KDFWR Annual Research Highlights 2009

Home , Atractosteus, Banded pygmy sunfish, Bandfin darter, Bantam sunfish, Cambarus veteranus, Dusky darter

Kentucky Department of Fish and Wildlife Resources

Annual Research Highlights 2009

Volume III, Sept. 2010

Kentucky Department of Fish and Wildlife Resources Annual Research Highlights 2009 Volume III, Sept. 2010

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

Annual Research Highlights 2008 Foreword

4) To expand and diversify our user base and 5) To create a more diverse, effective, and efficient orga- nization.

These two documents are available to the public, and are intended for frequent revision and re-adjustment to incorpo- rate ever changing agency and public needs and interests. The 2009 Kentucky Department of Fish and Wildlife Resources Research Summary represents our targeted efforts to fulfill the goals of our Comprehensive Wildlife Conservation Strategy as well as the goals of the 2008 – 2012 Strategic Plan. These project summaries serve as a testament to KDFWR’s vigi- lance in the conservation of the fish and wildlife resources that we hold in trust for the public. Prescribed burn / Joe Lacefield Funding Sources and Long Term Conservation two unique purposes. The Compre- Guidance to Federal Planning in Kentucky hensive Wildlife Conservation Strategy Programs The mission of the Kentucky (CWCS) is Kentucky’s roadmap for The Kentucky Department of Fish Department of Fish and Wildlife Re- sustaining fish and wildlife diversity. and Wildlife Resources receives no sources (KDFWR) is to conserve and The two primary goals of the CWCS general fund taxpayer dollars. As a enhance fish and wildlife resources are to identify and prioritize important result, the Department relies on hunting and to provide opportunity for hunting, species and habitats of conservation and fishing license fees, boat registra- fishing, trapping, boating, and other concern within Kentucky and to suc- tion fees, and federal programs to fund wildlife related activities. To effec- cessfully implement conservation mea- the six divisions within KDFWR. Proj- tively conserve and enhance game and sures for these species and habitats. In ects that are entirely funded by the state non-game fish and wildlife resources contrast, the 2007 – 2012 Strategic Plan are labeled “non-federal aid” (NFA); in Kentucky, long-term planning is addresses fish and wildlife manage- however, most of the projects included necessary. Over the past several years, ment issues as well as agency issues as in this document are partially or fully KDFWR has collaborated with multiple a whole. funded by federal programs such as the outside agencies, non-profit organiza- State and Tribal Wildlife Grant Pro- tions, professionals, and biologists The five primary goals of the gram, the Wildlife Restoration Act (Pit- to complete two important planning Strategic plan are: tman-Robertson), the Sport Fish Resto- documents: the Comprehensive Wild- 1) To conserve and enhance fish and ration Program (Dingell-Johnson), and life Conservation Strategy (completed wildlife populations and their habi- the Cooperative Endangered Species in 2007; http://fw.ky.gov/kfwis/stwg/) tats; Conservation Fund (Section 6). and the 2008 – 2012 Kentucky Depart- 2) To increase opportunity for, and safe These federal programs serve a va- ment of Fish and Wildlife Resources participation in hunting, fishing, riety of purposes; however, each has an Strategic Plan (http://fw.ky.gov/pdf/ trapping, boating, and other wildlife- underlying goal of fish, wildlife, and/or strategicplan008-01.pdf). Both of related activities; habitat conservation. Brief descrip- these documents are designed to guide 3) To foster a more informed and in- tions of each of these programs are as agency decisions; however, they serve volved public; follows:

Kentucky Department of Fish & Wildlife Resources FOREWORD

Federal Funding Source Program Goal

To develop and implement programs that benefit wildlife and State Wildlife Grant their habitats, specifically species (SWG) Program and habitats of conservation concern

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

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

Conservation Fund species (Section 6) Big South Fork mussel release / Lee McClellan These federal programs provided tents. For projects that have been com- that began in 2009, a brief 1-page over- approximately 18.9 million dollars to pleted and not yet published, a detailed view of the project is included in the KDFWR in 2009 (see Figure 1). For summary will be included in the first second portion (“project highlights”) reference, we have included the state portion of the document. For projects of the document. For select and federal funding sources for ongoing projects, brief updates each project; however, these are included in the last section projects may be additionally of this document. In the table supplemented by outside fund- of contents, an expected date ing provided by non-profit of completion is listed for each organizations or universities. project with a finite end-date. When possible, we listed these This will facilitate looking up sources in addition to the state detailed summaries of com- and federal funding sources. pleted projects in later years. For each project summary, we Additionally, a comprehensive also identify the specific goals glossary of all projects in- of the strategic plan or CWCS cluded in Research Highlights fulfilled, as well as the KD- documents (beginning in 2007) FWR contact responsible for is listed after the Table of Con- each project. tents. How to Use This Please use the following citation Document This document is divided when referencing this into four main sections: pub- (UNTINGAND&ISHING,ICENSES document: lished research, completed &EDERAL2EIMBURSEMENT Kentucky Department of projects, project highlights, Fish and Wildlife Resources "OAT2EGISTRATION&EES and project updates. Citations Annual Research Highlights, for all published research with /THEREG)NCOME4AX#HECK OFFAND)NTEREST)NCOME 2009. Volume III. Publication Kentucky Department of Fish of the Wildlife and Fisheries and Wildlife involvement are Figure 1. Kentucky Department of Fish and Divisions. September, 2010, included in the Table of Con- Wildlife Resources Funding Sources 009 121 pp.

Annual Research Highlights 009 Table of Contents

Published Research Wildlife Contact SWG Coordinator, Danna Baxley Genetic Diversity, Structure, and Recolonization Patterns ([email protected]) for reprints of these publications. of Black Bears in Eastern Kentucky ...... 33

Culp, J.J., A.C. Shepard, and M.A. McGregor. 2009. Bias in GPS Telemetry Studies: A Case Study Using Fish hosts and conglutinates of the pyramid pigtoe Black Bears in Southeastern Kentucky ...... 38 (Pleurobema rubrum). Southeastern Naturalist 8(1):19-22. Factors Impacting Reproductive Success of Interior Dzialak, M.R., K.M. Carter, M.J. Lacki, D.F. Westneat, Least Terns (Sterna antillarum athalassos) in Western and K. Anderson. 2009. Activity of post-fledging Kentucky...... 46 peregrine falcons in different rearing and habitat conditions. Southeastern Naturalist 8(1):93-106. Harris, D., C. Elliott, R. Frederick, and T. Edwards. Project Highlights 2009. Habitat characteristics associated with These projects began in 009 American woodcock (Scolopax minor Gmelin) nests in central Kentucky. The Journal of the Kentucky Academy of Sciences 70(2):114-144. Fishes

