose dace Rhinichthys atratulus C Longnose dace Rhinichthys cataractae S Central stoneroller Campostoma anomalum S Cutlips minnow Exoglossum maxillingua S Rosyside dace Clinostomus funduloides C Bluntnose minnow Pimephales notatus R Creek chub Semotilus atromaculatus C River chub Nocomis micropogon C Common shiner Luxilus cornutus S White sucker Catastomus commersoni S Northern hog sucker Hypentelium nigricans S Tessellated darter Etheostoma olmstedi S Margined madtom Noturus insignis S *Relative Abundance: A= Abundant; C= Common; S= Scarce; R= Rare

C103

Jabez Branch

Introduction

Jabez Branch is a very unique coldwater habitat as it contains Maryland’s only existing brook trout population within the coastal plain province. A housing development on 64 hectares known as Holladay Park is slated for construction in the Left and Right Fork watersheds of Jabez Branch. Maryland Department of Natural Resources (DNR) biologists and planners have had considerable input to the project since the late 1990’s and anticipate aggressive infiltration technology control features for the housing development. High infiltration rates in the watershed that are capable of infiltrating up to a ten year storm without discharge to either the Left or Right Forks of Jabez Branch have been determined. In order to protect as much of the Left and Right Forks from development as possible, the Maryland Environmental Trust holds a 22.7-hectare conservation easement along the Forks, half of which was purchased with funds from DNR’s Program Open Space. The fisheries activities conducted in Jabez Branch in 2005 included brook trout fry counts in the Left and Right Forks of Jabez Branch in March and single pass electrofishing surveys of the Left and Right Forks in June. The Left and Right Forks of Jabez Branch were last surveyed on 29 June 2004 and were also surveyed on 27 June 2001 during the five-year study period. The Jabez Branch mainstem was electrofished from Hog Farm Road upstream to Route 32 on 24 June 2002. The objectives of the fisheries activities were: (1) to monitor the distribution and population characteristics of brook trout in Jabez Branch; and (2) to monitor habitat and environmental conditions affecting the brook trout population dynamics in Jabez Branch for the purpose of preventing or reducing environmental degradation and documenting any improvement in environmental quality.

Methods

Fish were collected using a Model XII Smith-Root backpack electrofishing unit and all fish were retrieved with dip nets. Surveys began at the downstream end of a measured station and a single pass was made through the entire station. A 122-meter station that represented all the habitat types (riffles, pools, undercut banks) was measured in the Left and Right Forks prior to the survey. During the survey, all brook trout were collected and placed in a five-gallon bucket. The relative abundances of nongame species were observed, but these fish were not collected. The captured fish were anesthetized with a 1:10 solution of clove oil and ethanol alcohol, identified to the species level, measured for total length to the nearest millimeter, weighed in grams, and returned alive to the stream at the end of the survey. The coefficient of condition factor (K) was used to assess physical condition for each adult brook trout (Lagler 1956).

Brook trout fry counts were conducted in February and/or March in the Left and Right Forks. The Left Fork counts began at a culvert pipe 50 meters above the confluence of the Left and Right Forks and continued upstream approximately 305 meters. The Right

C104

Fork counts extended from the confluence of the two Forks upstream 577 meters to a split in the Right Fork. Swim-up brook trout fry counts were conducted by walking along or wading through the station and counting the identifiable fry. The number of observed brook trout fry were counted and recorded to determine the success of the annual hatch.

Onset WaterTemp Pro loggers monitored water temperatures in the Left and Right Forks of Jabez Branch in 2004. The loggers were placed under stream banks and wired to tree roots to prevent loss due to a potential high stream flow event. Stream temperatures (°C) were recorded hourly. Temperature data were downloaded and graphed using the BoxCar Pro 4.3 software package.

Results and Discussion

Swim-Up Fry and Redd Counts

Fisheries staff conducted swim-up brook trout fry counts in the Left and Right Forks of Jabez Branch during February and/or March each of the five years of the study period (Table 1). Brook trout fry have been observed in the Forks as early as 12 February and as late as 27 March. The observation of a brook trout fry in the Right Fork of Jabez Branch on 25 March 2005 marked the seventh consecutive year of natural reproduction in the Right Fork and represents the eleventh consecutive year of successful recruitment in Jabez Branch since transplant efforts began on 26 April 1991. Transplant efforts were required after the historical brook trout population was lost in 1990 as a result of an unauthorized discharge from a pond located in the median of Maryland Route 3. The observation of only one brook trout fry in the Right Fork in 2005 was likely the result of only one count being conducted when usually two or more are conducted each year. The 2005 count was later than the first count is typically conducted for the Jabez Branch.

Redd counts are not typically conducted in the Jabez Branch. During a site meeting on 17 November 2003 concerning restoration work in the headwaters of the Left Fork, Inland Fisheries staff observed the Left Fork for spawning activity. At that time a beaver dam was discovered in the middle of the electrofishing station. The dam pooled water for approximately 60 meters upstream through the highest quality spawning sites in the Left Fork. Heavy silt had been deposited directly below the dam. The dam was also a barrier to fish movement. Efforts were made to remove the beavers from the Left Fork in early January 2004. Two adults and two juveniles were trapped from the site. The dam was removed once the beavers were removed from the stream. It was not clear how long the dam had been in the Left Fork when it was discovered; however, it appears the dam was a major contributor affecting the failed spawn and hatch in the Left Fork in 2003- 2004.

C105

Water Temperature Monitoring

Water temperatures were monitored and recorded only once during the five-year study from 1 June to 7 October 2004 in the Left and Right Forks of Jabez Branch (Figure 1). Water temperatures were considered excellent for the growth and survival of brook trout in the Left and Right Forks of Jabez Branch in 2004. The Left Fork of Jabez Branch has consistently maintained colder summertime stream temperatures than the Right Fork as a result of more cold-water spring influence.

Electrofishing Surveys

The Left and Right Forks were to be surveyed in 2007 following the 29 June 2004 electrofishing surveys. As a result of the extremely low brook trout fry count in March 2005, there was enough concern to survey the Forks to determine if the hatch was more successful than what was found during the fry count. On 28 June 2005, a single-pass electrofishing survey was conducted in the Left and Right Forks of Jabez Branch (Table 2). Results of the electrofishing surveys suggest little change in the Left and Right Forks of Jabez Branch from the previous electrofishing survey in June 2004. Results of the electrofishing surveys indicated poor recruitment in the Left and Right Forks in 2004 with some improvement in 2005. Single-pass electrofishing surveys were also conducted in the Left and Right Forks of Jabez Branch on 27 June 2001 and in the mainstem of Jabez Branch from Hog Farm Road upstream to Route 32 on 24 June 2002 (Table 2). The June 2002 electrofishing survey in the Jabez Branch mainstem indicated high brook trout survival and continued residence in the mainstem. During periods of drought and extremely low stream flow such as was the case in 2002, brook trout will seek habitat better suited for their protection and survival. The mainstem of Jabez Branch provided such protection with higher base flow and more habitat than was available in the Left and Right Forks of Jabez Branch during the drought conditions. The June 2001 survey resulted in the highest recruitment of brook trout in both Forks since transplant efforts were discontinued in 1995. The condition factor (K) of the adult brook trout collected during the surveys was at the upper end of the optimal range of 0.90– .10 (Table 3).

The number of adult brook trout collected or observed during the electrofishing surveys has always been low, suggesting Jabez Branch has the water quality to support a naturally reproducing population of brook trout, however; limited adult brook trout habitat results in low numbers of adults. The Left and Right Forks of Jabez Branch are comprised of very unstable sand and gravel substrate. High flows associated with heavy storm events move large volumes of sand and gravel through the system. Quality pools and undercuts for adult brook trout have been filled in with sand at a faster rate than new pools are being created resulting in very limited adult habitat. Observations suggest the Left Fork of Jabez Branch has lost more habitat than the Right Fork. Fortunately, one or two successful redds in either Fork can provide the recruitment necessary to maintain the brook trout population in Jabez Branch (Heerd 2004). The relative abundance of fish species observed during the electrofishing surveys can be found in Table 4.

C106

Management Recommendations

The management strategy proposed for 2006 is to conduct swim-up fry observations on the Left and Right Forks in late February or March to assess successful trout reproduction. The Left and Right Forks are scheduled to be surveyed in 2008, however; surveys could be conducted in 2006 if unfavorable environmental events occur in the Jabez Branch watershed that raise concern over the health or status of the brook trout population.

C107

Table 1. Year and total number of swim-up brook trout fry observed by MDDNR in the Left and Right Forks of Jabez Branch during the five-year study period, 2001- 2005.

Year Left Fork # of fry Right Fork # of fry 2005 0 1 2004 0 33 2003 16 2 2002 25 46 2001 24 15

Table 2. Total number of brook trout adults and young-of-the-year (YOY) collected during single-pass electrofishing surveys conducted by MDDNR in the Left and Right Forks of Jabez Branch and Jabez Branch mainstem from Hog Farm Road upstream to Route 32 since 1995, the first year of natural reproduction since brook trout transplants were discontinued in Jabez Branch.

Station Length Brook Trout Brook Trout Station Date (m) Adults (n) YOY (n) Left Fork 12-11-1995 350 6 38 12-12-1996 350 17 35 12-11-1997 350 7 23 12-10-1998 350 2 7 09-09-1999 15 0 4 06-27-2001 116 1 49 06-29-2004 122 4 1 06-28-2005 122 2 6

Right Fork 12-11-1995 577 1 3 12-12-1996 577 1 1 12-11-1997 577 2 2 12-10-1998 577 2 9 09-09-1999 15 1 8 06-27-2001 91 9 28 06-29-2004 122 2 3 06-28-2005 122 3 5

Mainstem- 12-11-1995 402 0 4 Hog Farm 12-12-1996 402 1 4 to 12-11-1997 402 5 2 Route 32 06-24-2002 356 13 5

C108

Table 3. Mean size, condition and confidence intervals (95%) for adult brook trout collected during single-pass electrofishing surveys conducted by MDDNR in the Left and Right Forks of Jabez Branch in 2004 and 2005, the mainstem of Jabez Branch from Hog Farm Road upstream to Route 32 in 2002 and the mean length and confidence intervals (95%) for brook trout collected in the Left and Right Forks of Jabez Branch in 2001.

Mean TL Mean W Mean K Survey Date N (mm) (g) Factor 06-28-2005 5 157±26 47±25 1.07± .07 06-29-2004 6 173±12 58±13 1.09± .07 06-24-2002 15 155±31 63±49 1.07± .05 06-27-2001 9 152±14 *N/A *N/A *No weights were measured during survey

Table 4. Species name and relative abundance of fishes observed during electrofishing surveys by MDDNR in the Left and Right Forks of Jabez Branch in June, 2001,2004 and 2005 and the mainstem from Hog Farm Road to Route 32 in June 2002.

Relative Abundance* Common Name Scientific Name Left/Right Mainstem Brook Trout Salvelinus fontinalis S S Blacknose Dace Rhinicthys atratulus A C Eastern Mudminnow Umbra pygmaea C A American Eel Anguilla rostrata S R *Relative Abundance: A= Abundant; C= Common; S= Scarce

C109

25.00

20.00

15.00

10.00 Temperature C Temperature

5.00

0.00 6/1/2004 6/8/2004 7/6/2004 8/3/2004 9/7/2004 6/15/2004 6/22/2004 6/29/2004 7/13/2004 7/20/2004 7/27/2004 8/10/2004 8/17/2004 8/24/2004 8/31/2004 9/14/2004 9/21/2004 9/28/2004 10/5/2004

Date

Left Fork Right Fork

Figure 1. Average daily water temperatures (°C) recorded with Onset WaterTemp Pro temperature loggers in the Left and Right Forks of Jabez Branch by MDDNR from 1 June to 7 October 2004.

C110

Morgan Run

Introduction

Morgan Run is managed as a catch-and-return trout stream from Route 97 downstream to London Bridge Road, a distance of approximately 5.23 kilometers. Artificial lures and flies are permitted; however, the use of bait is strictly prohibited in the catch-and-return section. The fisheries activity conducted annually in the Morgan Run Catch-and-Return Area during the five-year study period was the stocking of adult brown and rainbow trout. Water temperature monitoring and two multiple-pass electrofishing surveys were conducted in 2004. Multiple-pass electrofishing surveys were last conducted in Morgan Run in 2000. The objectives of the fisheries activities were to monitor the distribution and population characteristics of wild brown trout and stocked brown and rainbow trout in Morgan Run to evaluate management strategies aimed at maximizing recreational fishing opportunities, to monitor habitat and environmental conditions affecting the trout population dynamics in Morgan Run for the purpose of preventing or reducing environmental degradation and documenting any improvement in environmental quality.

Methods

Sampling stations were selected to include all the habitat types present in the stream reach to be surveyed (pool, riffle, run, etc.). The total length and width of the station were then measured in meters. Fish are collected using a Model XII Smith-Root backpack electrofishing unit and all fish were retrieved with dip nets. Surveys began at the downstream end of the station and three passes were made through the entire station. During each pass all the sportfish were collected and placed in a separate float box.

The captured fish were anesthetized with a 1:10 solution of clove oil and ethanol alcohol, identified to the species level, measured for total length (TL) to the nearest millimeter, weighed in grams, and returned alive to the stream at the end of the survey. Trout population estimates for each species collected were derived using the depletion method (P ≤ 0.05) described by Zippin (1958) using the MICROFISH 2.2 software package (Van Deventer and Platts 1985). The coefficient of condition factor (K) was used to assess physical condition for each trout species (Lagler 1956). The relative abundance of non-game species was observed and recorded, but these fish were not collected.

An Onset WaterTemp Pro logger monitored water temperatures. The logger was placed under a large in-stream boulder and was covered with smaller boulders to prevent loss due to a potential high stream flow event. Stream temperatures (°C) were recorded hourly. Temperature data were downloaded and graphed using the BoxCar Pro 4.3 software package.

C111

Results and Discussion

Stocking

Although Morgan Run does sustain occasional low-density recruitment and survival of wild brown trout, stocking of adult brown and rainbow trout maintains trout populations annually. Trout stocking activities in 2005 consisted of a stocking of 1,500 rainbow trout adults on 9 February from the Albert Powell State Trout Hatchery (APH) in Hagerstown, MD., 1,600 adult brown trout on 29 March from the Greenspring Trout Hatchery, PA. and an 11 October stocking of 500 rainbow trout from APH. An additional 8,000 adult rainbow trout from APH and 6,340 adult brown trout from private trout hatcheries have been stocked into Morgan Run from 2001 through 2004. The trout were stocked from upstream of Jim Bowers Road downstream to below Klee Mill Road. Most of the 1.6-kilometer section between Jim Bowers Road and Klee Mill Road was float stocked by volunteers.

Water Temperature Monitoring

Stream temperatures were monitored in Morgan Run upstream of Klee Mill Road in 2004. A single Onset WaterTemp Pro logger monitored water temperatures in Morgan Run from 15 June to 15 October (Figure 1). The highest temperature recorded above Klee Mill Road was 23.8°C (74.9°F) on 31 July. Summer water temperatures were considered fair for the survival of the wild brown and stocked brown and rainbow trout in 2004. Although water temperatures exceeded 20°C throughout the summer, temperatures did cool to below 20°C most days, providing some thermal relief to the trout.

Electrofishing Surveys

A multiple-pass electrofishing survey was conducted in Morgan Run from Klee Mill Road upstream 163.1 meters on 27 July 2004. A 138.4-meter multiple-pass electrofishing survey was also conducted downstream of the old Jim Bowers Road bridge abutments on 27 July 2004. Statistical results of the multiple-pass electrofishing surveys conducted in the Klee Mill Road and Jim Bowers Road stations can be found in Table 1. Excellent survival of stocked brown trout and good survival of stocked rainbow trout through July was likely the result of normal to slightly elevated stream flows during the summer attributable to normal rainfall. Cool water temperatures associated with below normal ambient summer temperatures, as well as increased tributary and spring inflow, contributed to conditions better suited for over-summer survival of the stocked trout.

Mean size, condition and 95 percent confidence intervals for stocked brown and rainbow trout adults can be found in Table 2. A single wild brown trout adult collected in the Jim Bowers station was not included in Table 2. It measured 450mm and weighed 832g with a condition factor of K= 0.91, which was within the optimal range of 0.90– 1.10. Condition factor (K) of the stocked rainbow trout collected during the surveys was

C112 well within the optimal range of 0.90–1.10. The species name and relative abundance of fish collected during the electrofishing surveys in Morgan Run are listed in Table 3.

Management Recommendations

Annual stocking of hatchery-reared brown and rainbow trout has provided a quality catch-and-return trout fishery. Stocking of adult hatchery brown and rainbow trout should continue in the Morgan Run catch-and-return area at the current stocking rate. Monitoring of the wild and stocked trout population should be continued on a three- year cycle. The next electrofishing surveys should be conducted in 2007.

C113

Table 1. Population data with 95% confidence intervals for brown and rainbow trout collected during electrofishing surveys by MDDNR in the Klee Mill Road and Jim Bowers Road stations of Morgan Run on 27 July 2004.

Station/Species N kg/ha trout/ha trout/km YOY/ha YOY/km Above Klee Mill Road Brown trout 25 42±3 175±14 153±12 0 0 Rainbow trout 13 28±1 91±1 80±1 0 0 Below Jim Bowers Road Brown trout 18* 37±5 162±21 130±17 0 0 Rainbow trout 4 13±15 36±41 29±32 0 0 * Includes one wild brown trout adult

Table 2. Mean size, condition and confidence intervals (95%) for stocked adult brown and rainbow trout collected during electrofishing surveys by MDDNR in Morgan Run on 27 July 2004.

Mean TL Mean W Mean K Species N (mm) (g) Factor Brown trout 42 285±10 220±30 .90± .02 Rainbow trout 17 321±13 321±40 .94± .03

C114

Table 3. Species name and relative abundance of fishes collected during electrofishing surveys by MDDNR in Morgan Run Catch-and-Return Area on 27 July 2004.

Relative Abundance* Common Name Scientific Name Klee Mill Jim Bowers Brown trout Salmo trutta C C Rainbow trout Oncorhynchus mykiss C S Central stoneroller Campostoma anomalum S S Blacknose dace Rhinicthys atratulus S - Longnose dace Rhinichthys cataractae S S Cutlips minnow Exoglossum maxillingua S - Bluntnose minnow Pimephales notatus R - Common shiner Luxilus cornutus S S Rosyside dace Clinostomus funduloides S S Creek chub Semotilus atromaculatus - S White sucker Catastomus commersoni C S Northern hog sucker Hypentelium nigricans C S Blue ridge sculpin Cottus caeruleomentum A A Largemouth bass Micropterus salmoides R - Smallmouth bass Micropterus dolomieu C R Bluegill sunfish Lepomis machrochirus R S Green sunfish Lepomis cyanellus R - Yellow bullhead Ameiurus natalis S - *Relative Abundance: A= Abundant; C= Common; S= Scarce; R= Rare (one individual)

C115

25

20

15

Temperature C 10

5

0 7/6/2004 8/3/2004 9/7/2004 6/15/2004 6/22/2004 6/29/2004 7/13/2004 7/20/2004 7/27/2004 8/10/2004 8/17/2004 8/24/2004 8/31/2004 9/14/2004 9/21/2004 9/28/2004 10/5/2004 10/12/2004 Date

mintemp maxtemp

Figure 1. Maximum and minimum daily water temperatures (° C) recorded with Onset WaterTemp Pro Logger by MDDNR from 15 June to 15 October 2004 in Morgan Run above Klee Mill Road.

C116

Paint Branch

Introduction

Paint Branch was the first stream in the State of Maryland to be managed as a Special Wild Trout Management Area, beginning 1 January 1980. The use of bait was prohibited and only single hook flies and lures were permitted. All trout caught were to be returned to the water. The area subject to this provision included the mainstem and all tributaries above Fairland Road. On 1 January 1989, regulations were changed statewide to allow multiple hooked lures and flies in all catch-and-return trout waters to include the Paint Branch from Fairland Road upstream. Catch-and-return management is aimed at providing maximum protection to Maryland’s longest surviving urban trout population.

The Paint Branch and its headwater tributaries are threatened with the construction of an Intercounty Connector (ICC) highway that Maryland’s Governor Robert Ehrlich promised to break ground on by the end of 2006. A draft Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) was published November 2004 for review following preliminary studies and site visits initiated in 2003 concerning two proposed ICC sites. Maryland Department of Natural Resources (MD DNR) biologists attended numerous meetings to provide comments and review on the various road alignments. Fisheries data were made available throughout the planning process to consultants contracted by the Maryland State Highway Administration. The road proposals considered pass through either the Right Fork of the Paint Branch (Corridor II) or the Good Hope tributary to Paint Branch (Corridor I, original master plan alignment). In late 2005, under President George W. Bush’s Environmental Streamlining Executive Order, the Federal and Maryland State Highway Administrations completed the final EIS. The final EIS will be available for public review until February 27, 2006, after which time the “Record of Decision” will be issued by the Federal Highway Administration. The “Record of Decision” will determine between the Corridor One, Corridor Two or no build option (http://iccstudy.org/). The fisheries activities conducted in the Paint Branch during the five-year study period include brown trout fry counts in the Good Hope tributary to Paint Branch, multiple-pass electrofishing surveys in the Good Hope and Gum Springs tributaries to Paint Branch, the Right Fork of the Paint Branch and in the Paint Branch mainstem, redd counts in the Good Hope and Gum Springs tributaries and water temperature monitoring in the Good Hope tributary. The objectives of the fisheries activities were: (1) to monitor the distribution and population characteristics of brown trout in the Paint Branch; and (2) to monitor habitat and environmental conditions affecting the brown trout population dynamics in the Paint Branch for the purpose of preventing or reducing environmental degradation and documenting any improvement in environmental quality.

Methods

Sampling stations were selected to include all the habitat types present in the stream reach to be surveyed (pool, riffle, run, etc.). The total length and width of the station were then measured in meters. Fish were collected using a Model XII Smith-Root C117

backpack electrofishing unit and all fish were retrieved with dip nets. Surveys began at the downstream end of the station and three passes were made through the entire station. During each pass all trout were collected and placed in a separate float box.

The captured fish were anesthetized with a 1:10 solution of clove oil and ethanol alcohol, identified to the species level, measured for total length (TL) to the nearest millimeter, weighed in grams, and returned alive to the stream at the end of the survey. Trout population estimates for each species collected were derived using the depletion method (P ≤ 0.05) described by Zippin (1958) using the MICROFISH 2.2 software package (Van Deventer and Platts 1985). The coefficient of condition factor (K) was used to assess physical condition in the collected trout species (Lagler 1956). The relative abundance of non-game species were observed and recorded, but these fish were not collected.

Brown trout fry counts were conducted in March and/or April in the Good Hope tributary to Paint Branch from the confluence of the Paint Branch upstream to the Depot tributary. Counts were conducted a minimum of two times. Swim-up brown trout fry counts were conducted by walking along the stream or wading upstream through the station and counting the identifiable fry. The number of observed brown trout fry was recorded to determine the success of the annual hatch. Redd counts were conducted in the Good Hope tributary from the confluence of the Paint Branch upstream to the Depot tributary. The counts were conducted a minimum of two times during November. The distance was mapped on a Garmin GPSMAP 76C and the redd sites were marked on the map to identify locations to search for swim-up brown trout fry in the spring.

An Onset WaterTemp Pro logger monitored water temperatures. The logger was wired under a stream bank and was covered with boulders to prevent loss due to a potential high stream flow event. Stream temperatures (°C) were recorded hourly. Temperature data were downloaded and graphed using the BoxCar Pro 4.3 software package.

Results and Discussion

Swim-up fry survey

Inland Fisheries Central Region staff conducted swim-up brown trout fry surveys in the Good Hope tributary to Paint Branch each of the five years during the study period. Swim-up fry counts were typically done the last week of March and the second week of April. Fry counts are conducted to determine if there was a successful hatch of brown trout in the spring. Brown trout fry were observed every spring of the five-year study with the exception of 2003.

Water Temperature Monitoring

Stream temperatures were monitored in the Good Hope tributary each of the five years during the study period. Ryan TempMentors were deployed in 2001 and 2002 and C118

Onset WaterTemp Pro loggers were used to monitor water temperatures in 2003 through 2005 (Table 1). Water temperatures typically reach 21 to 23°C in the Good Hope during the warmest periods of the summer, however; late evening and overnight temperatures drop below 20°C. With the exception of the summer of 2002, when record drought lowered stream flow enough to preclude movement of adult trout from one pool to another in the Good Hope tributary, stream temperatures have been favorable for the growth and survival of brown trout.

Electrofishing Surveys

Results of the multiple-pass electrofishing surveys in the Good Hope tributary during the five-year study period can be found in Table 2. A multiple-pass electrofishing survey was conducted on 06 September 2005 in the Hobbs Drive station of the Good Hope tributary for the 27th consecutive year. Adult brown trout standing crop (kg/hectare) decreased eight percent from the 2004 survey results in the Hobbs Drive station and density (trout/hectare) of adult brown trout increased 21 percent from the 2004 results (Table 2). Brown trout young-of-the-year (YOY) recruitment declined 67 percent in 2005 from the 2004 results (Table 2). Recruitment failed in the Good Hope tributary in 2003 for the first time since multiple pass electrofishing surveys were conducted in 1979 (Figure 1). Recruitment in 2005 was the second lowest since 1979. Good Hope tributary has provided the most consistent and reliable brown trout recruitment anywhere in the Paint Branch watershed (Heerd 1995). Mean size, condition and 95 percent confidence intervals for adult brown trout collected in the Good Hope tributary during the five-year study period can be found in Table 3. The condition factors (K) of adult brown trout collected during the study period were at the upper end of the optimal range of 0.90–1.10.

There has been a downward trend in the number of adult and YOY brown trout residing in the Good Hope tributary at Hobbs Drive since 1997. The average number of adult and YOY brown trout collected during the current five-year study has decreased significantly (P < 0.05) from the average number of adult and YOY brown trout collected during the previous five-year study (Table 4). Although adult and YOY brown trout were expected to show a decline in numbers during the drought period from the fall of 2001 through early fall of 2002, both 2003 and 2004 were wet years and numbers should have rebounded, yet did not. The 2005 year was considered an average to wet year through July. Dry conditions from August through early October in 2005 would not have been expected to depress the numbers of YOY as observed, further confirming that a problem has developed in the Good Hope tributary concerning its ability to successfully recruit historic numbers of YOY as observed prior to 2000.

An established 91.44 meter electrofishing station in the lower Good Hope tributary near the confluence with Paint Branch was surveyed on 11 September 2003 and 30 September 2005. Failure to find young-of-the-year in the Hobbs Drive station in 2003 prompted a survey in the lower reach of Good Hope tributary to verify the status of

C119 brown trout recruitment. The discovery of several redds in the lower Good Hope electrofishing station in the fall of 2002 identified the station as a second survey location to assess recruitment. The survey identified two adult brown trout and no young-of-the- year. A single-pass electrofishing survey conducted immediately upstream of the lower Good Hope survey station also produced no young-of-the-year, confirming the first failed year class in 24 consecutive years of sampling in the tributary. Poor recruitment in the Hobbs Drive station of the Good Hope tributary in 2005 again compelled Maryland fisheries biologists to survey the lower Good Hope station. A single-pass survey found one adult and two young-of-the-year brown trout further verifying a poor recruitment year in 2005.

The 157.9 meter Gum Springs tributary station was surveyed on 06 September 2005. One adult and one young-of-the-year brown trout were collected during the survey (Table 5). Only one young-of-the-year brown trout was collected during the Gum Springs electrofishing survey in 2004. The brown trout population in the Gum Springs tributary was threatened multiple times during the mid 1990’s as a result of sewer drain overflows into the Gum Springs as well as development projects in the watershed. Controlled and uncontrolled runoff from storm water management facilities has resulted in loss of adult habitat. The Oak Springs development in the Gum Springs watershed required the construction of a stormwater management facility located on Twigg Lane. The facility was constructed with a wetland marsh design, which pooled water and directed pond surface discharge into Gum Springs tributary. The pond design promoted thermal impact to that portion of Gum Springs tributary below the discharge point. In 2001, a parallel pipe conveyance system (approximately 2,200 feet in length) was constructed along and parallel to Gum Springs tributary with the objective to transport surface discharge from the Oak Springs storm water management pond into the main stem of Paint Branch. The project, constructed by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers in cooperation with the Maryland-National Capital Parks and Planning Commission (M-NCPPC) and Montgomery County Department of Environmental Protection (MCDEP), received technical direction from state and local government officials. The parallel pipe empties immediately downstream of the mouth of Gum Springs tributary where the anticipated thermal impact from the storm water management pond would be better mitigated than in the smaller, higher quality Gum Springs tributary.

Once considered the second most productive spawning and nursery area in the Paint Branch watershed (Heerd 2000), Gum Springs tributary has failed to perform up to that standard in recent years; however, it continues to support very limited natural reproduction in most years. Nine of the last fifteen years surveyed have produced single- digit numbers of YOY and were considered poor recruitment years. Two years produced no YOY and only 2001 demonstrated recruitment equivalent to that of Good Hope tributary prior to 2001 (Table 5). Strong natural reproductive success has not consistently occurred in Gum Springs tributary since the years preceding 1994. Although brown trout still exist in the Gum Springs tributary, numbers have been extremely low with no indication of recovery to historic levels observed before 1995.

C120

A 133.2 meter electrofishing station on the Right Fork of Paint Branch at Timberlake and Seibel Drives was surveyed on 30 September 2002 and 3 September 2003. Two brown trout adults were collected during the 2002 survey. No brown trout adults or young-of-the-year were collected during the 2003 survey. The Right Fork has historically been found to have the highest water quality of any of the Paint Branch sub- watersheds. An overall lack of quality adult habitat (especially in the lower 1/3 of the Right Fork) has prevented it from reaching the spawning and nursery status of Good Hope and Gum Springs tributaries. Development in the Right Fork tributary over the last ten-year period has reduced the overall stream quality and habitat. Frequent and sustained sediment transport to the Right Fork tributary immediately upstream of the survey station was observed entering from a new housing development during construction. The combined stress of prolonged drought and sedimentation during development activities upstream of Timberlake and Seibel Drive on the Right Fork is believed to have been the primary cause for the decline of the Right Fork brown trout population.

A single-pass electrofishing survey was conducted in the lower Paint Branch at the Beltsville Agriculture Research Center (BARC) on 21 November 2001. No brown trout were observed on the BARC property. Brown trout adults had been found on the BARC property during fall surveys from 1996 through 1998. The absence of trout could be attributed to the drought of 1999. Extremely low flow and warm summer temperatures would have forced any surviving brown trout to migrate upstream to search for cooler stream temperatures. By 2001, the brown trout population in the lower Paint Branch had not recovered to the level present before the drought.

On 17 September 2004, MD DNR biologists assisted M-NCPPC and MCDEP biologists with two 75 meter multiple-pass electrofishing surveys. Sites were in the Paint Branch at Pilgrim Hill Park downstream of Randolph Road and at the end of Jackson Road. Both sites are downstream of the catch-and-return management area. The two stations are part of the M-NCPPC countywide stream assessment program. Only one young-of-the-year brown trout was found in the Pilgrim Hill Park station at Randolph Road and no brown trout were found in the Jackson Road station. Numbers of brown trout are historically low downstream of Fairland Road. MD DNR station lengths are typically about 400 meters to assess the brown trout population at these sites. Central Region Fisheries and MCDEP have been coordinating dates for fish sampling in the Paint Branch. MCDEP fish sampling sites include the lower 75 meters of all shared Fisheries Service stations. Shared sites are sampled simultaneously in order to avoid over sampling and additional stress to the brown trout. The species name of fishes collected during the five-year study period in the Paint Branch and tributaries are listed in Table 6.

Redd Count

The Good Hope tributary is surveyed annually to provide some insight into the annual brown trout spawning effort and to identify important stream reaches utilized by spawning trout. Brown trout begin spawning in the Paint Branch watershed by early November. Redd counts are conducted from the confluence with the Paint Branch main

C121 stem upstream to the Montgomery County Highway Depot tributary, a distance of 1.45 kilometers. Twelve redds were counted in 2005. Redd counts have been conducted in the Good Hope tributary since 1978. The mean redd count is 19±4 (95% CI) for the years 1978 through 2005. On 05 December 2005, Maryland fisheries staff provided field training to biologists from M-NCPPC and MCDEP on the characteristics and identification of trout redds. Staff used redds from the lower Good Hope tributary to train the biologists and then walked the Gum Springs tributary to search for redds. Three redds were found indicating limited spawning is still taking place in the Gum Springs tributary.

Management Recommendations

The management strategy proposed for the Paint Branch in 2006 is to conduct a swim-up fry count in the Good Hope tributary in March and April to assess trout reproduction and electrofish one or more established stations in the Good Hope tributary to Paint Branch. A redd count will be conducted in November to assess spawning effort and spatial distribution of the spawning brown trout in the Good Hope tributary. Additional electrofishing surveys may be conducted in Gum Springs at the confluence with Paint Branch and in the Right Fork of Paint Branch to continue monitoring brown trout population trends. Additional fish sampling efforts conducted by cooperating agencies and local governments will be coordinated through MDDNR Fisheries as necessary. It is imperative that Fisheries continues to monitor the Paint Branch brown trout population in order to assess trends and status of the only self-sustaining population of brown trout in Montgomery County.

C122

Table 1. Summary of water temperature data from the Good Hope tributary recorded on Ryan TempMentors in 2001,2002 and on Onset WaterTemp Pros in 2003-2005 deployed by MDDNR.

Location Year Recording Period High Date of High Temp. (°C) Temp. Above Good Hope Rd. 2001 6/19 – 10/29 23.2°C 8/9,8/13 2002 5/24 – 11/7 23.2°C 7/23,8/1,8/3 Hobbs Drive 2001 6/19 – 10/29 22.7°C 8/11 2002 5/24 – 11/7 23.7°C 8/18 2003 5/12 – 9/18 21.6°C 7/22 2004 5/12 – 10/15 22.4°C 8/1 2005 4/28 – 11/22 23.5°C 7/16 Near mouth 2001 6/19 – 10/29 22.5°C 8/11 2002 5/24 – 11/7 23.2°C 8/18, 8/19

Table 2. Population data (95% CI) for wild brown trout collected by MDDNR during multiple-pass electrofishing surveys in the Hobbs Drive station of the Good Hope tributary to Paint Branch, 2001-2005.

Adult Adult Adult Adult YOY Year YOY/ha YOY/km N kg/ha trout/ha trout/km N 2005 6 24±5 188±38 53±11 3 94±100 26±28 2004 5 26* 156 44 9 281±93 79±26 2003 4 14±7 174±85 44±21 0 0 0 2002 4 8±4 174±85 44±21 11 478±68 122±17 2001 8 24±6 348±89 89±23 15 652±119 167±30 Mean 5±2 19±7 208±69 55±17 8±5 301±235 79±60 Range 4 16 192 45 15 652 167 * No 95% confidence interval as all adult trout were collected during first pass

C123

Table 3. Mean size, condition and confidence intervals (95%) for yearling and older brown trout collected during electrofishing surveys by MDDNR in the Hobbs Drive station of Good Hope tributary to Paint Branch from 2001-2005.

Date N Mean TL Mean W Mean K (mm) (g) Factor 09/06/05 6 222±46 128±80 1.00±.05 09/15/04 5 239±64 165±90 1.02±.05 09/03/03 4 189±38 82±45 1.08±.06 09/19/02 4 162±31 46±30 .97±.05 07/19/01 8 184±25 68±31 .97±.02

Table 4. The mean number and confidence intervals (95%) of adult and young-of-the- year (YOY) brown trout collected during the five-year study periods from 1981 through 2005 by MDDNR in the Hobbs Drive station of Good Hope tributary to Paint Branch.

Study Period Date Mean # of Adults Mean # of YOY 1981-1985 13 ± 5 19 ± 9 1986-1990 13 ± 3 22 ± 10 1991-1995 14 ± 6 25 ± 12 1996-2000 17 ± 7 23 ± 7 2001-2005 5 ± 1 8 ± 5

Table 5. Population estimates (95% CI) for brown trout electrofished by MDDNR in the Gum Springs tributary to Paint Branch, 2001-2005.

Year Adult Adult Adult Adult YOY YOY/ YOY/ N kg/ha trout/ha trout/km N ha km 2005 1 2* 22 6 1 22* 6 2004 0 0 0 0 1 22* 6 2003 2 11* 44 13 0 0 0 2002 2 2±10 44±282 13±80 1 22* 6 2001 0 0 0 0 22 533±141 152±40 Mean 1±1 3±4 22±19 6±6 5±8 120±203 34±58 Range 2 11 44 13 22 533 152 * No 95% confidence intervals as all trout were collected on the first pass

C124

Table 6. Species name of fishes observed during electrofishing surveys by MDDNR in the lower Gum Springs tributary (1), Good Hope tributary (2), Right Fork of Paint Branch (3), Paint Branch below Randolph Road (4), Paint Branch at Jackson Road (5) and Paint Branch at Beltsville Agriculture Research Center (6) in 2001-2005.

Common Name Scientific Name Station Brown trout Salmo trutta 1,2,3,4 Blacknose dace Rhinichthys atratulus 1,2,3,4,5,6 Longnose dace Rhinichthys cataractae 1,2,3,4,5,6 Cutlips minnow Exoglossum maxillingua 1,2,3,4,5,6 Rosyside dace Clinostomus funduloides 1,2,3,4,5,6 Creek chub Semotilus atromaculatus 1,2,3,4,5,6 Fallfish Semotilus corporalis 1,2,3,4,5,6 Common shiner Luxilus cornutus 1,3,4,5,6 Spottail shiner Notropis hudsonius 5,6 Spotfin shiner Cyprinella spiloptera 6 Swallowtail shiner Notropis procne 4,5,6 Silverjaw minnow Notropis buccatus 6 Northern hogsucker Hypentelium nigricans 6 White sucker Catastomus commersoni 1,2,3,4,5,6 Margined madtom Noturus insignis 3,4,5 Blue ridge sculpin Cottus caeruleomentum 1,2,3,4,5,6 Tessellated darter Etheostoma olmstedi 1,2,3,4,5,6 Pumpkinseed sunfish Lepomis gibbosus 1,4,5,6 Bluegill sunfish Lepomis machrochirus 1,2,5 Green sunfish Lepomis cyanellus 1,6 Largemouth bass Micropterus salmoides 1 Yellow bullhead Ameiurus natalis 6 Least brook lamprey Lampetra aepypter 4 American eel Anguilla rostrata 1,2,3,4,5,6 Sea lamprey Petromyzon marinus 1,2,3,4,5

C125

60

50

40

Adults 30 YOY Number

20

10

0 1979 1982 1985 1988 1991 1994 1997 2000 2003 Year of Survey

Figure 1. Population estimates for adult and young-of-the-year brown trout electrofished by MD DNR in the Good Hope tributary at Hobbs Drive, 1979-2005.

C126

Patuxent River Catch-and-Return Area

Introduction

The Patuxent River is managed as a catch-and-return trout stream from Route 27 downstream to Route 97, a distance of approximately 17.7 kilometers. The entire length of river forms the dividing line between Howard and Montgomery Counties. From 1 January 1974 until 31 December 1982, one trout over fifteen inches (381mm) could be harvested a day and bait was permitted. As of 1 January 1983, the regulations were changed to the present management of catch-and-return, lures and/or flies permitted. No bait is permitted within the catch-and-return section. Fisheries activities conducted in the Patuxent River Catch-and-Return Area in 2005 included the stocking of adult brown and rainbow trout, a swim-up fry count, one multiple-pass electrofishing survey and a redd count. The objectives of the fisheries activities during the five-year study period were: (1) to monitor the distribution and population characteristics of wild brown trout and stocked brown and rainbow trout in the Patuxent River; (2) to evaluate management strategies aimed at maximizing recreational fishing opportunities; and (3) to monitor habitat and environmental conditions affecting the trout population dynamics in the Patuxent River for the purpose of preventing or reducing environmental degradation and documenting any improvement in environmental quality.

Methods

Sampling stations were selected to include all the habitat types present in the stream reach to be surveyed (pool, riffle, run, etc.). The total length and width of the station were then measured in meters. Fish were collected using a Model XII Smith-Root backpack electrofishing unit and all fish were retrieved with dip nets. Surveys began at the downstream end of the station and three passes were made through the entire station. During each pass all the trout were collected and placed in a separate float box.

The captured fish were anesthetized with a 1:10 solution of clove oil and ethanol alcohol, identified to the species level, measured for total length (TL) to the nearest millimeter, weighed in grams, and returned alive to the stream at the end of the survey. Trout population estimates for each species collected were derived using the depletion method (P ≤ 0.05) described by Zippin (1958) using the MICROFISH 2.2 software package (Van Deventer and Platts 1985). The coefficient of condition factor (K) was used to assess physical condition for each collected trout species (Lagler 1956). The relative abundance of non-game species were observed and recorded, but these fish were not collected.

Brown trout fry counts were conducted in March and/or April in the Mullinix Mill Road electrofishing station. Swim-up brown trout fry counts were conducted by walking the stream or wading upstream through the station and counting the identifiable fry. The number of observed brown trout fry were counted and recorded to determine the success of the annual hatch. Redd counts were conducted in November from approximately 50- C127 meters below Mullinix Mill Road upstream to approximately 50-meters above the Mullinix Mill electrofishing station above Mullinix Mill Road. The number of redds counted can give an early indication of the potential hatch of brown trout in the spring as long as conditions are favorable for the development and hatch of brown trout fry.

An Onset WaterTemp Pro logger monitored water temperatures in the Patuxent River at Hipsley Mill Road in 2005. The logger was placed under stream bank riprap to prevent loss due to a potential high stream flow event. Stream temperatures (°C) were recorded hourly. Temperature data were downloaded and graphed using the BoxCar Pro 4.3 software package.

Results and Discussion

Stocking

Trout stocking activities in 2005 consisted of stocking of 2,000 adult brown trout on 22 February from the Laurel Hill Trout Hatchery, PA, 1,000 rainbow trout adults on 2 March from the Albert Powell State Trout Hatchery (APH) in Hagerstown, MD, 700 adult rainbow trout from APH on 28 March and a 13 October stocking of 500 rainbow trout from APH. The trout were float stocked from above Annapolis Rock Road downstream to Howard Chapel Road with the assistance of the Potomac-Patuxent Chapter of Trout Unlimited. Adult hatchery trout were stocked from approximately 90 meters above Annapolis Rock Road downstream to approximately 90 meters below Howard Chapel Road to provide trout fishing opportunities to anglers where wild trout numbers are too low to provide a fishable population. No adult trout were stocked above Mullinix Mill Road due to the presence of a self-sustaining wild brown trout population. A total of 10,220 brown trout adults from private hatcheries and 10,700 rainbow trout adults from APH have been stocked into the Patuxent River from 2001 through 2005.