Hartman, P.J., D.S. Maehr, and J.L. Larkin. 2009. Alligator Gar Propagation and Restoration in Western Habitat selection by cerulean warblers in Eastern Kentucky Kentucky. The Wilson Journal of Ornithology Estimated Completion Date: December 31, 030 .....54 121(3):469-475. Distribution and Ecology of the Blackfin Sucker Hopkins, R.L. 2009. Use of landscape pattern metrics (Thoburnia atripinnis) in the Upper Barren River, and multiscale data in aquatic species distribution Kentucky models: a case study of a freshwater mussel. Estimated Completion Date: December 31, 010 .....55 Landscape Ecology 29:943-955. West Creek Fish Barrier Removal – Harrison County, Hopkins, R.L. and B.M. Burr. 2009. Modeling freshwater fish distributions using multiscale Kentucky landscape data: A case study of six narrow range Estimated Completion Date: June 30, 011 ...... 56 endemics. Ecological Modelling 220:2024-2034. Description and Geography of Restricted Range Kentucky Fish Endemics Estimated Completion Date: June 30, 011 ...... 57 Completed Projects Fisheries Mollusks

The Ichthyofauna of Rock Creek, Kentucky, with Augmentation of the Slippershell Mussel, Alasmidonta Observations on the Impact of Stocking Rainbow viridis in Guist Creek, Kentucky ...... 58 Trout on Native Fishes ...... 9 Augmentation of the Snuffbox, Epioblasma triquetra in Spatio-temporal Analysis of Fishes in Terrapin Creek, the Rolling Fork River, Kentucky ...... 59 Kentucky...... 15 Five Year Quantitative Monitoring at Thomas Bend on Conservation Status and Habitat of the Longhead the Green River, Kentucky ...... 60 Darter, Percina macrocephala, in Kinniconick Creek, Kentucky...... 21 Augmentation of the Cumberland Bean, Villosa trabalis and its host fish, the Striped Darter,Etheostoma Status Survey of the Northern Madtom, Noturus virgatum in Sinking Creek, Kentucky ...... 62 stigmous, in the Lower Ohio River ...... 28

Kentucky Department of Fish & Wildlife Resources TABLE of CONTENTS

Crayfish Migratory Shorebirds and Waterbirds The Conservation Status of Cambarus veteranus (Big Sandy Crayfish) in Kentucky American Woodcock Nocturnal Field Usage During Estimated Completion Date: June 0, 01 ...... 63 Spring Migration in Central Kentucky Estimated Completion Date: June 0, 011 ...... 73 The Conservation Status of Cambarus parvoculus (Mountain Midget Crayfish) in Kentucky Marsh Bird Monitoring in Kentucky ...... 74 Estimated Completion Date: June 0, 01 ...... 64 Post-Season Banding of American Black Ducks in Response of Crayfish Populations to Restored Stream Kentucky Habitats in Disturbed Portions of East Fork Little Estimated Completion Date: June 0, 01 ...... 75 Sandy River basin, Lawrence & Boyd Counties, Kentucky Estimated Completion Date: June 0, 01 ...... 65 Small Game

Avian Response to Production Stands of Native Warm- Reptiles and Amphibians Season Grasses Estimated Completion Date: June 0, 011 ...... 77 Status Survey of the Alligator Snapping Turtle (Machrochelys temminckii) in Kentucky Northern Bobwhite Population Ecology on Reclaimed Estimated Completion Date: June 0, 01 ...... 66 Mined Land Estimated Completion Date: June 0, 01 ...... 78 Effects of Phragmites Removal on Species of Greatest Conservation Need at Clear Creek Wildlife Bobwhite Focal Area Activity and Monitoring in Management Area Kentucky...... 79 Estimated Completion Date: June 0, 011 ...... 67 Efficacy of Surrogate PropagationTM As a Quail Restoration Technique in Central Kentucky Songbirds and Raptors Estimated Completion Date: June 0, 01 ...... 80

Investigating Local Declines of Rusty Blackbirds in Kentucky Bats Estimated Completion Date: June 0, 01 ...... 68 Foraging and Roosting Ecology of Rafinesque’s Big- Evaluating the Effects of Grassland Management on eared bat in Kentucky Raptor Habitat Use at Peabody Wildlife Management Estimated Completion Date: June 0, 01 ...... 81 Area Estimated Completion Date: June 0, 01 ...... 69 Surveillance and Monitoring of Cave Roosts for Abnormal Emergence Behavior by Rare and Evaluating the Effects of Grassland Management on Endangered Bats in Kentucky Nesting and Migrating Songbirds at Shaker Village of Estimated Completion Date: June 0, 010 ...... 82 Pleasant Hill Estimated Completion Date: June 0, 019 ...... 70 Habitat Management Monitoring the Effects of Wildlife Management Area Forest Stand Improvements on Songbirds ...... 71 Implementation of Habitat Restoration and Improvement Practices on Kentucky Wildlife Management Areas in Sharp-shinned Hawks in Kentucky: Detection, the Bluegrass Region Abundance, Nest-Site Selection, and Breeding Estimated Completion Date: December 1, 010 .....83 Success Estimated Completion Date: June 0, 011 ...... 72

Annual Research Highlights 009 TABLE of CONTENTS

Evaluation of Kentucky’s Largemouth Bass Stocking Project Updates Initiative This section includes brief updates for selected projects that Estimated Completion Date: June 30, 01 ...... 96 began prior to 009. Preliminary Assessment of a Newly Established Blue Sport Fishes Catfish Population in Taylorsville Lake Estimated Completion Date: June 30, 01 ...... 97 The Fishing in Neighborhoods (FINs) Program: Providing Fishing Opportunities to Residents in Cities Evaluation of the Growth of Two Different Stocking across the Commonwealth ...... 85 Sizes of Blue Catfish Stocked into Three North Central Kentucky Small Impoundments Use of Flathead Catfish to Reduce Stunted Fish Estimated Completion Date: June 30, 01 ...... 98 Populations in a Small Kentucky Impoundment Estimated Completion Date: June 30, 01 ...... 86 Impacts of Spawning Habitat Manipulation on Largemouth Bass Year-Class Production in Meldahl Evaluation of Trophy Brown Trout Regulations and Pool, Ohio River Stocking Strategies in the Lake Cumberland Tailwater Estimated Completion Date: June 30, 01 ...... 99 Estimated Completion Date: December 31, 010 .....87 River Sport Fish Surveys – Ohio River ...... 100 Investigation of the Walleye Population in the Rockcastle River and Evaluation of Supplemental Stocking of River Sport Fish Surveys – Kentucky River ...... 101 Native Strain Walleye Estimated Completion Date: June 30, 01 ...... 88 Ohio River Supplemental Stocking Survey ...... 102

Evaluation of White Bass Stocking to Enhance Existing Black Bass Tournament Results in Kentucky ...... 103 Reservoir Populations Estimated Completion Date: June 30, 01 ...... 89 Relative Survival, Growth and Susceptibility to Angling of Two Strains of Brown Trout in the Lake Evaluation of a 15-20 Inch Protective Slot Limit and Cumberland Tailwater ...... 104 5 Fish Creel Limit on Rainbow Trout in the Lake Cumberland Tailwater Estimated Completion Date: June 30, 01 ...... 90 Non Game Fishes Preliminary Assessment of Bluegill and Redear Sunfish Status, Life History, and Phylogenetics of the Populations in Small Impoundments Amblyopsid Cavefishes in Kentucky Estimated Completion Date: June 30, 013 ...... 91 Estimated Completion Date: December 31, 010 .. 105

Investigation of the Restoration of Native Walleye in the Propagation and Reintroduction of the Kentucky Arrow Upper Barren River Darter (Etheostoma sagitta spilotum) in the Upper Estimated Completion Date: June 30, 00 ...... 92 Kentucky River Drainage Estimated Completion Date: December 31, 01 .. 106 The Evaluation of a 40-in Muskellunge Minimum Length Limit at Buckhorn Lake Propagation and Reintroduction of the Cumberland Estimated Completion Date: June 30, 011 ...... 93 Darter (Etheostoma susanae) in the Upper Cumberland River Drainage. Evaluation of a 20-in Minimum Length Limit on Estimated Completion Date: December 31, 01 .. 107 Largemouth Bass at Cedar Creek Lake Estimated Completion Date: June 30, 015 ...... 94 Lake Sturgeon Restoration in the Upper Cumberland River Drainage in Kentucky Evaluation of a 12.0-in Minimum Size Limit on Channel Estimated Completion Date: December 31, 030 ...... 108 Catfish in Kentucky’s Small Impoundments Estimated Completion Date: June 30, 015 ...... 95 Analysis of the Environmental Requirements for the

Kentucky Department of Fish & Wildlife Resources TABLE of CONTENTS

Ashy and Olive Darters in the Rockcastle River Estimated Completion Date: December 1, 010 .. 109

Distribution, Habitat, and Conservation Status of Rare Fishes in Kentucky ...... 110

Mollusks Development of In Vitro (Artificial) Laboratory Culture Methods for Rearing Juvenile Freshwater Mussels. Estimated Completion Date: June 0, 011 ...... 111

Big Game Genetic Characteristics of Restored Elk Populations in Kentucky Estimated Completion Date: June 0, 010 ...... 112

Furbearers Status of the River Otter in Kentucky Estimated Completion Date: June 0, 010 ...... 113

Reptiles and Amphibians Inventory, Monitoring, and Management of Amphibians and Reptiles in Kentucky...... 114

Habitat Management Bottomland Hardwood and Riparian Restoration in Obion Creek/Bayou de Chien Watersheds Estimated Completion Date: June 0, 011 ...... 115

Appendix This section includes references for projects from 00- 009...... 116

KDFWR Contacts More information regarding the project summaries within Evening activity in a gray bat cave this publication can be obtained by contacting the KDFWR / John MacGregor and Mark Gumbert authors or contacts ...... 121

Annual Research Highlights 009 Black bear / Dave Baker Completed Projects

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

The Ichthyofauna of Rock Creek, Kentucky, with Observations on the Impact of Stocking Rainbow Trout on Native Fishes

Stephanie L. Brandt, Kentucky Cumberland River 8-digit hydrologic and treatment, open limestone chan- Department of Fish and Wildlife unit (HUC), which is ranked among the nels, and vertical flow systems (Carew Resources; Sherry Harrel, top five priority conservation areas for and Hohman 2007). Rock Creek’s list- Eastern Kentucky University aquatic species in Kentucky’s Wildlife ing was revised from “nonsupporting Action Plan (KDFWR 2005). How- for aquatic life and swimming” to “par- ever, the lower section of Rock Creek tial support” in 2004 (KDOW 2004). Introduction from White Oak Creek to its confluence Reclamation has been ongoing, and Rock Creek, located in McCreary with the Big South Fork has been im- since the addition of limestone to White County, Kentucky, is a tributary of the pacted by acid mine drainage (AMD) Oak Creek and lower Rock Creek in Big South Fork Cumberland River. The (Pierce 2002). Due to this impairment, 2000, fish abundance and species diver- stream spans thirty-three km (twenty- lower Rock Creek was added to Ken- sity have increased (Carew 2005). one miles), with its origin in Pickett tucky’s 1990 303(d) List of Impaired Six fish Species of Greatest Con- County, Tennessee, and flows north into Waters as “nonsupporting for aquatic servation Need (SGCN) are either Kentucky to its confluence with the Big life and swimming” (KDOW 1990, known to occur or have occurred South Fork Cumberland River (Pierce Pierce 2002). historically in Rock Creek: sawfin 2002). From the state line to its con- The Rock Creek Task Force was shiner (Notropis sp. cf. spectrunculus), fluence with White Oak Creek, Rock formed to solve water quality problems blackside dace (Chrosomus cumber- Creek has been designated a Wild and and consists of 12 state and federal landensis), emerald darter (Etheostoma Scenic River and Outstanding Natural agencies and organizations (Carew baileyi), ashy darter (Etheostoma ci- Resource Water by the Commonwealth 2005). This was accomplished through nereum), bloodfin darter Etheostoma( of Kentucky (KDOW 2009). Rock reclamation activities including lime- sanguifluum), and mountain brook Creek lies within the Big South Fork stone sand treatment, refuse removal lamprey (Ichthyomyzon greeleyi) (Burr and Warren 1986). Two species (sawfin shiner and mountain brook lamprey) are listed as threatened or endangered by the Kentucky State Nature Preserves Commission (KSNPC 2005), two (emerald darter and bloodfin darter) are known to be important fish hosts to federally endangered freshwater mussels, and one (ashy darter) has not been reported from Rock Creek since before 1920 (Burr a nd Warren 19 86). Blackside dace (Chro- somus cumberlandensis) is also a federally threatened species and is known from tributaries Rock Creek / Stephanie Brandt

Annual Research Highlights 009 9 COMPLETED PROJECTS / Fisheries of Rock Creek (Strange 2005). Since the early 1960’s, the USFWS has annually stocked Rock Creek with catchable- size rainbow trout (On- corhynchus mykiss). It is classified as a general trout stream that is managed as a put-and-take fishery as well as seasonal catch and release fishery (KDFWR 2008). Stocking occurs from White Oak Creek upstream to the Kentucky/ Tennessee state line. Adverse impacts on SGCN can occur as a result of stocking predatory fish species. Re- search has shown that predation by stocked rainbow trout can in- Rock Creek / Stephanie Brandt fluence intrastream (habitat) and interstream (geographic) located in lower Rock Creek, with one Recreation Area (Carew and Hohman distributions of small native fishes site located above the AMD, which was 2007). Rock Creek has a small number (Blinn et al. 1993). Interactions among sampled once in 1999 (Carew 2005). of private residences but is mostly for- stocked rainbow trout and SGCN in ested. Coal mining in the Rock Creek Rock Creek have not been studied. Methods drainage diminished after the 1960’s Thus, an intensive survey of the fishes Study Area and towns such as Yamacraw, Fidel- of Rock Creek (including stocked rain- In Kentucky, Rock Creek is lo- ity, and Co-Operative no longer exist bow trout) was needed to update infor- cated within the Plateau Escarpment (Carew and Hohman 2007). The Rock mation on the distribution and status Ecoregion in McCreary County. This Creek watershed is used more as a of SGCN relative to stocked rainbow ecoregion is described by narrow recreational attraction and is visited for trout distributions and habitat usage. ridges, gorges, and cliffs (Woods et al. angling, camping, and hiking. Such information was necessary to de- 2002). This area contains wild streams Fish Distributions and Abundance: termine any potential impact of stocked such as Rock Creek that support many For aquatic sampling purposes, Rock rainbow trout on the five SGCN that rare and endangered fishes and mussels. Creek was divided arbitrarily into three are known to exist in Rock Creek. The Streams within this ecoregion have high sections and sampled only within Ken- ichthyofauna of the Big South Fork gradients with riffles, pools, and boul- tucky. One sampling section encom- Cumberland River drainage was sur- der or bedrock substrate. The Plateau passed Rock Creek from White Oak veyed by Comiskey and Etiner (1972), Escarpment is more rugged, dissected, Creek downstream to the confluence but only included one sampling site in and forested than the surrounding Cum- with the Big South Fork Cumberland Rock Creek in the headwaters in TN. berland Plateau and Eastern Highland River (where stockings of rainbow trout Scott (2007) surveyed the fish fauna Rim (Woods et al. 2002). The majority do not occur). The remaining two sam- within the boundaries of the Big South of Rock Creek is managed by the U.S. pling sections were located upstream Fork National River and Recreation Forest Service (USFS), and the Nation- of White Oak Creek (where stockings Area with three locations within KY. al Park Service manages Rock Creek of rainbow trout do occur) to Bell Fish sampling by KDOW and KDFWR at the confluence of the Big South Fork Farm Horse Camp, and from Bell Farm associated with biomonitioring of rec- Cumberland River which is part of the Horse Camp to the Tennessee state line. lamation activities was limited to sites Big South Fork National River and At least three sites from each section