Swim-up fry count

On 11 April 2005, Fisheries staff conducted a brown trout fry count in several pools below Mullinix Mill Road and in several pools above Mullinix Mill Road including the upper end of the electrofishing survey station. A total of nine brown trout fry were observed including six within the electrofishing station. A 14 April 2005 count at Annapolis Rock Road revealed 12 brown trout fry from the pool immediately below the Route 94 bridge upstream approximately 137 meters. The fry observation and count confirmed successful reproduction and the relative abundance of fry indicated a good hatch. Swim-up brown trout fry counts have been conducted during each of the past five years. The earliest count was conducted on March 8 of 2002 and the latest on April 20 of 2001. The earliest date swim-up fry were observed was on March 29 with the peak count during the first two weeks of April.

C128

Water Temperature Monitoring

Water temperatures were monitored and recorded only once during the five-year study period from 11 May to 30 October 2005 in the Patuxent River at Hipsley Mill Road (Figure 1). The high water temperature for the study period was 25.72°C at 1800 hours on August 14. Water temperatures were considered fair to poor for the growth and survival of stocked and wild brown trout and stocked rainbow trout from late June through August at Hipsley Mill Road in 2005.

Electrofishing Surveys

A 185.9 meter multiple-pass electrofishing survey was conducted in the Patuxent River above Mullinix Mill Road on 26 August 2005. Forty yearling and older brown trout and 47 young-of-the-year brown trout were collected from the station. Results of the multiple-pass electrofishing surveys conducted in the Mullinix Mill Road station from 1989 through 2005 can be found in Table 1. The Mullinix Mill Road station was not surveyed in 2001 as a result of extremely low flows associated with a drought of record. Wild brown trout continue to provide anglers with a quality trout fishery above Mullinix Mill Road.

Two multiple-pass electrofishing surveys were conducted at other sites in the Patuxent River during the five-year study period. The surveys were conducted below Hipsley Mill Road and above Howard Chapel Road on 2 September 2004 to check for the presence of stocked trout survivors and wild brown trout. A 164.9 meter station was surveyed downstream of Hipsley Mill Road. A 185.6 meter station upstream of Howard Chapel Road was surveyed immediately after the Hipsley Mill survey. Results of the surveys can be found in Table 2. More wild adult brown trout (5) than stocked brown trout (4) were collected in the two downstream stations indicating more favorable stream conditions than usual for wild brown trout in the lower, more marginal reaches of the Patuxent River catch-and-return area in 2004. Results indicate that few stocked trout survive through the summer months in the lower Patuxent River catch-and-return area.

One single-pass electrofishing survey of interest was conducted in the Patuxent River catch-and-return area during the study period. A 320-meter survey was conducted above Hipsley Mill Road on 30 May 2001 following angler reports that no stocked brown trout were being caught. Survey results found 15 stocked rainbow trout and eight yearling wild brown trout but no stocked brown trout. Where the stocked brown trout went is unknown although reports of large brown trout caught in Triadelphia Reservoir could have been an indication the trout moved downstream.

Mean size, condition and 95 percent confidence intervals for the wild brown trout collected in the Mullinix Mill electrofishing station during the five-year study can be found in Table 3. Condition factor (K) of wild brown trout collected during the surveys

C129 was within the optimal range of 0.90–1.10. The species name and relative abundance of fish collected during the electrofishing surveys in the Patuxent River are listed in Table 4.

Redd Count

On 8 November 2005, Fisheries staff conducted a redd count beginning 30 meters downstream of the Mullinix Mill Road bridge pool upstream to 30 meters above the Mullinix Mill electrofishing station, a distance of approximately 520 meters. A total of two redds were counted and were observed in the Mullinix Mill electrofishing station. A warm late fall seemed to have delayed spawning in the Patuxent River at the Mullinix Mill Road location. The best spawning habitat for trout at Mullinix Mill Road is found within the stream reach that was surveyed.

Management Recommendations

The inability of the Patuxent River mainstem to support a quality wild trout population downstream of Route 94 will require continued stocking of hatchery reared adult brown and rainbow trout at current stocking densities. A fall stocking of rainbow trout should be continued as long as trout are available and stream conditions are favorable to provide angling opportunities during the fall and winter months. Adult hatchery brown and rainbow trout should continue to be stocked from Annapolis Rock Road to Howard Chapel Road in 2006. The wild brown trout population trends above Mullinix Mill Road should continue to be monitored in 2006. Hatchery and wild trout survival in the lower catch-and-return section below Annapolis Rock Road may be assessed in late summer or early fall if time constraints and scheduling allow.

C130

Table 1. Population data (95% CI) for wild brown trout collected by MDDNR during multiple-pass electrofishing surveys in the Mullinix Mill Road station of the Patuxent River,1989-2005.

Year kg/ha trout/ha trout/km YOY/ha YOY/km 2005 22+2 248+21 221+19 388+187 344+166 2004 38+3 273+20 242+18 600+47 533+42 2003 17+2 133+12 118+11 103+32 91+28 2002 8+1 109+7 97+6 248+223 221+199 2001 No Survey 2000 15+1 115+3 102+3 313+97 276+85 1999 9* 91 81 114+40 102+36 1998 22+1 267+3 238+2 163+13 146+12 1997 26+1 200+10 179+9 748+31 671+28 1996 11+1 91+6 81+6 309+1140 276+1018 1995 13+1 109+6 86+5 185+109 146+86 1994 4+1 54+5 43+4 272+69 237+60 1993 12+1 116+8 92+6 94+3 76+2 1992 26+2 156+10 124+8 170+13 135+10 1991 No Survey 1990 21+1 136+3 108+3 257+100 206+80 1989 34+2 148+8 119+6 148+60 119+48 Mean 19±5 150±34 129±31 274±94 239±85 Range 34 219 199 654 595 * No 95% confidence interval as all adult trout were collected during first pass

Table 2. Population data for brown and rainbow trout collected by MDDNR during multiple-pass electrofishing surveys in the Hipsley Mill Road and Howard Chapel Road stations of the Patuxent River, 2004.

YOY/ YOY/ N kg/ha trout/ha trout/km N ha km Below Hipsley Mill Brown trout 5 14* 42 30 1 8 6 Rainbow trout 2 4* 17 12 0 0 0 Above Howard Chapel Brown trout 5 7* 37 27 1 7 5 Rainbow trout 4 12* 37 27 0 0 0 * No 95% confidence interval as all trout were collected during first pass

C131

Table 3. Mean size, condition and confidence intervals (95%) for wild yearling and older brown trout collected by MDDNR during electrofishing surveys in the Mullinix Mill Road station in the Patuxent River, 2002-2005.

Mean TL Mean W Mean K Date N (mm) (g) Factor November 8,2002 18 193±14 69±18 .88 ± .03 October 16, 2003 22 221±18 130±39 1.06 ± .04 August 6, 2004 44 234±15 144±33 .94 ± .04 August 26, 2005 40 199±13 87±23 .94 ± .02

Table 4. Species name and relative abundance of fishes observed during electrofishing surveys by MDDNR in the Patuxent River Catch-and-Return Area in 2001- 2005.

Common Name Scientific Name Relative Abundance* Brown trout Salmo trutta C Rainbow trout Oncorhynchus mykiss S Central stoneroller Campostoma anomalum C Blacknose dace Rhinicthys atratulus S Longnose dace Rhinichthys cataractae C Cutlips minnow Exoglossum maxillingua S Fallfish Semotilus corporalis S River chub Nocomis micropogon C White sucker Catastomus commersoni S Northern hog sucker Hypentelium nigricans C Margined madtom Noturus insignis S Common shiner Luxilus cornutus C Rosyside dace Clinostomus funduloides S Tessellated darter Etheostoma olmstedi C Shield darter Percina peltata S Largemouth bass Micropterus salmoides S Smallmouth bass Micropterus dolomieu R

*Relative Abundance: A= Abundant; C= Common; S= Scarce; R= Rare

C132

30

25

20

Minimum 15 Maximum Degrees C Degrees

10

5

0

5 05 05 05 05 005 005 2 /20 2 20 /20 /20 1/ 6/8/ /22 7/6/2005 8/3/ 3 /12 /26 5/11/20055/25/2005 6 7/20/2005 8/17/200 8/ 9/14/20059/28/2005 10 10 Date

Figure 1. Minimum and maximum daily water temperatures (°C) recorded with an Onset WaterTemp Pro temperature logger in the Patuxent River catch-and-return area at Hipsley Mill Road by MDDNR from 11 May to 30 October 2005.

C133

Gunpowder Falls Tailwater

Introduction

Since a coldwater agreement between Trout Unlimited (TU) and Baltimore City went into effect on November 5, 1986, a thriving self-sustaining brown trout fishery has developed and dominated the fish species composition of the Gunpowder Falls tailwater (GFT) for nineteen years. The agreement obligates Baltimore City to provide a minimum discharge of 11.5 cubic feet per second (cfs), however, Baltimore City reserves the right to notify TU if the minimum cannot be delivered due to municipal water supply constraints or water shortage.

GFT is currently managed under three different regulation strategies along its 28.2km length. The upper 11.6km of river is managed as a Catch-And-Return (C&R) area, restricted to the use of artificial lures and flies only. The first C&R area was established January 1, 1989 between Prettyboy dam and Falls Road. The second C&R portion was added January 1, 1991 from York Road downstream to Blue Mount Road. The third and final addition included the section from Falls Road to York Road on January 1, 1993. Four established electrofishing stations within the C&R area are identified as Dam/Falls, Falls, Masemore, and York stations. The middle 6.8km portion of tailwater was established as a two-trout/person/day harvest area for wild trout since January 1, 1997. This section is not stocked with hatchery trout and allows the use of bait. A single electrofishing station established within this managed area is referred to as the Blue Mount station. The remaining 9.8km of tailwater has been managed as a Put- And-Take (P&T) area since 1989. The P&T portion is annually stocked in spring and fall with hatchery reared adult rainbow trout. A creel limit of five trout/angler/day applies in the P&T area and there are no restrictions on terminal tackle. A single electrofishing station referenced as the Glencoe station is sampled periodically within this stream section. Annual electrofishing surveys have been conducted since 1987 in GFT at established stations, ranging in number from four to eight.

The objectives of this project are to: (1) monitor population and recruitment trends of the wild trout fishery within 28.2km of GFT managed under various fishing regulation strategies; (2) monitor response and success of rainbow trout fingerling stocking between Falls Road and Prettyboy Dam; (3) monitor tailwater temperatures in response to newly adopted water release strategies employed during 2003, 2004 and 2005; and (4) initialize quantitative sampling protocol for non-game fish species within the Masemore and Blue Mount survey stations.

Methods

Fish sampling stations were selected to include all habitat types (pool, riffle, run, etc.) found in each selected stream reach. The total length and width of the station was measured in meters. Water regulation from Prettyboy Reservoir is required in order for

C134 the fall electrofishing survey to be completed at a discharge of approximately 30 cubic feet per second (cfs).

Trout populations were estimated at each sample location using the Zippin multiple pass removal method (1958). All fish were collected using a Type XII Smith- Root backpack electrofishing unit (at Dam/Falls station only) or a barge mounted 1.5 GPP Smith-Root barge-mounted electrofishing unit equipped with two anodes. Each electrofishing survey was initiated at the downstream end of the station and three electrofishing passes were made through the entire station. During each pass, all trout were collected and placed in live boxes. All trout were anesthetized with a 1:10 solution of clove oil and ethanol alcohol, identified to the species level, measured for total length (TL) to the nearest millimeter, weighed in grams, and returned alive to the stream at the end of the survey. Trout population estimates for each species collected were derived using the depletion method (P ≤ 0.05) described by Zippin (1958) using the MICROFISH 2.2 software package (Van Deventer and Platts 1985). The coefficient of condition factor (K) was used to assess physical condition for each collected trout species (Lagler 1956).

All fish species were collected from two established sample locations in the first 75 meters of the Masemore and Blue Mount stations. All fish species and trout were collected during each of two electrofishing passes and placed in live boxes. All trout were processed as described above while the non-game species were identified to species level and collectively weighted to obtain total weight in grams and recorded. All fish were returned alive to the stream at the end of the survey.

Kamloops rainbow trout eggs were obtained from Trout Lodge, WA and reared to fingerling size at Albert Powell State Trout facility in Hagerstown, MD. Fingerlings were provided by hatchery staff and placed into temporary holding pens in the hatchery. Fingerlings were anesthetized with clove oil (1:10) and were given an adipose fin clip. A random sample was taken and measured for total length to the nearest millimeter (mm TL) and weighed in grams. The fingerlings were retained in covered holding pens at the hatchery overnight. Fingerlings were observed for mortalities the following day, transported to GFT, and stocked upstream of Falls Road in buckets for a distance of approximately 1.6km.

Tailwater temperatures were monitored hourly using continuous recording data loggers manufactured by Onset Computer Corporation. Devices were located in Falls Road (1) and Blue Mount Road (1) electrofishing stations, located approximately 1.9 and 12.5km below Prettyboy dam, respectively. The information is collected annually and is used to monitor and evaluate thermal impact from new water release protocol activities first implemented in 2004.

C135

Results and Discussion

Electrofishing Surveys

Electrofishing surveys were conducted at five established sites in 2005 that included Dam/Falls, Falls Road, Masemore, Blue Mount and Glencoe stations. Dam/Falls and Masemore stations were the only two stations surveyed in 2004 that were repeated in 2005. Uncontrollable discharge from Prettyboy dam curtailed all planned electrofishing surveys in 2003 and eliminated three out of five stations planned in 2004.

Adult brown trout standing crop (kg/ha) in 2005 increased at Dam/Falls and Masemore stations 52% and 15% respectively from the last survey in 2004 (Table 1). Brown trout density (trout/ha) in 2005 at Dam/Falls and Masemore stations increased 50% and 31% respectively from the last survey in 2004 (Table 2). Mean lengths of yearling and older brown trout at Dam/Falls were significantly larger in 2002, 2004 and 2005 (P < 0.05) and displayed better condition than in 2001 (Table 3). Mean lengths of yearling and older brown trout at Masemore station were significantly larger in 2004 and 2005 (P < 0.05) and displayed better condition than those sampled in 2001 and 2002 (Table 4). Mean length and weight for yearling an older brown trout at the Falls and Blue Mount stations were significantly larger (P < 0.05) in 2005 when compared to previous sample dates during the five year period (Table 5). No significant change in mean length or weight at York station was observed between 2001 and 2002 (Table 5). Glencoe station in 2005 showed mean lengths of adult brown trout similar to those at Blue Mount in the 2005 sample (Table 5). Adult brown trout densities at Dam/Falls and Masemore stations were highest in 2001 and 2005, respectively, over the last five-year period (Table 2).

Density of YOY brown trout (YOY/ha) in 2005 increased 40% and 140% at Dam/Falls and Masemore Road stations, respectively, compared with the 2004 survey (Table 6). Historically, brown trout YOY densities at Dam/Falls station have been lower than other C&R stations, however, densities have remained comparable in the years sampled between 2001 and 2005, with the exception of 2001 (Table 6).

Stocking summaries of rainbow fingerlings, mean lengths at stocking and total number stocked appear in Table 7. A total of 2,055 fingerlings were stocked from buckets along the entire 2.1km reach of GFT from the base of Prettyboy Dam to Falls Road in 2005 (Table 7). Kamloops rainbow fingerlings have been stocked into a 2.1km reach of GFT between Prettyboy dam and Falls Road since 2002 in an attempt to revive failing numbers of wild reproducing rainbow trout. Rainbow trout standing crops in 2004 and 2005 were entirely composed of fish stocked as fingerlings, while 2001 and 2002 were entirely supported by natural reproduction (Table 1). Assessment of rainbow fingerling survival and recruitment contribution to the rainbow stock was not possible in 2003, as all fall surveys were cancelled due to uncontrollable discharge. Rainbow trout standing

C136 crop at the Dam/Falls station showed an 86% decline in 2005 compared to 2004 (Table 6). A zero return for adipose stocked rainbow fingerlings in 2004 likely contributed to the significant standing crop decline observed in 2005 (Table 6). Higher survival of adipose clipped fingerlings in 2002 and 2003 was responsible for the 3.5-fold standing crop increase from 2002 to 2004 (Table 1) and a 4.3-fold increase in adult rainbow trout density (Table 2). Although adipose clipped rainbow trout are not stocked in the Masemore station, downstream drift from Falls Road has resulted in a small contribution of rainbow standing crop and density (Table 1 and 2). Condition factor (K) of adipose clipped rainbow trout collected at Dam/Falls station was within the optimal range of 0.90–1.10 (Table 8).

The apparent failure of the 2004-year class of stocked fingerling rainbow trout at the Dam/Falls station was disappointing, however, the data suggest that several factors may have influenced fingerling survival. Dam/Falls station length (99.06m) represents only 4.8% of the total distance (2.08km) between Prettyboy dam and Falls Road, resulting in an inadequate sample length. A second sample station located at Falls Road used to help assess fingerling-stocking status wasn’t sampled in 2004 due to uncontrollable discharge. A higher mean size of brown trout in 2004 was also implied (Gougeon 2004) as predation may have contributed. Falling water conditions during the three-pass electrofishing survey promoted a poor depletion, resulting in a very high confidence interval for the Dam/Falls station in 2005 (Table 6).

Although the data collected at Falls and Dam/Falls stations don’t indicate significant improvement of the rainbow trout population following fingerling stocking efforts, anglers and local outfitters are reporting improved angling for rainbows between Falls Road and Prettyboy Dam. Stocking distribution and migration of fingerling and adult rainbows within the 2.08km section may explain the dissimilar conclusions.

Water Temperature Monitoring

HOBO Water Temp Pro loggers were deployed above Falls Road and below the confluence of Little Falls (Blue Mount Station) between 04/15/05 and 10/05/05. Maximum water temperatures in GFT were very brief in duration and occurred at Falls Road on 07/08/05 (23.6ºC) and Blue Mount station on 07/17/05 (23.2ºC) (Figure 1). Generally and historically, maximum temperatures in excess of 20ºC are the result of surface spillover during the warm summer months. Maximum water temperatures over the last five years were promoted by spillover events and were very brief in duration and non-threatening to the survival of trout species. A comparison of average daily water temperatures for Falls and Blue Mount stations in 2005, shows a smooth and gradual rise from early April until early July (Figure 1). This was accomplished using the new water release protocol begun in 2004 that initializes April releases through the 10’ level and transitions into a 10’ x 55” mix. Spillover is allowed beginning in April until surface temperatures exceed 20ºC. Full implementation of the 55’ level is determined when

C137 mixed temperatures approach 20ºC. Water temperature profiles obtained from Baltimore City staff biologists for Prettyboy Reservoir in 2004 (Table 9) demonstrate the thermal advantage gained from early season withdrawal from the 10’ level, over sole use of the 55’ level through April and June. Full transition to the 55’ level occurred on 07/08 in 2004 and 2005.

The new protocol was started in an effort to more closely approximate the tailwater to natural stream temperatures of local freestone streams during the early spring months of April and May. The objective was met in 2003, 2004 and 2005. Record high precipitation for the Baltimore area in 2003, kept the reservoir full and spilling through the spring, which resulted in warmer tailwater temperatures (Figure 2). The drought of 2002 exhausted all cold-water reserves by late September and forced water withdrawals from the 100’ level between 04/16/02 and 05/14/03. Cooler average air temperatures in late September prevented water temperatures from becoming lethal to trout. No spillover events occurred in 2001, however, failure to remove stop logs from the release structure of the dam following replacement of the new valves, allowed surface water to temporarily enter the tailwater and promote the season maximum temperature in August 2001.

In summary, tailwater temperatures in 2003 through 2005 have benefited from early spring spillover and multilevel mixing and have prevented the need to draw very cold water (6 to7º C) from the 55’ level during April and May. Tailwater temperatures in 2001 and 2002 for the months of April and May were withdrawn from the 55’ or 100’ level that was typical of all the previous years dating back to 1987. Tailwater temperatures over the five-year period were considered good to excellent for the growth and survival of trout.

Construction activities below Loch Raven Dam were completed in September 2005. Repairs to the gatehouse at Prettyboy Dam were bid out for contract by Baltimore City in the spring of 2005, however, a single high bid was rejected and the bidding process was restarted. Consulting engineers will reevaluate the project again prior to the start of new bidding that is anticipated to take place in the fall of 2006. The repair will allow greater mixing potential in the tailwater, which should further improve growth of trout and related aquatic resources.

Non-game fish species

All fish species were collected within the first 75 meters of the Masemore and Blue Mount stations on each of two electrofishing passes. The results appear in Tables (10 and 11). The blue ridge sculpin was the most abundant non-trout fish species observed at both fish sample stations. Blue Mount station contained a total of fourteen (14) non-trout species, while Masemore station only contained three (3) non-trout species. Warm water contribution to GFT from Little Falls and an increasing distance from the cold-water influence of Prettyboy Dam, present a warmer thermal regime

C138

(Figure 1) at the Blue Mount station. Warmer water temperatures at the Blue Mount station and fish species representing the marginal brown trout habitat of lower Little Falls, likely account for the observed difference in total fish species between stations.

Visible Implant Tagging

A tagging study initiated in 1998 and running through 2001 was reported on in 2002 (Gougeon 2002). During the study, a total of 1,500 VI tags were implanted and annual electrofishing surveys were conducted at four established tagging sites. The VI tagging study consistently showed that the majority of the tagged brown trout did not demonstrate significant movement from the original tagging sites in GFT. Only four tagged brown trout were found to have strayed far from the point of tagging. The longest travel was over 8.5km and the shortest was 3.7km. Another angler caught tagged brown trout could only be identified by its tag color, making the travel distance as short as 1.6km or as long as 4.8km.

Growth rates were summarized for the study period (Gougeon 2002) and showed that growth of brown trout in GFT is generally average to slow. Growth was best for fish 1+ and 2+ years of age, while growth for brown trout ≥ 275mm (TL) was slowest.

The tiny VI tags (1 x 1.5mm) proved difficult for anglers to read and report accurately, however, tag color proved very effective in discerning location of tag origin. Overall, the VI tags performed very well and provided a better understanding of brown trout age, growth, and movement in GFT.

Management Recommendations

Sixteen years of experience using the 55’ level of release as the primary water source to the tailwater (1987–2002), has proven to adequately meet all necessary life stage requirements for the development, maintenance and enhancement of a high quality self-sustaining wild trout population. All the objectives for municipal water supply have been met using the new water release protocol. The successful elevation of early spring tailwater temperatures appear to have successfully improved mean lengths and weights of adult brown trout in all survey locations in 2004 and 2005 (Tables 3, 4, and 5). Those sample stations closest to the dam have benefited the most from the new water release protocol. Continued water temperature manipulation under the new protocol over time is expected to improve growing conditions for trout, associated fish and macroinvertebrate populations.

The water release protocol initiated in 2004 will continue in 2006 and until such time that repairs to the gatehouse have been made, and the use of both wet wells has been restored. The 2004 water release protocol will include early spring spillover and or water withdrawal from the 10’ level if suitable pool elevation allows, followed by simultaneous multilevel mixing of the 10’ and 55’ level in the west wet well as a method to premix two

C139 dissimilar lake strata prior to release into GFT. Multilevel mixing will only be possible if discharge exceeds 50 cfs and will not be conducted during periods of minimum flow.

All project work objectives were accomplished in 2005. Fall electrofishing surveys should be continued in 2006 to monitor wild trout population trends, monitor rainbow trout population in response to fingerling stocking, and evaluate response of the wild brown trout population to a regulation change planned to take effect on January 2006. The proposed regulation will convert 2.6 kilometers from P&T/five trout/ day creel to a 2-trout/day-harvest management area.

C140

Table 1. Adult trout standing crops (kg/ha ± 95% CI) collected during electrofishing surveys by MDDNR in Gunpowder Falls Tailwater at Dam/Falls and Masemore stations in 2001, 2002, 2004 and 2005.

Year Station Combined Brown Rainbow 2001 Dam/Falls 132 ± 11 126 ± 10 7 ± 2 2002 Dam/Falls 104 ± 3 102 ± 3 4 ± 2 2004 Dam/Falls 168 ± 9 154 ± 7 *14 ± 9 2005 Dam/Falls 235 ± 44 234 ± 45 *2 ± 0 2001 Masemore 113 ± 2 113 ± 2 0 2002 Masemore 77 ± 1 77 ± 1 0 2004 Masemore 102 ± 0.5 99 ± 0.5 *2 ± 0.1 2005 Masemore 117 ± 1 115 ± 1 *2 ± 0 * Fingerling rainbow origin

Table 2. Adult trout densities (trout/hectare ± 95% CI) collected during electrofishing surveys by MDDNR in Gunpowder Falls Tailwater at Dam/Falls, Falls and Masemore stations in 2001, 2002, 2004 and 2005.

Year Station Combined Brown Rainbow 2001 Dam/Falls 1478 ± 118 1447 ± 116 31 ± 8 2002 Dam/Falls 950 ± 32 931 ± 32 19 ± 7 2004 Dam/Falls 918 ± 51 818 ± 38 *101 ± 69 2005 Dam/Falls 1226 ± 231 1226 ± 238 *6 ± 0 2001 Masemore 1080 ± 22 1080 ± 22 0 2002 Masemore 774 ± 11 774 ± 11 0 2004 Masemore 631 ± 3 617 ± 3 *15 ± 1 2005 Masemore 818 ± 5 808 ± 5 *36 ± 6 * Fingerling rainbow origin

Table 3. Mean size, condition and confidence intervals (± 95% CI) of yearling and older brown trout collected during electrofishing surveys by MDDNR in Gunpowder Falls Tailwater at Dam/Falls station, 2001, 2002, 2004 and 2005.

Year N Mean TL (mm) Mean W (g) Mean K Factor 2001 205 204 ± 5 87 ± 7 0.93 ± .01 2002 145 221 ± 5 109 ± 8 0.95 ± .02 2004 126 261 ± 5 188 ± 14 1.01 ± .01 2005 152 262 ± 6 192 ± 15 0.99 ± .01

C141

Table 4. Mean size, condition and confidence intervals (± 95% CI) of yearling and older brown trout collected during electrofishing surveys by MDDNR in Gunpowder Falls Tailwater at Masemore station, 2001, 2002, 2004 and 2005.

Year N Mean TL (mm) Mean W (g) Mean K Factor 2001 429 215 ± 4 105 ± 7 0.93 ± .01 2002 316 216 ± 4 100 ± 6 0.91 ± .01 2004 254 247 ± 5 161 ± 13 0.99 ± .01 2005 333 237 ± 4 142 ± 8 0.98 ± .01

Table 5. Mean size, condition and confidence intervals (± 95% CI) of yearling and older brown trout collected during electrofishing surveys by MDDNR in Gunpowder Falls Tailwater at Falls, Masemore, York, Blue Mount and Glencoe stations, 2001, 2002, 2004 and 2005.

Mean Mean Mean Station Year N TL (mm) W (g) K Factor Falls 2001 300 201 ± 4 85 ± 6 0.94 ± .02 2005 255 253 ± 5 170 ± 14 0.96 ± .01 York 2001 354 199 ± 4 82 ± 6 0.93 ± .01 2002 202 202 ± 6 85 ± 9 0.91 ± .01 Blue Mount 2001 359 211 ± 4 90 ± 6 0.88 ± .01 2002 314 215 ± 5 97 ± 8 0.85 ± .01 2005 212 223 ± 6 133 ± 13 0.93 ± .01 Glencoe 2005 127 229 ± 7 116 ± 16 0.86 ± .02

Table 6. Young-of-year densities (YOY/hectare 95% ± CI) of wild brown trout and adipose clipped rainbow trout collected during electrofishing surveys by MDDNR in Gunpowder Falls Tailwater at Dam/Falls, Falls and Masemore stations in 2001, 2002, 2004 and 2005.

Year Station Brown *Rainbow 2001 Dam/Falls 31 ± 14 0 2002 Dam/Falls 365 ± 37 25 ± 4 2004 Dam/Falls 208 ± 57 0 2005 Dam/Falls 289 ± 650 157 ± 2300 2001 Falls 329 ± 355 0 2005 Falls 558 ± 600 113 ± 117 2001 Masemore 410 ± 116 0 2002 Masemore 1447 ± 50 0 2004 Masemore 536 ± 28 0 2005 Masemore 1284 ± 54 36 ± 6 * Rainbow densities include adipose fin clipped fingerlings only

C142

Table 7. Stocking record of adipose fin clipped rainbow trout fingerlings for Dam/Falls station, Gunpowder Falls tailwater, 2002-2005.

Year Subsample Sample Lengths Mean Length Number Size TL (mm) (mm) Stocked 2002 50 84 –103 94 550 2003 74 80 –121 101 2,550 2004 51 89 -125 112 2,485 2005 52 108 - 172 141 2,055

Table 8. Mean size, condition and confidence interval (± 95% CI) of adipose clipped rainbow trout from fingerling origin, collected during electrofishing surveys by MDDNR in Gunpowder Falls Tailwater at Dam/Falls station, 2002, 2004 and 2005.

Year N Mean TL (mm) Mean W (g) Mean K Factor 2002 *4 184 ± 20 67 ± 23 1.07 ± .13 2004 13 239 ± 15 142 ± 34 1.00 ± .03 2005 6 250 ± 62 145 ± 107 0.91 ± .27 * All rainbows were fingerlings stocked in June 2002.

Table 9. Prettyboy Reservoir temperature profiles (Cº) at selected depths for April, May, and June 2004, collected by Baltimore City watershed biologists.

Profile Date Depth (ft.) Temperature (Cº) April 19, 2004 Surface 13.9º 10 8.4º 55 6.2º 100 5.5º

May 24, 2004 Surface 25.9º 10 23.3º 55 7.1º 100 6.1º

June 21, 2004 Surface 25.2º 10 24.0º 55 7.2º 100 6.3º

C143

Table 10. Two pass electrofishing results of fish species, number collected, and total weight (grams) in 75 meter length of Gunpowder Falls Tailwater at Masemore station by MDDNR in 2005.

Weight Common Name Scientific Name Run totals (grams) Blue Ridge sculpin Cottus caeruleomentum 128 Blacknose dace Rhinichthys atratulus 4 White sucker Catostomus commersoni 2 Non-trout totals 134 626 Brown trout Salmo trutta 193 8,194.4 Rainbow trout Oncorhynchus mykiss 2 153 Trout Totals 195 8,347.4

Table 11 . Two pass electrofishing results of fish species, number collected, and total weight (grams) in 75 meter length of Gunpowder Falls Tailwater at Blue Mount station by MDDNR in 2005.

Run Weight Common Name Scientific Name totals (grams) Blue Rdge sculpin Cottus caeruleomentum 91 Blacknose dace Rhinichthys atratulus 21 Longnose dace Rhinichthys cataractae 13 Cutlips minnow Exoglossum maxillingua 4 Creek chub Semotilus atromaculatus 3 Fallfish Semotilus corporalis 58 River chub Nocomis micropogon 6 White sucker Catostomus commersoni 52 Northern hog sucker Hypentelium nigricans 10 Rosyside dace Clinostomus funduloides 1 Tessellated darter Etheostoma olmstedi 26 Largemouth bass Micropterus salmoides 4 Smallmouth bass Micropterus dolomieu 2 Bluegill sunfish Lepomis macrochirus 23 Non-trout totals 314 4,100 Brown trout Salmo trutta 66 5,311.8 Trout Totals 66 5,311.8

C144

25

20

15

10 Temperature C 5

0 7/8/2005 8/5/2005 9/2/2005 4/15/2005 4/29/2005 5/13/2005 5/27/2005 6/10/2005 6/24/2005 7/22/2005 8/19/2005 9/16/2005 9/30/2005

Date

Falls Rd Little Falls

Figure 1. Average daily water temperatures (ºC) recorded from April 15 to October 5, 2005 using Onset Water Temp Pro devices in Gunpowder Falls tailwater at Falls Road and Little Falls stations.

C145

25

20

15

10 Temperature C Temperature

5

0

3 1 8 5 /5 2 9 /9 /20 27 6/ /24 7/ 7/ 1 /29 8 1 1 9/2 9 /16 5/13 5 5/ 6/10 6/17 6 7/ 7/22 7 8/ 8/ 8/26 9 Date

2003 AboveFalls 2004 AboveFalls

Figure 2. Average daily water temperatures (ºC) recorded from May 13 to September 16 during 2003 and 2004 above Falls Road using Onset Water Temp Pro devices in Gunpowder Falls tailwater.

C146

Basin Run and Unnamed Tributary

Introduction

Basin run is a small to medium sized stream located in western Cecil County. It supports a naturally reproducing population of brown trout and is considered unique and rare in this portion of the state. Until stocking was discontinued in 1997, Basin Run was managed as a put-and-take (P&T) hatchery supported fishery, regulated with a five trout creel/angler. State policy, which discourages stocking wild trout waters, prompted the move to stop stocking Basin Run and to pursue wild trout management. Monitoring of the brown trout fishery in Basin Run by MD DNR has been conducted since 1990. In 1999, Basin Run was placed under a two-fish/day creel limit in an effort to assess the wild trout potential of Basin Run. A significant tributary referenced as the “unnamed tributary” originates near the town of Woodlawn in Cecil County and has been found to be a major spawning and nursery site for brown trout. This tributary has been sampled routinely by MD DNR since 1992. On 19 December 2000, the embankment of two small ponds failed during a heavy storm event, causing sediment from a Superfund site, located in the town of Woodlawn, to spill into the unnamed tributary. The sediment entered the unnamed tributary immediately below Waible Road, impacting approximately one mile of stream habitat. The combined impact of an extended drought (1998–2002), and a slow response time to remove accumulated sediments in the summer of 2001, further disrupted the ecology of the unnamed tributary and Basin Run mainstem.

Methods

Fish sampling stations were selected to include all the habitat types present in the stream reach to be surveyed (pool, riffle, run, etc.). The total length and width of the station was measured in meters. Some stations were marked at the downstream and upper ends of the station using a handheld GPS unit and the coordinates recorded for later reference. Fish were collected using a single Model XII Smith-Root backpack electrofishing unit and all fish were retrieved with dip nets. Surveys started at the downstream end of the station, and one to three passes were made through the entire station. During each pass, all sport fish were collected and placed into separate float boxes at the end of each pass.

If necessary, captured fish were anesthetized with a 1:10 solution of clove oil and ethanol alcohol, identified to the species level, measured for total length (TL) to the nearest millimeter, weighed in grams, and returned alive to the steam at the end of the survey. Trout population estimates were derived using the depletion method (P ≤ 0.05) described by Zippin (1958) using the MICROFISH 2.2 software package (Van Deventer and Platts 1985). Non-game fish species were observed and recorded, but were not collected.

C147

In 2004, two single pass electrofishing surveys were conducted in the mainstem of Basin Run. Both stations were last electrofished in 2001 and were reported on by (Schaefer 2001). The stations repeated in 2004 corresponded to stations 2 and 6 in the previously mentioned report and are referenced in this report as Rowlandsville and Frist Road stations. The Rowlandsville station was 200 meters long and the Frist Road station was shortened to 181 meters in 2004 from the 200 meter length used in 2001. A third multiple pass electrofishing survey was conducted at Russell Road on the unnamed tributary. This station has been monitored periodically since 1992 with a single pass electrofishing survey along a 300 meter reach in order to monitor brown trout reproductive success. In 2004, this station was shortened to 150 meters in length and a two pass electrofishing survey was conducted to collect all trout and non-trout fish species. This tributary has been found to be an important and reliable brown trout spawning and nursery area for Basin Run main stem.

Results and Discussion

The results of two (2)-pass electrofishing surveys for brown trout conducted on the unnamed tributary showed a very low standing crop, however, the density of young- of-year (YOY) brown trout was very high (Table 1). In a comparison with all years sampled at this location (1992–2004), 2004 ranks as the second most successful recruitment year for brown trout observed during nine years of surveys (Figure 1). An electrofishing survey conducted at four stations of the unnamed tributary in 2002 upstream of Russell Road, were all found to contain YOY brown trout (Coakley 2002). The results of the 2002 and 2004 surveys in this unnamed tributary clearly demonstrate that it has recovered very nicely from the combined impacts of drought (1998–2002), floods (summer 2001), sediment spill (19 December 2000) and sediment removal activities (summer 2001).

The unnamed tributary is clearly functioning predominantly as a spawning and nursery habitat for brown trout. Density of adult trout estimated in unnamed tributary in 2004 was low (Table 1) and a mean size of 192mm (TL) (Table 2) shows most adults are of yearling age.

Results from electrofishing in the Basin Run mainstem indicated that brown trout numbers were very low (Table 2). Mean sizes of adult brown trout were largest at Frist Road station, although fewer in number compared to numbers collected at the Rowlandsville station (Table 2). Both mainstem areas produced too few trout after the first electrofishing pass to justify a second pass. Overall, relative abundance of trout in this unnamed tributary was listed as ‘common’ when compared to both mainstem stations, where relative abundance of brown trout was listed as ‘scarce’ (Table 3). A fish species list for the unnamed tributary and Frist Road station on the mainstem can be found in Table 3. Common shiners, creek chubs and margined madtoms were found only in the mainstem of Basin Run and not in the unnamed tributary, possibly indicating

C148 higher average water temperatures and a greater habitat diversity. Otherwise, species composition for both the unnamed tributary and Basin Run main stem was identical.

Discussion and Management Recommendations

Basin Run contains a marginal brown trout population in the mainstem and is capable of supporting limited wild trout angling opportunities in a portion of Maryland where wild trout angling is extremely limited. High quality tributaries to Basin Run such as this unnamed tributary, supply Basin Run with cool, high quality inflow and hold a ready supply of brown trout adults and YOY accessible to Basin Run. Basin Run mainstem is a very poor candidate as a put-and-take hatchery supported trout fishery due to its small size. Allowing the stream to persist as a wild trout stream, managed under the statewide creel limit of two trout/angler/day and the use of bait is an appropriate use at this time. Continued monitoring of the wild trout population will allow periodic assessment of the wild trout population trend and provide opportunity for input to future management needs.

• Basin Run mainstem and the unnamed tributary that originates in Woodlawn, MD, should be placed on a three-year rotational schedule to revisit several locations along the unnamed and mainstem portions of Basin Run to determine wild trout status. Several historical survey sites from each should be retained for future YOY and adult wild trout monitoring.

• Additional monitoring of fish and or water temperatures may be required in response to the needs of Maryland DNR’s Environmental Review Unit.

C149

Table 1. Adult and young-of-year brown trout standing crops (kg/ha) and density (trout/ha) (± 95% CI) collected during electrofishing surveys by MDDNR in a 150 meter portion of the unnamed tributary of Basin Run at Russell Road in 2004.

Brown Trout Russell Road Station Standing Crop (kg/ha) 5 ± 6 Density (trout/ha) 71 ± 80 Density – YOY/ha 1821 ± 1974

Table 2 . Mean size, condition and confidence intervals (± 95% CI) of yearling and older brown trout collected during electrofishing surveys by MDDNR at two stations on Basin Run main stem and a single station on the unnamed tributary at Russell Road, 2004.

Mean TL Mean W Mean K Station N (mm) (g) Factor Frist Road 3 342 ± 291 473 ± 984 0.98 ± .08 Rowlandsville 5 288 ± 59 239 ± 145 0.95 ± .04 Russell Road 4 192 ± 23 74 ± 22 1.03 ± .06

Table 3. Species name and relative abundance of fish observed in one electrofishing station on the unnamed tributary to Basin Run at Russell Road and from one electrofishing station on Basin Run main stem at Frist Road, 2004.

Relative Abundance* Common Scientific Russell Road Frist Road Brown trout Salmo trutta C S Blacknose dace Rhinichthys atratulus C C Common shiner Luxilus cornutus R Creek chub Semotilus atromaculatus R Cutlips minnow Exoglossum maxillingua S C Longnose dace Rhinichthys cataractae C C Rosyside dace Clinostomus funduloides C S White sucker Catostomus commersoni S S Tessellated darter Etheostoma olmstedi S S Margined madtom Noturus insignis S American eel Anguilla rostrata C A *Relative Abundance: A= Abundant; C= Common; S= Scarce; R= Rare

C150

200

180

160

140

120

100 Bn YOY

80

60

Number of yoy brown trout captured yoy brown of Number trout 40

20

0 1992 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2004 Year

Figure 1. Single pass electrofishing results collected by MDDNR biologists for a 300 meter section of the unnamed tributary to Basin Run at Russell Road from 1992 – 2004.

C151

Mill Creek

Introduction

Mill Creek is located in southwest Cecil County and flows south directly into Furnace Bay, north of the Susquehanna Flats. It is characterized by abundant shallow, low-gradient riffles and deeper undercut banks. The stream’s watershed is mostly forested, and unlike many other Cecil County streams, seems relatively un-impacted by agricultural practices. The areas that are not forested consist of small community subdivisions, and a small beef operation in the extreme upstream area. Most of the houses in these areas have large forested buffers along the stream. Seasonal temperature data from the stream was collected in 1991, and showed a thermal profile similar to other Piedmont streams that contained wild brown trout. Recognized by managers as a potential trout stream, it was stocked from 1992 to 1994 with fingerling brown trout. Stocking results were initially poor; no young-of-year (YOY) brown trout were collected for several years after the stocking occurred. Surprisingly, electrofishing surveys in 1997 documented successful reproduction of brown trout in two 200m stations on the stream. Several large adults were collected as well, but they were few in number. On June 25 and 26, 2001 and August 25, 2004 comprehensive electrofishing surveys were undertaken to determine the status of fisheries resources in Mill Creek.

Methods

Five stations were sampled in 2001, and two stations on Mill Creek were surveyed in 2004; the site locations, lengths and coordinates are listed in Table 1. Multiple pass depletion surveys for trout were planned for any station where there were sufficient numbers collected. Adult trout were collected, measured for total length (mm TL), and weighed (g). Young-of-year trout were simply measured in mm TL. Other fish encountered were identified to species, and their relative abundance was recorded. In each site in 2004, air temperature (°C), water temperature (°C), pH, alkalinity (ppm) and hardness (ppm) were recorded. An Onset “Tid-Bit” data-logger was deployed in the stream directly above the Principio Road crossing to monitor summer water temperatures from June 1, 2001 to September 18, 2001 and June 1 to September 10, 2004 (Figures 1 and 2).