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

were sampled during each spring, sum- Habitat Conditions contents of two individuals included N. mer, and fall sampling periods. Sample Kentucky Division of Water’s Rapid telescopus (n=2), E. obeyense (n=1), sites exhibiting maximum habitat Habitat Assessment protocol was used while other trout collected had either diversity were chosen within sections to score ten habitat parameters (KDOW empty stomachs or included macroin- of Rock Creek and its tributaries. All 2002) including riparian vegetation, vertebrates. available habitats at each site were thor- bank stability, instream habitat and oughly sampled using a combination channel morphology. These param- Species of Greatest Conservation Need of seining and backpack electrofishing eters were ranked on a numerical scale A total of 70 individuals of Notro- to ensure a complete representation of from 0 (lowest)-20 (highest) and added pis sp. cf. spectrunculus was collected fish species richness and composition. to produce a score used as a relative at 12 sites from the Kentucky/Ten- All fishes collected were identified measure of habitat quality. Temperature nessee line down to the confluence of and enumerated, both in the field (re- (°C), pH, dissolved oxygen (mg/L), and Grassy Fork in lower Rock Creek rang- leased) and in the lab (from preserved conductivity (µs) were measured with a ing from 35 to 61mm in total length. A specimens); SGCN were measured YSI meter at each site. total of 8 individuals of E. baileyi was for TL (mm), and released; except for Rainbow Trout Impacts to SGCN: collected at 3 sites ranging from 24 mm those kept as voucher specimens neces- In addition to assessing distributional to 36 mm. A single E. sanguifluum was sary for accurate identification in the overlap of stocked rainbow trout and collected near the confluence of Koger laboratory. All sample localities were SGCN, all trout collected were retained Fork with a total length of 55 mm. A georeferenced. Vouchered specimens for gut content analysis in the labora- total of 13 individuals of E. cinereum were deposited into the Branson Mu- tory. ranging from 41 to 91 mm in total seum of Zoology at Eastern Kentucky length was collected near the conflu- University. Results ence of Koger Fork and near the conflu- The Kentucky Index of Biotic In- Diversity ence of Grassy Fork. A total of 98 indi- tegrity (KIBI) was used to assess the A total of 44 species representing viduals of C. cumberlandensis ranging fish community structure and biotic 8 families of freshwater fishes was col- from 22 to 79 mm in total length were integrity of Rock Creek. The KIBI is lected in Rock Creek and its tributaries collected in White Oak Creek, Dolen composed of seven metrics that in- during 32 sampling localities. The total Branch, Watts Branch, and Puncheon- clude: (1) Native Species Richness, (2) number of fishes identified during the camp Branch. Ichthyomyzon greeleyi Darter, Madtom, and Sculpin Richness, study was 4,770. The most diverse was not collected during this project in (3) Intolerant Species Richness, (4) families were: Cyprinidae (18), Perci- 2008-2009 sampling. Simple Lithophilic Spawning Species dae (13), and Centrachidae (7). Four Richness, (5) Relative Abundance of families were represented by a single Habitat Insectivorous Individuals, (6) Relative species; Petromyzonidae, Ictaluridae, Using Rapid Assessment protocols Abundance of Tolerant Individuals, and Salmonidae, and Atherinidae. Main (KDOW 2002), the upstream section of (7) Relative Abundance of Facultative stem Rock Creek had a maximum of Rock Creek unaffected by AMD had a Headwater Individuals (KDOW 2002). 29 and a minimum of 8 species per col- mean score of 148(±19) showing it is Values were then ranked as excellent, lection. Tributaries had a maximum of partially supporting the designated use. good, fair, poor, or very poor to de- 5 and a minimum of 0 species per col- The middle section had a mean score of scribe the stream health based on fish lection. 134(±22) indicating it is not supporting community composition. the designated use as well as the lower Historical data concerning the Rainbow Trout section with a mean score of 124(±18). fishes of Rock Creek were obtained Stocked rainbow trout (Oncorhyn- The mean pH for the upstream, middle, through Ecological Data Applica- chus mykiss) were found in 6 of the 32 and lower sections was 8.30(±1.42), tion System (EDAS) database used collections with a total of 11 individu- 7.97(±0.66), and 8.01(±0.28), respec- by KDOW, KDFWR, and USFS and als collected, ranging in size from 7.7 tively. The mean conductivity level for Kentucky Fish and Wildlife Informa- inches (195 mm) to 10.3 inches (261 the upstream, middle, and lower section Systems (KFWIS) which included mm) total length. They were found tions was 0.86(±0.09), 0.15(±0.22), and data from SIUC and KSNPC. A total together with N. sp. cf. spectrunculus 0.21(±0.09) µs, respectively. of 88 past collections taken from 1961 and E. baileyi at 4 of the 6 sites. Rain- KIBI results varied from very poor to 2007 were reviewed. These collec- bow trout were collected throughout in headwater sites to excellent in wad- tions were made by KYAML, KDOW, Rock Creek, including the lower sec- ing sites. Approximately 70 percent of KDFWR, KSNPC, and NPS. tion which does not get stocked. Gut wading sites scored as excellent; while

Annual Research Highlights 009 11 COMPLETED PROJECTS / Fisheries

22 percent were scored as good. Two Cumberland Falls known only from and was not previously recorded from wading sites were scored at fair/poor. one specimen in the Rockcastle River below Hemlock Grove. The presence Headwater sites scored much lower (Burr and Warren 1986), Fishing Creek of this species in lower Rock Creek than wading sites with the majority at (D. Eisenhour, pers. comm.), and Alum indicates either a downstream dispersal poor/very poor. Two sites did not have Creek (Scott 2007). Only one individ- from upper Rock Creek or immigra- fish present during sampling and were ual was collected from Rock Creek at tion from Big South Fork Cumberland scored very poor. Two sites scored as Koger Fork by AML in June 2008 but River. Etheostoma baileyi appears to fair, four sites were poor, and one site was likely misidentified asEtheostoma be uncommon with only eight individu- was very poor. sp. cf. stigmaeum “longhunt darter”. als found in the lower section of Rock The specimen was carefully examined Creek. Chrosomus cumberlandensis Discussion to rule out Cumberland darter (E. su- was collected in Puncheon Camp Diversity sanae), a similar species found below Branch where it has not previously Fish sampling in Rock Creek from Cumberland Falls that is currently un- been reported. C. cumberlandensis was the Kentucky/Tennessee state line der review for federal listing. most abundant in White Oak Creek, to the confluence of Big South Fork Fourteen species previously re- including one site impacted by AMD. Cumberland River found 93 percent ported from Rock Creek were not Individuals were collected in pools; of the fish species previously reported collected during this study. Four of usually around scoured and undercut from the drainage and new occurrence these species are considered valid banks, around root masses, and large records for five additional species not records representing native popula- woody debris. Etheostoma cinereum reported from Rock Creek previously. tions, while two have been introduced. appears to be uncommon with 13 indi- The known fish fauna for Rock Creek The remaining species lack vouchered viduals collected at two sites in lower is now 50 species including the first specimens and are considered prob- Rock Creek. According to Burr and records of palezone shiner (Notropis al- able misidentifications. Questionable Warren (1986), E. cinereum is rare and bizonatus), silver shiner (Notropis pho- species records for which vouchered sporadic in the Big South Fork Cum- togenis), dusky darter (Percina sciera), specimens were lacking or unavailable berland River and reported a pre-1920 johnny darter (Etheostoma nigrum), were not included in the comprehensive record for Rock Creek. A single indi- and banded darter (Etheostoma zonale). species list. Emerald shiner (Notropis vidual was collected in 2000 and 2005 A single specimen of Notropis al- atherinoides) and ghost shiner (N. bu- by AML at the Grassy Fork confluence bizonatus was collected by KDFWR in chanani) were collected by AML and but voucher specimens do not exist. It June 2008 at Koger Fork but was likely vouchered specimens were examined appears that E. cinereum is rare but misidentified asN. stramineus. Notro- and identifications were confirmed. is repopulating the lower section of pis albizonatus is federally endangered Notropis atherinoides was collected at Rock Creek. Etheostoma sanguifluum and is previously known only from the three different sites in 1999 but was not appears to be rare with only one indi- Little South Fork Cumberland River collected previously and has not been vidual collected at the Koger Fork con- in Wayne Co., KY and Marrowbone collected in Rock Creek since 1999. fluence in lower Rock Creek. Burr and Creek, Cumberland Co., KY (Burr and This species is generally distributed Warren (1986) noted a pre-1920 record Warren 1986); the species also has a throughout the state and is found within at the mouth of Rock Creek and a post- disjunct population in the Paint Rock main channels of big rivers (Burr and 1920 record close to the Kentucky/Ten- River, Alabama. Subsequent sampling Warren 1986). Notropis buchanani, nessee line. KDOW reported a single efforts to collect more individuals have another big river species, was collected individual at the Kentucky/Tennessee thus far been unsuccessful. Lower in lower Rock Creek in 1999 and was in 1991, but it is unconfirmed. The KY- Rock Creek was not intensely sampled also not collected previously and has AML reported two individuals collect- historically due to the effects of acid not been collected since 1999. ed above Schoolhouse Branch in 2003 mine drainage. N. albizonatus may and one individual was vouchered and be present within Rock Creek and Big Species of Greatest Conservation Need confirmed. They reported seven indi- South Fork Cumberland River but are The only SGCN not collected dur- viduals from Koger Fork confluence in perhaps in such low numbers they are ing the 2008-2009 field season wasIch- 2003 but no voucher specimens exist. not being detected. Sampling efforts thyomyzon greeleyi, but it has been col- Those were likely misidentifications should continue in Rock Creek and lected within the last three years in the because upon examination of that col- Big South Fork Cumberland to docu- upper section of Rock Creek (Thomas lection, four specimens of E. camurum ment any potential dispersal from Little 2007; Scott 2007). Notropis sp. cf. and no specimens of E. sanguifluum South Fork Cumberland River. spectrunculus appears to be more com- were present. This species is similar in Etheostoma nigrum is rare below mon in the upper portion of Rock Creek appearance to E. camurum, which is

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

abundant in Rock Creek, so it could be of Rock Creek and its tributaries based tion Plan Project Final Report. more abundant than records show. on fish communities seems to be good. Comiskey, C. and D.A. Etnier, 1970. Fishes of the Big South Fork Cum- Rainbow Trout Management Implications berland River. Master’s thesis, The Rainbow trout and two SGCN, Based on the results of this study, I University of Tennessee, Knoxville, N. sp. cf. spectrunculus and E. baileyi recommend management protocols for TN. were collected together at five sites. stocking streams in Kentucky should Comiskey, C. and D.A. Etnier. 1972. Gut contents of two trout specimens include preliminary sampling to deter- Fishes of the Big South Fork Cum- included the remains of N. telescopus mine what species exist in the system. berland River. Journal of the Tennes- and E. obeyense, as well as macroinver- If SGCN species are present, serious see Academy of Science 47:140-146. tebrates. These trout had survived the consideration should be given to not KDOW (Kentucky Department for summer in warmer waters and were the stocking trout in the system. Further Environmental Protection, Division only ones collected that had consumed studies are needed to determine the im- of Water). 1990. 303(d) List of Im- fish. Those individuals that were col- pact of non-native rainbow trout stock- paired Waters in 1990. 200 Fair Oaks lected more recently had gut contents ings on native fish populations. Lane, Fourth Floor, Frankfort, KY of strictly macroinvertebrates. Accord- Since 1999, reclamation activities 40601. http://www.water.ky.gov/NR/ ing to Blinn et al. (1993) and McDow- including limestone sand treatment, rdonlyres/B7F9908-FB33-BA8- all (2003), predation of introduced trout refuse removal, and installation of ABB9-D87557DAD1/0/303d90.pdf on native fish and macroinvertebrates open limestone channels, have led to (Last Updated: 02/20/2009) has been previously recorded. There improvements in water quality as well KDOW (Kentucky Department for En- is no direct evidence of rainbow trout as species richness and abundance in vironmental Protection, Division of predation on SGCN, however, N. tele- lower Rock Creek. Based on these find- Water). 2002. 200 Fair Oaks Lane, scopus and N. sp.cf. spectrunculus are ings, such reclamation activities appear Fourth Floor, Frankfort, KY 40601. found within the same pools as rainbow to be a relatively cost-effective means Methods for assessing biological trout, indicating a potential threat of of mitigating water quality problems integrity of surface waters. Frankfort, predation. due to acid mine drainage, and should KY. be continued to prevent any further KDOW (Kentucky Department for Habitat degradation to the aquatic community. Environmental Protection, Division Conductivity and pH in Rock of Water). 2004. 303(d) List of Im- Creek fell within a normal range to paired Waters in 1990. 200 Fair Oaks support aquatic life. High conductiv- Literature Cited Lane, Fourth Floor, Frankfort, KY ity has been reported to be negatively Blinn, D.W., C. Runck, A. Clark and J. 40601. http://www.water.ky.gov/NR/ correlated with the presence of SGCN, Rinne. 1993. Effects of rainbow trout rdonlyres/B7F9908-FB33-BA8- including arrow darter (Etheostoma predation on Little Colorado spine- ABB9-D87557DAD1/0/303d90.pdf sagitta sagitta) and blackside dace (C. dace. Transactions of the American (Last Updated: 02/20/2009) cumberlandesis) in headwater streams Fisheries Society 122:139-143. KDOW (Kentucky Department for En- in eastern Kentucky (Mattingly et al Burr, B. M., and M. L. Warren, Jr. vironmental Protection, Division of 2005; Thomas 2007). 1986. A Distributional Atlas of Ken- Water). 2009. Special Use Waters. The majority of wading sites sam- tucky Fishes. Kentucky State Nature 200 Fair Oaks Lane, Fourth Floor, pled in Rock Creek scored excellent or Preserves Commission, Scientific Frankfort, KY 40601. http://www. good in the KIBI. The headwater sites and Technical Series Number 4. water.ky.gov/sw/specialwaters/ (Last scored lower than expected but it is Carew, M.B. 2005. Acid Mine Drain- Updated: 02/ 20/ 2009) likely due to the low abundance of fish age abated in Rock Creek. United KDFWR (Kentucky Department of present in headwater streams. Darter States Natural Resources and En- Fish and Wildlife Resources). 2005 and intolerant species richness values vironmental Protection Cabinet. Kentucky’s Comprehensive Wildlife were low in headwater streams. There Nonpoint Source Section Technical Conservation Strategy. #1 Sports- was a large percentage of tolerant indi- Bulletin Section 319. man’s Lane, Frankfort, Kentucky viduals which contributed to the lower Carew, M.B. and S. Hohman. 2007. 40601. http://fw.ky.gov/kfwis/stwg/ scores at these sites. All headwater Nonpoint Source Acid Runoff Pollu- (Last updated: 9/21/2005) sites seemed to be in good health with tion in Rock Creek and Back Creek KDFWR (Kentucky Department of the exception of White Oak Creek be- from Deep Mine and Coal Processing Fish and Wildlife Resources). 2008. cause of the acid mine drainage effects Refuse Disposal Sites. 2000 Rock Trout Streams Program in Kentucky that are still present. The overall health Creek Watershed Clean Water Ac- for 2008. #1 Sportsman’s Lane,