Results and Discussion

Adult brown trout were collected from stations 2 and 3 both years (Table 2). The numbers of adult brown trout in both stations were too few to allow for a successful depletion analysis, however in 2004 a second pass was completed above Jackson Station Road (station 3) since two additional brown trout were encountered during the first pass, but were not able to be netted. Both were collected in the second pass. All trout collected from the stream were in excellent physical condition; relative weight (Wr) of all adults collected was above 95%.

C152

In all stations, abundant and diverse forage species were documented (Tables 3 and 4). Data collected by the temperature data-logger showed an erratic pattern where the temperature temporarily exceeded 22°C (Figure 1). Peak temperatures recorded coincided with periods of hot weather, followed by large rainfall events, many of which were considered extreme. Water quality parameters collected were all within the acceptable range for brown trout (Table 4) (Carlander 1977).

Conclusions / Management Recommendations

Mill Creek continues to sustain a limited wild brown trout population, and contains some of the best water quality in Cecil County. Numbers of adult trout collected above Jackson Station Road have been relatively stable from 1997-2004 (Table 2). The 2004 absence of YOY in station 2 was surprising, since the stream’s best spawning habitat occurs in this area. Habitat for spawning and potential YOY survival is ideal in the Principio Road station and upstream; it consists of pea-sized gravelly riffles, and undercut banks with overhanging vegetation. Mill Creek endured severe flooding again in 2004. In fact, over the past five years, Mill Creek has endured two years of drought, two 100-year floods, and a 500-year flood. It is nothing short of remarkable that the brown trout population has remained intact during such extreme events. Their survival reaffirms the reasoning to reclassify Mill Creek to a Maryland Use III waterway.

C153

Table 1. Station locations, coordinates and length of area used for electrofishing surveys for Mill Creek, Cecil County 2001 and 2004.

Station Length Start Latitude Stop Latitude Location Number (m) and Longitude and Longitude From downstream bridge N 39o 36.504 N 39o 36.560 1 pool at Diamond Jim Road 200 W 76o 04.259 W 76o 04.264 under culvert upstream Upstream from Principio N 39o 35.697 N 39o 35.748 2 200 Road W 76o 03.461 W 76o 03.542 Upstream from Jackson N 39o 35.184 N 39o 35.230 3 170 Station Road to I-95 W 76o 03.221 W 76o 03.329 Upstream from Reservoir N 39o 35.890 N 39o 35.914 4 200 Road W 76o 03.679 W 76o 03.758 Upstream from Rt. 40 N 39o 34.537 N 39o 34.644 5 200 crossing W 76o 03.403 W 76o 03.450

Table 2. Number of adult and young-of-year (YOY) brown trout collected during electrofishing surveys from Mill Creek, Cecil County 1997-2004.

Number of Brown Trout Collected Station 1997 2001 2004 Number YOY Adult YOY Adult YOY Adult 3 6 1 0 5 3 6 2 0 6 9 3 0 1

Table 3. Relative abundances of other fish encountered during electrofishing efforts on Mill Creek, Cecil County, 2001. Blank cells denote absence of species in collection.

Species Station 1 Station 2 Station 3 Station 4 Station 5 Rosyside dace Abundant Abundant Abundant Abundant Abundant Mottled sculpin Abundant Abundant Scarce Common American eel Abundant Common Abundant Common Common River chub Abundant Common Common Common Common White sucker Common Abundant Abundant Abundant Blacknose dace Abundant Abundant Abundant Abundant Abundant Cutlips minnow Common Abundant Creek chub Common Scarce Scarce Green sunfish Common Common shiner Scarce Tessellated darter Abundant

C154

Table 4. Relative abundances of other fish encountered during electrofishing efforts on Mill Creek, Cecil County, 2004. Blank cells denote absence of species in collection.

Species Station 2 Station 3 Rosyside dace Common Common Mottled sculpin Common Abundant American eel Common Abundant River chub Scarce Scarce White sucker Scarce Absent Blacknose dace Common Common Creek chub Scarce Scarce Green sunfish Scarce Scarce

Table 5. Water quality parameters collected from Mill Creek, Cecil County, August 25, 2004.

Air Water Hardness Alkalinity Temperature Temperature Station pH (ppm) (ppm) (°C) (°C) Jackson Station Rd 82 64 6.5 80 0 Prinicipio Rd. 82 65 6.1 80 0

C155

25

20

15

10 Temperature (C) Temperature

5

0 6/1/2002 6/8/2002 7/6/2002 8/3/2002 9/7/2002 6/15/2002 6/22/2002 6/29/2002 7/13/2002 7/20/2002 7/27/2002 8/10/2002 8/17/2002 8/24/2002 8/31/2002 9/14/2002

Date

Figure 1. Maximum and minimum daily water temperatures (°C) recorded from Mill Creek above Principio Road, Cecil County from June 1, 2001 to September 18, 2001.

25

20

15 Temp (C) 10

5

0 06/01/04 06/11/04 06/21/04 07/01/04 07/11/04 07/21/04 07/31/04 08/10/04 08/20/04 08/30/04 Date

Max Min

Figure 2. Maximum and minimum daily water temperatures (°C) recorded from Mill Creek above Principio Road, Cecil County from June 1, 2004 to September 20, 2004.

C156

Rock Run

Introduction

Rock Run is a small stream in western Cecil County that flows southwest directly into the Susquehanna River at the town of Port Deposit. The stream consists of two main forks (left and right) of equal size that join to form the mainstem just above the town of Port Deposit, approximately 500m above its confluence with the Susquehanna River. Both streams begin as low gradient streams with high sinuosity, abundant gravel riffles and deeper scour pools. However, the right fork’s gradient quickly increases, and transforms the stream into a series of plunge-pools that cascade downstream. The left fork has approximately 2.5km of lower gradient stream before it begins its rapid descent to Port Deposit. Within this stretch of stream is a 100m fish sampling station, which produced fair numbers of adult brown trout when sampled in 2000 during a single pass electrofishing survey (Table 1). Additionally, there is a 200m station in the mainstem that begins just below Rt. 222 in Port Deposit that was sampled in 1993, 1994 and 2000. It has consistently produced fair numbers of adult brown trout and young-of-year (YOY) (Table 1). Seasonal water temperature data from the stream were collected from this station in 2001, and they showed a thermal profile similar to other Piedmont streams that contain wild brown trout (Figure 1). Water temperatures remained below the lethal limit for adult brown trout of 26.4ºC (79.5ºF) (Stolz and Schnell 1991). Comprehensive temperature, water quality and fish population assessment were completed for Rock Run, and its two main tributaries on August 8, 2002.

With this information collected, managers determined that there was enough information to support a request for reclassification of Rock Run from Class I to Class III (Natural Trout Waters). Letters requesting reclassification including catch data summaries and thermal profiles, were sent in May 2001 and November 2002 to Maryland Department of the Environment (MDE) and Maryland Department of Natural Resources Environmental Review Unit.

Methods

Three stations were selected for study in 2002. Fish community sampling was conducted with a pulsed DC Smith-Root backpack electrofishing unit set at 300 volts and 30 pulses-per-second. Multiple pass depletion surveys for trout were planned for any station where there were sufficient numbers collected. Adult trout were collected, measured for total length (mm TL), and weighed (g). Young-of-year trout were simply measured in mm TL. Other fish encountered were identified to species, and their relative abundance was recorded. Water quality data such as temperature (ºC), pH, dissolved oxygen (mg/l) and conductivity (ms/cm) were recorded in each station. The station locations, lengths and coordinates are listed in Table 2. A map of the sample area is included as Figure 2. Two Onset Tid-Bit data-loggers were deployed in the right and left

C157 forks of Rock Run to monitor hourly temperatures in the streams from June 25 to September 19, 2002.

Results

Adult brown trout were collected from the left fork and the mainstem stations of Rock Run in 2002 (Table 3). Abundant young-of-year brown trout were collected from the mainstem station upstream from Rt. 222 (Table 3). In that 200m station, sufficient numbers of adult and YOY trout were collected to allow for a Zippin depletion analysis for population estimation (Table 4) (Zippin 1958). In the 100m left fork station, one adult brown trout was collected. Diverse forage species were documented in the right fork and mainstem of Rock Run (Table 5).

Data collected by the temperature data-loggers showed erratic patterns in both forks of Rock Run (Figures 3 and 4). The right fork had periods where the temperature temporarily exceeded 23ºC. The left fork consistently remained 1-2ºC below the right fork, but had lower flow during the time of sampling. Peak temperatures recorded coincided with periods of hot weather, typical during Maryland summers, but cooled several degrees overnight. Water quality parameters collected were all within acceptable ranges to support brown trout (Table 6) (Carlander 1969).

Discussion / Management Recommendations

The drought conditions of the summer of 2002 were possibly the worst in Maryland history. Despite these extreme conditions, Rock Run sustained a healthy wild brown trout population, but trout biomass was slightly lower than other Cecil County streams (Table 4). The wide distribution of fish lengths was likely representative of several year classes of trout (Figure 5) (Carlander 1969). Most notably, the number of YOY collected in the Rt. 222 station exceeded any previous survey. This bodes well for the future of the population. New housing developments and poor agricultural practices are currently the biggest threats to suitable trout habitat. Judging from the temperature data, the left fork appears to have better and more consistent water quality than the right fork. It likely plays a key role in the survival of the population of brown trout in the mainstem. The reclassification of Rock Run from Use I to Use III was passed by MDE in 2003. The stream and its tributaries now receive a much higher level of protection from development.

An electrofishing survey of Rock Run should be conducted in 2007 to monitor the brown trout population.

C158

Table 1. Summary of DNR’s wild brown trout sampling history and results, 1992, 1993, 1994 and 2000, Rock Run, Cecil County.

Location Year/Group Number of YOY Number of Adult Brown Trout Brown Trout

Rock Run mainstem, upstream 1993 Fisheries 1 8 from Rt. 222

Rock Run mainstem, upstream 1994 MBSS 0 1 from Rt. 222

Rock Run left fork, upstream from 1992 Fisheries 0 1 Rowland Rd.

Rock Run left fork, upstream from 1994 MBSS 1 2 Rowland Rd.

Rt. 276 crossing, 1994 MBSS 0 0 southern branch

Post Rd. crossing, 1994 MBSS 2 3 southern branch Rock Run left fork, upstream from 2000 Fisheries 6 0 Rowland Rd. Rock Run mainstem, upstream 2000 Fisheries 14 4 from Rt. 222

C159

Table 2. Station locations, coordinates and lengths of areas used for electrofishing samples for Rock Run, Cecil County, August 8, 2002.

Station Start Latitude Stop Latitude Location Length (m) Number and Longitude and Longitude

1 Rock Run mainstem, 200 N 39o 36.504 N 39o 36.560 upstream from Rt. 222 W 76o 04.259 W 76o 04.264

2 Rock Run left fork, 100 N 39o 35.697 N 39o 35.748 upstream from W 76o 03.461 W 76o 03.542 Rowland Rd.

3 Rock Run right fork, 100 N 39o 35.184 N 39o 35.230 along Rock Run Rd. W 76o 03.221 W 76o 03.329

Table 3. Total number of adult and young of year (YOY) brown trout collected from Rock Run, Cecil County, August 8, 2002.

Length Number of Number of Station Location Technique (m) Adult Trout YOY Trout Rock Run mainstem, 200 2-pass 8 40 upstream from Rt. 222 Rock Run left fork, upstream from 100 1-pass 1 0 Rowland Rd. Rock Run right fork, 100 1-pass 0 0 along Rock Run Rd.

Table 4. Population estimates (Zippin three-pass method) for adult brown trout in Rock Run (2002), Basin Run (2000) and Love Run (2000), Cecil County.

Measure Rock Run Basin Run Love Run

Standing Crop (kg/ha) 15 34.7 37.0

Trout/ha 82 218 233

Trout/km 40 72 50

C160

Table 5. Relative abundances of other fish encountered during electrofishing efforts for Rock Run, Cecil County, August 8, 2002. Blank cells denote absence of species in collection.

Species Station 1 Station 2 Station 3

Rosyside dace Scarce Scarce

Fallfish Scarce Abundant

American eel Common Common Common

Creek chubsucker Rare

Blacknose dace Common Common Common

Creek chub Scarce Scarce Scarce

Bluegill sunfish Scarce Scarce

Longnose dace Scarce

Eastern silvery minnow Scarce

White sucker Scarce

Tessellated darter Rare

Table 6. Water quality parameters collected from Rock Run, Cecil County, August 8, 2002.

Station 1 Station 2 Station 3

Temperature (oC) 21.4 18.5 18.9

pH 8.02 8.06 7.79

Dissolved Oxygen (mg/l) 9.48 10.3 10.39

Conductivity (umhos/cm) 486 332 488

C161

25

20

15

10 Temperature C

5

0

1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 /0 /0 0 /5/01 0/0 6 10/0 15/0 7/5/0 8/4/01 8/9/01 9/3/01 9/8/01 6/ 6/ 6/2 6/25 6/30 7/10/ 7/15/017/20/0 7/25/0 7/30/0 8/14/0 8/19/0 8/24/0 8/29/0 9/13/0 9/18/0 Date

Min Temp Max Temp

Figure 1. Maximum and minimum daily temperatures (ºC) recorded from June 1, 2001 to September 18, 2001 from Rock Run at Rt. 222 crossing, Cecil County, 2001.

C162

d

R

e

v

o

r

G

n Ru

2 Rd Rowland Rd

Run k

c

o

R

t f e k L c o

Liberty R

R 222 oc 3 k S# un S R u t s h q g u i e R h a n n a 1 R

Port 276 Deposit S# # Fish/Water Quality Station

N 0.2 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 Kilometers

1:25000

Figure 2. Map of areas sampled in the Rock Run watershed, Cecil County, August 8, 2002.

C163

30

25

20

15 Temperature (C)

10

5

0

2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 /02 /0 0 2/02 /25/0 7/ 7/9 8/6/02 9/3/02 6 7/16 7/23/ 7/30/02 8/13/0 8/20/0 8/27/0 9/10/0 9/17/0 Date

Max Temp Min Temp

Figure 3. Maximum and minimum daily temperatures (ºC) recorded from June 25, 2002 to September 19, 2002 from the left fork of Rock Run at Rowland Rd. crossing, Cecil County, 2002.

C164

30

25

20

15 Temperature (C) Temperature 10

5

0

2 /0 /02 /02 5/02 6/02 3/02 3/02 0/02 7/02 0/02 7/02 7/2 7/9/02 8/6 9/3 6/2 7/1 7/2 7/30/02 8/1 8/2 8/2 9/1 9/1

Date

Max Temp Min Temp

Figure 4. Maximum and minimum daily temperatures (ºC) recorded from June 25, 2002 to September 19, 2002 from the right fork of Rock Run near Rock Run Road, Cecil County, 2002.

C165

25

20

15 Frequency 10

5

0 50 75 100 125 150 175 200 225 250 275 300 325 350 375 400 Total Length by 25 mm Interval

Figure 5. Length-frequency distribution of brown trout collected from Rock Run upstream from Rt. 222 crossing, Cecil County, 2002.

C166

Unicorn Branch

Introduction

Maryland’s Eastern Shore is home to many streams, most of which are warm, sluggish and muddy with inconsistent water quality. Unicorn Branch is a surprising exception. A major Chester River tributary, it flows north from the town of Sudlersville toward the town of Millington, in eastern Queen Anne’s County. The stream begins like other Eastern Shore streams, slow and warm, wandering though intensive agricultural areas, and non-tidal wetlands. However, Unicorn Branch’s character changes quickly as it flows north toward the Chester. Stream gradient increases slightly, and the bottom substrate changes from silt and mud to gravel and other coarser materials. Numerous springs and seeps enter the stream and provide cold water year-round. Wide forested buffers and non-tidal wetlands are present on both sides of the stream along most of its length. Near its confluence with the Chester, the stream was impounded to power a woolen mill in the 1800’s. The impoundment still exists, and it and the surrounding area are now publicly owned and are the site of the Unicorn Lake Fishery Management Area and State Fish Hatchery. The lake is currently managed as a balanced bass-bluegill fishery.

Unicorn Branch is populated by a variety of fish species, such as chain pickerel, largemouth bass, pirate perch, blacknose dace, and various sunfish species. Regional staff recognized potential for a coldwater fishery and brown trout fingerlings of hatchery origin were stocked several times from 1990-2001. Past surveys have yielded low numbers of adult trout in good condition; however there has been no evidence of successful reproduction. A small stocking of 79 wild, young-of-year brown trout from a Gunpowder River tributary was completed in the hope that they would successfully reproduce. Assessments of the fisheries resources were completed on August 20, 2003, and August 24, 2005.

Methods

Two 200m stations on Unicorn Branch were surveyed in each year, the site locations and coordinates are listed in Table 1. Two-pass depletion surveys were completed for each station in 2003, while one-pass surveys were completed in 2005 in which only trout were collected. All pickerel, trout and bass were collected, measured for total length (mm TL), and weighed (g) in 2003. Other fish encountered were identified to species, and their relative abundance was recorded. In each site, water temperature, pH, alkalinity, hardness and conductivity were recorded. Two Onset Tid- Bit data-loggers were hidden in the stream above the bridge at Hacketts Corner Road and along Glanding Road, just above Unicorn Lake from July 26 to October 19, 2003 (Figures 1 and 2). In past years, the data-loggers were deployed in early June, but high water delayed deployment in 2003.

C167

Results

Both stations yielded similar results. In 2003, no trout were collected from either station, but surprising numbers of chain pickerel (N=30) and largemouth bass (N=5) were collected. All pickerel collected were ≤ 200mm TL. The largemouth bass were much larger, their sizes ranged from 297-407mm. Various sunfish and minnow species were present as well (Table 2). Some bluegill sunfish and sunfish hybrids exceeded 200mm TL.

In 2005, six brown trout were collected from the two stations, each with a clipped adipose fin, identifying it as a trout stocked as a fingerling in 2004. The trout showed remarkable annual growth, ranging from 189-265mm. The trout averaged 98mm when stocked.

Discussion

Unicorn Branch has considerable fisheries resources. Anglers who secure fishing permission from property owners could enjoy catching quality bass, panfish and small pickerel in an unusual habitat. Of more interest is the potential to create a wild, self- sustaining brown trout population. Stocking prior to 2004 was done with “hatchery” trout. Hatchery trout have been genetically selected for quick growth in the hatchery environment. The use of wild brown trout collected from similar streams may provide a better chance to establish a reproducing population. They have already learned to avoid predators, which is of particular benefit given the large number of pickerel present. Water temperatures collected in 2003 approach lethal limits described by Carlander (1970) and Stolz and Schnell (1991). While sampling, staff were approached by the landowner, who claims to catch brown trout with some regularity. He also described the locations of several springs that supply cold water to the stream on his property. A mid- day summer site visit to these areas revealed that there were several springs that were contributing 52-58º water to the stream. Two of these are located within the upper sampling station above Hackett’s Corner Road, and one was located along Glanding Road, just below the sampling area. Temperature does not appear to be the limiting factor to establishing a reproducing brown trout population.

Management Recommendations

Tid-Bit temperature recorders should be deployed in Unicorn Branch along Glanding Road, and above the Railroad Crossing above Hacketts Corner Road during Spring 2006.

C168

Table 1. Site descriptions and coordinates for electrofishing surveys conducted in Unicorn Branch, Queen Anne’s County, 2003 and 2005.

Start End Station Site Description Coordinates Coordinates

N 39 14.101 N 39 13.964 Lower Station Along Glanding Road W 75 51.229 W 75 51.307

N 39 13.862 N 39 13.776 Upper Station Above Hacketts Corner W 75 51.383 W 75 51.227

Table 2. Common and scientific names, and general occurrence of species sampled in Unicorn Branch, Queen Anne’s County, August 20, 2003. Empty cells denote absence of species in collection.

General Occurrence Common Name Scientific Name Upper Station Lower Station Largemouth bass Micropterus salmoides Scarce Scarce Bluegill Lepomis macrochirus Abundant Common Pirate perch Aphredoderus sayanus Scarce Common Green sunfish Lepomis cyanellus Common Scarce Creek chubsucker Erimyzon oblongus Scarce Scarce Chain pickerel Esox niger Abundant Abundant Margined madtom Noturus insignis Scarce Common Bluespotted sunfish Enneacanthus gloriosus Scarce Scarce Redfin pickerel Esox americanus Scarce Scarce American eel Anguilla rostrata Abundant Abundant Brown bullhead Ameiurus nebulosus Scarce Tessellated darter Etheostoma olmstedi Common Common Hybrid sunfish Lepomis sp. Common Common Eastern mudminnow Umbra pygmaea Scarce Scarce

C169

25

20

15

Temperature (C) 10

5

0

3 3 03 003 003 /2003 2003 6 6/2003 3/2003 0/2003 3/200 0/200 7/20 4/2 8/2/2 8/9/ /1 /2 9/6/2003 7/2 8 8 8/3 9/1 9/2 9/2 10/ Date

Min Temp Max Temp

Figure 1. Maximum and minimum daily temperatures (ºC) recorded from July 26, 2003 to October 9, 2003 from Unicorn Branch above Hacketts Corner Road, Queen Anne’s County, Maryland.

C170

25

20

15

Temperature (C) 10

5

0

003 2 /2003 2003 2003 /2003 2003 2003 2003 2003 /2/2003 /9 6/ 3/ 4/ 8 8 9/6/2003 /13/ /20/ 27/ 7/26/ 8/1 8/2 8/30 9 9 9/ 10/ Date

Min Temp Max Temp

Figure 2. Maximum and minimum daily temperatures (ºC) recorded from July 26, 2003 to October 9, 2003 from Unicorn Branch along Glanding Road, Queen Anne’s County, Maryland.

C171

Study III. Management of Maryland’s Coldwater Streams

Literature Cited

Alexander, G.R. 1977. Consumption of small trout by large predatory brown trout in the North Branch of the Ausable River, Michigan. Mich. DNR Fisheries Rep. No. 1855. DJ Proj. F-35-R.

Barnhart, G. A. and R. Engstrom-Heg. 1984. A synopsis of some New York Experiences with catch and release management of wild salmonids. Wild Trout III – Proceedings of the Symposium, Yellowstone National Park, pp. 91 -101.

Becker, E. 2005. Water allocation and use permit no. GA92S009(03) exceedance of 25°C at Sang Run – June 2005. Brascan Power New York. Liverpool NY 13088

Boylan, S. 2005. Inspection and compliance issues in the Hoyes Run watershed. MDE memorandum – MDE/WMA Compliance Program, 160 South Water Street, Frostburg, MD 21532.

Carlander, K. 1969. Handbook of Freshwater Fishery Biology Vol. 1. The Iowa State University Press, Ames, Iowa. 752 pp.

Coakley, B. 2002. Survey and Management of Maryland’s Fishery Resources. Maryland Department of Natural Resources, Annapolis, MD. Basin Run – 2002 Progress Report. Project F-48-R-12, Study C, Job 2.

Conservation Strategy Work Group. 2005. Eastern Brook Trout Joint Venture. Conserving the Eastern Brook Trout: an Overview of Status, Threats and Trends.

Cooper, E. L. 1952. Rate of exploitation of wild eastern brook trout in the Pigeon River, Michigan. Transactions of the American Fisheries Society 81: 224-234.

Dewald, L.C. 1990. Growth, habitat use, and forageing behavior of wild brook char and hatchery brown trout in the presence and absence of each other. M.S. thesis. Frostburg State University, Frostburg, MD.

Drake, M.T. and W.W. Tayolor. 1996. Influence of spring and summer water temperatures on brook trout chaff, Salvelinus fontinalus, growth and age structure in the Ford River, Michigan. Environmental Biology of Fishes 45: 41 – 51.

Faush, K.D., and R.J. White. 1981. Competition between brook trout and brown trout for positions in a Michigan stream. Can. J. of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences 38:1220-1227.

C172

Grgich, P., R Hammack, T. Ackman, and W. Harbert. 2002. Delineating the subsurface-applying surface geophysics to locate groundwater. http://gsa.confex.com/gsa/2002AM/finalprogram/abstract_39071.htm

Heerd, T.D. 1995. Paint Branch. Maryland Department of Natural Resources, Federal Aid Project F-48-R.

Heerd, T.D. 1998. Bee Tree Run. Maryland Department of Natural Resources, Federal Aid Project F-48-R.

Heerd, T.D. 2000. Paint Branch. Maryland Department of Natural Resources, Federal Aid Project F-48-R.

Heerd, T.D. 2002. Bee Tree Run. Maryland Department of Natural Resources, Federal Aid Project F-48-R.

Heerd, T.D. 2003. Bee Tree Run. Maryland Department of Natural Resources, Federal Aid Project F-48-R.

Heerd, T.D. 2004. Jabez Branch. Maryland Department of Natural Resources, Federal Aid Project F-48-R.

Kaeding. L.R. 1980. Observations on communities of brook and brown trout separated by an upstream-movement barrier on the Firehole River. The Prog. Fish Cult. Vol. 42 (3):174-176.

Klotz, A. W. and K. W. Pavol. 2004. Trout studies in the Youghiogheny River tributaries – Hoyes Run. Annual Performance Report, Project F-48-R-13, Study B, Job 2. Maryland Department of Natural Resources, Annapolis, MD 21401.

Lagler, K. F. 1952. Freshwater Fishery Biology. First edition, Wm. C. Brown Co., Dubuque, IA.

Lee, R. M. and J. N. Rinne. 1980. Critical thermal maxima of five trout species in the southwestern United States. Transactions of the American Fisheries Society. Vol. 9, No. 6, pp. 632-635.

Maryland Department of Natural Resources. 2004. Maryland freshwater sportfishing guide. State of Maryland, Department of Natural Resources, Fisheries Service. Annapolis, MD.

Maryland Department of the Environment. 1994. Deep Creek Lake hydroelectric station water appropriation permit no. GA92S009(01). MDE - Water Rights Division, Baltimore, MD 21224.

C173

Maryland Department of the Environment. 2005. Notice of violation of state water appropriation permit no. GA1992S009(06) Deep Creek Lake. 1800 Washington Blvd, Baltimore, MD 21230.

Pavol, K. W., and A. W. Klotz. 1996. Gear type and the associated hooking mortality on trout populations. Maryland Department of Natural Resources, Annapolis, MD. Project F-48-R, Study VI, Job 2. Final Report.

Pavol, K. W. and A.W. Klotz. 1998. Trout studies in the Youghiogheny River catch and release trout fishing area.- annual performance report, Project F-48-R, Study B, Job 2. Maryland Department of Natural Resources, Annapolis, MD 21401.

Pavol, K. W., and A. W. Klotz. 2001. Savage River Tailwater trout population studies - final performance report 1996 - 2000. Maryland Department of Natural Resources, Annapolis, MD. Project F-48-R-10, Study B Job 2.

Pavol, K. W. and A.W. Klotz. 2001. Trout studies in the Youghiogheny River catch and release trout fishing area.- final performance report, Project F-48-R, Study B, Job 2. Maryland Department of Natural Resources, Annapolis, MD 21401.

Pavol, K. W. and A.W. Klotz. 2002. Trout studies in the Youghiogheny River catch and release trout fishing area.- annual performance report, Project F-48-R, Study B, Job 2. Maryland Department of Natural Resources, Annapolis, MD 21401.

Pavol, K.W. and A.W. Klotz. 2005. Savage River Tailwater trout population studies. Final Performance Report, Project F-48-R, Study B, Job 5. Maryland Department of Natural Resources, Annapolis, MD 21401.

Reeves, G. 2004. Youghiogheny River Watershed Association meeting minutes – October 26, 2004, Garrett College, McHenry, MD.

Schaefer, R. 2001. Survey and Management of Maryland’s Fishery Resources . Maryland Department of Natural Resources, Annapolis, MD. Basin Run Annual Performance Report (2001). Project F-48-R-11, Study C, Job 2.

Schreiner, S., C. M. Bruce, J. Dew. 2005. Youghiogheny River enhancement protocol for operating Deep Creek Hydroelectric Station: model development and results for 1995-2004. Versar, Inc. ESM Operations. Columbia, MD 21045.

Sherwood, T. 2002. The Hoyes Run restoration project. Western Maryland RC&D Council, Inc. Hagerstown MD.

C174

Steiner, L. 2000. Pennsylvania Fishes. Pennsylvania Fish and Boat Commission, Harrisburg, PA 17106

Stolz, J., and J. Schnell. 1991. The Wildlife Series: Trout. Stackpole Books, Harrisburg, PA. 370 pp.

Vincent, E.R. 1987. Effects of stocking catchable-size hatchery rainbow trout on two wild trout species in the Madison River and O’Dell Creek, Montana. North American Journal of Fisheries Management 7: 91-105.

Van Deventer, J. S. and W. S. Platts. 1985. MicroFish 2.2 microfish interactive program. Microsoft Corp.

Waters, T.F. 1983. Replacement of brook trout by brown trout over 15 years in a Minnesota stream: production and abundance. Trans. Amer. Fish. Soc. 112: 137- 146.

Zippin, C. 1958. The removal method of population estimation. Journal of Wildlife Management 22: 82-90.

C175

ANNUAL PERFORMANCE REPORT 2005

Maryland Department of Natural Resources Fisheries Service

SURVEY AND MANAGEMENT OF FRESHWATER FISHERIES RESOURCES

Management of Major Rivers and Streams

Study IV

USFWS Federal Aid Grant: F-48-R-15

by

Brett Coakley Letha L. Grimes Jody R. Johnson Alan W. Klotz John Mullican Susan Rivers Mark Staley Mark Toms

D1

Table of Contents Major Rivers and Streams

Monitor Trends in Fish Population Dynamics...... D3 Conococheague Creek ...... D3 Monocacy River ...... D12 North Branch Potomac River Downstream of Jennings Randolph Reservoir...... D19 Northwest Branch ...... D37 Patapsco River ...... D45 Potomac River ...... D51 Susquehanna River ...... D66

Literature Cited ...... D69

D2

State: Maryland Project No.: F-48-R-15 Study No.: IV Job No.: 2

Project Title: Survey and Management of Freshwater Fisheries Resources

Study Title: Management of Major Rivers and Streams

Job Title: Monitor Trends in Fish Population Dynamics

Introduction

The objective of this study was to monitor changes in habitat, fish and macroinvertebrate populations, as well as the physical and chemical characteristics of selected rivers and streams. It identified problems requiring special study or corrective action and revised existing management plans, if required. Actions identified in this job also included management regulation changes, although the development of these regulations was not charged to any federal aid project.

Conococheague Creek

Introduction

Conococheague Creek is one of the largest tributaries to the upper Potomac River. From its origin northeast of Chambersburg, Pennsylvania, it flows south through Washington County in Maryland, supporting warmwater fisheries for smallmouth bass, walleye, redbreast sunfish, rockbass, channel catfish, and tiger muskie for approximately thirty-five kilometers before joining the Potomac River near Williamsport. Here, smallmouth bass are subject to a 305mm minimum size, a five fish-per-day creel limit, and a catch-and-release season from March 1 to June 16. Water quality in the Conococheague is slightly basic (pH 8.4), considered hard (hardness 216 mg/l CaCO3), and has good buffering capacity (alkalinity 115 mg/l CaCO3). A variety of submerged aquatic vegetation typically clogs the stream channel during the summer.

Fishery management activities conducted on Conococheague Creek during this grant period included haul seining to assess natural reproduction of fish species and daylight electrofishing to assess adult fish stocks with the following objectives:

• Monitor smallmouth bass year-class strength, relative abundance, size structure, condition and growth rates.

• Collect smallmouth bass (2005) for endocrine disruption study in cooperation with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.

D3

• Assess walleye distribution, relative abundance and size structure.

Methods Seining

Young-of-year (YOY) fish species were collected using a 9.1m x 1.2m, 3.2mm mesh haul seine. Three samples were collected within each station (general, pool, riffle) to compensate for variable habitats. Smallmouth abundance was expressed as geometric mean YOY per haul. One YOY was added to each haul to compensate for zero values and allow the calculation of the geometric mean.

Electrofishing

Both boat and barge electrofishing equipment were used because of the variation in physical habitat. A flat-bottomed boat outfitted with a 5.0 GPP manufactured by Smith-Root Inc. was used to sample downstream of the Kemps Mill Dam. A commercially built barge outfitted with a 2.5 GPP manufactured by Smith-Root Inc. was used to collect fish at all upstream stations where wading was feasible. Three anode probes were used with the barge to cover the width of the river and reduce the potential of fish escaping the electrical field. Timed runs were conducted to obtain relative abundance data. Electrofishing was accomplished using pulsed (60 pulses per second, or pps) DC current; voltage was adjusted for maximum shocking efficiency; and, shocking time was automatically recorded. Collected fish were held in flow-through float boxes until the fish and population data were collected, and then they were released.

Analytical Procedures

Smallmouth bass weight measurements were compared to standard weights in order to obtain relative weight (Wr), a method of determining fish condition as described by Wege and Anderson (1978). Proportional stock density (PSD), a method of describing the size structure of a fish population was calculated using the formula:

PSD = (Number of fish > quality size / Number of fish > stock size) X 100 Using smallmouth as an example: where: smallmouth bass stock size = 18cm + smallmouth bass quality size = 28cm + smallmouth bass preferred size = 35cm+ smallmouth bass memorable size = 43cm+

(Nielsen and Johnson (1983) was used to provide the total lengths for size designations.)

Relative Stock Density (RSD), a method similar to PSD, but which uses a size other than quality size to compare to stock size, was calculated as:

D4

RSD = (Number of fish ≥ chosen size / Number of fish ≥ stock size) X 100 (Chosen size used for each species was taken from Nielsen and Johnson (1983) and is shown as a number, as in RSD63, using memorable size for walleye to compare to stock size.)

Catch-per-Unit-Effort (CPUE) was calculated to provide a measure of relative abundance (number of fish collected per hour of actual electrofishing time). Growth rates were calculating by removing scales from below the lateral line and just posterior of the pectoral fin. Scales were analyzed for annuli by 2X magnification under a dissecting microscope. Otoliths were removed from 40 bass sacrificed for analysis of endocrine disruption to provide growth ring age to compare with measured scale ages.

Results and Discussion

Smallmouth bass reproduction in 2005 was considered excellent. Since time and personnel allowed only a very limited seining effort, YOY were also collected during the electrofishing surveys. The number of YOY smallmouth collected per haul, 1999–2005 is presented in Table 1. The 2005 YOY electrofishing CPUEHr data, by station, is shown in Table 2. Young-of-year abundance was extremely high at Wishard Road (98 YOY/hr). The overall geometric mean for electrofishing CPUE for YOY smallmouth bass was 42.

Smallmouth bass were fairly abundant in Conococheague Creek. The overall geometric mean electrofishing CPUEHr for stock smallmouth bass, 1999–2005, was 50; the arithmetic mean was 60 (±19 CI95). Abundance of bass 230mm to 339mm total length increased from 2002 to 2005 (Figure 1). The overall mean CPUE from sampling year to sampling year had low variability (CV=13%) whereas the CPUE variability among sites each year was quite high (Table 3). Much of the variability among sites can be attributed to fish concentrating around limited good habitat at some sites. A great deal of the Conococheague consists of shallow flats that fish vacate under low flows.

Smallmouth bass exhibited a size structure that should be attractive to anglers. Proportional stock densities have consistently been very good, particularly for a riverine population (Table 4). The slight decline in the proportion of preferred-length fish (350– 429mm) was mostly due to an increase in the proportion of stock and quality length fish (Figure 1). Smallmouth bass PSD has consistently been within the 30–60 range suggested by Anderson and Weithman (1978) for a balanced population.

Conococheague smallmouth bass were found to be in very good physical condition based on Wr (Table 4). There has been no change in mean Wr 1999–2005 at the 95% confidence level.

D5

Scales were removed from all stock-size and larger smallmouth bass (N=105) collected during 2002 to determine growth rates. Growth rates are typical of Maryland riverine smallmouth populations with an average bass reaching quality or harvestable size (305mm) during their fourth or fifth growing season and preferred size (350mm) during their sixth growing season (Figure 2). Scales and otoliths were removed from 40 smallmouth bass sacrificed in 2005 as part of an endocrine disruption study. The accuracy and precision of the two ageing techniques will be evaluated and reported in a future report.

Walleye were first observed in Conococheague Creek in 1999 with the collection of two fish below the Kemps Mill Dam. Scale analyses revealed that both fish were members of the 1997 year-class and were speculated to have migrated upstream from the Potomac River. A total of seven walleye ranging in length from 344mm to 567mm were collected from this site in 2002. Five of the seven walleye were determined by scale analysis to be members of the 2001 year-class, a record year-class in the Potomac River. A total of eight walleye ranging in total length from 390mm to 705mm were collected in 2005, seven downstream of the Kemps Mill Dam and one at Route 40. The PSD, RSD51 and RSD63 were 100, 25 and 13 percent, respectively, suggesting little or no recent reproduction. Stock walleye CPUEHr below the dam in 2005 ranged from 8 to 21 with a geometric mean of 12. The presence of walleye at the Route 40 site in both 2002 and 2005 indicates that they were able to bypass the Kemps Mill Dam through the small fish ladder on the east side of the dam.

A fish species list was compiled in 2002 (2002 Conococheague Creek Federal Aid Progress Report) using data from both the seining and the electrofishing surveys (Table 5). No new species were collected during the 2005 surveys. Primary prey species in terms of occurrence and relative abundance were spotfin shiner, common shiner, spottail shiner, river chub, and bluntnose minnow. The margined madtom was collected from all electrofishing sites and is considered an important prey species. Despite the fact that their nocturnal habits make collection difficult, the Conococheague is popular with anglers as a source of madtoms for live bait. Eastern crayfish Cambarus spp was found to be exceedingly abundant at all sites and is providing an additional foraging opportunity for smallmouth bass.

Conclusions

Conococheague Creek continues to support a very high quality smallmouth bass fishery. Electrofishing catch rates suggest that smallmouth are abundant while the PSD, RSD35, and Wr values indicate the population contains a highly desirable percentage of large individuals in good physical condition. Walleye numbers are increasing in the lower river downstream of the Kemps Mill Dam. However, most of these fish are believed to have ascended from the Potomac River 5.6km downstream; there is currently little evidence of walleye reproduction in the Conococheague. Specific recommendations include:

D6

• Continue to monitor the smallmouth bass and walleye populations by electrofishing every three years.

• Monitor reproduction of fish species by seining annually.

D7

Table 1. Geometric mean young-of-year smallmouth bass per seine haul from Conococheague Creek 1999 – 2005, MD DNR. One YOY added to each haul to compensate for zero values to calculate geometric mean.

Year 2005 2002 2001 1999 # Sites 1 4 5 5 # Hauls 3 12 15 15 # YOY 10 16 18 165 SMB YOY/haul 2.4 1.3 1.3 6.1

Table 2. Electrofishing CPUEHr of young-of-year smallmouth bass collected from Conococheague Creek, by station, 2005. MD DNR.

Station Hours # YOY CPUEHr Kemps Mill 1 .26 18 70 Kemps Mill 2 .11 1 9 Kemps Mill 3 .19 6 31 Route 40 .32 17 53 Cress Pond .60 33 55 Wishard .68 66 98 Sum Sum GeoMean 2.15 141 42

D8

Table 3. Stock smallmouth bass CPUEHr data collected by electrofishing from Conococheague Creek, 1999, 2002, 2005. MD DNR. *Arithmetic mean confidence interval 95%.

Geometric Mean Station 1999 2002 2005 1999 − 2005 Kemps Mill 38 23 109 46 Route 40 28 68 37 41 Cress Pond 39 57 39 44 Broadfording 144 123 133 Wishard 43 27 34 N 131 87 113 GeoMean 48 58 45 50 Mean* 58 ± 60 68 ± 66 53 ± 60 60 ± 19 CV% 82 61 71 13

Table 4. Size structure and Wr data for Conococheague Creek smallmouth bass collected by electrofishing 1999, 2002 and 2005 by MD DNR. 95% CI

Size/Population Index 1999 2002 2005 PSD 40 ± 9 36 ± 10 43 ± 9 RSD35 22 ± 7 13 ± 7 7 ± 5 RSD43 2 2 4 Wr 91 ± 1 94± 2 92 ± 2 N 131 87 113

D9

Table 5. Fish species collected by electrofishing and seining from Conococheague Creek 1999 - 2005.

Sample Site Common Name Scientific Name S1 S2 S3 S4 S5 American eel Anguilla rostrata x x x x x Tiger muskie Esox masquinongy x Esox lucius - x x - - Carp Cyprinus carpio x x x x x Cutlips minnow Exoglossum maxillingua - x x x x River chub Nocomis micropogon x x x x x Golden shiner Notemigonus crysoleucas - - - - x Common shiner Notropis cornutus x x x x x Spottail shiner Notropis hudsonius x x x x x Rosyface shiner Notropis rubellus x x - - - Spotfin shiner Notropis spilopterus x x x x x Bluntnose minnow Pimephales notatus x x x x x Longnose dace Rhinichthys cataractae - - x x x Fallfish Semotilus corporalis x - x x x White sucker Catostomus commersonii x x x x x Northern hog sucker Hypentelium nigricans x x x x x Golden redhorse Moxostoma erythrurum x x x x x Shorthead redhorse Moxostoma macrolepidotum - x - - x Yellow bullhead Ictalurus natalis x x x x x Brown bullhead Ictalurus nebulosus - x x - x Channel catfish Ictalurus punctatus x - x x - Margined madtom Noturus insignis x x x x x Banded killifish Fundulus diaphanus - x x x x Rock bass Ambloplites rupestris x x x x x Redbreast sunfish Lepomis auritus x x x x x Bluegill Lepomis macrochirus - - - - x Longear sunfish Lepomis megalotis x - - - x Green sunfish Lepomis cyanellus - x - - x Smallmouth bass Micropterus dolomieu x x x x x Largemouth bass Micropterus salmoides x - - - x Greenside darter Etheostoma blennioides x x x x x Tessellated darter Etheostoma olmstedi - x x x x Walleye Zander vitreum x x - - - Sample stations S1 – Below Kemps Mill Dam S2 – Route 40 S3 – Cress Pond Rd S4 – Broadfording Bridge S5 – Wishard Rd

D10

12 10 8 Hr 6

CPUE 4 2 0 199 239 279 319 359 399 439 Total Length by 2 cm Grouping

2005 2002

Figure 1. Length frequency of stock size and greater smallmouth bass collected by electrofishing from Conococheague Creek, 2005 and 2002. MD DNR. 2005 N = 113, 2002 N = 87.