Annual Research Highlights 009 13 COMPLETED PROJECTS / Fisheries

Frankfort, Kentucky 40601. http:// actions of American Fisheries Soci- dace from Rock Creek, McCreary fw.ky.gov/troutstreams08.asp?lid=8 ety. 132:229-238. Co., Kentucky. Daniel Boone Na- 85&NavPath=C(Last Updated: Nelson. J.S. , E.J. Crossman, H. Es- tional Forest Report. 05/14/08) pinosa-Perez, L.T. Findley, C. R. Thomas, M. R. 2007. Targeted surveys KSNPC (Kentucky State Nature Pre- Gilbert, R.N. Lea, and J.D. Williams. for species of greatest conservation serves Commission). 2005. Rare and 2004. Common and scientific names need in Kentucky. Section IV of the Extirpated Biota of Kentucky. 801 of fishes from the United States, Interim Annual Performance Report Schenkel Lane, Frankfort, KY 40601 Canada, and Mexico. American for State and Tribal Wildlife Grant: http://www.naturepreserves.ky.gov/ Fisheries Society, Special Publication T-9-RSI-1, Ichthyofauna Resources NR/rdonlyres/C305FC3-035-1- 29. Bethesda. Maryland. of Kentucky. Kentucky Department 9AE-C9AE0D091/0/ets005.pdf Pierce, R.N. 2002. Non-support to of Fish and Wildlife Resources. (Last Updated 02/21/2009) partial support: reclamation of the Frankfort, Kentucky. Lachner, E.A., and Jenkins, R.E. 1967. lower Rock Creek watershed, Mc- Woods, A.J., J.M. Omernik, W.H. Mar- Systematics, distribution, and evolu- Creary County, Kentucky. United tin, G.J. Pond, W.M. Andrews, S.M. tion of the chub genus Nocomis (Cy- States Natural Resources and En- Call, J.A. Comstock, D.D. Taylor. prinidae) in the Southwestern Ohio vironmental Protection Cabinet. 2002. Ecoregions of Kentucky (color River Basin, with the description of a Nonpoint Source Section Technical poster with map, descriptive text, new species. Copeia. No. 3:557-580. Bulletin No. 3. summary tables, and photographs): Mattingly, H.T., J.E. Detar, B.K. Jones, Scott, E. M., Jr. 2007. Survey of Reston, VA., U.S. Geological Survey and C.F. Walton. 2005. Factors af- Big South Fork National River and (map scale 1:100,000). fecting the distribution and recovery Recreational Area. Unpublished re- of the threatened blackside dace in port submitted to the National Park Kentucky and Tennessee. Unpub- Service, Appalachian Highlands lished final project report prepared Network, Asheville, North Carolina. Funding Source: State Wildlife Grant for the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Ser- 59 pp. (SWG) vice, Tennessee Ecological Services Smith, P.W. 1965. A preliminary anno- Field Office, Cookeville, Tennessee. tated list of the lampreys and fishes KDFWR Strategic Plan. Goal 1. 126 pp. of Illinois. Illinois Natural History Strategic Objective 5. Comprehen- McDowall, R.M. 2003. Impacted of in- Survey Biological Notes. 54:1-12. sive Wildlife Conservation Strategy: troduced salmonids on native galaxi- Strange, R.M. 2005. Genetic variabil- Appendix 3.9; Class Actinopterygii ids in New Zealand upland streams: ity and relationships of a recently and Cephalaspidomorphi: Taxa spe- A new look at an old problem. Trans- discovered population of blackside cific research project #1.

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

Spatio-temporal Analysis of Fishes in Terrapin Creek, Kentucky

Donovan B. Henry, Lennie J. Pitcher, and Collin Beachum, Three Rivers Environmental Assessments, LLC KDFWR Contact: Ryan Oster