600

500

400

300

200

Total Length (mm) Length Total y = 39.079x + 141.08 100 R2 = 0.8917 0 0246810 Age in Years

Figure 2. Length at age data for smallmouth bass collected from Conococheague Creek, 2002, by electrofishing. MD DNR. N = 105. Ages determined by scale analysis.

D11

Monocacy River

Introduction

The Monocacy River is the largest Maryland tributary to the Potomac River, with a watershed that encompasses nearly 251,230 hectares. The Monocacy flows from its origin near the Pennsylvania line at the junction of Marsh and Rock Creeks south 93km to its mouth near Dickerson. Varying in width from 12m (40') to 114m (375'), the Monocacy flows gently with an average gradient of 3 percent (DeRose 1966). Mean water quality data suggests that the Monocacy is slightly basic (pH 7.7), moderately hard (139 mg/l CaCO3) with fair buffering capacity (104 mg/l CaCO3), and minimally conductive (299 microhmos/cm). During runoff events turbidity becomes very high.

Electrofishing surveys were conducted throughout the Monocacy in 2004 and 2005 and just within the Black Bass Catch-and-Release Area (from Buckeystown Dam downstream to the Potomac River) in 2001. The purpose of these surveys was to assess the smallmouth bass population with the following objectives:

• Determine smallmouth bass year-class strength, abundance, size structure, condition, and growth rates.

• Collect smallmouth bass for analysis of endocrine disruption in cooperation with a USFWS study.

• Maintain a current fish species list.

Methods

Seining

Young-of-year (YOY) fish species were collected using a 9.1m x 1.2m, 3.2mm mesh haul seine. Three samples were collected within each station (general, pool, riffle) to compensate for variable habitats. The geometric mean number per seine haul was used to quantify YOY smallmouth bass abundance. One YOY was added to each haul to compensate for zero values and allow the calculation of the geometric mean.

Electrofishing

Both commercially-built electrofishing boat and barge equipment manufactured by Smith-Root Inc. were used to collect fish species because of depth/habitat and access variations among sites. Three anode probes were used while barge electrofishing to cover the width of the river and reduce the potential of fish escaping the electrical field. Timed runs were conducted to obtain relative abundance data. Electrofishing was accomplished using pulsed (60pps) DC current; voltage was adjusted for maximum

D12 shocking efficiency; and shocking time was automatically recorded. Collected fish were held in flow-through float boxes or the boat’s livewell until the data were collected, and then the fish were released. A total of 40 smallmouth bass were sacrificed for the analysis of endocrine disruption through a USFWS study. Both scales and otoliths were removed from these fish for age determination.

Lengths and weights of collected fish were used to obtain relative weight (Wr), a method of determining fish condition as described by Wege and Anderson (1978). Evaluation of smallmouth bass size structure was made using the concept of Proportional Stock Density (PSD) as proposed by Gablehouse (1984). Catch-per-Unit-Effort (CPUEHr) was used as a measure of relative abundance expressed as the number of fish collected per hour of actual electrofishing time.

Results and Discussion

Reproduction of smallmouth bass in 2005 was very good in the upper reaches, poor in the lower river, and good overall based on YOY electrofishing CPUEs (Table 1). Downstream of Frederick City, reproduction was usually low. The geometric mean of YOY smallmouth per seine haul in 2005 was the third highest since 1997 (Table 2) and slightly higher than the long-term geometric mean (1.8). No seining data were collected during 2003 because of high flows and turbidity, but recruitment was expected to be very low because of these flows. Research by Virginia Department of Game and Inland Fisheries biologists suggests that both high and low flows during and immediately after the spawning season are linked to a reduction in recruitment success (Rizzo et al. 2005).

Catch rates for stock-size and greater smallmouth bass were very low in 2004 (Table 3). The drought that began in 2001 and continued through 2002 greatly reduced carrying capacity for adult fish, and poor recruitment in 2003 slowed recovery. According to USGS flow data for the Jug Bridge gauging station, mean monthly flow for July and August, 2002 was 68 and 62 cfs, respectively. The mean flow for those months, 1929 – 2004, was 452 and 403, respectively. With increased flow rates, the electrofishing catch rate for stock smallmouth bass increased substantially in 2005 and is expected to further increase as the strong 2005 year-class reaches stock size.

Unlike abundance, smallmouth bass size structure has not changed appreciably during the last grant period (Table 3). Whereas the 2004 and 2005 length frequency distributions (Figure 1) show a clear increase in abundance, the Kolmogorov-Smirnov test at the 95% CI suggests no difference in the proportion of stock and quality length bass (D = 0.2083, P = 0.081). Smallmouth bass PSD has consistently fallen just below the 30–60 range suggested by Anderson and Weithman (1978) for a balanced population. However, this difference was not significant at the 95% CI.

Smallmouth bass Wr has been quite variable during the last grant period ranging from 83 to 93 (Table 3). These differences were significant at the 95% CI.

D13

Scales were removed from 71 smallmouth bass in 2004 for age and growth analysis. Length at age data indicates that the average smallmouth bass in the Monocacy River will reach the 300mm minimum length limit during its fifth year of life, typical of riverine populations in Maryland. Scales and otoliths were removed from 40 smallmouth bass in 2005 to compare the accuracy and precision of the two ageing techniques. The results will be reported in a future report.

The most important forage species found in the Monocacy River in terms of percent occurrence and relative abundance were spottail shiner, spotfin shiner, and bluntnose minnows. Intermediate river chubs and golden redhorse suckers were common and no doubt also contributed to the prey base. Forage fish populations were extremely plentiful in the lower Monocacy and should provide a more-than-adequate forage base for smallmouth bass. A list of fish species collected from the Monocacy River to date by seining and electrofishing is shown in Table 2.

Management Recommendations

• Continue annual seining surveys to determine smallmouth bass year-class strength and monitor abundance of forage species.

• Conduct late summer or early fall (water temperature > 15°C) electrofishing surveys of the upper and lower river to assess the effectiveness of the catch-and-return regulations by examining the adult smallmouth bass size structure (PSD, RSD35), relative abundance (CPUE), and physical condition (Wr). Conduct electrofishing surveys at least every three years.

• Stock fingerling largemouth bass where suitable habitat exists to increase angling opportunities for this species.

D14

Table 1. Young-of-year smallmouth bass electrofishing CPUEs from the Monocacy River, 2005. MD DNR.

Site LeGore Devilbiss Mon. Blvd. Pine Cliff Park Mills Total # YOY 11 15 6 0 0 32 # hours .43 .82 .53 .52 .47 2.77 CPUEHr 26 18 11 0 0 12

Table 2. Geometric mean young-of-year smallmouth bass (smb) per seine haul collected from the Monocacy River, 1997 – 2005 MD DNR.

1997 1998 2000 2001 2002 1999 2004 2005 # hauls 29 34 24 24 20 18 23 27 # smb 50 58 39 67 37 81 39 68 Mean 1.5 1.4 1.4 2.2 1.5 3.3 1.4 1.9 smb/haul

Table 3. Smallmouth bass population data collected by electrofishing from the Monocacy River. PSD confidence interval 95%. * Catch-and-Release Area only ** Park Mills site only. MD DNR

1994** 2001* 2004 2005 PSD 27 ± 25 27± 8 21 ± 15 29 ± 9 RSD35 14 ± 20 4 ± 4 5 ± 9 6 ± 5 RSD43 0 1 0 0 GeoMean 43 113 19 41 CPUEHr Wr 86 ± 3 93 ± 1 83 ± 3 89 ± 1 N 22 143 43 127

D15

Table 2. Fish species collected to date by location from the Monocacy River.

Common Scientific Sample Site

S1 S2 S3 S4 S5 S6 S7

American eel Anguilla rostrata x x x x

Tiger muskie Esox masquinongy x x Esox lucius

Stoneroller Campostoma anomalum x x x x x x

Carp Cyprinus carpio x x x x x x x

Silverjaw Ericymba buccata x x x minnow

River chub Nocomis micropogon x x x x x x x

Golden shiner Notemigonus crysoleucus x x

Comely shiner Notropis amoenus x x

Common shiner Notropis cornutus x x x x x x

Spottail shiner Notropis hudsonius x x x x x x x

Swallowtail Notropis procne x x x x x x x shiner

Rosyface shiner Notropis rubellus x x x x x

Spotfin shiner Notropis spilopterus x x x x x x x

Bluntnose Pimephales notatus x x x x x x x minnow

Longnose dace Rhinichthys cataractae x x x x

Creek chub Semotilus atromaculatus x x x x

Fallfish Semotilis corporalis x x x x x

White sucker Catostomus commersoni x x x x x x x Sample stations S1 - Rt 77 S2 – Rt 550 S3 - Devilbiss Br S4 - Pinecliff Park / Rt 355 S5 - Rt 80 S6 - Criss Ford Rd S7 - Park Mills Rd / Rt 28

D16

Table 2 (contd.). Fish species collected from the Monocacy River.

Sample Site Common Name Scientific Name S1 S2 S3 S4 S5 S6 S7

Northern hog sucker Hypentelium nigricans x x x x x x x

Golden redhorse Moxostoma erythrurum x x x x x x x

Shorthead redhorse Moxostoma x x macrolepidotum

Yellow bullhead Ictalurus natalis x x x x

Brown bullhead Ictalurus nebulosus x

Channel catfish Ictalurus punctatus x x x x x x

Margined madtom Notorus insignus x x x

Rock bass Ambloplites rupestris x x x x x x x

Redbreast sunfish Lepomis auritus x x x x x x x

Green sunfish Lepomis cyanellus x x

Pumpkinseed Lepomis gibbosus x x x

Bluegill Lepomis macrochirus x x x x x

Longear sunfish Lepomis megalotis x x x x x

Smallmouth bass Micropterus dolomieu x x x x x x x

Largemouth bass Micropterus salmoides x x x x x

Black crappie Pomoxis nigromaculatus x

Greenside darter Etheostoma blennioides x x x x x x x

Tessellated darter Etheostoma olmstedi x x x x x x x

Walleye Sander vitreus x x Sample stations S1 - Rt 77 S2 – Rt 550 S3 - Devilbiss Br S4 - Pinecliff Park / Rt 355 S5 - Rt 80 S6 - Criss Ford Rd S7 - Park Mills Rd / Rt 28

D17

9.0 8.0 7.0 6.0 Hr 5.0 4.0 CPUE 3.0 2.0 1.0 0.0 199 239 279 319 359 399 439 Total Length by 2 cm Grouping

2005 2004

Figure 1. Length frequency of stock-size and greater Monocacy River smallmouth bass collected by electrofishing during 2004 and 2005. MD DNR. 2005 N = 127, 2004 N = 43.

D18

North Branch Potomac River Jennings Randolph Lake Dam Downstream to Pinto, MD

Introduction

Water quality in the North Branch Potomac River (NBPR) from Jennings Randolph Lake (JRL) downstream to Cumberland, MD (about 60km), has been historically impacted by acid mine drainage from abandoned mines and industrial pollution. Pollution mitigation efforts by MD DNR Fisheries Service, Maryland Department of the Environment, industry, and the public have been underway for at least three decades. Substantial progress towards improved physical habitat and water quality, enhanced aquatic communities, and sport fishery development in the NBPR has been achieved, however, much work remains in order to exploit the full recreational potential of the area.

As part of an ongoing statewide project to establish baseline data characterizing the freshwater fisheries resources of Maryland, Inland Fisheries Service staff initiated a fishery survey in the NBPR from the JRL Dam downstream to Pinto, Maryland. The purpose of the work was to describe and monitor the important developing sport fisheries for trout and black bass in order to maintain and enhance recreational fishing opportunities. Objectives included:

• Identify and estimate relative abundance of all fish species in the North Branch Potomac River study area.

• Monitor reproductive success, and estimate population numbers and standing crop for all trout species when practical, or as an alternative, determine relative abundance in areas where habitat and flow conditions prevent conducting depletion based population estimates.

• Develop indices of size and physical condition of trout.

• Describe water temperature and flow regimes.

• Determine relative abundance, and describe the age and size structure, proportional stock density (PSD), relative weight (Wr), and general distribution of black bass in the Catch and Return Black Bass Management Area.

D19

Methods

Fish populations were surveyed at eight sites in the NBPR during this study period. Sampling station location descriptions are contained in Table 1. Sampling stations were selected to include all the habitat types present in the stream reach to be surveyed (pool, riffle, run, etc.). Fish were collected in Stations 1 through 4 using a Smith/Root 2.5 kilowatt, pulsed DC, barge-mounted electrofishing unit equipped with three anodes. Trout populations were estimated using the three pass regression technique described by Zippin (1958). Estimates were calculated using the MICROFISH 2.2 software package (Van Deventer and Platts 1985). Trout population estimates were not conducted during 2003 due to persistently high river flows throughout the 2003 sampling period.

A 14' Zodiac inflatable boat powered by a 15 horsepower outboard motor and equipped with a Smith/Root 2.5 kilowatt, pulsed DC electrofishing unit was used to collect fish in Stations 5 through 8, where the physical size of the NBPR precludes depletion derived population estimates. The Zodiac was operated using three personnel: an individual at the tiller, a worker operating the anode, and a netter collecting fish. Approximately 3,600 seconds of power-on sampling effort was directed at all available habitats in each sampling station in order to obtain representative fish samples. Electrofishing effort (seconds) was recorded to obtain a measure of relative abundance (catch per unit effort) for all fish species. General abundance occurrence was derived from CPUE values and fish were rated as abundant (>100 individuals), common (5-100 individuals), or scarce (< 5 individuals).

At all sampling stations, trout and black bass were anesthetized using a 1:10 solution of clove oil and ethanol alcohol, identified to the species level, measured for total length to the nearest millimeter, weighed to the nearest gram, and returned alive to the stream. Scale samples were obtained from black bass on the left side of the fish below the lateral line near the tip of the pectoral fins. Scale samples were impressed on acetate slides and interpreted using a Micron Model 700-A microfiche reader.

The coefficient of condition (K) described by Lagler (1956) was used as a measure of fish condition for trout. Growth histories for black bass were determined by back-calculation of length at annulus as described in Lagler (1956). Proportional stock density (PSD) and relative stock density (RSD) were calculated using methods described by Anderson (1980). Confidence intervals for PSD and RSD were calculated using the formula described by Gustafson (1988). Relative weight (Wr), a measure of fish condition, was calculated using the methods described by Anderson (1980).

NBPR water temperatures were monitored in the area of the river from the Upper Potomac River Commission Wastewater Treatment Plant (UPRCWTP) effluent at Westernport, MD downstream to Pinto, MD between June and October during this study period to evaluate coldwater fisheries potential. Temperatures were recorded at three

D20 stations (Stations 6, 7, and 8) downstream of the UPRCWTP using Onset StowAway® temperature loggers.

Results

A list of common and scientific names of 31 fish species collected in the NBPR during this study period is contained in Table 2. General occurrence for each fish species by station is presented in Table 3. The fish assemblage is representative of a coldwater community beginning at Station 1, and transitions into a coolwater community by Station 8 (Steiner 2000).

Station 1, within the Natural Trout Propagation Area, generally contained the highest standing crop and highest density of adult trout of the NBPR stations during this study period (Figures 1 and 2). Brown trout were the most common trout species, comprising 64% of the adult population and 76% of standing crop during this study period. Rainbow trout accounted for 28% of adult numbers and 20% of the standing crop. Brook trout and cutthroat trout were present in low numbers throughout this five- year study (Table 3). This station routinely produces exceptionally large trout each year, including a 690mm 4,137g brown trout collected during 2005. Although intense spawning activity was observed in the Natural Trout Propagation Area during the fall, few or no young-of-year (YOY) trout were collected during this study period (Figure 3).

Station 2 is located in the upper Catch and Return Trout Fishing Area of the NBPR, downstream of the Natural Trout Propagation Area. The upper Catch and Return Area generally contained the second highest adult trout standing crop and density of the four trout sampling stations during this study period (Figures 1 and 2). Adult trout densities and standing crops showed a decrease from 2001 to 2004, however by 2005 these indices improved (Figures 1 and 2). Adult rainbow trout were the most abundant salmonid comprising 67% of the density and 52% of the standing crop during this study period. Brown trout accounted for 29% of the density and 41% of the standing crop during this five-year period. Brook trout and cutthroat trout were present but uncommon (Table 3). Wild YOY trout of undetermined species were observed within Station 2 during 2004 and 2005, and brook trout, rainbow, and brown trout YOY were collected in low densities during the fall electrofishing surveys during this study period (Figure 3). The YOY cutthroat trout collected in the 2004 electrofishing survey were from a stocking downstream at Barnum.

Station 3, located in the Put-and-Take Trout Fishing Area, received the majority of the 16,000 adult hatchery trout stocked annually in the NBPR (Table 4); however, adult trout standing crop and density was the lowest of any station during this study period (Figures 1 and 2). Anglers apparently harvested a high proportion of hatchery trout soon after they were stocked, as few of the trout collected in the electrofishing survey were of catchable size. The majority of trout density and standing crop in this station consisted of rainbow trout less than 250mm TL during this study period.

D21

Naturally reproduced YOY trout were observed within this station during spring 2004 and 2005, however, none were collected during the fall electrofishing surveys for those years (Figure 3).

Combined trout densities and standing crops in the lower Catch and Return Area (Station 4) were generally lower than the upper Catch and Return Area (Figures 1 and 2). Both adult densities and standing crops showed a decline from 2001 to 2005 (Figure 1 and 2). Rainbow trout were the most common salmonid collected in Station 4, followed by brown trout and brook trout. Adult cutthroat trout were present but uncommon during this study period. The presence of wild YOY indicated successful reproduction by brook and brown trout (Figure 3), however YOY densities in the fall were low. Resident non- game fish species richness and abundance in Station 4 was higher than the three upstream stations (Table 3). Rainbow trout and brown trout fingerlings have been stocked in the lower C&R Area during this study period (Pavol and Klotz 2002–2005). The 2005 stocking record is contained in Table 4.

Condition factors for all trout species were in the optimal range of 0.90–1.10 throughout the study period for Stations 1 through 4.

Compared to Stations 1 through 4, fish species richness increased at Station 5 (Table 3), located immediately upstream of the Upper Potomac River Commission Wastewater Treatment Plant (UPRCWTP) near Westernport, MD. Station 5 also contained a greater relative abundance of white suckers, sculpin, fantail darters, and cyprinid and centrarchid species (Table 3). This station is within the Put-and-Take Trout Management Area and receives a portion of the adult trout stocking described in Table 4. Wild brown trout and brook trout were collected in this station during the study period.

The area of the North Branch Potomac from the UPRCWTP downstream to Pinto, MD was evaluated for coldwater fisheries potential in this study period. A Zero Creel Limit Trout Management Area was established in this 29km section of the river in 2003. Both brown (26,700) and rainbow trout (192,443) fingerlings were stocked during study period in the Zero Creel Limit Trout Management Area with the objective of supporting a high quality put-and-grow coldwater fishery. Stations 6 (TriTowns/McCoole) and 7 (Black Oak) were located within the Zero Creel Limit Trout Management Area. Staff documented that brown and rainbow fingerling trout stocked since 2001 survived and recruited to adult status in 2004 (Pavol and Klotz 2005), however in 2005 only one brown trout was collected in Station 7.

River temperatures recorded at Stations 6, 7, and 8 did not reach the critical thermal maxima developed by Lee and Rinne (1980) for brown and rainbow trout during 2004 and 2005 (Figures 4-6). Maximum river temperature reached 26°C on only two dates at Pinto during 2004, the downstream extent of the Zero Creel Limit Trout Management Area. River flows recorded at Pinto were > 300 cubic foot per second throughout the summer of 2004 (Pavol and Klotz 2005). However, during the summer of

D22

2005 river temperatures reached were greater than or equal to 26°C at Pinto on fourteen dates. River flows at Pinto for summer 2005 are presented in Figure 7. Generally maximum river temperatures were experienced when flows at Pinto were < 300 cfs.

Station 7 at Black Oak and Station 8 at Pinto are located within the Catch and Return Black Bass Management Area. The area supports a smallmouth bass population characterized by a diverse age and size structure (Figure 8). Smallmouth bass reproduction was documented for the ninth consecutive year in 2005. The naturally reproduced smallmouth bass were the offspring of bass that were stocked as fingerlings from 1993 to 1997 as well as stream-bred bass that have reached sexual maturity. Smallmouth bass size and condition indices for 2005 are presented in Table 5. Adult smallmouth bass exhibited Wr values for stock, quality, and preferred size within the normal range suggested by Wege and Anderson (1978). Smallmouth bass growth rates were comparable to those in the mainstem Potomac River (Enamait 2004), reaching quality size (280mm) at age 4+, and preferred size (350mm) at age 6+ (Table 6). During this study period, PSD and RSD35 values were generally representative of a balanced population (Anderson and Weithman 1978). Largemouth bass were less abundant than smallmouth bass in Stations 7 and 8 (Table 3). Largemouth bass Wr equaled or exceeded the 95 to 100 range considered indicative of good physical condition for stock, quality, and preferred size classes (Pavol and Klotz 2005).

Discussion

Some background information on fishery management and regulations, pollution issues, and pollution mitigation efforts may be useful to understand the management history of the NBPR. The tailwater area of the JRL Dam has developed into one of Maryland’s most attractive trout fishing destinations for residents as well as anglers from neighboring states. Special trout management areas were established in 1994, including (in downstream order) a 0.6km Natural Propagation Area (no fishing or public access) immediately downstream of the JRL Dam, followed by a 1.1km Catch and Return Trout Fishing Area, a 2.0km Put-and-Take Trout Fishing Area, a 6.2km Catch and Return Trout Fishing Area, and finally another 6.0km Put-and-Take Area. Maryland State Records for brown trout, brook trout, and cutthroat trout were all captured in the JRL Dam tailwater area of the NBPR within the last ten years.

Trout management efforts in the tailwater area of the JRL Dam have been periodically hindered by episodes of nitrogen gas supersaturation caused by the operation of the dam and the design of the outlet structure. Early life stages of wild trout are sensitive to elevated Total Gas Pressure (TGP) levels. High flow events from the JRL Dam typically occur each year and produce gas supersaturation and elevated TGP, adversely affecting sac fry, larval trout, and YOY downstream. Weitkamp and Katz (1980) reported that researchers are divided on the impacts of gas supersaturation on fish eggs; some species show no impact while others fail to develop in the presence of high gas levels (although no typical gas signs were seen in the eggs). Water is discharged

D23 from JRL Dam through a steeply angled outlet tunnel into a stilling basin with a maximum depth of about 40 feet. The outlet configuration and stilling basin design result in gas supersaturation > 110% of atmospheric whenever releases exceed about 1500 cubic feet per second (cfs). The discharge, and entrained ambient air, penetrates progressively deeper into the stilling basin with increased flow volume, reaching maximum penetration at about 4,000 to 5,000 cfs. The resulting total gas pressure (TGP) has shown supersaturated gas levels in the stilling basin as high as 130%. TGP measurements during high discharge events have documented levels as high as 115% for at least 3.7km downstream of the JRL Dam.

TGP above 110% is considered to adversely affect aquatic fauna, particularly macroinvertebrates and the early life stages of fish (Weitkamp and Katz 1980). Maryland DNR Fisheries Service and the Army Corps of Engineers (ACOE) have engaged in a cooperative effort to explore various strategies to reduce or eliminate elevated TGP levels during high discharge events from the JRL Dam.

Natural reproduction of trout was documented in this study period downstream of the JRL Dam during swim-up fry surveys and subsequent electrofishing surveys; however, reproduction was considered poor for all trout species. Brown and brook trout natural reproduction in the JRL Dam tailwater was first documented in 1990 and natural reproduction by rainbow trout was first observed in 1995. Natural reproduction of all trout species was considered poor in all years since 1990 except 1997, when good reproduction was documented for brook, brown, and rainbow trout. Flows from JRL Dam were moderate throughout 1997. Despite the presence of many spawning brown and rainbow trout in the Natural Propagation Area (Station 1), few wild YOY trout have been collected during annual electrofishing surveys, and no swim-up fry were observed in the sampling station during this study period.

Adult trout densities have decreased in both of the NBPR Catch and Return Trout Fishing Areas since 2001. As nitrogen gas super-saturation episodes associated with the operation of the JRL Dam occur, continued stocking of fall fingerling trout will be necessary to maintain adult trout densities downstream. In an effort to supplement natural reproduction in the Catch and Return Trout Fishing Areas, fry and fingerling brown, rainbow, and cutthroat trout have been stocked in most years. In general, cutthroat trout fry stocking has produced relatively few adults in NBPR fish samples.

Historically, trout management efforts have been hampered downstream of the discharge of the Upper Potomac River Commission Wastewater Treatment Plant (UPRCWTP) at Westernport, MD. The UPRCWTP receives and treats domestic sewage from surrounding communities as well as industrial wastewater from the New Page Pulp and Paper Mill at Luke, MD. Treated effluent, about 98% industrial wastewaters and 2% domestic sewage, is discharged into the NBPR from the outfall of the UPRCWTP 1.5km downstream from the paper mill at Westernport. The effluent increases color, turbidity, and suspended solids in the NBPR, as well as odor levels adjacent to the river, with

D24 associated impacts to fish populations and recreational and aesthetic values downstream (Pavol and Klotz 2001).

Pollution abatement requirements mandated by the 10-year discharge permit renewal in 1990 resulted in substantial improvements to the treated paper mill waste and effluent from the UPRCWTP. This action enhanced water quality sufficiently to support a greater diversity of fish species and a potential forage base for gamefish in the NBPR downstream. In response to that management opportunity, MD DNR Inland Fisheries Division initiated a fingerling black bass stocking program in the NBPR from 1993 through 1997 with the objective of establishing naturally reproducing smallmouth (Micropterus dolomieu) and largemouth bass (Micropterus salmoides) populations between Keyser, West Virginia, and Cumberland, MD. This objective has been achieved. Monitoring studies documented the presence of substantial numbers of adult smallmouth and largemouth bass, as well as naturally reproduced young-of-the-year by 1997 (Pavol and Klotz 2001). Further fingerling bass stocking was discontinued in 1997. About the same time, reports from anglers indicated an emerging black bass fishery in the NBPR. In order to insure that harvest did not limit the re-colonization of black bass before they had fully exploited all available habitats, Inland Fisheries designated the 40.2km portion of the NBPR between Keyser and Cumberland as a Catch and Return Bass Fishing Area effective January 1, 2001. Smallmouth YOY were present in the entire length of the Catch and Return Black Bass Fishing Area in 2005, the ninth consecutive year of successful smallmouth reproduction.

The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) mandated further enhancements to the UPRCWTP effluent during the 10-year discharge permit renewal process conducted in 2000. Modifications were implemented by August 2002, with the goal of reducing total suspended solids in the discharge by 50 percent (NPDES Permit No. MD0021678). The resulting water quality improvements in the NBPR have enhanced trout management efforts downstream of the discharge. In light of improved water quality downstream of the UPRCWTP, the Inland Fisheries Division initiated an effort to develop a high quality trout fishery in the North Branch Potomac River downstream. Effective January 1 of 2003, a Zero Creel Limit Trout Management Area for all trout species was established between the UPRCWTP discharge and Pinto, MD, a distance of about 29km (18 miles). The intent of the regulation was to eliminate harvest-induced mortality of trout in order to develop a high quality coldwater fishery supported through put-and-grow management with fingerling rainbow and brown trout.

The area of the North Branch that will support coldwater management will vary somewhat from year to year depending primarily on flow conditions and the effects of flow volume on water temperature. Under typical summer conditions, all but a small proportion of the total flow volume between the UPRCWTP and Pinto is determined by coldwater releases from the two upstream impoundments, the Savage Reservoir and Jennings Randolph Lake. Water temperature monitoring results from 2004 and 2005 suggest that when releases from those reservoirs total > 300 cubic feet/second, water

D25 temperature at Pinto, the downstream extent of the Zero Creel Limit Trout Management Area, will remain within a thermal range that will support trout management.

The development of public access to the North Branch Potomac River was improved in 2003 when a prefabricated concrete boat ramp was installed on a 0.5 ha (1.2 acre) tract of land bordering the NBPR at Black Oak Road near Dawson, Maryland. The site was purchased by MD DNR Program Open Space in 2001 and is managed by MD DNR Inland Fisheries Division. The new ramp facilitates the launching or take-out of portable craft such as kayaks or canoes, as well as larger craft that require trailers.

In December 2004, MD DNR Program Open Space purchased the Potomac Conservancy 6.5 ha (16 acre) site bordering 1.3km (0.8 miles) of the NBPR near McCoole, Maryland, 6.4km downstream of the UPRCWTP. MD DNR Inland Fisheries Service will manage the property. Future efforts will attempt to identify and obtain additional access sites on the 32km reach of the NBPR between the Black Oak access site and Cumberland, Maryland. Emphasis will be placed on obtaining and developing sites that support float increments of about a day's duration. MD DNR Program Open Space is currently investigating other potential sites to provide angler and boating access to the NBPR by purchasing or leasing properties.

Conclusions

All project work objectives were accomplished during this study period. However, further monitoring studies will be required to continue to assess the development of fish populations in the NBPR downstream of the JRL Dam in response to continuing pollution abatement activities, water quality improvements in the watershed, and fishery management actions.

Trout population surveys should continue in order to monitor the effects of special fishing regulations and water quality enhancements. Coordination of sampling efforts with the ACOE will be necessary to arrange for reduced flow levels from JRL Dam. Discharge rates of about 100-120 cfs during stream surveys will ensure safe wading conditions and efficient sampling. Fingerling trout stocking should continue in NBPR Catch and Return Trout Fishing Areas at the rate of 10,000 brown and 10,000 rainbow fall fingerlings annually.

A commitment of at least 10,000 brown trout and 20,000 rainbow trout fingerlings annually should be dedicated for the Zero Creel Limit area of the NBPR. Sampling effort should also be increased to better evaluate the status of trout within this trout management area.

Monitoring efforts in the Catch and Return Bass Fishing Area should be continued to better describe age and size structure, physical condition, and distribution. It is recommended that a ninth sampling station be established in the NBPR in the vicinity

D26 of the Allegany County Fairgrounds (approximately 60km downstream from the JRL Dam) in order to further describe the black bass population.

It is recommended that this study be continued in 2006.

D27

Table 1. North Branch Potomac River sample station locations 2001 – 2005.

Km Station Description downstream of JRL Dam 1 – Tailrace – Beginning at a point 90m downstream from the 0 Natural Propagation confluence of the Tailrace and the old river Area channel and ending 60m upstream of that confluence 2 - Upper Catch and Beginning at a point 0.4km upstream of the first 1.3 Return Trout Fishing power line and ending 120m Area upstream. 3 – Barnum, Put and Beginning at the second bridge abutments in 1.9 Take Trout Fishing Barnum, WV, and ending 152m upstream. Area 4 - Lower Catch and Beginning at the whitewater take-out downstream 8.1 Return Trout Fishing of Warnicks, and ending 147m upstream. Area 5 – Piedmont, Put Beginning 60m upstream of the UPRCWTP and 15.3 and Take Trout ending 305m upstream. Fishing Area 6 – Tritowns/ Beginning at a point 152m upstream of the 18.1 McCoole, Zero Creel confluence of Stoney Creek and ending 305m Limit Trout Fishing upstream. Area Beginning at the boating access area on the 24.4 former Landis property and ending about 300 meters upstream. 7 – Black Oak, 0 Beginning at the MD DNR boating access and 33.0 Creel Trout; Catch ending about 300 meters upstream and Return Bass 8 – Pinto, Catch and Beginning at the Western MD Railroad bridge on 50.3 Return Bass Fishing the Charles Twigg property near Pinto, MD, and Area ending about 300m upstream.

D28

Table 2. List of common and scientific names of fish collected in the North Branch Potomac River from Jennings Randolph Lake Dam downstream to Pinto, MD, 2001-2005.

Common name Scientific name Central stoneroller Campostoma anomalum Rosyside dace Clinostomus funduloides Satinfin shiner Cyprinella analostana Cutlips minnow Exoglossum maxillingua Common shiner Luxilus cornutus Golden shiner Notemigonus crysoleucas Bluntnose minnow Pimephales notatus Blacknose dace Rhinichthys atratulus Longnose dace Rhinichthys cataractae Creek chub Semotilus atromaculatus Fallfish Semotilus corporalis White sucker Catostomus commersoni Northern hog sucker Hypentelium nigricans Yellow bullhead Ameiurus natalis Brown bullhead Ameiurus nebulosus Cutthroat trout Oncorhynchus clarki Rainbow trout Oncorhynchus mykiss Brown trout Salmo trutta Brook trout Salvelinus fontinalis Blue Ridge sculpin Cottus caeruleomentum Potomac sculpin Cottus girardi Rock bass Ambloplites rupestris Redbreast sunfish Lepomis auritus Green sunfish Lepomis cyanellus Pumpkinseed Lepomis gibbosus Bluegill Lepomis macrochirus Smallmouth bass Micropterus dolomieu Largemouth bass Micropterus salmoides Fantail darter Etheostoma flabellare Tessellated darter Etheostoma olmstedi Walleye Sander vitreus Total species = 31

D29

Table 3. Fish species general occurrence(A = abundant: > 100 individuals, C = common: 5-100 individuals; S = scarce: < 5 individuals) at North Branch Potomac River sampling stations, 2001-2005.

Sample Station Common name 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Central stoneroller ------S C Rosyside dace ------S -- -- Satinfin shiner ------S Cutlips minnow ------C S C -- Common shiner ------C -- Golden shiner ------S -- -- Bluntnose minnow ------S C C Blacknose dace S C S C C C Longnose dace C C C C A C C C Creek chub ------C -- S Fallfish ------S White sucker C C S C A A C C Northern hog sucker ------C C C C Yellow bullhead ------S S -- S Brown bullhead ------S S ------Cutthroat trout S S S S -- S -- -- Rainbow trout C C C C S C C S Brown trout C C C C C C S -- Brook trout S S S C S ------Blue Ridge sculpin ------S C S S -- Potomac sculpin ------S C -- S -- Rock bass S S S S C C S C Redbreast sunfish ------S S C C Green sunfish ------S S -- -- C Pumpkinseed ------C S C C Bluegill ------S S S Smallmouth bass S S -- -- S C C C Largemouth bass S ------S S S S Fantail darter -- S S C A C C S Tessellated darter ------S S Walleye S ------Total species 10 10 9 13 19 21 19 19

D30

Table 4. Fish stocking record for the North Branch Potomac River downstream of Jennings Randolph Lake, 2005.

Species Source * Size No. Area Date Brown trout, JRL Net-pens, Adults 16,000 Barnum/ Spring/Fall Rainbow trout Mettiki Piedmont 2005 Rainbow trout WV 67/lb. 40,200 0 Creel limit 2/18/05 Rainbow trout WV 53/lb. 31,800 0 Creel limit 2/23/05 APH fingerling 28,000 Barnum/ 6/1/05 Rainbow trout Piedmont Green Spring 8/lb. 5,000 Lower C&R 6/21/05 Rainbow trout WV Cutthroat trout Murley Spring 288/lb. 2,534 Barnum 11/30/05 * APH = Albert Powell Trout Hatchery Maryland WV = West Virginia

Table 5. Summary of smallmouth bass size indices in the North Branch Potomac River Catch and Release Bass Management Area, 2005.

Size Index Measure Count Wr Stock 91% N=14 Wr Quality 100% N=13 Wr Preferred 98% N=4 PSD 55% (21 = CI 95) N=31 RSD 13% (16 = CI 95) N=31

Table 6. Mean back-calculated total length (TL - mm) at age for smallmouth bass in Stations 7 and 8 in the North Branch Potomac River Catch and Release Bass Management Area, 2005.

Age N TL(mm) 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 1+ 5 134 88 2+ 3 192 94 158 3+ 3 223 109 150 201 4+ 10 281 104 160 218 255 5+ 5 303 121 181 228 261 284 6+ 5 363 116 191 247 282 317 348 7+ 1 417 108 199 245 302 337 371 396 Mean= 106 170 225 265 304 352 396 N = 32 27 24 21 11 6 1

D31

350

295 300

250

200 Station 1 Station 2 157 Station 3 150 Station 4 Adult trout standing crop crop (Kg/ha) standing trout Adult 100

43 50 46 28 35 39 20 18 21 19 11 6 10 8 0 4 2001 2002 2004 2005 Year

Figure 1. Adult trout combined species standing crops in the North Branch Potomac River, Stations 1 through 4, 2001 through 2005.

D32

1600

1400 1352

1200

1105

1000

Station 1 Station 2 800 Station 3 722 Station 4 Adult trout/km 656 650 600 594

511 459 400 395

311 259 230 236 200 218 164 112

0 2001 2002 2004 2005 Year

Figure 2. Adult combined species trout densities in the North Branch Potomac River Stations 1 through 4, 2001 through 2005.

D33

250

200 203

150 151 Station 1 129 129 Station 2 123 Station 3 Station 4 YOY trout/km 100

50 42

25 13 14 7 0 00000 2001 2002 2004 2005 Year

Figure 3. Young of year trout densities in the North Branch Potomac River Stations 1 through 4, 2001 – 2005.

Figure 4. Water temperatures recorded in the North Branch Potomac River at McCoole, MD, between June and October 2005.

D34

Figure 5. Water temperatures recorded in the North Branch Potomac River at the MD DNR Black Oak property, between June and October 2005.

Figure 6. Water temperatures recorded in the North Branch Potomac River at Pinto, MD, between June and October 2005.

D35

Figure 7. Stream flows recorded in the North Branch Potomac River at Pinto, MD, between 1 June and 1 October 2005 (USGS data).

10

9

8

7

6

5

4 Number of smallmouthNumber bass

3

2

1

0 37.5 62.5 87.5 112.5 137.5 162.5 187.5 212.5 237.5 262.5 287.5 312.5 337.5 362.5 387.5 412.5 437.5 Midpoint of size class (mm)

Figure 8. Length frequency distribution of smallmouth bass (N= 54) collected in Stations 7 and 8 in the North Branch Potomac River Catch and Return Bass Management Area, 2005. D36

Northwest Branch

Introduction

Northwest Branch (NWB) is located in eastern Montgomery County and is the largest of four significant watersheds (Northwest Branch, Sligo Creek, Paint Branch, and Little Paint Branch) that enter the Anacostia River. Approximately 31 square miles of NWB drains out of Montgomery County (CSPS 1988). The NWB headwaters above Randolph Road have been least impacted by development. Land use in NWB watershed within Montgomery County varies from rural residential and agricultural to high density development. In the lower reaches (Prince Georges County), land use is predominantly high-density development with a mix of high-density and commercial uses.

NWB is a small-to-medium sized stream located in the Piedmont Plateau. The low flow wetted stream width averages 9.6 meters in the middle portion of the study reach (Oakview Drive survey station). Immediately below Route 29, NWB passes out of the Piedmont and through the fall line, on its way to the Coastal Plain. The resulting steep gradient, rock-lined gorge area forms the most scenic portion of the entire NWB and Anacostia watershed. This area was instrumental in leading the state of Maryland to declare the Anacostia as a “Scenic and Wild River” in 1984, under the Maryland Scenic and Wild Rivers Act. Burnt Mills Dam exists immediately upstream of Route 29 and is a barrier to upstream fish passage. Smallmouth bass stocking efforts for this project occurred above and below this dam.

NWB has been part of the statewide spring season put-and-take (P&T) trout program for thirty plus years. Each spring, approximately 7, 500 catchable sized rainbow trout (9 – 14” long) are stocked between Randolph Road and West Park Drive over a distance of approximately 9.1 miles (14.7km). The P&T fishery is extremely popular and serves the angling needs of a highly populated urban area and will remain in the P&T program.

The objective of this study was to introduce and establish a self-sustaining population of smallmouth bass that would expand and promote additional angling opportunities for sport fish in the highly urbanized Northwest Branch.

Methods

Fish sampling stations were selected to include all the habitat types present in the stream reach to be surveyed (including pool, riffle, and run). The total length and width of the station was measured in meters. Some stations were marked at the downstream and upper ends of the station using a handheld GPS unit and the coordinates recorded for later reference. Fish were collected using either one Model XII Smith-Root backpack electrofishing unit or two units used side-by-side, and all fish were retrieved with dip nets. The survey started at the downstream end of the station and one to three passes

D37 were made through the entire station. During each pass, all sportfish were collected and placed into separate float boxes at the end of each pass.

If necessary, captured fish were anesthetized with a 1:10 solution of clove oil and ethanol alcohol, identified to the species level, measured for total length (TL) to the nearest millimeter, weighed in grams, and returned live to the stream at the end of the survey. Smallmouth bass population estimates were derived using the depletion method (P ≤ .05) described by Zippin (1958) using the MICROFISH 2.2 software package (Van Deventer and Platts 1985). Non-game fish species were observed and recorded, but were not collected.

Results and Discussion

Initial stocking of NWB was conducted in 2000 and 2002 using fingerling smallmouth bass obtained from the MD warmwater hatchery located in Cedarville MD. (Table1). The fingerlings were spawned from twenty-seven (27) brood stock obtained from the Potomac River and then reared in a 0.25 acre pond at Cedarville. A smallmouth bass stocking history for NWB can be found in Table 1. Fingerlings were stocked into NWB on 2 June 2000 by Central Region staff, with the assistance of biologists from the Maryland-National Capital Park and Planning Commission (M-NCPPC) and the Washington DC Metropolitan Council of Governments (WMCOG). While conducting a second stocking on 25 June 2002 at Oakview Drive, Central Region biologists observed seven (7) smallmouth bass that were estimated to be approximately 17 to 23cm long. Low flow, promoted by extreme drought conditions and crystal clear water at the time of the second stocking, gave biologists the opportunity to positively confirm the smallmouth bass as survivors from the first stocking on 2 June 2000. A single pass electrofishing survey effort was conducted on 8 September 2000 in order to determine the status of the 2 June 2000 stocking. No young-of-the-year (YOY) smallmouth bass were found at any of the following three locations below Route 29: (1) between Oakview Drive and Route 495 (Washington Beltway); (2) Route 212 (located downstream of Oakview Drive); and (3) West Park Drive (most downstream sample site).

Three MD DNR electrofishing survey locations were established in NWB (Table 2) in order to assess both stocking efforts. Kemp Mill station was the only survey site located above Burnt Mills dam (Route 29). All other sites were located below Route 29, including two 75 meter sites maintained by M-NCPPC biologists as part of their Countywide Stream Protection Strategy Program.