Introduction Terrapin Creek is located in the southeast corner of Graves County, Kentucky with eastern portions of the watershed in southwestern Calloway Terrapin Creek / M. Thomas County, Kentucky. The stream origi- nates in Kentucky and flows southward muddy slope before entering the creek, has been listed in the top five of highest into Henry County, Tennessee where limiting access by fishes during low priority for conservation management it joins the Obion River. The Obion flows. Downcutting has also reduced efforts that benefit the largest number River is a direct tributary of the Mis- floodplain connectivity, leaving wet- of species listed as SGCN in sections sissippi River, making Terrapin Creek lands perched and their associated fish 4.3.2 and 4.3.3 of the Wildlife Action part of the Mississippi River Drain- populations disjunct from the stream Plan. Under the mandate to acquire age. This hydrologic feature is fairly community. East Branch Terrapin and manage significant examples of unique in Kentucky, as nearly all other Creek, however, is largely unaltered Kentucky’s rare species and natural streams in the state are in the Ohio and still sits in its natural streambed. communities, the Kentucky State Na- River Drainage. Terrapin Creek lies on Terrapin Creek supports six fish ture Preserves Commission (KSNPC) the Eastern Gulf Coastal Plain, and as species that are unique in the state of committed to long term protection of is common in coastal plains streams, Kentucky, including the Blacktail Red- Terrapin Creek in 1992 and now owns it is characterized by unconsolidated horse, Moxostoma poecilurum; Least nearly 250 acres of Terrapin Creek sand and small gravel substrates. These Madtom, Noturus hildebrandi; Brown floodplain, forming the Terrapin Creek loose substrates are subject to major Madtom, Noturus phaeus; Gulf Darter, State Nature Preserve (Cicerello 2004). shifts during high water events, and Etheostoma swaini; Brighteye Darter, This study was initiated to gather significant alterations in the scour and E. lynceum; and Firebelly Darter, E. detailed information on the status of the deposition patterns of the streambed are pyrrhogaster (Burr and Carney 1984, fishes of Terrapin Creek and to assess evident when the high waters recede. Burr and Warren 1986). In addition, potential changes in the fish fauna over It is a 3rd order stream formed by East at least four other species having time. Additional objectives included and West Branch Terrapin Creek, with a limited ranges in Kentucky maintain synthesizing known data on the fish small watershed of approximately 112 viable populations in Terrapin Creek, assemblage of Terrapin Creek, as well km2. West Branch of Terrapin Creek including the Bluntface Shiner, Cypri- as establishing detailed baseline as- and the Terrapin Creek mainstem were nella camura; Central Mudminnow, semblage data using methods which ditched and channelized in the 1920’s Umbra limi; Dollar Sunfish,Lepomis are quantitative and repeatable for long and 1930’s from the headwaters to the marginatus; and Goldstripe Darter, term monitoring. Fish assemblage confluence with the Obion River. This Etheostoma parvipinne. All ten of the structure was examined temporally, has resulted in obvious downcutting aforementioned species are Species in over the course of the study, as well as of the streambed, and subsequently, Greatest Conservation Need (SGCN) over the last 55 years by making com- the tributaries. The spring fed rivulets and considered imperiled or critically parisons to previous studies and avail- along the length of Terrapin Creek are imperiled in Kentucky (NatureServe able museum collections. Long-term deeply incised, but still often set several 2004) and threatened or endangered studies are essential for detecting shifts inches above the bed of Terrapin Creek. by Kentucky State Nature Preserves in species composition and abundance These rivulets trickle down a short Commission (2004). This watershed in stream systems. Quantitative studies

Annual Research Highlights 009 15 COMPLETED PROJECTS / Fisheries

over relatively long time periods can pack electrofisher and 6’ x 15’ minnow Water quality and physical descriptive provide strongly supported evidence for seine with 1/8” mesh. Sites were thor- data were taken at the above mentioned relative stability or instability of fish oughly sampled using a combination of sites, as well. Organic and inorganic assemblages and can reveal potentially seining and backpack electrofishing to substrates were classified based on catastrophic changes (Stewart et al. ensure a complete representation of fish percent coverage of the stream bottom 2005). The fish assemblage was further species richness and composition. Col- and categorized according to particle characterized spatially along the course lected fishes were held in an instream diameter as follows: boulder (>60.4 of the stream from the headwaters to live well, identified, and counted in the cm), cobble (25.4 – 60.4 cm), pebble the Kentucky/Tennessee border. The field, and returned to the stream where (7.6 – 25.4 cm), gravel (0.2 – 7.6 cm), overarching goal of this project was to collected. Voucher specimens were sand (0.074mm – 0.2 cm), and bedrock, provide useful information for moni- preserved and deposited in the Southern silt, muck/mud, and leafpack (no size toring the conservation status of the Illinois University at Carbondale Fluid classes). Depths were taken with a 2 unique fish assemblage found in Ter- Vertebrate Collection as a permanent meter graduated staff by wading in a rapin Creek. record of species occurrence. zigzag pattern throughout the sample Eight species were also measured area and periodically taking a reading. Methods to total length to develop length fre- A minimum of 40 depths were recorded Fish Assemblage quency histograms for each taxon. in each quantitative area. This method Five sites were selected to be sam- The species measured included seven was employed to insure all available pled for fishes every two months for SGCN in Kentucky: Blacktail Red- depth ranges were represented. Current two consecutive years, as water levels horse, Moxostoma poecilurum; Least velocity was measured with a Marsh- and weather permitted. This included Madtom, Noturus hildebrandi; Brown McBirney Flo-Mate Model 2000 flow three sites on the mainstem of Terra- Madtom, Noturus phaeus; Gulf Darter, meter at 0.6 of the depth from the sur- pin Creek: 1) 200 meters downstream Etheostoma swaini; Brighteye Darter, face. Features such as stream morphol- of Kentucky State Route 1485 (TPC. E. lynceum; Firebelly Darter, E. pyr- ogy types (e.g. riffle, run, and pool), CR1485); 2) 400 meters upstream of rhogaster; and Goldstripe Darter, E. woody debris, and aquatic vegetation Alderdice Road (formerly Carl Brown parvipinne; and one additional species, were visually estimated. Stream widths Road) (TPC.ALDRD); and, 3) 0.25 the Brindled Madtom, Noturus miurus. and length of sampled area were mea- miles upstream of Kentucky State A minimum of 30 individuals were sured using a standard 100 meter roll Route 97 (TPC.RT97). The remaining measured at each site, for each species, tape. two stream sites were on West Branch on each collection date. In cases where Terrapin Creek approximately 100 more than 30 individuals of a target Historic Land Use meters upstream of Swan Road (TPC. species were collected, a subsample of To evaluate the land use practices SWNRD), and on East Branch Terrapin at least 30 individuals was measured. over the last twenty years, Landsat 5 Creek approximately 40 meters down- TM imagery for the area was downstream of Swan Road (TPC.SWRDTR). Habitat Evaluation loaded from GLOVIS website (http:// Three additional sites in wetlands and A Physical Characterization/Water glovis.usgs.gov) for three dates, July tributaries were sampled once each to Quality Field Data Sheet, a Habitat 17, 1986, June 26, 1996, and July further characterize the status of the Assessment Field Data Sheet – Low 24, 2006. Original Landsat data were watershed. These sites included Beaver Gradient Streams (Barbour et. al. reduced to watershed extent by vec- Slough downstream of Route 97 (TPC. 1999), and a Qualitative Habitat Evalu- tor masking using an ESRI shapefile BVRSL), the wetland adjacent to Terra- ation Index and Use Assessment Field outlining the HUC 12 boundary for pin Creek on County Road 1485 (TPC. Sheet (Ohio EPA) were all employed at Terrapin Creek Watershed. Raw digital SWAMP), and the ditch running from the three mainstem quantitative seine number data were corrected to top of this same wetland to Beaver Slough sites. These habitat analyses provided atmosphere reflectance values. Four and ultimately to Terrapin Creek (TPC. scoring criteria for instream habitat, user defined classes (dense vegetation, MUD). riparian quality, channel morphology, light vegetation, bare soil, and water) For the quantitative stream sites, etc., so the sites could be directly com- were created by using region of interest a minimum of 100 meters of stream pared. Only physical measurements tools with 2D scatter plots and various reach was sampled. In the three tribu- and qualitative habitat notes were taken band ratios. These regions of interest tary and wetland sites, sampling con- at the headwater, wetland, slough, and were then used in a minimum distance tinued until the available habitat types ditch sites due to size and/or water supervised classification for each of the were exhausted. Fish sampling was body type not being applicable to the three sets of images. Change detec- achieved with an ETS pulse D/C back- quantitative habitat assessment sheets. tion analysis was performed between