Results of the electrofishing surveys conducted by MD DNR and M-NCPPC are presented in (Table 3) for years 2003, 2004 and 2005. Collection of two YOY smallmouth bass at the Kemp Mill station in 2003 confirmed limited success of the smallmouth bass stocking conducted on 25 June 2002. Additional electrofishing surveys conducted in the Kemp Mill area of NWB by MD DNR and biological consultants Rummel, Klepper & Kahl, LLP (RK&K), working for the Montgomery County

D38

Department of Environmental Protection (MCDEP) in August and September of 2005, failed to collect any smallmouth bass. These findings indicate that the smallmouth bass stocking upstream of Route 29 may not have been very successful. However, successful natural reproduction of smallmouth bass in NWB below Route 29 did occur and was first observed in the Oakview Drive station on 26 August 2004 and again on 8 September 2005. Three YOY smallmouth bass were also observed on 23 August 2005 at the West Park Drive station (Table 3). Lengths of naturally reproduced smallmouth bass ranged from 60 to 105mm (TL) when collected from NWB during August and September of 2004 and 2005 (Table 3).

Adult smallmouth bass observed in NWB have generally been scarce at the sampled locations (Table 3). A total of five adults and seven YOY were collected on 8 September 2005 at the Oakview Drive station. A population estimate for the station showed a very low standing crop and density of adults (Table 4). The rate of capture at this station over three passes resulted in an irregular or non-descending removal pattern in data calculation that would not allow reliable confidence intervals for the sample. Overall, mean relative weight (Wr) for 25mm length groups for a pooled sample of smallmouth bass collected between 2003 and 2005 was found to be less than optimal (Figure 1). The small sample size of smallmouth bass taken from NWB indicated Wr compared similarly with long-term Wr values of 81–100 observed for the Potomac River, MD, as reported by (Enamait 2001). A single smallmouth bass collected in the 225mm size class, was the only exception to an otherwise poor Wr (Figure 1).

Growth rates of smallmouth bass in NWB appear to be slow. The largest fish collected was scale-aged at 6+ years and measured 294mm (TL) (Table 3), which corresponded with fish stocked in 2000.

Electrofishing results showed a very diverse assemblage of fish species (Table 5) in all sample locations of NWB. The occasional recovery of late season, hold over rainbow trout, further demonstrated the ability of NWB to provide a wide variety of sport fishing opportunities.

Conclusions

A reproducing population of smallmouth bass has successfully established downstream of Route 29 in NWB; however, additional assessment will be required to confirm the presence and viability of a reproducing population upstream of Route 29. Re-stocking may be required in order to secure a viable reproducing smallmouth population in this portion of NWB. Anglers will now be able to pursue smallmouth bass in NWB downstream of Route 29, which contains some of the most scenic stretches of river found anywhere in the Anacostia watershed. Combined with hatchery supported spring trout fishing, reproducing smallmouth bass population and the occasional largemouth bass and channel catfish, Washington DC metropolitan anglers will find diverse and challenging sport fishing opportunities.

D39

Management Recommendations

• Conduct additional electrofishing surveys above Route 29 to determine need to restock.

• Conduct periodic electrofishing surveys below Route 29 to follow the expansion and development of the smallmouth population.

D40

Table 1. Summary of Smallmouth bass stocked into Northwest Branch, Montgomery County, MD 2000 and 2002.

Species Date Number Size Location Source Smallmouth 06/02/00 4,346 1,000/lb Oakview Dr Cedarville Below Smallmouth 06/02/00 1,000 1,000/lb Cedarville Route 29 Smallmouth 06/25/02 1,500 350/lb Oakview Dr Cedarville Below Smallmouth 06/25/02 1,000 3500/lb Cedarville Route 29 Kemp Smallmouth 06/25/02 1,000 350/lb Cedarville Mill Rd.

Table 2. Station location for MDDNR fish sampling, coordinates and lengths of areas sampled for Northwest Branch , Montgomery and Prince Georges Counties, 2004 and 2005.

Start End Station Length Location Coordinates Coordinates (m)

N 39 03 .596 N 39 03 .610 Kemp Mill Road - W 77 01 .153 W 77 01 .324

N 39 00 .684 N 39 00 .757 Oakview Drive 157.89 W 76 59 .359 W 76 59 .393

N 38 58 .856 N 38 58 .963 West Park Drive - W 76 57 .694 W 76 57 .845

D41

Table 3. Survey locations for MDDNR and M-NCPPC 75 meter sampling sites for smallmouth bass sampled in Northwest Branch , Montgomery and Prince Georges Counties, 2000 – 2005.

Survey No. Size Range Natural Date Location Type SMB mm(TL) Reproduction Kemp Mill Road 08/04/03 1 pass 2 125-166 Kemp Mill Road 08/23/05 1 pass 0 - Oakview Drive 10/23/03 2 pass 9 133 - 274 Oakview Drive 08/26/04 2 pass 3 186 - 257 Oakview Drive 09/08/05 2 pass 12 61 - 294 yes M-NCPPC 1 10/23/03 2 pass 3 152 - 198 M-NCPPC 1 08/26/04 2 pass 1 238 M-NCPPC 2 08/26/04 2 pass 2 104 and 105 yes M-NCPPC 2 09/08/05 2 pass 2 104 and 298 yes West Park Drive 08/23/05 1 pass 3 60 - 81 yes

D42

Table 4. Fish species observed during electrofishing surveys conducted by MDDNR in Northwest Branch, Montgomery and Prince Georges Counties 2001-2005.

Kemp Oakview West Common Name Scientific Name Mill Drive Park Dr Rainbow trout Oncorhynchus mykiss X X Blacknose dace Rhinichthys atratulus X X X Longnose dace Rhinichthys cataractae X X X Creek chub Semotilus atromaculatus X -- -- Cutlips minnow Exoglossum maxillingua X X X Rosyside dace Clinostomus funduloides -- X -- Common shiner Luxilus cornutus -- X -- Spotfin shiner Cyprinella spiloptera -- X X Satinfin shiner Cyprinella analostana X X X Spottail shiner Notropis hudsonius X X X Bluntnose minnow Pimephales notatus X X -- Swallowtail shiner Notropis procne X X -- Silverjaw minnow Notropis buccatus X -- -- Eastern silvery minnow Hybognathus regius X -- -- White sucker Catostomus commersonii X X X Northern hog sucker Hypentelium nigricans X X X Tessellated darter Etheostoma olmstedi X X X Fantail darter Etheostoma flabellare X X X Largemouth bass Micropterus salmoides X X -- Smallmouth bass Micropterus dolomieu X X X Bluegill sunfish Lepomis macrochirus X X -- Pumpkinseed sunfish Lepomis gibbosus -- X -- Green sunfish Lepomis cyanellus -- -- X Redbreast sunfish Lepomis auritus X X X American eel Anguilla rostrata X X X Margined madtom Noturus insignis X X -- Brown bullhead Ameiurus nebulosus -- X -- Yellow bullhead Ameiurus natalis -- X X Channel catfish Ictalurus punctatus -- X -- Eastern mosquito fish Gambusia holbrooki -- -- X

D43

120

100

80

60

40 Relative (Wr) Weight

20

0 150 175 200 225 250 275 Total Length (mm) by 25 mm interval

Figure 1. Average relative weight (Wr) of smallmouth bass collected from Northwest Branch, 2003 – 2005.

D44

Patapsco River

Introduction

The Patapsco River is a rocky, shallow river averaging 15 meters wide with a low-to-moderate gradient in the Catch and Return Bass Fishing Area. The river forms the boundary between Howard and Baltimore counties. The CSX Railroad maintains a railroad track and right-of-way along the entire length of the Catch and Return area on the Howard county side of the river. The right-of-way provides the most convenient access to the river for fishermen. Vehicles are not allowed on the railroad right-of-way so access is limited to foot or bicycle travel. Patapsco Valley State Park owns most of the land on both sides of the river for the entire length of the Catch and Return area.

The Patapsco River is managed as a Catch and Return Bass Fishing Area between Interstate 70 and Route 144 (Frederick Road). This section of the river is 5.5km in length. All bass must be released immediately after being caught. There are no bait or tackle restrictions.

The catch and return regulations were enacted on November 17, 1997. Statewide regulations restricting harvest of black bass (12 in. minimum size, 5 fish/day, closed season March 1-June 15) applied to this section of river prior to 1997. In addition, trout are stocked into this section of river in spring and fall. This area has been stocked with trout since 1995. The regulations on trout in this portion of the Patapsco River are 2 fish/day, with no size limit, and no bait or tackle restrictions.

Methods

Population estimates were derived using the depletion method outlined by Zippin (1958). The survey was initiated at the downstream end of each station and three electrofishing passes were made through the entire station. Target species were captured with dipnets and held in a livewell at the completion of each pass. Electrofishing surveys were accomplished using a Smith-Root barge-mounted electrofisher. Two established stations were electrofished within the Catch and Return area. Non-target species were noted and occasional large specimens were captured. All fish captured were measured in millimeters and weighed in grams. Population estimates were made using the MICROFISH 2.2 software package (VanDeventer and Platts 1985).

Results

Two stations were electrofished within the Catch and Return area. One station was located at the I-70 bridge and the other station was approximately 0.8km downstream from the Rt. 40 bridge. Each station was approximately 150m in length and 15m in width.

D45

Fish species found were typical of a mid-size river in the Maryland piedmont region (Table 1).

Smallmouth bass proportional stock density (PSD) at I-70 was 6 percent and PSD at Rt. 40 was 22 percent in 2002. (The Rt. 40 station was the only Patapsco station sampled in 2005.) Population indices were comparable to previous years’ data (Table 2). The length frequency histogram for the Rt. 40 station shows a large year class at the 150mm interval (Figure 1). There were relatively few quality size (>280mm) smallmouth bass available to anglers in the stations sampled (Figure 1 and Table 2). The mean relative weight (Wr) of smallmouth bass for all size classes at both stations was less than optimal (Figures 2 & 3). The Wr for bass at the Rt. 40 station was better in the 300mm- 375mm size classes than it was at the I-70 station. This may indicate better habitat for large fish in the Rt. 40 station. The growth of smallmouth bass in the Patapsco was slow (Figure 4). Smallmouth bass may not reach 12 inches until their 6th year in the river.

The population of young-of-year bass was estimated at 6 for each station in 2002. The estimate for the Rt. 40 station was 17 in 2005. These results were not different at the 95 % significance level based upon the confidence limits for young-of-year (YOY) population estimates (Table 2)

Discussion

The Patapsco River provides a viable recreational fishery for smallmouth bass near an urban area. Large smallmouth bass (>300mm) are rare and growth is slow as would be expected in a small river. The slow growth will make it difficult to accumulate a population of large smallmouth that are attractive to anglers. Catch and Return Bass regulations and trout stocking seem to have no impact on the population structure of smallmouth bass in the Catch and Return Area (Staley 2002)

Management Recommendations

• Conduct electrofishing survey to assess smallmouth bass population structure. • Conduct electrofishing survey to assess smallmouth bass reproductive success.

D46

Table 1. List of fish species and relative abundance in Patapsco River Bass Catch and Return Area 1997-2005.

Relative Abundance Station Station Common Name Scientific Name I-70 Rt. 40 Year Year 1997 2002 1999 2002 2005 Smallmouth bass Micropterus dolomieu C C C C C Largemouth bass Micropterus salmoides ------R Redbreast sunfish Lepomis auritus C C S C S Rock bass Amblopites rupestris S C S C S Pumpkinseed Lepomis gibbosus ------S -- Bluegill Lepomis machrochirus R ------R Green sunfish Lepomis cyanellus R ------Rainbow trout Oncorhynchus mykiss C ------American eel Anguilla rostrata S C S C S Yellow bullhead Ameirus natalis -- S R S -- White sucker Catastomus commersoni C S S S S Northern hogsucker Hypentelium nigricans C S S C C Margined madtom Noturus insignis -- -- S C S Common shiner Luxilis cornutus S -- S -- S Central stoneroller Campostoma anomalum C S ------Longnose dace Rhinichthys cataractae -- S -- R R River chub Nocomis micropogon S S S A C Spotfin shiner Cyprinella spiloptera -- C S C -- Cutlips minnow Exoglossum maxillingua -- R -- S S Bluntnose minnow Pimephales notatus -- R ------Mottled sculpin Cottus bairdi R ------Tessellated darter Etheostoma olmstedi C R -- S S Shield darter Percina peltata R R ------Relative Abundance: A= Abundant; C= Common; S= Scarce; R= Rare

D47

Table 2. Smallmouth bass population indices-Patapsco River Catch and Return Area- 2002-2005.

I-70 Route 40 Population Index Station Station 2002 2002 2005 PSD (95 % C.I.) 6 22 (5-39) 36 (14-64) RSD-35 6 14 0 Adult Population estimate (95 % C.I.) 56 (48-64) 102 (50-153) 120 (96-143) Adult bass/km (95 % C.I.) 367 (317-418) 661 (326-997) 778 (626-931) YOY population estimate (95 % C.I.) 6 (5-7) 6 (3-15) 17 (11-22) YOY/ km (95 % C.I.) 39 (31-47) 39 (-21-98) 110 (76-144)

45 40 35 30

25 2002 N=72 20 2005 N=116

Percent of Total of Total Percent 15 10 5 0

0 0 0 0 0 50 00 50 10 15 2 250 30 3 400 450 50 Total Length by 25 mm interval

Figure 1. Patapsco River Smallmouth Bass Length Frequency Histogram 2002-2005.

D48

120

100

80

1997 60 2002

40 Relative Weight (Wr) Relative Weight 20

0 150 200 250 300 350 400 450 500 550 Total Length (mm)

Figure 2. Patapsco River smallmouth bass relative weight at I-70 station 1997-2002.

100

90

80 70

60 2002 50 2005 40 30

20

Mean Relative Weight (Wr) Weight Mean Relative 10 0

150 175 200 225 250 275 300 325 350 375 400

Total Length by 25 mm interval

Figure 3. Patapsco River smallmouth bass relative weight at Rt. 40 Station 2002-2005.

D49

400 350 300 250 200 y = 29.53x + 93.225 2 150 R = 0.959 100 Total Length (mm) 50 0 0246810 Age (years)

Figure 4. Patapsco River Smallmouth Bass Length at Age Growth Curve 2005.

D50

Potomac River

Introduction

The objective of this study was to gather status and long-term trend information on Potomac River aquatic resources with particular attention to black bass, muskie, and walleye populations. These species were monitored for relative abundance, natural reproduction success, age and size structure, growth and general health. This information is vital to management decisions with the ultimate goal of the protection of the Potomac River resources and the enhancement of its sport fisheries.

Methods

Fall electrofishing surveys were conducted with a 16 ft Smith-Root electrofishing boat equipped with a 5 Kw electrical generator. The power output was generally set between 8 and 12 amps, with a frequency of 60 pulses/second direct current.

Sampling was conducted at fixed stations. Multiple sampling runs of 600 seconds actual shocking time were conducted within a station. These were performed parallel to the shore and with the river current. Runs were spatially non-overlapping and were treated as separate independent samples. The number of runs within a station was adequate to cover most of the accessible habitat and was variable between stations. The fall electrofishing survey was designed to target smallmouth bass; however, other species were collected including largemouth bass, walleye, true and tiger muskie, and channel catfish. In recent years, multiple year-classes of smallmouth and largemouth were collected.

Shoreline seining to evaluate natural reproduction of largemouth and smallmouth bass was performed at fixed stations from Seneca to Hancock during mid-July to early August, utilizing a 9.1m x 1.2m seine with 3mm square mesh. Each station contained a pool, riffle, and flat run site. At each site, three samples covering 30.5m (100 ft) of shoreline were seined. A seining index was calculated based upon the average number of young-of-year (YOY) collected from each site. The following index was utilized for categorizing the reproductive success of black bass.

Number of YOY per 30.5m (100 ft) of shoreline Seining Index 0 to 0.50 Poor 0.51 to 2.50 Fair 2.51 to 5.50 Good 5.51 and greater Excellent

A summer trap-net survey was conducted with D-traps set for approximately 24 hours. These traps measured 1.5m long, 0.6m wide and 0.6m high. The traps consisted of enclosed 25mm octagonal wire mesh with two throats 140mm in diameter leading to a D51 catch or holding area. On average 11 traps were fished each day. During 2002, traps were randomly set at Williamsport from July 29 through August 2, and from August 6 and 7, and at Brunswick from September 30 – October 2. In 2004 traps were set at Williamsport from July 19 through 21.

Results

True Muskie and Tiger Muskie

True muskie juveniles collected during 2005 fall electrofishing surveys in October included 22 captured at McCoy’s Ferry, one at Taylor’s Landing, and one at Hancock. All of these stations were within Washington County. These fish ranged from 250 to 395mm TL with a mean size of 322mm and a median size of 327mm, which represents good first year growth. One young muskie was collected in 1996. Eight young were collected in 2001 and DNA testing at the Virginia Institute of Marine Science confirmed that they were true muskie.

Six true and one tiger muskie, age 1+ were collected during fall 2005 electrofishing. Numerous muskies were observed, but not collected during a night electrofishing survey for American eel on June 9 below Dam #4. Over the past 5 years there was a gradual increase in the number of true muskie in survey collections (Table 1). This may be due to an expanding population in the Washington County portion of the river. During this period there was a decrease in tiger muskie, probably as a result of reduced stocking of tiger muskie (Table 2). No tigers were stocked in 2004 due to concerns about disease problems at the source hatchery.

Scale ageing of fish collected in 2003 and 2005 indicated that the 2001 year class of true muskie was the largest followed by the 1999 year class. Age at capture showed that Potomac River true and tiger muskie reached the legal size of 914mm at age six. Other samples showed that Potomac tiger muskie, on average, reached the legal size limit in five growing seasons. The oldest true muskie caught in Maryland was a 10 year old female of 1,143mm and 12.6kg, and is the current state record fish. The oldest tiger muskie collected was in its 9th year of life, having a length of 1,056mm and weight of 5.4kg (an extremely thin fish probably at the end of its lifespan).

Walleye

The portion of the river in Washington County, from Dam #3 upstream to Dam #4, was routinely monitored for the presence of walleye. The electrofishing catch per unit effort (CPUE) for yearling and older walleye in this area was only 2.9 in 2005 and no 2004 cohort walleye were collected.

The ageing of scales from spring and fall captured walleye indicated that most of these fish reached the legal minimum size (381mm) late in their 3rd year of life. A few

D52 reached this size by the end of their second year. The mean relative weight (Wr) from the fall 2005 survey was 92 for YOY and 87 for age 1+. This was similar to fish collected during the fall of 2003 and could be considered fair.

The 2005 YOY CPUE of 2.3 for the Dam 3# to Dam #4 stretch suggested relatively good reproduction (Table 3). A total of 14 YOY walleye were collected, all between Taylor’s Landing and Edward’s Ferry. No YOY were collected upstream of a low water dam at Williamsport. Some were observed further downstream directly above Dam #4 (per. comm. J. Mullican, DNR Fish biologist). During the fall of 2004 a total of 34 young walleye were electrofished for a CPUE of 5.9 (Table 3). This is the first time, since it was first documented in 1985, that walleye reproduction was recorded in two consecutive years. During October, young walleye in this area ranged from 218 to 298mm and had a mean length of 251mm. The latter is similar to the mean length of 257mm recorded for young walleye found there last fall.

Largemouth Bass

The YOY index for largemouth bass collected by seine was 3.0. This was considered good natural reproduction for nontidal Potomac largemouth. There has been a gradual increase in natural reproduction success of largemouth bass in the Potomac over the past several years, even when counting riffle locations, which were omitted in early computations because this was considered unsuitable habitat (Table 4). Largemouth bass reproduction has been assessed as fair to good over the past 3 years. A YOY index of 4.0 in 2004 was the highest ever recorded and even exceeded the smallmouth bass index of 2.2 for that year. This was the first time more largemouth bass YOY were collected than smallmouth bass YOY.

Largemouth bass fingerlings were stocked in the impounded section of river above Dam #5 from 2001 through 2003 to augment natural reproduction (Table 5). These fish were tagged with coded wire tags (CWTs) to differentiate between wild fish and those of hatchery origin. A 2003 fall electrofishing effort targeted largemouth bass but failed to recover any of the tagged fish. Largemouth comprised only 5% of the black bass sampled during that survey.

The lower river reach, which is under Catch and Return (C&R) Bass regulations and is characterized by wider and slow moving water than upstream, has historically provided the best largemouth bass fishing on the non-tidal Potomac. In 2003 electrofishing surveys, largemouth comprised 25% of the stock-size black bass collected there. During 2005 fall electrofishing surveys in the upper river (at Hancock, McCoy’s Ferry, and Williamsport stations), the Maximum Size Bass Fishing Area (Taylor’s Landing and Shinham stations), and the C&R Bass Fishing Area (White’s and Edward’s Ferry stations) largemouth bass comprised 2, 8, and 5% of the black bass catch, respectively. Physical condition of the largemouth was very good, as Wr ranged from 90 to 117, with both a mean and median Wr of 100 (mean 95% CL +2.5).

D53

Smallmouth Bass

Seining during late July and early August, conducted at fixed stations from Seneca to Hancock indicated excellent smallmouth bass reproduction in 2005. A seining index (SI) of 10.7 was recorded for YOY bass, the fifth highest value recorded since 1975. Additionally the mean and median lengths were exceedingly good (Table 6). Young bass ranged from 52 to 128mm and several were over 120mm. The mean electrofishing CPUE of 32.5 in October verified seining results and indicated low early mortality. Seining conducted at Paw Paw and Spring Gap resulted in indices of 10 and 4, suggesting excellent to good smallmouth bass hatches in the upper river. In comparison, the 2004 results for fall electrofishing and summer seining were 2.2 and 9.0 respectively, suggesting fair reproductive success.

During the 2005 summer seining surveys, approximately 10% of young smallmouth bass were observed with lesions or fungus. Some of these fish were sent to the Leetown National Fish Health Laboratory in Kearneysville, West Virginia for examination. No common cause was identified for the lesions, but rather a variety of bacterial infections were found, and were thought to be caused by environmental stressors (per. comm. Dr. Panek, Director). Angler reports of smallmouth bass with lesions surfaced throughout the summer, although electrofishing collections and DNR personnel personal fishing trips failed to confirm this. A sample of young and intermediate sized smallmouth as well as redbreast sunfish and golden redhorse suckers were collected at Shinham station on August 22, 2005 and sent to the Leetown lab. Tissue samples taken from these fish were forwarded to the USF&WS Lamar Fish Health Center in Lamar, Pennsylvania. The smallmouth bass and redbreast sunfish both tested positive for largemouth bass virus (LMBV). This was the first documentation of LMBV in Maryland and indicated it is now present in the Potomac River watershed (letter dated 12/09/05 from J. Coll, project leader, Lamar Fish Health Center case 05-279). In September 2004, smallmouth bass from this same location tested negative for LMBV (letter dated 01/04/05 from W. Quartz, fish health biologist, case #05-014). Nine male smallmouth bass from the 2004 sample were all found to be positive for the intersex condition as well (per. comm. V. Blazer, USGS National Fish Health Research Lab at Leetown, WV). Intersex is a condition where fish exhibit sexual characteristics, either externally or histologically, of both sexes of that species. Substances that act as endocrine disruptors are suspected to cause this condition. In 2005 fish were collected from Conococheague Creek and Monocacy River, two major Potomac tributaries in Maryland, to determine the range and extent of intersex or other evidence of endocrine disruption in Potomac River watershed fish.

Electrofishing results showed little difference in the smallmouth bass populations between special regulation areas and control areas under a statewide 305mm minimum size and closed season (Table 7). This was consistent with previous surveys. CPUE for stock size bass in the maximum size, lower control, and catch & return areas was below

D54 expectations. In contrast, in 2004 the CPUE in the maximum size area was 56 stock bass per hour. Marginal reproduction over the past 5 years, three of which were below a long- term average, probably contributed to lower catch rates. Smallmouth length frequency showed a fairly typical distribution with no evidence of weak year classes (Figure 1). This was probably due to reduced catch rates for all size classes. The mean Wr was average during fall sampling (Table 7). Length at age indicated that growth has changed little from early years and was considered moderate on a national scale (Table 8).

American eel

A night electrofishing survey just below Dam# 4 was performed to determine if eels were more numerous on the Maryland side of the river than the West Virginia side. Eel ladders are planned for 2006, however the location and specific design for these structures have not been determined. The survey conducted on June 9 failed to collect any eels. The effort was complicated by low but turbid water and an abundance of caddisflies and mayflies that hampered the visibility of the survey crew.

Fall daylight electrofishing CPUEs for American eel are presented in Table 9. Between 1996 and 2000 CPUEs ranged from 1.4 to 11.5. All the CPUEs reported were based on eels observed, not netted, in the electrical field. This data may provide a baseline for eel information obtained after the installation of eel ladders.

Channel catfish

No specific surveys targeted channel catfish during this period. Sunfish trapping efforts had impressive by-catches of 10.2 catfish per D-trap/day at Brunswick in 2002. Sunfish trapping above Williamsport in 2004 hinted at lower abundance as the by-catch rate for channel catfish was 3.6 fish per D-trap/day or less. Physical condition of the fish ranged from fair to good. Frequent observation during electrofishing surveys indicated that channel catfish abundance was good. Despite local rumors, no blue catfish, Ictalurus furcatus, were observed during MD DNR surveys or at a local catfish tournament this year. Blue catfish have not yet been documented by MD DNR in the freshwater portion of the Potomac River. However, a flathead catfish was collected on August 6, 2002 in a D-trap at Williamsport. This fish was 510mm in TL and weighed 1,900g. This is the only flathead collected to date.

Other Fish Species

A list of all fish species caught or observed during both seine and electrofishing surveys is presented in Table 10. One northern pike was collected above Williamsport in 2004. Occasionally, rainbow darters were collected in seine hauls in the upper river. During 2005, seventy-one satinfin shiners were collected in the seine at the Paw-Paw station. Quillback (a member of the sucker family) were mostly found in the lower river.

D55

Water Quality and Aquatic Vegetation

All water quality values obtained were within the tolerance of observed species. Fall conductivity readings ranged from 90 micromhos at White’s Ferry to 440 at Snyder’s Landing. Rooted aquatic vegetation was generally limited except during 2002 when water levels were low. Water conditions appeared favorable in 2005 for the establishment of rooted aquatic vegetation in the lower river; however, it remained sparse throughout the season. Possible reasons include two previous elevated flow years when seed or rootstock may have been washed away or covered with sediments, and relatively cool water temperatures well into the growing season. As in previous years water stargrass (Heteranthera dubia) was the most commonly found rooted species followed by curly pondweed (Potamogeton crispus). A small amount of un-rooted hydrilla (Hydrilla verticillata) was found at Hancock. Its presence in Blairs Valley Lake, a Washington County impoundment, increases the potential for this vegetation to establish in the Potomac mainstem. Infestation could reach nuisance levels in the impounded areas where conditions would be well within its requirements. Nuisance levels of blue-green algae, primarily Oscillatoria sp., were common in late summer 2005, especially at and down river of Brunswick. In the past, algae blooms were mainly confined to the Virginia shoreline downstream of the Shenandoah River, indicating that it was the major source of nutrients. This year however, the bloom spread across the entire width of the river suggesting that it was not the only contributor.

Discussion

Muskie

Fall collections of true muskie juveniles in 2005 and 2001 suggested good first year growth for naturally reproduced fish. The first and only other year that true muskie juveniles were collected was one fish in 1996. However, scale age estimates on 2005 adults indicated that muskie have been reproducing naturally since at least 1995. 2005 results suggest that the true muskie population is expanding or that low water conditions are good for juvenile recruitment.

Survival of hatchery stocked tiger muskie is thought to be relatively low, based upon observed habits after stocking and electrofishing results. Despite attempts to acclimate fish to ambient water temperature during stocking, many tiger muskie appeared docile or tame, remaining suspended in open water rather than seeking cover. This vulnerability has been documented (Koupal 1999; Wahl 1999) and was demonstrated this year when a fisherman netted several individuals shortly after a stocking at the Lander boat ramp. The 2005 electrofishing return of three stocked fingerling tiger muskie is typical following fall stocking (Table 2). Current tiger muskie stocking seems to be, at best, a low maintenance effort to sustain this fishery.

D56

Early season sampling from March thru May is recommended for muskie as they seem to be more vulnerable to electrofishing as compared later in the season when river water is typically clear and low. Future targeted muskie sampling should be designed to document status and trends in the true muskie population and determine the contribution of tiger muskie to Esocid populations. This information is necessary to evaluate the success and necessity of future tiger muskie stocking.

Walleye

The stocking of walleye fry and fingerlings in the Potomac River began in 1979 and was successful in establishing a self-sustaining walleye population. The last stocking was made in 2000 with two million fry put above Dam #4 and one million fry stocked between Dams #4 and #3. This decision was based on the occurrence of significant natural reproduction in 2001. Natural reproduction was also documented in 1985, 1990, and 1997, but at lower levels than in 2001 (Table 3). Good reproduction every 4 to 5 years was expected as females from the previous good year class reached maturity. Consecutive natural hatches in 2004 and 2005 suggest that the population’s age distribution may be increasing. River conditions and water quality following the spawn may have also played an important role.

The lack of 2004 cohort walleye in the 2005 survey may have been due to survey selectivity. The low flow and clear water conditions experienced during the 2005 fall sampling may have made walleye less susceptible to electrofishing, as they may seek refuge in deeper waters under these conditions. Subsequent surveys may verify if this cohort was not sampled in a representative manner or if it suffered significant natural mortality between the 2004–2005 period.

Managers believe that the current maximum size regulation (508mm), January 1 thru April 15, affords adequate protection for spawning walleye. The occurrence of two consecutive detectable year classes may be an indication of decreased exploitation of larger females. There is also a minimum size of 380mm all year around. These regulations, like most, depend upon angler interpretation and compliance as fishing is permitted prior to and during the spawning period when walleye tend to congregate, and harvest is restricted to fish ranging from 381 to 507mm in length. Regulation acceptance and compliance, with the exception of a small group of seasoned poachers, is high (per. comm. Natural Resource Police officers Harner, White, and McCartney).

Largemouth bass

The stocking of fingerling largemouth bass above Dam #5 had little impact on population size. The survival of stocked bass was thought to be low because they were transported and stocked during extremely warm weather and warm water conditions, and they were relatively small in size (<50mm). The numbers stocked also may have been too low to evaluate.

D57

Few largemouth bass have been present in electrofishing collections recently, despite fair to good natural reproduction. Their very good physical condition suggests no forage problems. The scarcity of rooted aquatic vegetation in the lower river, especially in 2005, could have made them less vulnerable to electrofishing. However, aquatic vegetation, mainly water stargrass, was abundant at McCoy’s Ferry in 2005, yet largemouth bass comprised only 2% of the black bass catch there. This low abundance may indicate that habitat is, at best, marginal for largemouth bass.

Smallmouth bass

Uniform sampling of smallmouth bass in the Potomac River is extremely challenging. Not only are physical conditions hard to duplicate from year to year, but limited human resources make it difficult to take complete advantage of favorable conditions when available. Sampling under low, clear water and warmer water temperatures (at the start of the fall sampling period) tended to favor collecting smaller bass. Late season cool water temperatures and slightly turbid conditions seemed to favor capture of larger bass. Several volunteers were used as netters during the fall of 2005 to augment professional and technical staff.

The year 2005 was characterized by stable, clear river flows during and following the spawning period, which resulted in high numbers of YOY smallmouth bass and a high SI (Table 6). Virginia fish biologists determined that stream discharge during and immediately after spawning could be critical to smallmouth bass recruitment success (Smith et al. 2005).

Seine indices are believed to be a useful device in identifying very weak or strong year classes. The fair (indices 0.51 to 2.5) and good (indices 2.51 to 5.5) hatches are more difficult to verify and identify at later ages. Besides initial abundance, recruitment to the adult stock can be heavily influenced by environmental factors. The excellent 2005 year class should experience high survival over a normal 2005/2006 winter because of their relative large size during the fall. If this cohort is not abundant in subsequent electrofishing surveys then environmental conditions are probably to blame. Nutrification as evidenced by Oscillatoria sp. algal blooms and recent discoveries of endocrine disruption and largemouth bass virus pose significant threats to the river’s aquatic resources. Prey/predator relationships in the Maximum Size Bass Fishing Area (Dam #4 to Dam 3) and areas where walleye are relatively abundant, may require some investigation as a low smallmouth bass CPUE did not contribute to a higher Wr this past year (Table 7).

Fall adult surveys presented no evidence that special regulations have altered the population abundance or size structure. Environmental factors, in particular, the two 100-year floods in 1996, appeared to have a greater effect. It is suspected that angler harvest was low and did not change with regulation changes. Recent discussions with

D58

Maryland Natural Resource Police officers pertaining to angler behavior indicated that compliance with smallmouth bass regulations was not a concern, as few anglers were found with any in their creel (per. comm. Natural Resources Police).

Management Recommendations

• Apply Koupal’s (2004) tiger muskie suitability index. Should it confirm that stocking is appropriate, substantially increase the numbers of fish stocked annually. If true muskie recruitment continues then numbers of stocked tiger muskie should be compensated down or discontinued.

• Maintain the current walleye regulations and monitor for continued reproductive success.

• If further analyses of historical data confirm preliminary results, special smallmouth bass regulations should be removed and the mainstem Potomac River regulated under one uniform regulation. While the statewide 305mm minimum size is an option it may not result in the desired size structure according to published standards of PSD/RSD and perceived angler opinion. Better analysis of growth should be obtained to determine if it is depressed due to competition. If so, other options such as a Maximum or No size limit may produce better results. However, a Maximum size limit may not be popular with tournament anglers. In both scenarios, education and compliance of the angling public is paramount to regulation effectiveness.

D59

Table 1. Numbers of muskie (yearling & older) collected in Potomac River electrofishing surveys, 2001 to 2005.

Year Number of Number of Tiger Muskie True Muskie 2001 11 4 2002 8 6 2003 8 9 2004 2 4 2005 1 6

Table 2. Summary of tiger muskie stocked into the Potomac River by MD DNR, 2001 to 2005.

Special stocking Fall fingerling stocking Year & locations & locations 274 yearlings 2,500 2001 McCoy’s to Four Lock’s Little Orleans to Monocacy R. 523 yearlings 2,500 2002 Spring Gap to McCoy’s Paw Paw to Seneca 8,000 sm fingerlings 3,665 2003 Wash County Paw Paw to Edward’s Ferry 2004 None None 1,235 2005 None McCoy’s to Edward’s Ferry

Table 3. Walleye mean CPUEs from, fall electrofishing, Dam # 3 to Dam # 4, Potomac River, 1997 - 2005.

Size 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003* 2004 2005 YOY 2.2 0 0.2 0 25.2 0 0 5.9 2.3 Yearling 1.7 20.1 9.8 5.4 3.8 9.8 36.0 5.2 2.9 + Older *River conditions limited sampling to one day at Taylor’s Landing

D60

Table 4. Seining indices for largemouth bass in the Potomac River (Hancock to Seneca). Pool and general sites 1996 - 2000; riffle, pool and general sites 2001 - 2005.

Year Reproduction Success Index 1996 Fair 1.0 1997 Fair 1.9 1998 Fair 0.7 1999 Poor 0.2 2000 Fair 0.8 2001 Good 3.0 2002 Poor 0.5 2003 Fair 1.4 2004 Good 4.0 2005 Good 3.0

Table 5. Summary of largemouth bass stocked by MD DNR, McCoy’s Ferry to Dam #5, Potomac River, 2001 to 2003.

Year Number of Fingerlings 2001 17,000 2002 14,712 2003 26,049

Table 6. MD DNR Seining indices for YOY smallmouth bass, Seneca to Hancock, Potomac River, July thru August, 2001 to 2005.

Seining Index Mean Size Median Size Year (SI) (mm) (mm) 2005 10.7 81 79 2004 2.2 73 73 2003 3.6 55 54 2002 1.8 -- -- 2001 5.3 -- --

D61

Table 7. Potomac River smallmouth bass relative abundance and size structure indices, MD DNR Fall electrofishing 2005.

CPUE CPUE Station PSD RSD Mean Wr (Stock) (Quality) 35 Up Control 76 15 19 (+/-5) 12 88 Max Size 35 9 26 (+/-7) 12 89 Low Control 32 17 52 (+/-16) 7 93 C&R 44 17 40 (+/-12) 4 95

Table 8. Potomac River smallmouth bass mean back calculated length (mm) at age. Compared with national moderate and slow growth rates (Anderson and Weithman 1978).

Year 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9

1958 (Fred Co.) 107 188 249 295 333 386

1975-1978 117 195 243 294 351 414 427

1990 84 173 229 277 318 381 429

2001-2003 106 180 236 282 331 375 402 437 456

Moderate 94 173 249 309 346 373 393 410 421

Slow 64 142 201 234 269 325 348 376 389

D62

Table 9. Mean American eel electrofishing CPUEs, Potomac River, 2004 and 2005.

Station 2004 2005 Hancock -- 9.6 McCoy’s Ferry 3.4 6.2 Williamsport 4.8 1.2 Taylor’s Landing 1.5 4.8 Snyder’s Landing 1.3 4.0 Shepherdstown 4.0 2.4 Shinham 2.3 1.5 Lander -- 3.0 Point of Rocks -- 6.1 White’s Ferry -- 0 Edward’s Ferry -- 5.4

Table 10. Common, scientific name, and general occurrence of fish species collected by seine and electrofishing surveys, Potomac River, 2001-2005 (continued on next page).

Common Name Scientific Name Occurrence American eel Anguilla rostrata Common Central stoneroller Campostoma anomalum Common Satinfin shiner Cyprinella analostana Common Spotfin shiner Cyprinella spilopterus Common Carp Cyprinus carpio Common Cutlips minnow Exoglossum maxillingua Rare Common shiner Luxilus cornutus Common River chub Nocomis micropogon Common Golden shiner Notemigonus crysoleucas Rare Comely shiner Notropis amoenus Common Spottail shiner Notropis hudsonius Abundant Swallowtail shiner Notropis procne Common Rosyface shiner Notropis rubellus Abundant Bluntnose minnow Pimephales notatus Abundant Longnose dace Rhinichthys cataractae Common Creek chub Semotilus atromaculatus Rare Fallfish Semotilus corporalis Abundant Quillback Carpiodes cyprinus Common White sucker Catostomus commersonii Common

D63

Table 10 (contd.). Common, scientific name, and general occurrence of fish species collected by seine and electrofishing surveys, Potomac River, 2001-2005 (continued on next page).

Common Name Scientific Name Occurrence Creek chubsucker Erimyzon oblongus Common Northern hog sucker Hypentelium nigricans Common Golden redhorse Moxostoma erythrurum Abundant Shorthead redhorse Moxostoma macrolepidotum Common Yellow bullhead Ameiurus natalis Common Brown bullhead Ameiurus nebulosus Common Channel catfish Ictalurus punctatus Common Margined madtom Noturus insignis Common Flathead catfish Pylodictis olivaris Rare Northern pike Esox lucius Rare Muskellunge Esox masquinongy Common Tiger musky Esox masquinongy x Esox lucius Common Chain pickerel Esox niger Common Banded killifish Fundulus diaphanus Common Eastern mosquitofish Gambusia holbrooki Common Rock bass Ambloplites rupestris Common Redbreast sunfish Lepomis auritus Common Green sunfish Lepomis cyanellus Common Pumpkinseed sunfish Lepomis gibbosus Common Bluegill Lepomis macrochirus Common Longear sunfish Lepomis megalotis Common Smallmouth bass Micropterus dolomieu Abundant Largemouth bass Micropterus salmoides Common White crappie Pomoxis annularis Rare Black crappie Pomoxis nigromaculatus Common Greenside darter Etheostoma blennioides Common Rainbow darter Etheostoma caeruleum Rare Tessellated darter Etheostoma olmstedi Common Yellow perch Perca flavescens Common Walleye Sander vitreum Common

D64

140 100.00% 120 80.00% 100 80 60.00% 60 40.00%

Frequency 40 20.00% 20 0 0.00%

e 00 75 200 225 250 275 3 325 350 375 400 425 450 4 Mor Total length by 25 mm groups

Figure 5. Length frequency of Smallmouth bass collected by MD DNR fall electrofishing, Potomac River, 2005.

D65

Susquehanna River

Introduction

The Susquehanna River is the largest tributary to Chesapeake Bay, contributing over 60% of its freshwater. Its massive watershed drains a significant portion of Pennsylvania and Central New York. Throughout its length, the Susquehanna supports excellent fisheries for warm and cool water species, principally smallmouth bass and walleye. The Maryland portion of the river is a short, but diverse section that includes three main sections: a large hydroelectric impoundment named Conowingo Reservoir, a swift rocky portion from the Conowingo Dam to Lapidum boat landing, and a slow semi- tidal area from Lapidum to Havre De Grace, where the River meets Chesapeake Bay. All three sections are highly governed by water flow, whether anthropogenic (for power generation) or natural (rainfall and/or tides). The freshwater fisheries within the middle section have not been well documented due to the difficulties in sampling and danger in operating in the extreme conditions which exist there. Conowingo Reservoir was sampled in 2005, the results of which can be found in Study II of this report. The two lower sections have not been sampled for freshwater fish species in several years, although they support significant fisheries for largemouth and smallmouth bass, and to a lesser extent, walleye. These species were the target of this investigation.

Methods

The river section directly downstream of Conowingo Dam is a highly dangerous environment for traditional prop-driven watercraft due to many large boulders, swift currents and irregular water levels dictated by the water release schedule and rainfall events. A Smith Root SR-16 jet-driven boat was used to sample four 600 second electrofishing stations where the depth and current would allow on October 8, 2005. The unpredictability of the flow regimes made random site selection impossible, so sites were selected by the boat operator with regard to safe operation. The river reach below Lapidum is generally deeper, slower in current and influenced by the tidal cycles downstream and river discharge upstream. This habitat allowed for random site selection and more typical electrofishing techniques. Five 600 second stations were systematically chosen and sampled on November 8, 2005 using a Smith Root SR-18 electrofishing boat.

All largemouth bass, smallmouth bass, walleye and tiger muskellunge encountered were collected, measured (mm TL), and weighed (g). Scale samples were collected from bass behind the left pectoral fin, and below the lateral line for ageing (Carlander 1977). The scales were dried and pressed into thin slides of cellulose acetate using an Ann Arbor Roller PressTM. Resulting impressions were read by trained biologists to determine age.

D66

Results and Discussion

Jet-boat electrofishing in the faster middle reach was inefficient and unproductive. Shortly before sampling, water level was so low that access was impossible. As sampling started, dam releases created high and dangerous conditions, which limited accessibility to areas out of the main current, along the shoreline of the islands. Only one adult largemouth bass was collected in four 600 second samples. Other species present included common carp, gizzard shad and yellow perch, but these were also in low abundance. No smallmouth bass or walleye were encountered during sampling.

Survey of the lower river reach was more productive. Largemouth bass were abundant in the dense grassbeds and hard structure in all five stations sampled. A wide range of size and age classes was collected with 1+ bass being the most abundant age group (Figures 1 and 2). Interestingly, the next most abundant group was age 6+ with ages two through five being relatively absent. The PSD of 76% (+ 20) was very high however the confidence interval was large due to a small sample size (<100). All bass collected were in excellent physical condition. Relative weight ranged from 99 to 120.

No smallmouth bass or walleye were collected; however one tiger muskellunge was collected south of Lapidum. These hybrids have been stocked annually into Conowingo Reservoir and the Susquehanna to create a limited trophy fishery.

Conclusions

The Susquehanna River from Conowingo Dam to Lapidum is a very difficult and dangerous environment to sample for fish. The largemouth bass fishery in the lower reach sampled (below Lapidum) appears healthy. Its proximity to and similarity with, downstream habitats which are sampled during the Upper Chesapeake Bay tidal bass surveys, suggest that this reach should be included in that survey. It is likely that both largemouth bass populations are a part of the same stock as fish can freely move between areas. The smallmouth bass and walleye populations within these river reaches remain an enigma. Anglers catch many individuals of both species annually, but traditional electrofishing techniques were clearly ineffective. Static gear or angler-intercept surveys may be the only way to gather population data on these species.

D67

14 12

10 8 6

Frequency 4 2

0 5 5 5 25 75 75 25 125 1 225 27 325 37 42 475 5 Total length by 25mm interval

Figure 1. Length-frequency distribution of largemouth bass collected from the lower Susquehanna River, fall 2005.

30

25

20

15

10 Frequency 5

0 012345678

Age

Figure 2. Age-frequency distribution of largemouth bass collected from the lower Susquehanna River, fall 2005.

D68

Study IV. Major Rivers and Streams

Literature Cited

Anderson, R.O. 1980. Proportional Stock Density (PSD) and Relative Weight (Wr): interpretive indices for fish populations and communities. Pages 27-33 in S. Gloss and B. Shupp, editors. Practical fisheries Management: more with less in the 1980’s. Proceedings of the 1st Annual Workshop of the New York Chapter American Fisheries Society. New York Cooperative Fishery Research Unit, Ithaca, New York, USA.

Anderson, R.O. and A.S. Weithman. 1978. The concept of balance for coolwater fish populations. Pages 371-381 in R.L. Kendall, editor. Selected coolwater fishes of North America, Special Publication 11, North American Fisheries Society Bethesda, Maryland, USA.

Carlander, K.D. 1977. Standard intercepts for calculating lengths from scale measurements for some Centrarchid and Percid fishes. Transactions of the American Fisheries Society 111:332-336.

DeRose, C. R. 1966. The Monocacy River: Physical, Chemical, and Bacteriological Water Quality. State of Maryland Dept. of Water Resources, Division of Water Quality Investigations Report #1 March through December. Annapolis, MD.

Enamait, E. 2001. Monitoring Studies. Federal Aid Project. F-48-R, Study II. Maryland Department of Natural Resources, Annapolis, MD.

Enamait, E. 2004. Management of Maryland’s major rivers and streams – Potomac River. Federal Aid Project F-48-R-13, Maryland Department of Natural Resources, Annapolis, MD.

Gustafson, A. K.1988. Approximating confidence intervals for indices of fish population size structure. North American Journal of Fisheries Management 8:139-141.

Kolmogorov-Smirnov Test http://www.physics.csbsju.edu/stats/KS-test.html

Koupal, K. D. 1999. Assessment of post-stocking mortality for tiger muskies and strategies to increase survival. dissertation. Colorado State University, Fort Collins ______. 2004. A modified suitability index to guide selection of stocking waters for juvenile tiger muskies. American Fisheries Society Symposium 44:291-305.

D69

Lagler, K. F. 1956. Freshwater fishery biology. First edition, Wm. C. Brown Co., Dubuque, IA.

Lee, R.M. and J.N. Rinne. 1980. Critical thermal maxima of five trout species in the Southwestern United States. Transactions of the American Fisheries Society. Vol.109 No.6.

Montgomery County CSPS. 1988. Countywide Stream Protection Strategy. Montgomery County DEP, Watershed Management Division.

National Pollution Discharge Elimination System - Permit No. MD0021678. 1999. Maryland Department of the Environment – Baltimore, MD 21224.

Nielsen, L.A. and D.L. Johnson, ed. 1983. Fisheries Techniques. American Fisheries Society. Bethesda, Maryland. P.291.

Pavol, K.W. and A. W. Klotz. 2001. North Branch Potomac River restoration study, Jennings Randolph Dam downstream to Cumberland, MD - Final Report. Federal Aid Project F-48-R, Study C, No. 5. Maryland Department of Natural Resources, Annapolis, MD.

Pavol, K.W. and A. W. Klotz. 2002-2005. North Branch Potomac River restoration study, Jennings Randolph Dam downstream to Pinto, MD – Annual Progress Reports. Federal Aid Project F-48-R-13. Maryland Department of Natural Resources, Annapolis, MD.

Rizzo, Frank, et al. Prediction of Smallmouth Bass Year-Class Strength in Virginia Rivers Using Stream Discharge: A Nonlinear Relationship. Unpublished.

Smith, S.M., J.S. Odenkirk, and S.J. Reeser. 2005. Smallmouth bass recruitment variability and its relation to stream discharge in three Virginia rivers. North American Journal of Fisheries Management 25:1112-1121.

Staley, M. 2002. Patapsco River Progress Report- Monitoring Studies. Federal Aid Project. F-48-R, Study II, Maryland Department of Natural Resources, Annapolis, MD

Steiner, L. 2000. Pennsylvania Fishes. Pennsylvania Fish and Boat Commission, Harrisburg, PA 17106

USGS http://waterdata.usgs.gov/md/nwis/rt

Van Deventer, J.S. and W.S. Platts. 1985. MicroFish 2.2 microfish interactive program. Microsoft Corporation.

D70

Wahl, D.H. 1999. An ecological context for evaluating for factors influencing muskellunge stocking success. North American Journal of Fisheries Management 19:238-248

Wege, G.J., and R.O. Anderson. 1978. Relative weight (Wr): A new index of condition for largemouth bass. Pages 79 - 91 in G.D. Novinger and J.G. Dillard, eds. New approaches to the management of small impoundments. N. Central Div. Am. Fish. Soc., Spec. Publ. No. 5.

Weitkamp, D. E. and M. Katz. 1980. A review of dissolved gas supersaturation literature. Transactions of the American Fisheries Society, Vol. 109, No. 6

Zippin, C. 1958. The removal method of population estimation. Journal of Wildlife Management. 22(1): 82-90.

D71

ANNUAL PERFORMANCE REPORT 2005

Maryland Department of Natural Resources Fisheries Service Inland Fisheries Management Program

SURVEY AND MANAGEMENT OF FRESHWATER FISHERIES RESOURCES

Management of Maryland's Tidal Freshwater Streams

USFWS Federal Aid Grant F-48-R-15

Study V

By:

Ray Borras Brett Coakley Don Cosden Tim Groves Mary Groves Richard Schaefer Jerry Stivers Ross Williams

E1

Table of Contents Management of Maryland's Tidal Freshwater Streams

Adult Population Assessment ...... E3

Juvenile Recruitment Surveys...... E22

Hatchery Contribution ...... E29

Tagging Studies ...... E38

Scale/Otolith Comparison Studies ...... E52

Angler Creel Surveys...... E57

Tournament Creel Surveys ...... E65

Literature Cited ...... E73

E2

State: Maryland Project Number: F-48-R-15 Study No.: V Job No.: 1

Project Title: Survey and Management of Freshwater Fisheries Resources

Study Title: Management of Maryland's Tidal Freshwater Streams

Job Title: Adult Population Assessment

Introduction

Largemouth bass (Micropterus salmoides) populations in Maryland’s tidal waters support extremely popular recreational and tournament fisheries. In 2001, tournament creel surveys at one Potomac River site indicated over 40,000 angler hours were targeted at black bass. No estimates of effort were made for recreational (non-tournament) anglers and smaller tournaments at that location, but when the number of access points on tidal freshwaters around Chesapeake Bay are considered, the total fishing pressure is likely in the hundreds of thousands of hours. The popularity of this fishery makes monitoring and management of tidal bass populations a priority for Fisheries Service.

A review of sampling methods and population estimates was conducted between the 1998 and 1999 study years. Results indicated that surveys were not obtaining the precision necessary to determine inter-annual differences in abundance estimates. Hence, the effects of changes in management strategy or angling pressure could not be assessed. In an effort to maintain and monitor this fishery, and to obtain more precise tidal bass abundance indices, a new sampling strategy was developed and has been employed since 1999.

Methods

Study Areas

Tidal bass are found in all of the major tributaries of the Chesapeake Bay that have suitable salinity range (< 5 ppt) (Swingle 1956). A map of areas sampled from 2001-2005 is provided in Figure 1.

Survey Design and Site Selection

Prior to electrofishing, a crew visually mapped each river by cruising the shorelines and categorizing reaches (continuous stretches of shoreline of similar habitat) into one of three classifications. These classifications, prime, average, and marginal, were defined on the basis of suitability for adult black bass. Prime habitats were characterized by an abundance of wood, submerged aquatic vegetation (SAV), adjacent deep water, current breaks and/or various other structures known to attract and hold the E3 highest densities of adult bass during the fall sample period. In average habitat, structure was less prevalent or water depth was less attractive to bass. Fish were likely present, but in lower concentrations than prime areas. Marginal habitats were those where one would expect to find few, if any, bass. These areas are usually devoid of cover, or cover is inaccessible to fish during a large part of the tidal cycle due to extremely shallow water. Positions where habitat types changed were marked as waypoints using Garmin Map 76 GPS units and mapping software. Classifications of each reach were noted on paper charts. Sample areas were limited to waters less than 2 parts per thousand (ppt) of salinity and excluded areas where depth was insufficient to allow use of the gear.

Upon completion of field mapping, waypoints and ‘tracks’ were downloaded to PC map files and each reach was divided into sample sites of approximately 250m in length. Previously this had been done by creating detailed outlines of shorelines using ARCVIEW, then manually entering latitude and longitudes from GPS waypoints. Each sampling site was given an alphanumeric code based upon its habitat classification and listed with stop and start coordinates.

All random sites were chosen using a systematic sampling design, but still keeping all other aspects of stratified sampling. This can be considered equivalent to random sampling if site numbers are assigned and the starting site chosen randomly (Nielsen 1983). Systematic sampling eliminates the possibility of random sites being clumped within a few areas while missing large portions of the study area. It is particularly useful in systems where progressive changes occur over the sample area, which is true of many of these tidal tributaries (Miranda et al. 1996). Sites were chosen randomly from each stratum and were allocated in the following approximate proportions: 25% of prime, 15% of average and 10% of marginal. A minimum of 10 sites per habitat classification was desired, but not always achieved. The Pocomoke River contained an alternating habitat arrangement consisting of shallow spatterdock fields, flooded cypress trees and deep channel edges. The unique nature of these habitats necessitated the classification of the whole sample area as “average”. Thirty sites were chosen using the systematic method described above. The permanent stations used in previous surveys were sampled in the Choptank and Chester Rivers and the Upper Bay from 2001-2004. All systems were sampled in 2005 using only random sites.

Sampling

The additional areas sampled required that sampling begin in late August. Site start points were located with handheld GPS units (Garmin Map 76) preloaded with coordinates as waypoints. Electrofishing was conducted against the current where detectable, with a Smith-Root model 5.0 GPP or 9.0 GPP boat mounted unit. The shoreline was approached from roughly a perpendicular direction at 5-10m intervals. The distance between intervals varied slightly depending upon width of the electrical field as indicated by observation of affected fish. The entire distance between site start and stop points was sampled. Actual shocking began approximately 10 meters from shore and

E4 was continued to the shoreline, but an effort was made to include any near shore structure such as depth gradients (drop-offs), weed beds, wood and other cover. On occasion, shallow water prohibited sampling close to the shore. In these cases, the nearest area of reasonable depth was sampled while covering roughly the same amount of distance as the original site.

All largemouth and smallmouth bass (M. dolomieu) were collected and held in onboard live wells until sampling was completed at that station. All fish were then measured for total length (mm), weighed (g), and released. Scales were removed from bass >200mm TL from the left side of the fish posterior to the pectoral fin and below the lateral line. Scales chosen for ageing were selected by choosing five bass per 25mm length group. Bass exceeding 200mm TL were tagged with a T-bar tag inserted between the pterygiophores at the rear of the soft dorsal fin. Legal sized bass (>305mm) from the Choptank River were tagged with a T-bar tag and an internal anchor tag, which was inserted into the abdominal cavity. Bass in the Chester River were also checked for the presence of coded wire tags (CWTs), indicative of hatchery origin. Other data collected at each station included: starting time, sampling time (seconds), electrofishing voltage and pulse rate, tidal stage, and the actual start and stop coordinates in the field. Environmental parameters collected included water temperature (C), conductivity (Φmhos/cm), and secchi disk depth (cm).

Analysis

Catch per unit effort (CPUE) was based on the number of bass collected per hour. CPUE was calculated for each sampling site and means were calculated by habitat type (or strata). The final stratified index was the grand mean of habitat means weighted by total meters of each habitat. Variance estimates and 95% confidence limits (CIs) of stratified indices were determined according to King (1995).

Stratified geometric means were also calculated by adding one to site CPUEs and log transforming. Means and confidence limits were then calculated and then back transformed.

Weighted length frequency (25mm length groupings) and age frequency graphs (based upon scale ages) were developed for each system. Raw frequencies were weighted by total meters of each strata within the study area. Strata total were then summed. Scales were collected from the first five fish in each 25mm group. These were aged and then ages were assigned to the full sample according to an age length key. Mean-length-at-capture was calculated for age groups in each system. Differences in years and rivers were tested with analysis of variance (ANOVA). Length and weight data were log transformed in some cases to determine linear relationships to describe growth. Since sampling was conducted from August-November, it is likely significant growth had probably occurred beyond the given age. Therefore, fish were not promoted. Proportional stock densities (PSD), expressed as the percentage of the stock that is of

E5 quality size, and RSD380, defined as the percentage of the stock that is >380mm in size, were calculated for each system (Anderson 1980).

Results and Discussion

Potomac River

Since the introduction of random stratified sampling in 1999, efforts to monitor the largemouth bass population in the Potomac River have been concentrated largely on the upper portion of the tidal Potomac. However, data collected in 2003 and 2005 focused on the lower portion of the river where much of the tidal bass population is currently concentrated. Fifty-three sites totaling 13,845 meters (16% of study area total) were sampled in the fall of 2005. This constituted 27%, 13% and 8% of prime, average and marginal habitat types, respectively. Indices were compared with data collected from a similar area in 2003. Some sites were not surveyed due to high salinities caused by low summer rainfall. Nanjemoy creek was included in the study area in 2005 but was excluded from comparative analysis since this area had not been a part of previous surveys.

Stratified arithmetic and geometric mean CPUEhr for the composite sample of all size categories decreased slightly from 2003. Both sub-stock (<200mm) and legal (>305mm) size groups decreased although differences were not significant. The exception to this was the increase in relative abundance of stock size fish (Figure 2). Fish less than 200mm showed the greatest decrease. It was not clear whether these were true declines in abundance or effects of unusual environmental conditions in 2005. A late spring caused water temperatures to remain low well into May. The monthly average in Mattawoman Creek was 66°F. This delayed the spawn by almost a month, which may have reduced the catch of young sub-stock bass. The cold spring was followed by a very dry summer, which resulted in high salinities and conductivity throughout much of the lower Potomac mainstem. This had a negative impact on electrofishing success and ultimately precluded sampling of several sites. Although salinities rarely exceeded 1ppt salinity, it appeared that bass preferred the lower salinities at the headwaters of the tributaries over SAV closer to the mainstem which should have otherwise been prime habitat. Samples within Chicamuxen and Mattawoman found the highest densities of bass well up these creeks.

While relative abundance was reasonably stable in the lower section of the tidal Potomac the upper section experienced a more marked decrease in CPUEhr. This decline was paralleled by a decrease in SAV beds during the same period (MD DNR, 2004). The Virginia Institute of Marine Science, which monitors grass beds in the Chesapeake Bay and its tributaries, reported a 99.9% reduction in grass beds in the uppermost portion of the tidal Potomac since 2001(VIMS 2004). Grass beds in the area between Washington Channel and Broad Creek covered 1,522 hectares in 2001 but declined to 1.96 ha. by 2003. Correlation analysis between abundance of SAV (hectare/year) in the

E6 upper tidal Potomac and weighted geometric mean CPUEhr for all bass showed a significant positive relationship (r=0.67, 1999-2004). The loss of SAV may have decreased gear efficiency. Bass often hold deeper on other types of preferred habitats, which are often not associated with shoreline sites. Bass may have also have moved down river where SAV was more abundant. However there is a possibility that decreases in abundance were real as a result of lower survival and other impacts from the decline of SAV.

Proportional stock density (PSD) for 2005 was 53% (CI + 5). This was significantly lower than 2003 (PSD = 81, CI + 4) but still shows a good percentage of quality bass. Relative Stock Density (RSD380) was comparable to previous years. Relative weight (Wr) for bass in most size groups was over 100% indicating that bass were in good condition and adequate forage was available.

Upper Chesapeake Bay

Although stratified arithmetic means for all size groups indicated a slight decline in CPUE in 2004, estimated relative abundance of bass in the Upper Bay remained good (Figure 3). Tied closely to the health and abundance of largemouth bass is the presence of SAV. Grass beds have fluctuated in size and composition from year to year in the Upper Bay. The most recent information provided by The Virginia Institute of Marine Science reported an 18% loss of grass beds in 2003 (VIMS-CB1TF 2004). Field observations of SAV made during electrofishing surveys indicated a further decline in 2004. Above normal precipitation resulted in extended periods of turbidity and increased nutrient loading throughout the bay. Although not as extensive as those in the Potomac, algae blooms were reported by anglers fishing the Upper Bay and associated creeks.

Choptank River

The Choptank River tidal bass fishery was in a state of slow decline over the five- year period, however, there were no significant changes in bass abundance in 2005 from previous years (Figure 4). Overall, CPUEs have trended downward over the last few years in most categories. This was noted in previous reports, but not acted upon to help determine the effects of supplemental stocking, and determine whether natural reproduction could sustain a quality fishery. Without a doubt, the stocking in the mid- late 1990’s had created the quality fishery that was present from 1999-2001. By 2002, the bass that were stocked may have begun to exit the population. The stocking completed in 2005 must be continued to return the river’s bass population to its former abundance.

E7

Chester River

The Chester River bass population experienced a severe state of decline from 2001-2004. Mean CPUEs for almost all size categories decreased significantly (Figure 5). There were two positive observations from the 2005 surveys however. Several juvenile bass (<200mm), which have not been observed in several years, were collected during fall surveys. Also, large, scattered beds of SAV are beginning to grow in the lower portion of the study area. The presence of new SAV beds will only help the bass population’s recovery. Declines in population indices in previous reports were blamed on higher salinities and weather. Although these factors may have influenced catch, the Chester River bass population is currently very low. The problem affecting the population remains an enigma. More intensive sampling that occurs over the entire year is needed to better track survival of stocked fingerlings and fry. Experimental studies varying the size and method of marking and stocking should continue. Mortality of hatchery and wild bass must decrease if the Chester River is going to once again become a quality bass fishery.

Patuxent River

Although some data on Patuxent River tidal bass were collected in 2003, complete sampling was done in 2000, 2001 and 2005. Arithmetic and geometric means of CPUE showed some disagreement in 2005, but overall there was only one significant difference (Figure 6). The AM of bass <200mm was significantly higher than all previous years. The relative abundance of Patuxent River largemouth bass is still below the level of some other tidal bass populations. The highest GM CPUE of bass occurred in 1999, after heavy stocking in the mid to late 1990's. Tagging studies show that the contribution of hatchery raised fish is high in the Patuxent population. In one sample, a combination of cwt/calcein/OTC marked fish made up almost 30% of all fish less than 200mm. Size structure in the Patuxent showed a high percentage of juvenile fish. Close to 50% of all fish sampled were under 200mm in length. Many of these sub-stock fish came from Western Branch, which produced 77% of the entire 2005 sample. Survival of stocked fish has been high in Western Branch where favorable habitat provides good forage and cover and a sewage treatment plant outfall also provides moderates water temperatures year round.

Pocomoke River

No previous surveys using the updated survey design have been conducted in the Pocomoke. As explained in the methods section, the Pocomoke River has a unique sequence of habitats that did not allow the river to be stratified. The Pocomoke’s sample area included the shoreline between the cities of Pocomoke City and Snow Hill, and included portions of Nassawango Creek. Total shoreline length was 58,321 meters. Sampled shoreline length was 8,701 meters, which comprised 14% of the study area. The Pocomoke River appears to have an abundant largemouth bass population. CPUEs

E8 in most size ranges were similar or better than those of the Choptank, however the Pocomoke’s population is generally comprised of young, small bass (Table 1). In fact, age 0 bass were a co-dominant cohort along with age 3. This is promising, since no other eastern shore Chesapeake Bay tributary sampled has produced so many young-of-year (YOY). It will be interesting to see if this kind of reproductive success is repeated each year. One troubling observation was the absence of large, older fish, greater than age 5. Their absence could be a result of an increase in mortality rate(s) or sampling bias. Watching the growth and abundance of the 2004 cohort closely in future years may produce an answer.

Elk/Bohemia Rivers

The Elk and Bohemia Rivers, though close in proximity to other Upper Chesapeake Bay bass fisheries, were sampled independently in 2004. Over half the study area (37,707 meters) was considered “average” habitat, much of which was shallow coves covered with seemingly endless beds of SAV. Marginal habitat was less abundant (17,760 meters), and prime habitat was somewhat rare (5,962 meters). Clearly, the Elk/Bohemia River’s bass population is not of the same quality of other Upper Bay fisheries. Bass abundance (measured in CPUE) in all size ranges was much lower than expected (Table 1). However, there is no doubt that the extensive SAV beds artificially increased electrofishing effort, thereby decreasing CPUE. Nevertheless, low numbers of bass appeared to be evenly scattered throughout the Elk/Bohemia System. Many of the SAV beds sampled in 2004 were not present even two years prior. The hope is that the largemouth bass population within the Elk/Bohemia System will expand quickly enough to fully utilize the new habitat.

Wicomico River

No previous surveys using the updated survey design have been conducted in the Wicomico. Thirty systematically chosen sites were designated from each system, which allowed ten sites per habitat classification strata. The Wicomico River’s short length of prime habitat prohibited an allocation of ten prime sites. As a result, only seven were sampled. This represented 100% of prime habitat within the 22,828 meter study area. Sites in marginal and average habitats covered 16% and 45%, respectively. Large, older bass dominate the Wicomico River bass population. Bass abundance (measured in CPUE) in all size ranges was similar to other Eastern Shore systems (Table 2). Previous reports by MD DNR (1991) showed similar findings. Relatively few age 0 bass were collected, other than one of hatchery origin. Generally, small, young bass were not well represented in the sample.

Marshyhope Creek

In 2003, twenty-nine of the thirty chosen sites comprising 8,001 meters were sampled in Marshyhope Creek. The sampling comprised 92 % of classified prime, 43%

E9 of average and 6% of marginal habitats. Weighted age and length frequencies were similar to those of the Choptank, with peak abundances occurring at age 3 and 300- 350mm. PSD values were similar as well, but the Marshyhope had a lower RSD380, reflecting a lower abundance of large bass (Table 3). Bass abundance (measured in CPUE) in all size ranges was similar to other Eastern Shore systems (Table 2). Age 0 bass were infrequently encountered in the 2003 fall survey.

Sassafras River

A total of forty-one sites were sampled on the Sassafras River in 2003. Total sample area was 7,112 meters or approximately 11% of the study area. Judging from the length and age frequencies, the Sassafras River bass population is balanced with relatively equal abundances of all size and age classes. Bass were collected over 450mm, but were few in number. As a result, PSD and RSD380 values were lower than all other tidal bass fisheries surveyed (Table 2). Only one bass collected was aged greater than 5 years old.

Tidal Bass Age and Growth

Bass from all rivers frequently reached legal-size (305mm) by age 3 (Table 4 ). Analysis of variance indicated significant differences in many age classes, depending on river system. Overall, bass collected from the Choptank, Chester and Pocomoke Rivers tended to be significantly larger at their assigned age than bass from the Upper Bay and Potomac River (Table 4). Sample sizes were small beyond age 6. The oldest bass sampled was age 9. Martin (1999) reported the maximum age of bass collected from the Nanticoke River to be 12. She also reported a significant decrease in bass abundance after age 6. Growth compared favorably with tidal bass populations of the Escambia River, Florida, which were characterized as “slow growing in relation to their freshwater counterparts” (Krause 2002). Tidal bass growth was similar or better than that described by Elser (1962) for Maryland coastal plain populations. Fisheries staff have tagged 3,940 bass since 2001, but few recaptures have been collected during the annual fall surveys. However, a model of annual growth was derived from this small pool of individuals (Figure 7). As expected, smaller bass from 200-300mm TL displayed rapid, consistent growth, while larger specimens grew slower, with more variability.

Conclusions

Overall, most of the tidal bass fisheries of the Chesapeake Bay are healthy. Bass in all systems appear to grow quickly and at similar rates, although recruitment in certain systems is poor. Recruitment in the Upper Bay and Potomac River has historically been much higher than that of all other systems. Habitat conditions differ in several respects, but the abundant SAV found in the Potomac and Upper Bay may be the key. It may create better spawning habitat, ensure better survival, or simply create an area where catchability increases. The Elk/Bohemia System had good reproduction, given the

E10 relatively small number of adult bass collected. However, despite the lack of SAV, reproduction in the Pocomoke River was very good when compared to the Choptank, Wicomico, Marshyhope or Chester. The Pocomoke River does have an abundance of spatterdock fields, cypress trees and suitable spawning substrates. Clearly, stocking of hatchery-raised bass into the Chester, Choptank and Patuxent Rivers is needed to recover/maintain quality bass fisheries.

Regardless of differences in habitats, peak abundance in samples for all systems usually occurred at age 3 or from 300-350mm TL. Age 1 and 2 bass were caught infrequently in all systems, even in those that exhibited high recruitment the year before. This occurred in the Upper Bay and Potomac in 2002, 2003 and 2004. It is clear that these fish are underrepresented in the surveys. It is possible that bass are not fully recruited to the survey gear until they are age 3 or about 300mm TL, or that they utilize areas that are not effectively sampled.

Many analyses using the fall tidal bass survey data are based on ages derived from reading scales. Previous reports have noted the potential for ageing error, however, little has been done to address this potential problem. The recapture of tagged fish has allowed for a formulation of an estimate of annual growth (Figure 7). This does not agree with a similar model derived from length at age data, which presents a much quicker rate of growth for older individuals (Figure 8). From this, it can be concluded that most bass greater than 300mm TL are being under-aged. It is hoped that this will be verified through more tag recoveries, and otolith ageing.

Management Recommendations

• Continue population assessments, possibly augmenting surveys on the Choptank and Chester Rivers were populations have been in decline .

• Continue to assess hatchery contribution during adult surveys in the Chester, Patuxent and Choptank Rivers, with emphasis on the relationship of fish size at time of stocking, tag/mark type, tag placement and release location to survival.

• Use otolith derived ages for all age dependent estimates. Continue comparison of scale versus otolith ages to better understand bias that may have occurred in previous and current assessments due to ageing from scales.

E11

Table 1. Stratified arithmetic and geometric mean CPUEs (#bass/hour) with 95% confidence intervals (95% CI) for largemouth bass collected by electrofishing from the Pocomoke River and Elk/Bohemia Rivers during fall 2004.

Arith. Mean CPUE (95% CI) Geom. Mean CPUE (95% CI) River Largemouth Bass All Sizes Pocomoke 28.53 (19.30-37.75) 16.87 (10.63-26.76) Elk/Bohemia 6.24 (3.46-9.02) 3.22 (2.03-5.11) Largemouth Bass >305mm (12 inches) Pocomoke 13.60 (7.36-19.84) 5.61 (3.22-9.78) Elk/Bohemia 3.74 (1.08-6.40) 1.80 (1.19-2.76) Largemouth Bass >200mm (stock) Pocomoke 18.62 (11.73-25.52) 2.47 (1.55-3.96) Elk/Bohemia 5.16 (2.37-7.97) 8.79 (5.11-15.11) Largemouth Bass <200mm (sub-stock) Pocomoke 9.90 (4.48-15.32) 4.33 (2.60-7.21) Elk/Bohemia 1.07 (0.20-1.94) 1.42 (1.08-1.87)

Table 2. Stratified arithmetic and geometric mean CPUEs (#bass/hour) with 95% confidence intervals (95% CI) for largemouth bass collected by electrofishing from the Sassafras River, Wicomico River and Marshyhope Creek in fall 2003.

Arith. Mean CPUE (95% Geom. Mean CPUE (95% CI) River CI) Largemouth Bass All Sizes Sassafras 34.84 (32.63-37.04) 17.59 (15.58-19.87) Marshyhope 29.32 (26.52-32.11) 8.28 (6.84-10.03) Wicomico 21.65 (19.22-24.09) 4.32 (3.73-5.01) Largemouth Bass >305mm (12 inches) Sassafras 15.11 (13.79-16.43) 5.99 (5.36-6.69) Marshyhope 22.98 (20.19-25.17) 6.94 (5.77-8.33) Wicomico 15.80 (14.34-17.25) 3.67 (3.25-4.15) Largemouth Bass >200mm (stock) Sassafras 21.49 (20.05-22.93) 9.64 (8.54-10.89) Marshyhope 26.65 (24.03-29.27) 7.87 (6.51-9.52) Wicomico 18.91 (17.11-20.71) 4.14 (3.61-4.75) Largemouth Bass <200mm (sub-stock) Sassafras 13.35 (11.68-15.01) 4.26 (3.73-4.87) Marshyhope 2.67 (2.17-3.16) 1.49 (1.37-1.61) Wicomico 2.74 (1.93-3.56) 1.49 (1.35-1.64)

E12

Table 3. Proportional Stock Density (PSD), Relative Stock Density at 380mm (RSD380), indices of tidal largemouth bass populations fall samples from 1999 through 2005. Blank cells indicate no sampling was conducted.

Elk/Bohemia Marshyhope Chesapeake Pocomoke Wicomico Choptank Sassafras Sassafras Patuxent Potomac Chester System Upper B 1999 85 74 72 73

2000 75 76 77 69 55

2001 65 78 67 84 68

2002 PSD 29 57 89 58

2003 90 79 65 73 84 84 88 81

2004 78 76 80 72 85 80

2005 45 67 53 53

1999 43 34 38 37

2000 34 32 27 29

2001 51 34 41 34

RSD 380 2002 10 33 37 21

200 23 60 20 26 36 35 26 3

2004 56 22 49 37 41 31

2005 19 42 15 26

E13

Table 4. Chesapeake Bay tributary largemouth bass mean-lengths-at-capture (mm) for ages 0 through 9 from fall electrofishing surveys in 2004. Age groups with different letters denote a significant difference (p<0.05). All fish were aged from scales.

Chesapeake AGE AGE AGE AGE AGE AGE AGE AGE AGE AGE Tributary 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 142 218 266 327 384 453 Pocomoke AB BC C BC DC A 163 291 279 358 422 396 Elk/Bohemia A A BC AB AB AB 257 323 382 433 371 Chester AB A A A B 157 225 308 350 398 440 455 450 Choptank A B AB AB BC AB A A 135 171 257 307 353 399 439 482 465 Potomac B CD C C D AB A A A 122 157 218 301 370 400 439 496 517 Upper Bay B D D C CD AB A A B 522

E14

Elk/Bohemia Upper Bay River

Sassafras Rive r

Chester

Rive r

Choptank Rive r

Potomac

River Marshyhope Patuxent Cree k River

Wicomico Rive r

Pocomoke River

Figure 1. Map of areas sampled for tidal bass surveys conducted from 1999-2005.

E15

Potomac AM all sizes Potomac GM all sizes 140 90 80 120 70 100 60 80 50 60

40 CPUE CPUE 30 40 20 20 10 0 0 1998 2000 2002 2004 2006 1998 2000 2002 2004 2006 Potomac GMYear >305mm Year Potomac AM >305mm 30

25 50 20 40 15 30 CPUE 10 20 CPUE 5 10 0 0 1998 2000 2002 2004 2006 1998 2000 2002 2004 2006 Year Year Potomac GM >200mm Potomac AM >200mm

60 100 50 80 40 60 30

CPUE

CPUE 40 20 20 10 0 0 1998 2000 2002 2004 2006 1998Potomac 2000 GM 2002 <200mm 2004 2006 Year Potomac AMYear <200mm 35

30 100

25 80

20 60

CPUE 15

CPUE 40

10 20 5 0 0 1998 2000 2002 2004 2006 1998 2000 2002 2004 2006 Year Year

Figure 2. Tidal Potomac River stratified arithmetic mean (AM) and geometric mean (GM) CPUE (#bass/hr) with 95% confidence intervals (95% CI) for largemouth bass from fall electrofishing surveys from 1999-2005.

E16

Upper Bay AM all sizes Upper Bay GM all sizes

200 120 100 150 80 100 60 CPUE CPUE 50 40 0 20 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 0 Upper Bay AMYear >305mm 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 Upper Bay GM >305mm Year 80 50 70 45 60 40 50 35 30 40 25 CPUE 30 CPUE 20 20 15 10 10 5 0 0 1998 1999Upper 2000 Bay 2001 AM 2002>200mm 2003 2004 2005 1998 1999Upper 2000 Bay 2001 GM 2002 >200mm 2003 2004 2005 Year Year 100 60 90 80 50 70 40 60 50 30 CPUE 40 CPUE 30 20 20 10 10 0 0 1998 1999Upper 2000 Bay 2001 AM 2002 <200mm 2003 2004 2005 Upper Bay GM <200mm 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 Year Year 80 35 70 30 60 25 50 40 20 CPUE 30 CPUE 15 20 10 10 5 0 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 0 Year 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 Year

Figure 3. Upper Bay stratified arithmetic mean (AM) and geometric mean (GM) CPUE(#bass/hour) with 95% confidence intervals (95% CI) for largemouth bass from fall electrofishing surveys from 1999-2004.

E17 Choptank GM all sizes Choptank AM all sizes

70 50 60 40 50 30 40 CPUE 20 CPUE 30

10 20 10 0 0 1998 2000 2002 2004 2006 1998 2000 2002 2004 2006 Year Choptank GM >305mm Year Choptank AM >305mm 25 50 20 40 15 30

CPUE 10

CPUE 20 5 10 0 1998 2000 2002 2004 2006 0 1998 2000 2002 2004 2006 Year Choptank GM >200mm Choptank AMYear >200mm

30 60 25 50 20 40 15 30 CPUE 10 CPUE 20 5 10 0 0 1998 2000 2002 2004 2006 1998 2000 2002 2004 2006 Choptank GMYear <200mm Choptank AM <200mm Year

14 25 12 20 10 8 15 CPUE CPUE 6 10 4 5 2 0 0 1998 2000 2002 2004 2006 1998 2000 2002 2004 2006 Year Year

Figure 4. Choptank River stratified arithmetic mean (AM) and geometric mean (GM) CPUE (#bass/hr) with 95% confidence intervals (95% CI) for largemouth bass from fall electrofishing surveys 1999-2005.

E18

Chester GM all sizes Chester AM all sizes

90 60 80 50 70 60 40 50 30 40 CPUE CPUE 20 30 20 10 10 0 0 1998 2000 2002 2004 2006 1998 2000 2002 2004 2006 Year Year Chester GM >305mm Chester AM >305mm

30 70 60 25 50 20 40 15 30 CPUE CPUE 10 20 10 5 0 0 1998 2000 2002 2004 2006 1998 2000 2002 2004 2006 Year Chester AM >200mm Chester GMYear >200mm 35 80 30 70 25 60 20 50 40

CPUE 15 CPUE 30 10 20 5 10 0 0 1998 2000 2002 2004 2006 1998 2000 2002 2004 2006 Year Year Chester GM <200mm Chester AM <200mm

8 20 7 6 15 5 10 4 CPUE CPUE 3 5 2 1 0 0 1998 2000 2002 2004 2006 1998 2000 2002 2004 2006 Year Year

Figure 5. Chester River stratified arithmetic and geometric mean CPUEs (#bass/hour) with 95% confidence intervals (95% CI) for largemouth bass from fall electrofishing 1999-2005.

E19

Patuxent GM all sizes Patuxent AM all sizes

90 80 50 70 40 60 50 30 40 CPUE 20 30 CPUE 20 10 10 0 0 1998 2000 2002 2004 2006 1998 2000 2002 2004 2006 Year Year Patuxent GM >305mm Patuxent AM >305mm

14 35 12 30 10 25 8 20 6 15 CPUE

CPUE 4 10 2 5 0 0 1998 2000 2002 2004 2006 1998 2000 2002 2004 2006 Patuxent GMYear >200mm Patuxent YearAM >200mm

35 40 35 30 25 30 20 25 15 20 CPUE 10 CPUE 15 5 10 0 5 1998 2000 2002 2004 2006 0 1998 2000 2002 2004 2006 Patuxent GMYear <200mm Patuxent AM <200mm Year

7 35 6 30 5 25

4 20 3 15 CPUE CPUE 2 10 1 5 0 0 1998 2000 2002 2004 2006 1998 2000 2002 2004 2006 Year Year

Figure 6. Patuxent River stratified arithmetic and geometric mean CPUEs (#bass/hour) with 95% confidence intervals (95% CI) for largemouth bass from fall electrofishing 1999-2005.

E20

5

4

3

2 y = -0.0085x + 6.1275 1 R2 = 0.2552 LN of annual growth 0 0 200 400 600 Initial total length (mm TL)

Figure 7. Annual growth of largemouth bass tagged and recaptured from fall electrofishing surveys of Chesapeake Bay tributaries from 1999-2004. Annual growth was log transformed to provide a linear relationship.

5 4 3

2 y = -0.0049x + 5.4853 1 R2 = 0.8374 LN of annual growth 0 0 200 400 600 Initial total length (mm TL)

Figure 8. Annual growth of largemouth bass aged as part of the length-at-age analysis from fall electrofishing surveys of Chesapeake Bay tributaries from 1999- 2004. Annual growth was log transformed to provide a linear relationship.

E21

State: Maryland Project Number: F-48-R-15 Study No.: V Job No.: 2

Project Title: Survey and Management of Freshwater Fisheries Resources

Study Title: Management of Maryland's Tidal Freshwater Streams

Job Title: Juvenile Recruitment Surveys

Introduction

Young-of-year (YOY) indices are an important tool in assessment of population dynamics and prediction of future adult abundance. Species such as largemouth bass, which experience variable rates of annual reproductive success, are dependent on the production of occasional strong year-classes to maintain healthy populations (Garvey et al. 2000; Maceina 1998). This is particularly true in tidal waters.

Assessment of tidal water black bass juvenile recruitment in Maryland was traditionally performed with a 4.6 meter beach seine. However, this gear has produced low catch rates, which were not well correlated with subsequent abundance. Further, because of bias toward a narrow size range of bass, this gear provided a small window of opportunity in which to conduct surveys

Alternative indices were developed from both mid-summer surveys using backpack electrofishing gear and fall surveys using boat-mounted electrofishing gear. Although fall surveys were targeted at adult bass, small bass form a reasonably high proportion of overall catch and may indicate the relative abundance of young-of-year (YOY). Age 0 fish from fall surveys were determined from scale ageing. Because of probable gear and temporal bias toward larger fish from the fall survey and potential error from scale ageing, a summer backpack electrofishing survey was initiated for a comparative index on rivers with suitable conductivity.

This report concludes a 5-year study period from 2001 to 2005. In addition to reporting the juvenile catch-per-unit-effort (CPUE), a comparison between summer and fall indices is also presented. Correlation of fall and summer indices may indicate that fall electrofishing alone is sufficient to predict juvenile recruitment. Currently, the summer index is considered the best indicator of juvenile recruitment because equipment and timing for collecting juvenile bass are optimal.

Methods

Summer backpack electrofishing was performed at fixed stations from the last week of June to the last week of July. In some areas, new stations were chosen as well.

E22

Sites of approximately 100m in length were sampled either from the bow of a poled skiff, or by wading depending on depth and bottom type. A Smith-Root Model 12-B backpack unit provided pulsed DC current. Researchers in North Carolina found this to be the least biased method of sampling juvenile largemouth bass when compared to seining and large boat mounted generator units (Jackson and Noble 1995). Fish were counted and measured to nearest mm (TL). Site length (m), start/stop coordinates, water temperature (C), conductivity, secchi depth, tide stage, percent submerged aquatic vegetation (SAV), and bottom substrates were recorded. Summer survey CPUE was calculated as YOY per hundred meters of shoreline and is noted as CPUE100. Annual arithmetic and geometric means were calculated from site CPUE. This survey was conducted in the Potomac and Patuxent Rivers in 2005. In past years sampling was also conducted in the Upper Bay, Choptank, Nanticoke, and Wicomico Rivers to a lesser extent. The survey has the longest history in the Potomac.

A second juvenile index, was derived from fall adult electrofishing as the stratified means of YOY per electrofishing hour (CPUEHr). Indices were from age specific CPUEs (see Study V Job 1 for methodology) estimated by applying age length keys from scale-aged fish. CPUEs from fall surveys were recalculated for all years using the Inland Fisheries database and Statistical Analysis System (SAS).

CPUEs were compared between years and survey types. Correlation (Pearson’s Coefficient) analysis was performed on ages 0 and 1 CPUE by year-class. Summer and fall YOY indices were compared to subsequent age one indices derived from fall surveys. High coefficients were viewed as evidence of accuracy in estimating relative year-class strength. Correlation between summer and fall YOY indices, within year, was used to further determine the potential for each survey to track annual changes in abundance. All correlations were made with geometric means (GM).

An intense seining survey was conducted on the Chester River in 2004 and 2005. The main goals were to determine stocking success/survival of hatchery largemouth bass using two different marking techniques. The results of the survey are included in the Study V, Job 3 Hatchery Contribution section.

Results and Discussion

Relative indices for some systems showed a wide range in annual recruitment. This was not surprising since conditions in tidal rivers are highly variable and often harsh for species like largemouth bass, which are dependent on maintaining nests in shallow areas for extended periods. The degree to which values are predictive of weak and strong year-classes can only be judged with long term monitoring and continued validation with adult CPUEs.

Systems such as the Upper Bay and Potomac Rivers, which have high percentages of shallow (< 2meters) habitat and SAV, appear to support higher levels of reproduction

E23 on average. Systems characterized by deeper more constricted channels and a predominance of emergent vegetation and wooded banks have consistently lower annual indices. Differences between system indices are less in summer than in fall. Natural mortality on YOY could be higher in systems like the Chester and Choptank Rivers, which have little SAV. This would create greater disparity between system types during fall surveys and might indicate that fall indices more accurately estimate recruitment to older age classes. However, these comparisons are tenuous. Indices could be heavily influenced by different gear efficiencies between habitat types and survey methods.

Potomac River

Because the Potomac may be Maryland’s most popular bass fishery, summer and fall surveys were conducted every year. Summer backpack indices showed similar values for the last 3 years (2003 to 2005). Variation in catch rates between sites within years resulted in coefficients of variation for annual means ranging from 106% to 167%. Confidence intervals (CI) of geometric means indicated that there were no differences among years except for 2002, which was significantly lower than all other years (Table 1).

The Potomac River fall survey currently alternates between upper and lower river areas. Therefore comparisons are best made between years ‘01,’02, and ‘04 or ’03 and ‘05. (The summer index encompasses both the upper and lower areas.) Both the geometric and arithmetic means (AM) for fall 2005 decreased from values observed in 2003 for the same area. In 2004 the GM CPUE was 1.79 fish/hr (AM 3.26) and was significantly lower than any other year in the time series (Table 2). However, the 2004 fall survey covered the upper tidal Potomac River, which experienced a decline in SAV in 2003 and 2004. This most likely resulted in reduced abundance of both YOY and adult bass in the upper river.

Summer and fall indices showed a similar pattern of annual abundance, except for the low fall 2004 value (Figure 1). These indices showed a moderate degree of positive correlation (r=0.68). As discussed earlier, the 2004 fall index showed a much greater relative decline than did the summer index. This may or may not have accurately estimated abundance, but it heavily influenced the degree of correlation between the two surveys. Correlation between YOY and age 1 indices by year-class were positive but more weakly correlated (summer YOY vs. fall age 1, r=0.52, fall YOY vs. fall age 1, r=0.42).

Upper Chesapeake Bay

Summer backpack electrofishing was not performed in the Upper Bay in 2004 or 2005, and fall sampling was not performed in 2005 because of time and manpower constraints. The range in GM values for the Upper Bay fall YOY index was similar to the Potomac. The 2003 fall YOY CPUE was the highest of the period. The 2004 fall

E24 survey data’s confidence interval for GM overlapped all years except 2003 (Table 2). Correlations between Age 0 and 1 indices by year-class from fall surveys were positive but weakly correlated (r=0.24) as were age 0 to age 2 indices (r=0.35) for years 1999- 2004.

Patuxent River

Natural reproduction in the Patuxent River has historically been poor. Annual stocking of largemouth bass fry or fingerlings has been necessary to supplement the bass population. All fish that were stocked in the Patuxent were tagged in order to assess hatchery contribution to the wild population. The Patuxent River summer backpack survey was conducted in 2004 and 2005, in part for monitoring of natural reproduction, but also for a follow up on the survival of stocked largemouth bass. Patuxent summer CPUE was lower than Potomac and variation among sample sites was high (Table 1). In 2004 the number of tagged fish collected made up 43% of the sample and in 2005 it was 50%. Fall adult sampling was not conducted in 2004. Recent increases in SAV in the Patuxent may improve natural reproduction and survival of juvenile bass in the future.

Choptank

Choptank River mean CPUE for the fall survey indices improved in 2005 over previous years 2003 (Table 2). Confidence limits derived from fall indices exhibited overlapping confidence limits across the time series. The relationship between age 0 and 1 indices by year-class from the fall survey showed a high degree of correlation (r=0.91). The correlation between age 0 and age 2 by year-class showed a poor correlation (r=0.28).

Other Rivers

The Chester River has been electrofished each fall and 2005 was the first year that YOY were collected since 2001. Chester River was stocked with tagged fish in 2005 and one of five age 0 fish were found to be of hatchery origin. Further insight into the Chester River bass population is included in the Study V Job 3 Hatchery Contribution section. Fall electrofishing took place on Pocomoke and Elk Rivers for the first time in 2004. Sassafras River, Wicomico River and Marshyhope Creek were all sampled for the first time in 2003. Among five Eastern Shore rivers with a single year of data (Table 3), Sassafras and Pocomoke are seemingly high indices relative to other rivers. Indices were relatively low in Elk, Wicomico and Marshyhope.

Conclusions

Summer electrofishing for young of year remains the most reliable method for collecting young fish. However, a positive correlation between summer backpack and fall surveys which targeted all size groups of fish may indicate that fall sampling alone

E25 may be used to determine year class strength or recruitment. A major drawback to this is that in some years tremendous growth of SAV, particularly hydrilla sp., occurs very late in the summer, which could affect fall electrofishing success on small fish by preventing access to shorelines and creeks. Fall surveys are also more labor intensive than summer surveys.

At this time, strong year-classes were not predictive of relative abundance beyond age 1. However more years of data are needed to determine the extent to which age 0 indices are predictive of age 2 and older abundance. Recent use of otoliths instead of scales to age bass may also provide better insight into this relationship.

Management Recommendations

• Continue summer backpack surveys to determine YOY index and use fall electrofishing surveys to help verify recruitment estimates.

• Continue correlation analysis between summer and fall data to determine if fall electrofishing methods could be used to determine YOY abundance.

• Continue efforts to validate and correlate YOY indices with later stage abundance, using otoliths to assign ages wherever possible.

• Determine methods to better describe the relationship between annual recruitment and changes in preferred habitat types.

E26

Table 1. Arithmetic (AM) and geometric (GM) mean of CPUE100 (fish/100 m) with 95% confidence level (CL) and coefficient of variation (CV) for young-of- year largemouth bass from summer backpack electrofishing surveys.

Year AM CPUE100 (CL) CV GM CPUE100 (CL) Potomac 2001 9.41 (5.89 - 12.93) 106% 6.47 (4.44 - 9.43) 2002 1.40 (0.39 – 2.41) 167% 1.76 (1.28 - 2.42) 2003 5.78 (3.00 – 8.57) 131% 3.77 (2.48 – 5.74) 2004 4.40 (2.41 – 6.38) 129% 3.35 (2.37 - 4.74) 2005 5.86 (3.55 – 8.18) 115% 4.48 (3.20 - 6.27) Patuxent1 2004 2.63 (-0.39 - 5.64) 207% 1.92 (1.09 - 3.36) 2005 0.57 (-0.02 - 1.16) 179% 1.36 (1.00 - 1.83) 1 Nearly half of the fish collected in the Patuxent each year were tagged indicating hatchery released fish.

Table 2. Stratified arithmetic (AM) and geometric (GM) mean of CPUE (fish/hr) and 95% confidence limits (CL) for young-of-year bass collected during fall electrofishing surveys

AM of CPUE 95% CL GM of CPUE Low-High CLs Year Hr Hr Potomac 2000 18.90 ±7.63 8.35 4.98-13.99 2001 39.01 ±14.18 14.78 8.07-27.05 2002 9.33 ±3.34 4.81 3.27-7.10 2003 64.99 ±19.28 14.45 9.86-21.17 2004 3.26 ±2.61 1.79 1.23-2.61 2005 27.16 ±6.21 8.77 6.45-11.92 Upper Bay 2000 17.71 ±7.32 6.36 3.48-11.63 2001 26.67 ±11.67 7.0 3.87-12.69 2002 27.49 ±13.40 9.56 4.23-21.60 2003 34.29 ±11.87 14.4 7.39-26.68 2004 9.73 ±3.98 3.18 2.07-4.88 Choptank 2000 9.79 ±4.85 3.28 1.99-5.41 2001 4.99 ±2.08 1.97 1.46-2.65 2002 7.47 ±4.88 2.18 1.43-3.32 2003 3.88 ±2.91 1.80 1.21-2.67 2004 4.13 ±2.59 1.93 1.38-2.70 2005 6.78 ±5.56 3.58 1.33-9.67

E27

Table 3. Arithmetic (AM) and geometric (GM) mean of CPUE (fish/hr) with 95% confidence limits (CL) for young-of-year bass collected during from fall 2003 to 2005 electrofishing surveys on 6 eastern shore rivers. These were first-time surveys except for the Chester on for these rivers.

Year River AM OF CPUE 95% CL GM OF CPUE Low-High CL 2005 Chester 7.47 ±13.51 3.8 0.52-27.7 2004 Elk 1.07 ±0.87 1.52 1.15-2.02 2004 Pocomoke 9.6 ±5.45 4.16 2.47-6.98 2003 Sassafras 11.86 ±8.48 3.96 1.98-7.90 2003 Wicomico 2.45 ±4.08 1.39 0.86-2.24 2003 Marshyhope 1.63 ±1.45 1.35 1.00-1.82

7 18 16 6 14 5 12 4 10

3 8 6 2 Summer CPUE Summer 4 1 2 0 0 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005

Year

s ummer fall

Figure 1. Potomac River young-of-year indices for summer and fall surveys. Indices are geometric means of catch-per-unit-effort (CPUE). Summer CPUE is fish per 100 meters of shoreline. Fall CPUE is fish per hour.

E28

State: Maryland Project Number: F-48-R-15 Study No.: V Job No.: 3

Project Title: Survey and Management of Freshwater Fisheries Resources

Study Title: Management of Maryland's Tidal Freshwater Streams

Job Title: Hatchery Contribution

Introduction

Certain Maryland tidal largemouth bass fisheries are characterized by low reproductive levels and above average growth and condition. In these rivers, juvenile recruitment is the main factor limiting population levels. Two of these rivers, the Patuxent River and Chester River, have been identified as candidates for supplemental stocking and have received significant numbers of juvenile largemouth bass from state hatcheries over the last decade. Unfortunately, for many years large numbers of bass were stocked into these rivers with no permanent mark that distinguishes their hatchery origin, thus it is impossible to determine stocking success and natural recruitment. In 1999, DNR began marking bass prior to stocking to monitor effects of the stocked individuals on the bass populations in the Chester and Patuxent Rivers. The Middle River was added in 2003 and the Choptank River was added in 2005 to supplement natural reproduction and determine stocking success. Bass over the past five years have been marked with coded wire tags (CWTs). Marking with this procedure requires that the young bass be grown to >50mm TL, and tagged individually. As a result, the numbers of bass tagged and stocked were much lower than in previous years (Table 1). Recent data suggests that the current CWT tagging program may not be the most efficient method, since few individuals are being encountered during sampling. Stocking many more bass at a younger age marked with oxytetracyline (OTC) may provide better results. Directed stocking using both methods was completed in 2004 and 2005, in an attempt to determine the most efficient method

The use of calcein, a fluorochrome dye that appears green when observed under epifluorescent light, provides a method that allows for batch-marking large numbers of fry without sacrificing fish to determine tag status. Several studies using Atlantic salmon and other species have been conducted with some success (Mohler 2003; Negus and Tureson 2004). In salmonids, calcein marks persist predominantly in the head, scales and fin rays. Although this marking method shows great promise for short-term identification of hatchery fish, the long-term reliability of calcein is still unknown. Few, if any, studies have been done using calcein as a marking method for identifying black bass hatchery stock. A study was initiated in 2005 to determine the feasibility of using calcein to batch- mark largemouth bass fry. All largemouth bass raised in State hatcheries for stocking in tidal fresh water were marked with calcein and coded wire tags before release into various rivers. One hundred and thirty eight thousand additional largemouth bass fry

E29 were marked with OTC only. Electrofishing gear was later used to collect juvenile fish for examination.

Methods

Coded Wire Tags/Calcein

Largemouth bass were propagated at Maryland’s Cedarville and Unicorn hatcheries from brood stock collected annually from tidal river populations. A portion of young fish were transported to indoor circular tanks and acclimated to commercial feed in order to augment and accelerate growth. When these fish reached approximately 50mm they were implanted with coded wire tags (CWTs), which were marked with a Maryland State agency code of 31. The tags were applied in the nape area (behind the head and to either side of the spine). Fish stocked in the Middle River were tagged at 60mm, grown out to 100-175mm, and stocked as advanced fingerlings in the fall.

Bass stocked in 2005 were marked with the chemical calcein, which causes bony structure of the fish to glow when florescent light is applied. The chemical was dissolved into solution at a rate of 3 grams/gallon. The bass were immersed in solution for 4.5 minutes, to obtain a mark on bony fin structures. Largemouth bass were cultured at the Cedarville Hatchery from brood stock collected in the vicinity of Mattawoman Creek (Potomac River). Fish were batch-marked with calcein using a process described by Mohler (2003) as "osmotic induction". This involves submerging fish in a salt bath prior to marking in order to maximize absorption of calcein into calcified structures. Water quality parameters of the calcein bath were replicated as closely as possible to culture water to minimize stress. Refrigerated calcein was brought to ambient water temperature before use. A one-to-one calcein:hatchery-water solution was buffered to bring the pH to that of the culture water (8.0-8.3, varied by trial), and supplemental oxygen was added to the solution to maintain O2 levels above 6.0 mg/L. Hardness in the culture water was usually between 90-100. Bass culture tanks were salted to 3.5-4.0 ppt and kept static. Bass were placed in a hatchery grader and immersed in tank of culture water at 12.0–13.0 ppt salinity for 4.5 to 5 minutes. They were dipped out of the grader, and the dipnet of fish was lighted "patted" on absorbent material, in an effort to remove as much of the salt water as possible. The fish were placed into the calcein solution for 4 minutes+, and then were netted out and slightly shaken in order to allow most of the calcein solution to drip back into the pan. Finally, the fish were placed directly back into a culture tank of hatchery water. Fingerlings were initially marked about 500 at a time, but as experience and confidence increased, up to as many as 1,500 were marked per batch. Over time, the salinity of the calcein solution increased. To combat this, the salinity of the salt bath was increased and the duration of immersion in both salt and calcein baths was increased in an attempt to maximize osmotic uptake. Once the salinity of the calcein solution reached 3.9-5.0 a fresh batch was mixed. In addition to the calcein mark, all fish were marked with CWTs to positively identify calcein fish and aid in the assessment of the stocking program success.

E30

Fish were tagged and stocked in daily batches of 10,000 to 15,000. One hundred fish were randomly drawn from the batch and assessed for initial retention. Hatchery contributions to individual populations were assessed during fall adult stock assessment activities.

Oxytetracycline

Largemouth bass were propagated at Maryland’s Unicorn Lake Hatchery from brood stock collected annually from tidal river populations. Schools of 5-7 day old bass were identified in each pond, and carefully seined with a 3m seine with 1mm bar mesh. The bass were washed out of the net into a bucket, which was emptied into a portable oxygenated holding tank. Larval marks were produced by immersion in a 500 ppm buffered oxytetracycline (OTC) bath for six hours. Dissolved oxygen content was monitored and regulated (>5 mg/l) by a carbon air stone connected to an oxygen delivery system. All water used for OTC marking was softened (Culligan ion exchange system) before use in marking. Reliable marking can only take place in water with a hardness below 20 mg/L and water hardness at Unicorn Lake Hatchery routinely exceeds 200 mg/L, which necessitated softening. The bass stocked into the Patuxent River were held overnight in the tank, and stocked the following morning by boat into Western Branch. Bass stocked in the Chester and Choptank River were dipped out of the treatment tank with a five gallon buckets to reduce any further handling stress, and evenly distributed at various boat ramps. The process of marking and stocking was completed on several separate groups of fish for each river. A sub-sample of 100 bass was held in a tank at the Unicorn and Cedarville Hatcheries to assess mortality and provide fish for mark verification. Marks were verified by viewing with a fluorescent microscope (Zeiss Axioskop) in the hatchery lab.

Field Sampling

Sampling efforts for the Chester and Choptank River consisted of bi-weekly seining of several boat ramps from June-September, and routine fall adult bass surveys conducted from September-October. Two hauls using a 3m seine with 3.1mm bar mesh were taken at each location. Only one seine haul was taken at the MD Route 301 Chester River site due to its small size and snags. All sites were sampled if tide and weather conditions allowed. Bass collected were measured (mm TL) and scanned for presence of CWTs. Bass with CWTs were held briefly, and released after all hauls were completed. Bass collected not marked with CWTs were immediately put on ice, and later frozen to check for the presence of an OTC and/or calcein mark at a later date by hatchery staff. Methods for mark detection are described in MD DNR’s F-57 Federal Aid Grant performance report. Other fish caught in the first haul were identified to species, and counted. Water temperature (C°), pH and conductivity (umohs/cm) were recorded at each site. Fall sampling protocols are described in the Study V Job 1he section of this report.

E31

Sampling efforts on the Patuxent River in 2004 consisted of summer backpack electrofishing. Electrofishing was performed at fixed stations over the second and third weeks of July. Sites ranging from 30 to 100m in length were sampled either from the bow of a poled skiff, or by wading depending on depth and bottom type. A Smith-Root Model 12 backpack unit provided pulsed DC current. Fish were counted and measured to nearest mm (TL). Site length (m), start/stop coordinates, water temperature (C), conductivity, secchi depth (cm), tide stage, percent submerged aquatic vegetation (SAV), and bottom substrates were recorded.

Largemouth bass were collected for analysis during six electrofishing events on the Potomac and Patuxent Rivers in the summer, fall, and winter of 2005. Because calcein tag detection requires a darkened environment, all juvenile fish were transported back to Cedarville Hatchery and placed in a 200 gallon aerated tank in order to assess tag status. Fish were checked for both CWT and calcein marks. A subsample of un-tagged fish were kept to determine if OTC marks were present on otoliths. All remaining live fish were returned to the river after examination. Number of fish collected, location and tag status are listed in Table 2. Fish were first checked for a calcein mark with the use of a Se-MarkTM hand-held calcein detector. This detector is a patented, portable single- wavelength light source with a special filter that is able to detect a fluorescent mark on either fin rays or other calcified structures. The hope was that the calcein dye would persist in the scales and fin rays of marked fish, as it has in some studies involving salmon. In largemouth bass, the calcein initially showed intense fluorescence in scales and fin rays, but appeared to diminish after the fish had been in the wild for a short time. There had been concern that calcein could be photosensitive and fade with exposure to light; however, this study showed that while most of the calcein did fade with time, one area on the isthmus persisted with a distinct mark. This mark was only viewable if the fish was held ventral side up and the fish was grasped by the lower jaw, allowing the operculum to be fully extended. This location was apparently unaffected by light exposure due to coverage by overlapping gill membranes and its position on the ventral side of the fish. Once this spot was located as a good area for tag detection, comparison of marked vs. unmarked fish could proceed. After all fish were checked for the presence of calcein, they were re-checked for CWTs and the results recorded.

A blind test between readers was also conducted to determine the accuracy of tag detection between marked and unmarked fish. Eighty-six largemouth bass juveniles were collected from the Patuxent River in the winter of 2005. Each fish was numbered and three readers independently examined fish for the presence of a calcein mark. Readers separately recorded whether the fish was calcein positive or negative then each fish was checked for the presence of CWT to verify a positively marked calcein fish.

E32

Results and Discussion

Over the five-year period, CWT verification of 100 bass selected from each batch of fish concluded that initial tag retention ranged from 96-100 %, and tag loss was deemed insignificant. Initial mortality in stocking tanks was observed, and numbers were adjusted accordingly. Mortality was likely influenced by fish size and tag placement, which was somewhat inconsistent among tag applicators. Over the past three years, long- term mortality estimated by holding a group of tagged bass averaged about 25%.

Chester River

During the directed seining surveys, 85 juvenile largemouth bass were collected in 2004, and 24 were collected in 2005. Catch rates were highest during June and July, but no CWT bass were collected after mid-July both years. Catches of CWT negative bass remained steady until September. Growth rates of both samples of bass were similar, but CWT positive bass on average were much larger at given age, likely due to their accelerated growth in a hatchery environment. Predictive growth models suggest that bass were not effectively sampled when they exceed the 60-70mm range. This may be a result of their ability to evade the gear, an increase in mortality, dispersal into inaccessible habitats, or a combination of these factors. Fifty-nine percent (N=33) of the bass collected were not marked with CWTs. Many of these individuals were examined for an OTC mark. Only one bass in 2004 was OTC positive, while zero were positive in 2005. In 2005, six bass CWT negative and calcein positive were collected. In 2004, no YOY (age 0) bass were collected during the fall electrofishing survey. In 2005, two YOY bass were collected, one being CWT positive.

Largemouth bass have been stocked heavily into the Chester River since 1988, but were not marked with CWTs until 1999 (Table 1). The percentage of CWT positive bass increased each year from 1999-2002, indicating that stocking of bass was providing a major contribution to the bass population (Table 1). Had bass been marked prior to 1999, they would have likely comprised an even higher percentage of the overall population. Only 41 bass were collected in the 2004 fall survey, of which 17% were CWT positive. Thirty-five bass were collected in 2005, of which three were CWT positive (8%).

Choptank River

Acting on management recommendations from previous reports, the Choptank River was stocked with largemouth bass in 2005. A total of 214,427 marked bass were stocked (188,695 with OTC, 25,473 with CWT/calcein). Bi-weekly sampling was fruitful, as 39 YOY bass were collected. Twelve of the individuals were CWT positive. The remaining 27 non-CWT bass were kept to check for an OTC or calcein mark. None of the bass were OTC positive, but 22 were positive for a calcein mark, indicating they shed the CWT. This phenomenon is highly suspect. The calcein marking procedure is an

E33 experimental process, and it is likely that there are many false-positive results. Several YOY bass were collected during fall surveys, however none of them were CWT positive.

Potomac and Patuxent Rivers

In 2005, 34 non-CWT positive juvenile largemouth bass were collected from the Patuxent River and checked for the presence of an OTC mark. Of these, seven fish were found to be OTC positive (21%).

Thirty nine percent (39%) of Potomac fish were found to have CWT/calcein marks although total sample size for Potomac fish was small (N=22). Two hundred and twenty six juvenile largemouth were collected in the Patuxent River, mainly in Western Branch. Of these, 34% had CWTs, and 41% were marked with calcein. It was determined that fish which tested positive for calcein, but negative for CWT were truly calcein positive because of the intensity and location of the fluorescent mark. Furthermore, many of these fish displayed a weak mark at the base of the pelvic fin, also characteristic of some calcein positive fish. Mean weighted relative weight (Wr) for tagged fish was 114%, excellent condition for largemouth bass according to Wege and Anderson (1978). On average, tagged fish were 20-35mm longer than untagged fish. This is likely due to advantageous growth during pond rearing and the steady diet provided to hatchery raised fingerlings.

The accuracy of tag detection was demonstrated in the blind read conducted on fish collected in the Patuxent River. Two readers agreed 99% on the tag status of the 86 fish. Injuries or parasites on largemouth bass tend to fluoresce green as well, and may be mistaken for a false mark if it occurs near the isthmus. It was just such a mark that caused the only disparity between the two readers. The third reader had some difficulty adjusting to the optics of the detector and discerning the color difference between naturally occurring white patches and the green fluorescence of the calcein mark. This difficulty lessened with experience. One unanticipated outcome of all the CWT/calcein comparisons was information on the number of fish that lost CWTs. Coded wire tag loss among calcein marked fish ranged from 11-25%, far greater than previous short-term tag retention studies indicated.

Conclusions

Total numbers of bass from 2002-2005 fall surveys conducted on the Chester River were less than one half previous numbers collected from 1999-2001 surveys and drawing conclusions based on such a limited sample size would not be prudent. The “disappearance” of young bass later in the summer from the Chester River seining surveys, and the lack of juvenile bass collected in the fall is troubling. It appears that further directed studies on juvenile bass recruitment on the Chester River will be required. Based on previous data, stocking of marked bass into the Chester and Choptank Rivers should continue, since historically they have comprised a significant portion of the

E34 population. One could conclude that the natural mortality rate of marked fingerlings and small bass has increased over the last four years in the Chester River.

The main question the OTC studies sought to answer was whether stocking fewer larger individuals is more efficient than stocking many smaller ones. Proportions of CWT bass were much higher than the OTC bass in both rivers, which may indicate better survival. Taking into account the extreme mortalities of the OTC control bass, and the relatively small number of those collected, this method may not be most efficient.

Preliminary results of using calcein to batch-mark juvenile largemouth bass is promising. While calcein does not persist in fin rays and scales to any practical degree, they do retain a very distinct mark on the isthmus that is easy to detect with hand-held equipment when the fish is positioned properly. Long-term reliability of the calcein mark is untested in largemouth bass but subsequent marking and monitoring of stocked fish in the Patuxent should provide information on the persistence of this tagging method. Studies in 2006 will include a readjustment of calcein solution concentrations to increase mark intensity and the development of a portable device that will simulate darkened conditions and allow for field identification of calcein marked fish.

Management Recommendations

• Continue to conduct stocking success and juvenile largemouth bass survival studies in the Chester, Choptank and Patuxent Rivers, by varying size of fish, tag type, tag placement and release location.

E35

Table 1. Largemouth bass stocking history for the Chester and Patuxent Rivers and percentage of marked fish collected during fall surveys, 2001-2004.

Chester River Number Number of of Percent of Percent bass juvenile juvenile Number bass marked Year Marked? collected bass bass stocked (all sizes) (all sizes) collected marked

2001 23,913 CWT 202 16 37 16 2002 15,177 CWT 38 52 0 0 2003 20,971 CWT 28 4 0 0 2004 29,320/270,00 CWT/OTC 41 17 0 0 CWT- 2005 22,437/160,527 Calcein/ 35 8 2 1 OTC Patuxent River 2001 54,583 CWT 264 37 59 56 2002 15,182 CWT No Sampling in 2002 2003 25,442 CWT 71 18 8 38 OTC- 2004 138,000/6,940 No Sampling in 2004 CWT/Calcein OCT- 2005 50,000/11,000 195 20 89 19 CWT/Calcein

Table 2. Summary of largemouth marked and stocked to Nanjemoy Creek (Potomac River) and Patuxent River. All bass were double-marked with calcein and a coded wire tag (CWT). Fish were stocked within one day of coded wire tagging.

Calcein Marked Coded Wire Tagged Number River Stocked Date Size Date Size 6/9/05 400/lb 6/10/05 400/lb 12,260 Nanjemoy Cr. 7/5/05 230/lb 8/17/05 24/lb 1,311* 6/19/05 400/lb 6/23/05 400/lb 9,393 Patuxent River 7/5/05 230/lb 8/17/05 24/lb 1,678* * Advanced fingerling (mean TL=109mm). These fish were calcein marked then placed in a hatchery pond where they were maintained on pellet food. Of the 4,300 that were originally stocked in the pond 2,989 were recovered, CWT tagged, fin clipped and then stocked into the Potomac and Patuxent Rivers.

E36

Table 3. Number of fish recovered from electrofishing samples and tag status and summary.

number fish number fish % total Date collected CWT + Calcein + w/no tag CWT/Calcein Potomac 7/20/05 2 1 1 1 50/50 9/8/05 2 1 1 1 50/50 10/26/05 22 8 8 14 36/36 Total 26 10 10 16 39% Patuxent 10/18/05 88 21 28 60 24/32 12/19/2005 52 32 37 15 62/71 1/12/2005 86 24 27 59 28/32 Total 226 77 92 134 41%

E37

State: Maryland Project Number: F-48-R-15 Study No.: V Job No.: 9

Project Title: Survey and Management of Freshwater Fisheries Resources

Study Title: Management of Maryland’s Tidal Freshwater Streams

Job Title: Tagging Studies

Introduction

The purpose of the tidal black bass (largemouth bass, Micropterus salmoides, and smallmouth bass, Micropterus dolomieu) tagging program was to obtain life history data. Tagging coincides with the Tidal Black Bass Adult Population Assessment Study. Objectives for tagging include collecting information on growth, range and movement patterns, and mortality or exploitation estimates (MD DNR 2000)

Methods Tagging

Tagging methods for this survey were described in Study V, Job 1, Adult Population Assessment.

Recapture Outreach

This study was dependent on angler recaptures for meaningful statistical analyses of much of the recapture data (Elrod 1990). As a result, an outreach strategy was developed to minimally maintain and potentially improve the angler reporting rate without the use of costly rewards. Outreach tactics included: presentations, recapture reporting worksheets, staff training, and posting informative signs.

Outreach to encourage the public to report captured tagged black bass began in 2004 with a PowerPoint presentation of 2003 tagging studies data to attendees of a bass round table meeting in March 2003 (MD DNR 2003). Attendees included members of local fishing and statewide bass clubs, Sport Fish Advisory Commission (SFAC), and Delaware Department of Natural Resources and Environmental Conservation (DDNREC). In addition to the presentation, a handout summarizing the content of the 2003 Federal Aid Report and an example of the Department’s recapture worksheet was provided to the attendees. The handout and recapture worksheet were also provided to outdoor writers and offered to anglers reporting recaptures throughout the year.

The recapture data sheet was redesigned to collect detailed information on the tag and fish fates. This document was posted as a Portable Document File (PDF) on the

E38

Maryland Department of Natural Resources Fisheries Service website (URL: http://www.dnr.state.md.us/fisheries/recreational/tag/tags.html) and advertised on popular Department web pages. A photograph of a tagged fish was also posted online with this information to illustrate the location and appearance of deployed tags in an effort to increase tag detection and reporting rates among recreational anglers. As returns were processed, the worksheet was revised to address potentially confusing questions and improve data collection. In order to improve tag return data collected from anglers over the telephone and reduce phone transfers, Fisheries administrative staff were trained to assist callers with completing the worksheet. In addition, anglers calling in recaptures were notified of the worksheet being available online. In most cases, Inland biologists returned anglers’ phone calls to provide release information on the tagged fish they caught.

Weather resistant plastic signs advertising the program were placed at public access points within the study systems beginning July 2004 and continuing through December 2004. An outline of a bass depicting the two possible tag locations and contact information were placed on the sign. The last text line on the sign requested that anglers leave the tag in place when possible.

Recapture Reporting

Anglers fishing with rod and reel reported recaptures by calling the phone number printed on the tag or via email during the calendar year. MD DNR and DDNREC staff attending fishing tournaments documented some angler recaptures that may have been missed otherwise. MD DNR, Maryland Department of Environment (MDE), and DDNREC reported agency recaptures. Those encounters occurred while conducting routine sampling for adult tidal bass, brood stock collection, or toxics analysis. Double- tagged fish from the Choptank River were reported once in the t-bar category if both tag types were returned.

Analysis

Microsoft Excel was used to generate descriptive statistics (ranges, means, sample variances, confidence intervals, etc.) and to create histograms depicting length frequencies of tagged tidal black bass at the time of initial release from 2001-2004 (Figure 1), frequency of black bass tag recaptures by days at large from 2001-2004 (Figure 2), and frequency of angler-reported returns of double tagged largemouth bass by tag type for Choptank River (Figure 3).

The following three calculations were performed to obtain the number of pool tags at large and the percent return for all systems combined and by river system from 2001-2005:

Pool Number of Tags =

E39

Total Tagged – (Harvested + Dead + Tag Removals)

Adjusted Pool Number of Tags = Pool Number of Tags – Unknown Fates

Percent of Angler Returns = ((Total number of tag returns/adjusted pool number of tags)*100) These calculations do not account for natural or catch and release mortality or for tag loss.

Catch a Million Fishing Challenge

Although, this was not a federally funded activity, it was a unique opportunity to assess and compare rates of return between a high stakes reward tagging program and one which only offered a hat and the satisfaction of contributing to the black bass management effort. The Maryland Department of Natural Resources held this tournament from June 3, 2006 through July 18, 2006 to promote fishing in Maryland. Bass were tagged at popular fishing areas around the state approximately two weeks before the tournament stated (Table 1). Other species were also tagged in the estuaries further downstream as well as the Chesapeake Bay proper. Each tournament tag was marked with the statement “Maryland 1,000,000.00 Fishing Challenge”, a unique tag number, a contact phone number and an expiration date of July 18, 2005. Tags were implanted following the same protocol as the anchor tags applied to Choptank River bass. Potential prizes for the tournament were: $1,000,000.00, $50,000.00, $10,000.00, gift certificates and some individually sponsored prizes. The tournament was advertised on- line and at many tackle and bait stores.

Results and Discussion

In the fall of 2005, 601 black bass were t-bar tagged in four tidal systems in Maryland, including the Chester River, Choptank River, Potomac River, and Patuxent River (Table 2). In addition, eighteen of the largemouth bass from the Choptank River received a second tag (internal anchor) tag.

Over the past five years, 4,574 tags were deployed in 4,286 bass (288 double tagged) across 10 tidal systems (Table 3). Largemouth bass were the dominant species tagged in this program with smallmouth bass (13 bass) comprising less than 1%. The adjusted pool number of tagged black bass, including t-bar and internal anchor-tagged fish, at large was 4,472 as of December 2005.

Total angler/DNR recaptures for the five-year period was 430 (Table 4). 9.4% of fish tagged were recaptured at least once. Anglers accounted for nearly 85% of total returns. In 2005, anglers and state agencies recaptured 94 black bass in 10 tidal systems. The annual number of angler recaptures showed surprisingly little variation, ranging from 81 to 90 recaptures between 2002 and 2005. This suggested that neither the 2004 public

E40 outreach efforts nor the 2005 Catch a Million tournament had much effect on angler return rates of non-tournament tags. Data from 2001 were not included in much of the angler recapture analysis because of differences in the minimum size of fish tagged between 2001 and 2002-2005.

Days at large at time of recapture across all systems ranged from 1 to 1,359 days. However, over 26% of reported recaptures occurred within the first thirty days of release (Figure 1.). The next highest frequency for a 30-day period was at 240 days (mid-May) and was only 7.5%. This rate held steady through the first spring and early summer. The median value was 217 days at large. It was not clear why the rate of reported recaptures decreased so markedly. The reported rate of harvest was less than 1% of fish tagged. Another 2% had their tag removed upon release. Other possible contributing factors include non-recognition due to tag fouling, tag loss, emigration or natural and catch and release mortality.

October and November had the highest return rate of all months across all systems and years (Table 5). This was due to the timing of tagging, which occurred during the adult population assessment in September and the high first 30 day reporting rate. The rate picked up again in April and held relatively steady through July. This second peak probably coincided with angler activity and high catch rates due to bass spawning activity.

Exploitation

While not an estimation of true exploitation, individual rates of return by river system may provide insight into fishing pressure on each population. While the Potomac River is believed to experience the greatest amount of angler effort and had the greatest number of returns (162), its percent of returns (9.94%) was only third highest of the ten systems in the study. The Wicomico River and Marshyhope Creek had higher rates of returns at 15.48% and 15.45% of fish tagged by system. The recapture rates across all systems over the five year period ranged from 4.33 in the Chester to the 15.48% noted on the Wicomico (Table 6). Of course, more than just fishing pressure could influence these differences. The Potomac River also has the greatest amount of habitat and fish could disperse over a large area. The proportion of the population tagged is also unknown. Estimating fishing pressure from returns also assumed similar rates of reporting recaptures. While this was not known, the Catch a Million Fishing Challenge provided one method to estimate this.

One hundred and eighty-seven largemouth bass were tagged in June 2005 with bright green anchor tags and placed in freshwater tributaries of the Chesapeake Bay for the Million Dollar Fishing Challenge. Fifty-six (30%) tagged largemouth bass were caught reported during the 45-day tournament (Table 1). Non-tournament tagged fish caught during the same dates from 2002 to 2004 had a range of recaptures from 0.38 to 2.20 percent (Figure 3). This indicated an angler reporting rate range of 1.27% to 7.33%.

E41

It is unlikely that the angler reporting for project tags was this low. The phenomena noted earlier of greatly reduced rates of reported recapture after the first 60 days at large was probably responsible for this low estimate of angler compliance. Because of this, estimates were made for the first 45 days at large during the 2005 fall tagging period. During this period the Potomac River had 1.35% reported recaptures (6 of 443). During the spring 45-day Million Dollar Fishing Challenge twenty-three tournament tagged bass were recaptured for a 46% rate of return. If catch rates were assumed to be equal then angler compliance for reporting project tags was only 2.93%. The assumptions violated in comparing these rates are obviously critical in making accurate estimations.

Multiple recaptures may also provide some insight into fishing pressure. Table 7 summarizes individual multiple recaptured fish by river. Over the study period, 19 black bass were recaptured more than once. Anglers caught one fish on the Potomac River 4 times since being tagged. The Potomac River had the greatest number of multiple recaptures followed by the Choptank River.

Competitive Fishing Tournament Returns

The number of anglers catching tagged bass while participating in competitive black bass fishing tournaments has increased steadily since 2001 (Table 8). Tournaments accounted for 16% of all angler recaptures. More than half of these were from the Potomac River (29 tournament recaptures). This is not surprising considering the amount of tournament fishing the Potomac River receives. In 2005, there were 143 bass tournaments on the Potomac in which 11,862 bass were weighed in. The number of bass caught is not known but is undoubtedly much greater. The Potomac has also had the greatest number of tagged bass released. The Upper Bay had the second highest return rate from tournaments with eleven recaptures. The Upper Bay saw its highest number of tournament recaptures in 2005 despite having no new tags released in that year. This may be an indication that tournament activity is on the rise there. Under- reporting of tournament recaptures may occur due to anglers focusing on total weights and maximizing fishing time and not wanting to take time to clean and record tag numbers or there could be concerns of over regulation if negative impacts on the tidal bass fishery were related to tournament activities (Richardson-Heft et al. 2000; Wilde 2003).

Concerns about bass relocation and concentration near tournament weigh-in sites have been expressed by anglers and are of interest to resource managers (Richardson- Heft et al. 2000; Wilde 2003). Tagging data did not indicate that bass were being moved out of a system on a frequent basis. Out of five study years, two fish were reported from a river system different from its tagging location.

Double-tagged Bass

Forty-nine angler returns were reported from the Choptank River from 2001- 2005. Thirty-five of these were doubled tagged (Figure 3). Double-tagged returns from

E42 the Choptank River remained steady over the past two years, 38% percent of anglers reported the presence of both tags. It cannot be assumed that when only one tag was reported, the other was missing. In addition, only seven Agency recaptures occurred on the Choptank, one of which was double tagged. Therefore the retention of tag types could not be assessed until more Agency return data are gathered. Retention rates for t- bar, dart, and cinch tag types were reported in USFWS Federal Aid Grant F-48-R-13 Study 5, Job 4, Tagging Studies (2003) report. That study was conducted from October 12, 2000 to November 15, 2000. It showed that retention of t-bar tagged fish held in a Cedarville Hatchery Pond was 100%. Keefer and Wilson (1993) showed documented internal anchor tag loss at less than 1 percent.

Management Recommendations

• The apparent low reporting rate and the quick decline in the probability of fish being recaptured over time make angler recapture data less useful than hoped. This part of the program should be de-emphasized.

• Tags should continue to be collected by DNR Fisheries Service to help verify ageing but some should be sacrificed for otoliths as it appears that scales are unreliable for age determination.

• Tags may be appropriate for special projects but routine tagging for all bass >200m during adult surveys should be discontinued.

• Current tagging data should be further analyzed for patterns in angler effort and other insights. Data should also be examined with a GIS application to look for migration, displacement, home range and other such movement patterns.

E43

Table 1. Summary of tagged fish from 2005 Million Dollar Fishing Challenge.

River No. of No. of Fish Percent fish Tagged Recaptured Recaptured Susquehanna 28 13 46 Gunpowder 13 2 15 Middle 7 1 14 Patuxent 2 0 0 Potomac 50 23 46 Sassafras 45 6 13 Chester 2 0 0 Choptank 9 2 22 Marshyhope 15 6 40 Pocomoke 15 2 13

Table 2. Summary of MD DNR 2005 tagging for tidal black bass.

Number Type of Tagging Sequence System of bass Dates Tagged Tag Numbersa tagged T-Bar Chester River 25 4147-4171 9/7/05-9/19/05 Streamer T-Bar Choptank River 31 3476-4206 9/20/05-10/19/05 Streamer Anchor Choptank River 18 CH000237-CH000305 9/20/05-10/19/05 Tag T-Bar Potomac River 443 840-2744 9/26/05-11/28/05 Streamer T-Bar Patuxent River 104 2051-2683 10/17/05-10/24/05 Streamer a Some tags were applied out of sequence.

E44

Table 3. Summary of the number of tidal black bass tagged from 2001 – 2005 by MD DNR. Years and systems labeled N/A were not part of the study at that time.

Number Number of Number of Number of Number of Total Tags System of Bass Bass Bass Bass Bass Issued in 5 Tag Type Tagged Tagged Tagged Tagged Tagged years 2005 2004 2003 2002 2001a Chester River 25 38 25 36 180 304 T-Bar Choptank River 31 81 71 97 167 447 T-Bar Choptank River 18 51 58 51 110 288 Anchor Elk River 0 31 N/A N/A N/A 31 T-Bar Marshyhope Creek 0 0 113 N/A N/A 113 T-Bar Patuxent River 104 0 65 0 193 362 T-Bar Pocomoke River 0 63 N/A N/A N/A 63 T-Bar aPotomac River 443 182 338 340 371 1674 T-Bar Sassafras River 0 0 55 N/A N/A 55 T-Bar Upper Chesapeake 0 478 333 240 98 1149 Bay T-Bar Wicomico River 0 0 88 N/A N/A 88 T-Bar Combined Total by 621 924 1146 764 1119 4574 Year and Tag Types

aThe tidal black bass Potomac River sampling area is divided into two areas, upper and lower. Upper Potomac River, sampled 2004 and 2002-2001, extends from Marshall, MD upriver to Washington D.C. The lower Potomac River extends from Marshall Hall downriver to Mallows Bay.

E45

Table 4. Summary of Maryland tidal black bass angler hook and line and agencyb electrofishing tag recaptures from 2001-2005. Years and systems labeled N/A were not part of the study at that time.

Number of Recaptures System Angler/Agency Tag Type 2005 2004 2003 2002 2001 Total Chester River T-Bar 1/1 0/2 2/1 9/2 1/0 13/6 bChoptank River T-Bar 12/3 9/1 7/1 11/1 2/0 41/6 Choptank River Anchor 0/0 1/0 3/0 4/1 0/0 8/1 Elk River T-Bar 1/0 0/0 N/A N/A N/A 1/0 Marshyhope Creek T-Bar 3/2 3/1 11/0 N/A N/A 17/3 Patuxent River T-Bar 9/3 0/0 5/4 8/0 3/10 25/17 Pocomoke River T-Bar 2/0 1/0 N/A N/A N/A 3/0 Potomac River T-Bar 28/3 28/2 43/0 42/4 21/2 162/11 Sassafras River T-Bar 0/0 2/0 1/0 N/A N/A 3/0 Upper Chesapeake Bay T-Bar 23/1 29/8 16/8 7/0 3/0 78/17 Wicomico River T-Bar 2/0 9/4 2/1 N/A N/A 13/5 Totals by Year 81/13 82/18 90/15 81/8 30/12 364/66 aAgency is currently defined as MD DNR, MD MDE, or Delaware Department of Natural Resources and Environmental Conservation. bDouble tagged recaptures are counted once under t-bar.

E46

Table 5. Summary of Maryland tidal black bass 2001-2005 angler t-bar tag and anchor tag recaptures by month in Chester River (CHS), Choptank River (CHP), Elk River (ELK), Marshyhope Creek (MSH), Patuxent River (PAX), Pocomoke River (POC), Potomac River (POT), Sassafras River (SAS), Upper Chesapeake Bay (UBY), Wicomico River (WIC).

Month CHS CHP ELK MSH PAX POC POT SAS UBY WIC Total

Jan. 0 0 0 0 1 0 3 0 0 0 4 Feb. 0 0 0 1 3 0 1 0 2 0 7 Mar. 0 3 0 0 3 1 11 0 0 1 19 Apr. 1 3 0 0 0 0 24 0 6 1 35 May 0 2 0 2 0 0 20 0 10 4 38 June 2 7 0 1 2 0 14 1 5 2 34 July 5 9 1 0 1 1 16 0 13 1 47 Aug. 2 4 0 2 5 0 7 1 6 1 28 Sep. 2 4 0 0 0 0 9 0 3 0 18 Oct. 0 9 0 9 6 1 33 1 14 1 74 Nov. 1 8 0 0 4 0 18 0 16 2 49 Dec. 0 0 0 2 0 0 4 0 2 0 8 No Date 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 1 0 3 Total 13 50 1 17 25 3 162 2 77 14 364

E47

Table 6. Angler returns and tag/fish status for Maryland tidal black bass t-bar and anchor tags for 2001-2005 overall and by system.

Unconfirmed Without Tag Returns By Harvested Unknown Unknown With Tag R Removed Removed Adjusted Location Location Released Released Tag Not Not Tag Returns Release Release Status Status e River Total Total Dead % of % of Pool t Tag Tag u

rn e d

Chester River 1 8 3 1 0 0 0 13 0.29 4.33 aChoptank River (T-bar) 2 31 6 0 2 0 0 41 0.92 9.38 Choptank River (Anchor) 1 4 2 0 1 0 0 8 0.18 2.82 Elk River 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 0.02 3.23 Marshyhope Creek 0 14 3 0 0 0 0 17 0.38 15.45 Patuxent River 0 17 3 3 2 0 0 25 0.56 7.0 Pocomoke River 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 3 0.07 4.92 Potomac 11 River 8 3 35 4 1 1 0 162 3.6 9.94 Sassafras River 0 3 0 0 0 0 0 3 0.07 5.45 Upper Chesapeake Bay 3 44 28 0 1 1 1 78 1.7 6.82 Wicomico River 0 9 4 0 0 0 0 13 0.29 15.48 24 Total 16 5 85 8 7 2 1 364 8.1 8.16 Percent of Total Pool Returns by Fate 0.36 5.5 1.9 0.18 0.16 0.04 0.02 8.1 aDouble tagged recaptures are counted once under t-bar.

E48

Table 7. Summary of angler and agency multiple recaptured fish.

Recaptured Recaptured Recaptured System Total 2 times 3 times 4 times Chester River 1 0 0 1 Choptank River 4 1 0 5 Elk River 0 0 0 0 Marshyhope Creek 3 0 0 3 Patuxent River 4 0 0 4 Pocomoke River 0 0 0 0 Potomac River 7 0 1 8 Sassafras River 0 0 0 0 Upper Bay 3 0 0 3 Wicomico River 3 0 0 3 Total 25 1 1 27

Table 8. Summary of angler recaptures taken during tournament participation. Years and systems labeled N/A were not part of the study at that time.

River System 2005 2004 2003 2002 2001 Total Marshyhope Creek 1 2 4 N/A N/A 7 Patuxent River 00300 3 Pocomoke River 0 1 N/A N/A N/A 1 Potomac River 10657129 Upper Bay 6500011 Wicomico River 1 5 0 N/A N/A 6 Total 18 19 12 7 1 57

E49

mean = 265,sd = 265, n = 411

120 1.2

100 1.0

80 0.8

60 0.6 Frequency 40 0.4

20 0.2

0 0.0 30 60 90 120 150 180 210 240 270 300 330 360 390 420 450 480 510 540 570 600 630 660 690 720 750 780 810 More Bin

Frequency Cumulative %

Figure 1. Frequency of black bass angler and agency t-bar and anchor tag recaptures by days at large from 2001-2005, n=411. Days are in 30-day intervals.

15

10

5

0

Number of Tag Returns of Number T-bar Anchor Anchor & T-bar Total Tag Type

2001 2002 2003 2004 2005

Figure 2. Frequency of angler-reported returns of double tagged largemouth bass by tag type for Choptank River, n=44.

E50

50

45

40

35 )

(% 30

ate

e R 25

ur

pt 20

eca

R 15

10

5

0

Million Dollar 2005 2004 2003 2002 Tourn.

Figure 3. Comparison of angler reported recapture rates between the Million Dollar Tournament and non-tournament tag returns reported for the Potomac River. Rates are for the 45-day June through early July period.

E51

State: Maryland Project Number: F-48-R-15 Study No.: V Job No.: 5

Project Title: Survey and Management of Freshwater Fisheries Resources

Study Title: Management of Maryland's Tidal Freshwater Streams

Job Title: Scale/Otolith Comparison Studies

Introduction

Obtaining accurate ages for fish collected during project surveys is vital to understanding population dynamics. Growth, mortality and verification of juvenile indices are all dependent on accurate estimation of age. Scales have been widely used because of the ease and non-lethal method of collection. However a growing body of literature indicates that scales are often imprecise and systematically biased in assignment of age. Maryland Inland Fisheries personnel developed and applied otolith ageing techniques in order to assess efficiency, precision in agreement and possible biases with each method. The results will be used to determine future methods of project analyses.

Methods

Otoliths and scales collected from one hundred and seventy two largemouth bass were obtained from tidal Potomac River tournament mortalities in 2005. Total length (mm) and date of capture were recorded for each fish. Ages from independent blind readings for both structures were assigned by three biologists. Agreement between readers for each structure and agreement between structures for each reader were summarized.

Scale samples were collected from each fish by removing several scales posterior to the depressed left pelvic fin and just below the lateral line. Scales were placed on a 0.040" thick rigid vinyl plastic slide and an impression made by processing through a Model 110 Wildlife Supply Company roller press. Annuli were counted from the projected scale image by placing the slide in a Datagraphix Model 965 microfiche.

The preferred method for retrieving otoliths whole was by using the "up through the gills" method described by Secor, Dean and Laban (1991). Saggital ololiths were used since they are the largest of the three pairs found in black bass. Otoliths were prepared for viewings by first breaking them across the dorso-ventral plane by hand or with large nail clippers. The broken surface was polished on either a 600 or 800 grit wet/dry sanding sheet until a smooth surface was obtained. The prepared otolith was then slightly embedded into a small block of pliable clay positioned in the bottom of a deep, 180ml crystallizing dish filled with clean water. The smooth side was positioned so

E52 that it was perpendicular to the bottom of the dish, which was then placed on the stage of a Bausch & Lomb StereoZoom 7 dissecting microscope. External, directed light was provided by a 150watt quartz halogen fiber optic illuminator fitted with a 24" flexible cable, which was reduced to a single, 1.5mm wide glass fiber. This concentrated the light to a strong, narrow beam that could be directed through the otolith. Both the otolith and the light source had to remain below the water surface in order for a clear image of the annuli to be detected. The otolith was positioned such that the light source was directed through the sulcus side of the otolith to help illuminate all growth rings.

Bass were collected from early spring through the fall of 2005. Annuli at the margin were not obvious until some growth had occurred, typically by mid or late June. Therefore, all fish caught from April through June were promoted by assigning an annulus at the margin.

Prepared scales and otoliths from each fish were put in separate envelopes but numbered the same. Each reader was provided with a data sheet for recording otolith ages and a separate sheet for recording scale ages. After each reader had read all the otoliths they moved on to the scales. Data sheets were collected and information compiled into one dataset.

Results and Discussion

There was 100% agreement between readers on 171 of 172 otoliths. This amounted to a 99% agreement rate on otoliths. The single disagreement was a 372mm fish, which was aged as three by two readers and four by one reader.

Agreement between readers from scales was much lower than for otoliths. At least two readers agreed on the same scale age 79% of the time. All three readers agreed only 24% of the time. Agreement generally decreased with scale age (Figure 1). Only one of 31 fish beyond age 6 saw agreement between all three readers.

Agreement between scale and otolith ages was poor. At least one reader agreed with otolith ages 70% of the time, but only 39% of fish where assigned the same age from both structures by two readers. All three readers gave scale ages equal to otolith age on only 15% of fish. Total agreement between scales and otoliths was highest at age 4 (26%) but this decreased with age and none agreed completely beyond age 6 (Table 1).

The assigned ages from otoliths were generally greater than from scales as fish size increased (Figure 2). This has been documented in the literature and was not un- expected. Interestingly, agreement was poor for ages 1 and 2, with scale ages greater than ages from otoliths; however, sample sizes for these age groups were small.

E53

Conclusions

Comparison of scale and otolith derived ages indicated a large discrepancy in estimated ages between the two techniques. As expected, the divergence in estimated age increased with size. What was not expected was the high rate of disagreement for age one, two and three fish as well. This has major implications in estimates of mortality and growth and future plans to model populations under a variety of regulation scenarios.

In addition, agreement between readers for scales was very poor. Although biologists recognize that tidal water bass are exceptionally difficult to age from scales, these results cast doubt on the use of scale ageing even of young fish for estimating population parameters. While otolith ageing was extremely precise, known age fish will have to be obtained in order to verify the accuracy of this technique. It is recommended that unless scale age disagreement can be reconciled, otoliths be used for all future ageing projects.

E54

Table 1. Level of precision between scale and otolith age agreement for Potomac River largemouth bass for three experienced scale readers. Otolith age is assigned with 100% agreement between all readers. Shaded area represents number of fish out of each age group and the corresponding number of readers that agreed with the assigned otolith age.

Age (estimated from otoliths) # readers % in N Agree- agreement 00 01 02 03 04 05 06 07 08 09 10 11 12 Aged ment 0 2 4 3 9 5 6 8 7 2 2 2 51 30% 1 2 5 6 22 5 7 4 1 1 3 53 31% 2 1 4 23 7 2 3 40 24% 3 (all) 2 19 3 2 26 15% N Aged 1 4 9 15 73 20 17 12 11 3 2 3 170

E55

0.70

0.60

0.50

0.40

0.30

Percent (%) 0.20

0.10

0.00 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 10 11 12 Agegroup (estimated from scales)

Figure 1. Percent of scale-aged largemouth bass from the Potomac River by age group with no agreement between three readers.

11 10 Otolith Scale

e 9 8 7

6

5 4 3 2

Ag Assigned Average 1

0

138 213 238 288 313 338 363 388 413 438 463 488 513 Length Groups mmTL

Figure 2. Comparison of assigned ages by method and their corresponding length group. Assuming otolith ages are correct, scale ages were overestimated before age four and underestimated beyond age 5.

E56

State: Maryland Project Number: F-48-R-15 Study No.: V Job No.: 7

Project Title: Survey and Management of Freshwater Fisheries Resources

Study Title: Management of Maryland's Tidal Freshwater Streams

Job Title: Angler Creel Surveys

Introduction

The tidal black bass fisheries of Chesapeake Bay are some of the most important recreational fisheries in Maryland. Undoubtedly, the Potomac River from Washington D.C. to the Route 301 bridge supports the largest and most economically important black bass fishery in the state. Other areas such as the upper Chesapeake Bay support large- scale fisheries, however fishing intensity is considerably lower than the Potomac. The Eastern Shore of Maryland has several geographically isolated fisheries that exist is the upper reaches of major Bay tributaries. Rivers currently monitored by fisheries personnel include the Chester and Choptank Rivers. These are perhaps two of the best-known fisheries in the region. Despite this, only one angler intercept study to monitor largemouth bass fishing activity has been completed in the last twenty years on any eastern shore river. In 1988, a roving creel census was conducted on the upper Choptank River from May through November. It was a broad survey, designed principally to gain information on the fishing activities for a variety of tidal-fresh species that reside in the upper Choptank River. Of particular interest were the fishing activities directed at largemouth bass, which was growing in popularity at the time. The results of the 1988 survey indicated that the majority (62%) of anglers targeted largemouth bass (MD DNR 1990). However, overall success of bass anglers was 0.078 bass/hour, considerably lower than rates obtained from similar studies conducted on the Potomac River in 1990, which exceeded 0.366 bass/hour (Heft and Fewlass 1990). Bass anglers participating in a “volunteer” angler survey in 2000 reported a catch rate of 0.907 bass/angler hour for the eastern shore tidal bass fisheries.

Historical data suggest that other rivers such as the Wicomico and Pocomoke support sustainable bass fisheries, however bass populations are not currently monitored (Fewlass 1991). There is no reason to assume bass populations have significantly deteriorated, but recent population data are not available. Even less is known about bass fishing activities on these rivers. To address these information shortfalls, largemouth bass population studies were planned for both rivers in 2003 and 2004. In the summer of 2002, an access intercept survey was performed in order to characterize the recreational bass fishery.

E57

Methods

A stratified two-stage creel census design described by Malvestuto (1983) was chosen to survey the Wicomico and Pocomoke Rivers. These rivers vary in size (river miles of habitat) and number of access points. The Pocomoke River consists of approximately 60 linear km of largemouth bass habitat, and has five access points. The Wicomico River consists of 25 linear km of largemouth bass habitat and has one boat ramp in downtown Salisbury. Equal sampling probabilities were selected for each river, however sampling probabilities for the Pocomoke River interview sites were based on ramp usage. Contacts with Maryland’s Natural Resources Police (NRP) were made to gain insight into which of the five ramps on the Upper Pocomoke River were most heavily used by bass fishermen. Stratification probabilities for the Pocomoke River were based on their observations and judgment. Verification of their selections would be confirmed through the survey process. Day selection probabilities were selected assigning equal sampling probabilities to the five weekdays and two weekend days. Random selection probabilities assigned for day, boat ramp, time and river are shown in Table 1. Maps of boat access/survey sites are shown in Figures 1 and 2. Five-hour blocks of time allocated for the survey were selected with equal probabilities in either the morning, or afternoon, during times at which bass fishermen should be returning from trips. The morning surveys began two hours after sunrise, and ran for five hours thereafter. Afternoon surveys began four and one-half hours before sunset, and ran for five hours thereafter. On the days selected for the Pocomoke River, instantaneous counts of the number of trailers at each of the five boat ramps were made prior to the intercept period. These counts were used to extrapolate angler effort over the entire river system for each survey day.

The sampling period began on June 4, 2002 and ended on October 7, 2002. A total of fifty survey days were allocated for data collection. There were twenty-seven dates selected for the Pocomoke River, and twenty-three dates selected for the Wicomico River. On the randomly selected days and times, a Maryland DNR employee approached vessels returning to the ramp, and identified themselves and the survey. They then politely asked if the party would answer a few short questions. Questions were limited to the ones listed on the survey sheet (Appendix 1). If the party did not want to be interviewed, the time and number of persons in the party were noted. Data were entered into a Microsoft Access database for statistical analysis.

Results

A total of 237 interviews were completed on the Wicomico and Pocomoke Rivers over the forty-nine survey dates selected. One date was not surveyed due to scheduling conflicts. A total of 111 fishing parties were targeting largemouth bass, and 14 parties were targeting other species including striped bass, catfish, white perch and crappie. Bass fishing parties averaged 1.7 anglers/boat. Interviewed bass fishermen caught a total of 585 bass, and fished 657.9 hours. Combined catch per unit effort (CPUE) was 0.52

E58 bass/angler hour, which is higher than CPUE from similar creel surveys conducted from 1987-1992 on the Upper Chesapeake Bay and the Choptank and Potomac Rivers (Table 2) (MD DNR 1990). However it is lower than Eastern Shore catch rates derived from a “volunteer” bass angler survey conducted in 2000 (MD DNR 2001). Over 80% of bass fishermen interviewed rated the fishing either “good” or “excellent”. Approximately half the anglers interviewed were currently participating in a bass tournament at the time of their interview. Similarly, non-resident anglers comprised almost half of the fishermen interviewed in both rivers. The majority of these non-resident anglers were from the state of Delaware.

Through extrapolation using instantaneous trailer counts, it was determined that bass fishing effort for the Pocomoke River exceeded 16,699.8 angler hours, during which anglers caught an estimated 9,226 bass. Mean CPUE of Pocomoke bass fishermen was 0.552 bass/angler hour. Harvest from the Pocomoke River was very low (N=2, 0.003 bass/angler hour). Eighty-three percent of bass fishermen interviewed rated the Pocomoke River bass fishing as “good” or “excellent”.

Overall, the public boat ramp at Snow Hill was the most active boat ramp on the Pocomoke, and was the location of the two large, two-day tournaments on the river. The Delaware Bass Anglers Sportsman Society (BASS) Federation held both of these tournaments. The ramp at Shad landing State Park was also heavily used, but bass anglers comprised a lower percentage of those interviewed, and no large tournaments were held there. Several interviewed bass fishermen were camping at the State Park for several days to fish the river. Surveys completed at Pocomoke City, Winters Quarters and Milburn Landing yielded no interviews with any bass fishermen, leading to the conclusion that they receive little to no use from bass fishermen.

Wicomico River total estimated effort was 3,657 angler hours. Surveyed anglers caught an estimated 1,640 bass. Mean CPUE for Wicomico bass fishermen was 0.440 bass/angler hour. No largemouth bass were harvested from the Wicomico River by those anglers interviewed. Seventy-seven percent of bass fishermen interviewed rated Wicomico bass fishing as “good” or “excellent”. Tournaments occurred on the Wicomico, but they were comprised of small, local club tournaments, with 10 or less boats participating.

Conclusions and Management Recommendations

The Wicomico and Pocomoke Rivers are currently supporting quality largemouth bass fisheries. Staff conclude that they both support moderate levels of effort based on their relative size. Future creel surveys will allow the determination of trends in fishing effort. Catch rates derived from the 2000 volunteer angler survey were higher, but these rates were inflated due to angler bias. The results of the volunteer survey were based on a small sample of highly skilled and dedicated bass anglers. Therefore, catch rates derived from their reports are likely higher than actual catch rates. Unbiased samples

E59 should include data from bass anglers of all abilities. Additionally, the volunteer survey was conducted from March through November, while the 2002 access intercept survey was from June through October. Traditionally, peak catch rates for tidal largemouth bass occur from March through May.

In both rivers, weekday angler effort was generally light, while weekend fishing activity was variable, depending on tournament activity. Most bass fishermen interviewed considered both rivers “good” to “excellent” fisheries. Many fishermen commented that the Pocomoke River is currently supporting “the best bass fishery on the Eastern Shore”. Others commented that the Wicomico River’s bass fishing has deteriorated from previous levels. However, reported catch rates, although lower than the Pocomoke, are still very good. Some anglers reported that tournament anglers from the Pocomoke and Nanticoke Rivers frequently drive their boats to the upper Wicomico River to catch their fish. These fish are brought to the weigh in site and released at the tournament site, thus the fish changes rivers. Due to salinity barriers that exist at the mouths of these rivers, it is unlikely that these fish naturally emigrate back to the Wicomico River. Thus, the Wicomico River does sustain a population depletion of bass, but the number could not be estimated by this survey. Bass fishing effort on the Pocomoke River was estimated to be much higher than the Wicomico, but was likely influenced by the two large tournaments that occurred during the survey period. Without them, the Pocomoke River’s bass fishing effort estimate would likely be comparable, or even lower than the Wicomico. The Wicomico’s smaller size, and single access point make it unfeasible for large tournaments, while the Pocomoke’s larger size allows effort to spread out over its 60km of habitat. Both rivers are quite popular with non-resident anglers, primarily from Delaware, likely making them locally economically important.

E60

Table 1. Random selection probabilities assigned for type of day, time period and river and boat ramp, 2002.

Time Period Probability Type of Day Probability A.M. 0.50 Weekend Day 0.50 P.M. 0.50 Weekday Day 0.50 1.00 1.00 River and Boat Ramp Probabilities River Boat Ramp Probability Wicomico River Salisbury 0.50

Pocomoke River Snow Hill 0.20 Shad Landing State Park 0.20 Winters Quarters 0.05 Pocomoke City 0.0025 Milburn Landing 0.0025 1.00

Table 2. Mean largemouth bass catch rate (fish/angler hour) as reported by fishermen targeting largemouth bass during creel surveys of Maryland tidal rivers.

Location Potomac Choptank Pocomoke Wicomico (Year) (1990) (1988) (2003) (2003)

Catch Rate 0.366 0.078 0.552 0.440 (bass/angler hour)

E61

Snow Hill

Milburn Landing MD Rt. 13 Shad Landing State Park Winters Quarters

MD Rt. 113

Pocomoke City Pocomoke River

Maryland

Virginia N

2024Kilometers

Figure 1. Map of the Pocomoke River displaying angler intercept locations for 2002 creel survey. The shaded areas indicate suitable largemouth bass habitat within the river.

E62

M D

R t .

5 0

Salisbury Boat Ramp Wicomico River

3 1 . t R D M

Wicomico Creek

N 1012Kilometers

Figure 2. Map of the Wicomico River displaying angler intercept locations for 2002 creel survey. The shaded areas indicate suitable largemouth bass habitat within the river.

E63

Appendix 1. Sample angler intercept questionnaire used in 2002 tidal bass creel census.

Angler Intercept Questionnaire

River: Pocomoke Wicomico Interviewer’s Initials: _____

Date:______AM PM

Boat Ramp:______Fishing? Yes No

Time: ______Number In Party: ______

“Good morning (good afternoon). My name is ______and I am conducting a angler survey for the Maryland Department of Natural Resources, Fisheries Service. We are collecting information that will be used to help manage the tidal largemouth bass resource. Do you mind if I ask you a few questions about your fishing trip today?”

Are you finished fishing for the day? Yes No

What time did you begin your trip today? ______

What is your State of residence and Zip Code? ______

What (if any) was your targeted species? ______

How did you fish? Artificials Bait

Did you catch any fish today?

Species Caught Creeled

How would you rate the largemouth bass fishing on this River?

Very Poor Poor Fair Good Excellent

Are you currently participating in a tournament? Yes No

Thank you for your time. Do you have any comments about the tidal largemouth bass resource? ______

E64

State: Maryland Project Number: F-48-R-15 Study No.: V Job No.: 9

Project Title: Survey and Management of Freshwater Fisheries Resources

Study Title: Management of Maryland's Tidal Freshwater Streams

Job Title: Tournament Creel Surveys

Introduction

Tournament angling accounts for a significant percentage of the total fishing effort on Maryland's tidal largemouth bass (Mictropterus salamoides) populations. Annual monitoring of largemouth bass tournaments in Maryland's Chesapeake Bay and tidal tributaries was performed to provide resource managers with information about trends in effort, catch rates and quality of catch.

Tournament activities were at the highest concentration in areas where facilities could accommodate large events. Dundee Creek Marina in Gunpowder State Park and Tydings Park were favored on the Upper Bay, and Smallwood State Park hosted most of the events on the Maryland side of the Potomac River.

Methods

A list of bass tournaments and dates was compiled from contacts with marina managers at popular tournament locations, advertisements at fishing shows, the Maryland Bass Federation magazine, Internet listings of tournaments, and by word of mouth. A creel specialist from the Southern Regional Office attended as many weekend tournaments as possible from March through November. Sites were chosen based on the number or size of tournaments being held at that location in order to provide the largest possible samples on a given day. Data collected from each tournament included number of fishermen, number of fish weighed, start and stop times, total weight of fish checked in, weight of largest fish checked in, type of tournament, location, date, and water temperature range. When observable, an estimate of mortality was made at time of release. Some data were submitted by club or tournament managers for unvisited tournaments and some data were available from websites.

Catch-per-angler-hour (CPAH) was determined for individual tournaments as (# bass weighed in/# fishermen)/# tournament hours. Although many of the large tournaments were multiple day events, each day was treated as a separate tournament for analysis. Annual Catch Per Unit Efforts (CPUE) were means of tournament CPAH. These were further separated into spring and summer/fall seasons and noted as either CPUE15" (March 1 - June 15, 381mm (15") minimum total length) or CPUE12" (June 16 -

E65 end of February, 305mm (12") minimum total length). Differences in annual means were tested with analysis of variance (ANOVA) and Duncan's Multiple Range Test (SAS,2000) and were considered significant at alpha=0.05. It should be noted that tournament CPAH was biased low compared to true total angler catch per effort due to failure to account for culled and released fish. The degree of this bias was unknown.

Tournament data were separated by types (open or club), due to the differences in rules. Club tournament anglers collect points over the season and register their catch at every event. Open tournaments are one-time events in which anglers usually compete for money. If a heavier creel has already been registered anglers often release their catch before weigh-in, which negatively biases CPUE. Unless otherwise noted, seasonal CPUEs and other indices are for club tournaments with a 5 fish creel per angler.

Tournaments were grouped into "systems" for analysis. A system may denote a single river, such as the Potomac, or it may include several rivers and adjacent waters, such as the upper Chesapeake Bay. Weigh-in sites were grouped together if the same areas were fished from those sites. Nearly all data collected were from four sites on the Potomac River and three sites on the Upper Bay.

Average fish weight (number of fish/total weight of fish per event) and weight of largest fish were determined for each tournament and examined for trends and differences in annual means.

Length samples (mm TL) were collected during one or two tournaments each season. Selection of tournaments was not random, but chosen when personnel were available. Mean, mode, and relative frequencies were examined for differences in years.

Largemouth bass mortalities were collected from as many Potomac River tournaments as possible in order to extract otoliths to be used for otolith/scale ageing comparison. This also provided some initial tournament mortality information.

Results

Data were compiled for 143 largemouth bass tournaments during 2005. Five thousand eight hundred and sixty five anglers weighed in 11,862 bass during these events. Total angler hours were 48,714. Twenty tournaments were excluded from CPUE calculations due to special creel rules or tournament type. Thirty-six Potomac River and eighteen Upper Bay spring season events and fifty-three Potomac and eleven Upper Bay summer/fall events were analyzed for CPUEs and other indices.

Potomac

Summer/fall CPUE12" was significantly higher than spring CPUE15" (p=0.003) for 2005 (Table 1). This would be expected since smaller fish were allowed during the 12"

E66 season. Duncan's Multiple Range Test indicated that 2005 CPUE was similar to all years with the exception of 2001 when CPUE was significantly lower (ANOVA=0.004) (Table 2). Annual spring mean CPUE15" for 2005 was similar to the past 3 years, but was significantly higher than data collected from 2000 and 2001 tournaments (ANOVA, p=0.02). While CPUE fluctuated, trends in annual means were not evident for either season for the same time period (Figure 1).

ANOVA did not detect a significant difference in average weight of fish caught in summer/fall tournaments (P=0.41, Table 3). Duncan's Multiple Range Test ranked 2002 higher than all other years in the series (alpha=0.05). Although mean annual weight of largest fish during the summer/fall season in 2005 was the lowest in the series, no significant difference was detected (ANOVA, p=0.6462, Duncan's Multiple Range Test, alpha=0.05). Average fish weight and weight of largest fish for spring tournaments (Table 4) showed no significant differences (ANOVA, p=0.373, p=0.8608) during the same period.

Length frequency distributions of bass from Potomac River tournaments were similar to previous years with a slight shift in 2005 toward higher numbers of smaller fish in the summer/fall season (Figures 2 & 3). This was also reflected in the overall average length of fish measured from some tournaments (Table 5).

One hundred and eighty nine bass mortalities were collected from Potomac River tournaments. This represented 2% of all fish weighed in at Potomac events where a DNR representative was present. Individual event mortalities ranged from 1-16%. A weak correlation was detected between water temperature and number of dead fish (r=0.52).

Upper Bay

Analysis of variance showed no significant difference in summer/fall CPUE12" (P=0.1171). Spring CPUE15" was similar to previous years with the exception of 2004 when information from only one tournament was collected. Summer/fall average fish weight (881g) was similar to previous years, but a significant decline in average weight of largest fish (1,627g) was detected (p=0.0016). Average fish weight and weight of largest fish for spring tournaments was similar to previous years. Overall lengths of fish measured were similar to data collected from Potomac River tournaments.

Discussion

Indices for Potomac River spring season tournaments have shown some significant statistical differences over the past 5 years. While these differences do occur, the variations do not indicate a trend toward either an increase or decrease in catch rates or quality of catch.

E67

Catch rates for anglers fishing the tidal Potomac river in the 2005 summer/fall season rebounded from the lower catch rates in 2004. Excessive rainfall, widespread algae blooms and a decline of SAV in some tributaries may have influenced the lower CPUE12" in 2004. A similar decrease in abundance was noted during fall adult electrofishing samples of the same year.

Upper Bay indices for both the spring and summer/fall seasons in 2005 were similar to the tidal Potomac. Due to small sample sizes, indices for both spring and summer seasons prior to 2005 may not accurately characterize typical Upper Bay tournament results. However, anecdotal information provided by anglers has indicated that the Upper Bay competes favorably with the Potomac River in terms of positive angling experiences. An increase in submerged aquatic vegetation has undoubtedly reestablished largemouth bass in many areas of the Upper Bay by allowing for better recruitment.

Conclusions and Management Recommendations

Tournament fishing for largemouth bass is a popular sport in Maryland's tidal waters. Data collected at these events helps resource managers to characterize angling success and identify long-term trends that may be indicative of changes in the bass population.

Factors other than population structure and density may influence angler success. Seasonal fluctuations in grass bed density, water clarity, and changes in water quality due to algae blooms all affect fish distributions and diurnal activities.

Given the importance of the tidal Potomac River bass fishery, annual monitoring by both tournament data analysis and electrofishing surveys should continue. Additional data are also needed on Upper Bay tournaments in order to accurately reflect stability or trends in the bass population.

E68

Table 1. Mean catch per angler hour (CPAH) and total fish weighed for surveyed tidal Potomac River and Upper Chesapeake Bay black bass tournaments. Results are for fish brought to weigh-in and do not include culls and sub-legal fish.

POTOMAC RIVER TOURNAMENTS

Year # Tourns # Fish Weighed CPUE15"* (0.95 C.I.) CPUE12"** (0.95 C.I.) 2005 89 9277 0.21 (0.18 - 0.24) 0.29 (0.25 - 0.33) 2004 85 5360 0.19 (0.16 - 0.22) 0.23 (0.20 - 0.26) 2003 68 8605 0.16 (0.13 - 0.19) 0.35 (0.31 - 0.39) 2002 53 5560 0.17 (0.13 - 0.21) 0.26 (0.23 - 0.30) 2001 52 4295 0.14 (0.11 - 0.17) 0.21 (0.18 - 0.23) 2000 51 4653 0.15 (0.12 - 0.19) 0.24 (0.21 - 0.28) UPPER BAY TOURNAMENTS

Year # Tourns # Fish Weighed CPUE15"* (0.95 C.I.) CPUE12"** (0.95 C.I.) 2005 29 763 0.18 (0.13 - 0.23) 0.23 (0.17 - 0.28) 2004 4 316 0.09 - 0.31 (0.14 - 0.48) 2003 5 393 0.19 (0.07 - 0.31) 0.34 - 2002 7 1304 0.13 (0.06 - 0.21) 0.34 (0.31 - 0.37) 2001 2 232 0.05 - 0.18 - 2000 3 837 - - 0.24 (0.22 - 0.27) * CPUE15" is for the 15" minimum size season (March 1 - June 15) and excludes open tournaments, professional tournaments and those with special creel rules. **CPUE12" is for the 12" minimum size season (June 16 - Feb 28) and excludes open tournaments, professional tournaments and those with special creel rules.

Table 2. Duncan's grouping (alpha=.05) for annual means of catch per angler hour for Potomac River Club tournaments during the 12 inch minimum size season (means with the same letter are not significantly different).

Year Grouping Mean N 2003 A .35 42 2005 A B C .29 53 2002 B C D .26 32 2000 C D .24 23 2004 C D .23 41 2001 D .21 32

E69

Table 3. Annual means of average fish weight and average weight of large fish (grams) from Potomac River summer/fall (12") tournaments.

Average Fish Weight Largest Fish Weight Year Weight LoCL HiCL Weight LoCL HiCL 2005 858 820 896 1841 1663 2020 2004 854 812 897 1897 1703 2091 2003 826 798 855 1938 1792 2085 2002 870 834 906 2025 1854 2196 2001 830 801 858 1886 1720 2052 2000 783 751 815 1909 1714 2104

Table 4. Annual means of average fish weight and average weight of large fish (grams) from Potomac River spring (15") tournaments.

Average Fish Weight Largest Fish Weight Year Weight LoCL HiCL Weight LoCL HiCL 2005 1206 1150 1262 2325 2131 2519 2004 1213 1179 1246 2228 2092 2363 2003 1220 1170 1270 2177 1932 2409 2002 1198 1124 1273 2241 1946 2535 2001 1141 1065 1218 2290 2019 2561 2000 1210 1157 1262 2181 1961 2399

Table 5. Mean and modal lengths from a sub-sample of tournament caught largemouth bass from Potomac River, 2005.

Spring (15" minimum) Summer/Fall (12" minimum)

Season Season Year Mean SE Mode n Mean SE Mode n 2005 421 2.31 395 212 361 2.71 320 189 2004 411 2.92 400 112 387 3.17 380 228 2003 424 2.69 400 164 379 4.14 360 126 2000 422 2.19 395 222 383 3.23 380 219 1999 427 2.58 400 192 381 2.42 380 341

E70

0.4

0.35

0.3

0.25

0.2

0.15 CPUE (#fish/hr.) 0.1

0.05

0 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005

Spring Summer/Fall

Figure 1. Mean catch per angler hour from spring (15" minimum size limit) and summer/fall (12" minimum size limit) tournaments on the tidal Potomac River. Catch is only for fish brought to weigh-in only.

45 40

35 30 25

20 15

Percent Frequency Percent 10

5 0 300 325 350 375 400 425 450 475 500 525 550 575 Length (mm)

2003 2004 2005

Figure 2. Percent frequencies (mm TL) by 25-millimeter length groups for tidal Potomac River largemouth bass from non-randomly selected spring season (15" minimum size) tournaments.

E71

30

25

20

15

10

Percent Frequency 5

0 300 325 350 375 400 425 450 475 500 525 550 575

Length (mm)

2003 2004 2005

Figure 3. Percent frequencies (mm TL) by 25-millimeter length groups for tidal Potomac River largemouth bass from non-randomly selected summer/fall season (12" minimum size) tournaments.

E72

Study V. Management of Maryland’s Tidal Freshwater Streams

Literature Cited

Anderson, R. O. 1980. Proportional Stock Density (PSD) and Relative Weight (Wr): interpretive indices for fish populations and communities. Pages 27-33 in S. Gloss and B. Shupp, editors. Practical fisheries management: more with less in the 1980's. Proceedings of the 1st Annual Workshop of the New York Chapter American Fisheries Society. New York Cooperative Fishery Research Unit, Ithaca, New York, USA.

Elrod, Joseph H. and Anthony Frank. 1990. Sample size requirements and analysis of tag recoveries for paired releases of lake trout. North American Journal of Fisheries Management. 10:196-201.

Elser, H. J. 1962. Growth rates of Maryland freshwater fishes. Natural Resources Institute, Unv. Of MD. Annapolis, MD. Ref. No. 62-13.

Fullerton, A. H., J. E. Garvey, R. A. Wright, and R. A. Stien. 2000. Over-winter growth and survival of largemouth bass: interaction among size, food, origin, and winter severity. Transactions of the American Fishery Society 129:1-12.

Jackson, J. R., and R. L. Noble. 1995. Selectivity of sampling methods for juvenile largemouth bass in assessments of recruitment processes. North American Journal of Fisheries Management 15:408-418.

Keefer, L.C. and H. Wilson. 1993. Differences in Estimates Generated by two tag types. Pro. Annu. Conf. Southeast. Assoc. Fish and Wild. Agencies 47:611-621.

King, M. 1995. Fisheries Biology, Assessment, and Management. Fishing News Books, Malden, MA, USA. 341 pages.

Krause, R. A. 2002. Exploitation of an estuarine largemouth bass population in northwest Florida. Page 553 in D. P. Philipp and M.S. Ridgeway, editors. Black Bass: Ecology, Conservation, and Management. American Fisheries Symposium 31.

Malvestuto, S. P. 1983. Sampling the recreational fishery. Pages 397-417 in L. A. Neilsen and D.L. Johnson, editors. Fisheries Techniques. American Fisheries Society, Bethesda, Maryland.

Martin, C. C. 1998. Monitoring and enhancement of Nanticoke River largemouth bass population. In Final Performance Report, Federal Aid Grant Project F-41 R, Job 1. Delaware Division of Fish and Wildlife, Dover, DE 19901. Pages 1-16.

E73

Maceina, M.J. 1998.Variation in largemouth bass recruitment in four mainstream impoundments of the Tennessee River. North American Journal of Fisheries Management 18:998-1003.

MD DNR. 1990. Final Performance Report, Federal Aid Grant Project F-48-R-1 Study V, Job 1-5. Maryland Department of Natural Resources, Fisheries Service, Annapolis, MD 21401. Pages 1-75.

MD DNR. 1991. Final Performance Report, Federal Aid Grant Project F-48-R-2 Study V, Job 1-5. Maryland Department of Natural Resources, Fisheries Service, Annapolis, MD 21401. Pages 1-75.

MD DNR. 2000. Survey and management of Maryland’s fishery resources- grant proposal. Federal Aid Grant: F-48-R. MD DNR, Fisheries Service, Annapolis, MD.

MD DNR. 2001. Final Performance Report, Federal Aid Grant Project F-48-11, Study V, Job 1. Maryland Department of Natural Resources, Fisheries Service, Annapolis, MD 21401. Pages B71-B82.

MD DNR. 2001. Final Performance Report, Federal Aid Grant Project F-48-11, Study V, Job 4. Maryland Department of Natural Resources, Fisheries Service, Annapolis, MD 21401. Pages E33-E36.

MD DNR. 2002. Final Performance Report, Federal Aid Grant Project F-48-12, Study V, Job 4. Maryland Department of Natural Resources, Fisheries Service, Annapolis, MD 21401. Pages E32-E37.

MD DNR. 2002. Final Performance Report, Federal Aid Grant Project F-48-12, Study V, Job 1. Maryland Department of Natural Resources, Fisheries Service, Annapolis, MD 21401. Pages E3-E23.

MD DNR. 2003. Final Performance Report, Federal Aid Grant Project F-48-12, Study V, Job 1. Maryland Department of Natural Resources, Fisheries Service, Annapolis, MD 21401.

MD DNR. 2004. Final Performance Report, Federal Aid Grant Project F-48-13, Study V, Job 1. Maryland Department of Natural Resources, Fisheries Service, Annapolis, MD 21401.

Miranda, L.E., W.D. Hubbard, S. Sangare, T. Holman. 1996. Optimizing electrofishing sample duration for estimating relative abundance of largemouth bass in reservoirs. North American Journal of Fisheries Management 16:324-331.

E74

Mohler, J.W. 2003. Producing Fluorescent Marks on Atlantic Salmon Fin Rays and Scales with Calcein via Osmotic Induction. North American Journal of Fisheries Management, 23:1108-1113 . U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Northeast Fishery Center, Lamar, PA.

Negus, Mary T., Tureson, Fred T. 2004. Retention and Nonlethal External Detection of Calcein Marks in Rainbow Trout and Chinook Salmon. North American Journal of Fisheries Management, 24:741-747. Minnesota Department of Natural Resources, Section of Fisheries, Duluth, Minnesota.

Nielsen A.N., 1983, Sampling Considerations. Pages 1-21 in Nielsen A.N.,and D.L. Johnson., editors. Fisheries Techniques, American Fisheries Society.

Richardson-Heft, Carol A., Alan A. Heft, Leon Fewlass and Stephen B. Brandt. 2000. Movement of largemouth bass in northern Chesapeake Bay: Relevance To Sportfishing Tournaments. North American Journal of Fisheries Management. 20:493–501.

Secor, D.H., Dean, J.D., & Laban, E.H., 1991. Manual for Otolith Removal & Preparation for Microstructural Examination. Technical Publication #1991-01. Belle W. Barush Institute for Marine Biology and Coastal Research.

Swingle, H. S. 1956. Determination of balance in farm fish ponds. North American Wildlife Conference, Transactions. Vol. 21, pp. 298-322.

Wege, G. J. & R.O.Anderson. 1978. Relative Weight (Wr): a new index of condition for largemouth bass. In G. D. Novinger and J. D. Dillard, editors, New approaches to the Management of Small Impoundments. Special Pub. No. 5, North Cen.Div. Amer. Fish Soc., pages 79-91.

Wilde, Gene R. 2003. Fisheries Management Feature: Dispersal of tournament caught black bass. Fisheries. 28:10-17.

Virginia Institute of Marine Sciences, December 2004. College of William and Mary. Internet site www.vims.edu/bio/sav , Bay Grasses (SAV) in Chesapeake Bay and Delmarva Peninsula Coastal Bays. Scientific Report # 144 for 20003 segment POTTF, VIMS map #034 & #048.

Virginia Institute of Marine Sciences, December 2004. College of William and Mary. Internet site www.vims.edu/bio/sav , Bay Grasses (SAV) in Chesapeake Bay and Delmarva Peninsula Coastal Bays. Scientific Report # 144 for 2003 segment CB1TF, VIMS map #003.

E75