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

all pairs of images; 1986 – 1996, 1996 abundant at both Alderdice and RT 97, several factors that are not related to – 2006, and 1986 – 2006. Change de- and sixth highest in abundance at CR shifts in the overall fish assemblage of tection analysis calculates “from – to” 1485. Cyprinids were the next most the drainage. The 2007-2009 head- status of pixel classification between prevalent group with Bluntface Shin- water samples, East and West Branch, images and reports these changes in ers (Cyprinella camura), Bluntnose were taken well upstream of Smith’s km2 of each class. All image transfor- Minnows (Pimepahles notatus), Creek samples. The headwater samples col- mations and analyses were performed Chubs (Semotilus atromaculatus), and lected by Smith (1994) were actually using ENVI 4.7 software. These results Suckermouth Minnows (Phenacobius at CR 1485, one of the sites considered should be viewed as strictly descriptive, mirabilis) abundant at all three sites. a lower mainstem site in this study. as there was no attempt to statistically Two ictalurid species, the Least Mad- The wetland sites sampled during each determine accuracy of the initial image tom (Noturus hildebrandi) and Brown time period were not the same, and in classifications. Madtom (N. phaeus), and two sucker fact, the wetland site sampled during species, the Blacktail Redhorse (Mox- this study in March 2008 was partially Results ostoma poecilurum) and Western Creek drained in April 2008, removing most Fish Assemblage Chubsucker (Erimyzon claviformis), of the aquatic community. This was A total of 44,405 fishes represent- were also represented well at these likely not the only time this area had ing 47 species and 12 families were sites. been drained, and current management collected in ten sampling trips between East Branch, West Branch, and practices may be for a moist-soil unit. July 2007 and July 2009. The most the mud ditch were also similar in the West Branch differed significantly abundant fish collected overall was the relative abundance of captured fishes. from all other stream sites most likely Johnny Darter (Etheostoma nigrum), Creek Chub, Johnny Darter, and West- because it is the smallest and appears to which accounted for just over one- ern Creek Chubsucker were common be the most impacted. West Branch ap- fourth of all of the fishes captured. at all three sites. However, unlike pears to have recovered the least from Creek Chub (Semotilus atromaculatus), East and West Branch, the mud ditch channelization and has a very narrow Bluntnose Minnow (Pimephales no- and Beaver Slough had a surprisingly riparian zone with row crop fields on tatus), Brighteye Darter (Etheostoma high number of Firebelly Darters. The both sides. It is the most prone to dry- lynceum), and Bluntface Shiner (Cypri- swamp samples were not very speciose ing during low water periods of all of nella camura) rounded out the five and consisted of only centrarchids, the stream sites, and the fauna consists most abundant species collected over including Bluegill (Lepomis macrochi- mostly of pioneer species such as Creek all samples, respectively. The next five rus), Warmouth (L. gulosus), and Dol- Chub, Bluntnose Minnow, and Western most abundant species collected across lar Sunfish L.( marginatus). However, Creek Chubsucker, and tolerant species all samples in Terrapin Creek dur- five Bantam SunfishL. ( symmetricus), such as Green Sunfish Lepomis( cyanel- ing this survey included the Firebelly were also captured in this remnant wet- lus). The mud ditch has a similar set of Darter (Etheosotma pyrrhogaster), land. Bantam Sunfish typically inhabit conditions to that of West Branch, with Least Madtom (Noturus hildebrandi), good quality (generally clear and well drying conditions occurring when there Redfin Shiner Lythrurus( umbratilis), vegetated) lowland habitats (Etnier and is not water flowing out of the wetland. Western Creek Chubsucker (Erimyzon Starnes 1993). This is probably why the relative abun- claviformis), and Least Brook Lamprey Smith (1994) found that the spe- dance of these two sites was not signifi- (Lampetra aepyptera), respectively. cies composition of the wetlands, cantly different. Beaver Slough is the Over 90% of the fishes collected headwater, and downstream sites of wetland site sampled by Smith (1994), during this program were collected at Terrapin Creek did not differ. Spatial and this site is spring fed, supporting a the three lower mainstem sites. This analysis of the relative abundance of more stable aquatic community. The was due to the increased frequency of the fish community in Terrapin Creek small size of this site, often no more sampling at the lower sites, but also due from 2007-2009 showed that the lower than 1.5 meters wide, lends itself to a to the diminutive size of the stream/wa- three mainstem sites (CR 1485, Al- more headwater community like that ter body at other sites. The total catch derdice Rd, and Rt. 97), East Branch of West Branch. However, with peren- at the lower three sites was very similar of Terrapin, and Beaver Slough were nial flows, more mainstem species such in abundance as well as species com- indeed similar. However, during this as Firebelly Darter and Dollar Sunfish position. Percids ranked very high with time period, the species assemblage of are common here as well. In addition, Johnny Darter being the most abundant the swamp, West Branch, and the mud the mud ditch connects Beaver Slough at all three sites, and Brighteye Darter ditch were significantly different than to the swamp, so wetland species (Etheostoma lynceum) and Firebelly the downstream sites. The difference such as Banded Pygmy Sunfish Elas-( Darter (E. pyrrhogaster) second most in these findings could be caused by soma zonatum) also occur here. This

Annual Research Highlights 009 17 COMPLETED PROJECTS / Fisheries

combination of factors is likely what as 1954. Temporal data was sorted comparisons to total number of fishes. maintains a diverse fish assemblage in based on obvious breaks or patterns in Trends in relative abundance could still Beaver Slough and resembles headwa- collecting activity, or former surveys be detected, despite the differences in ter, swamp, and downstream sites, as (e.g. Smith 1994 and Cicerello 2004). sample size. The 1978-84 data used observed by Smith (1994) and in this This would lump data from specific in this comparison are from museum study. time periods to provide a robust enough records and may not reflect the actual Temporal shifts in the relative data set to allow for quantitative com- numbers of fishes collected over this abundance of Terrapin Creek fishes parisons. For the time periods in 1954, time. The 1988-89 data collected by over the course of this study (July 1999-01, and 2005-07, collection data Smith (1994) is pulled from the unpub- 2007 – July 2009) were not significant was insufficient for analyses, but in- lished master’s thesis, and total number (p>0.05). However, total number of formative nonetheless. Collection data of fish for common and target species captured specimens varied somewhat from 1954 was not extensive, but did were reported, but the total number was between samples and among seasons. give some insight into the presence, and not always reported for some of the less The average number of individuals potential absence, of some of the fish common species. For the less common captured across all sample dates would species in Terrapin Creek at the time. species, museum records were used to have been approximately 4,400 fishes, The one Bluntface Shiner was the only fill these gaps. The 2000-01 data came with the highest recorded abundance SGCN vouchered in this sample. Every from a quantitative effort by Kentucky coming during the October 2007 other species included in this collection State Nature Preserves Commission sample (7,223 individuals) and the is a common, tolerant, or pioneer spe- (Cicerello 2004) and is the actual col- lowest recorded catch rates on March cies. Given the paucity of data from lection data. For this comparison, the 2009 (2,976 individuals). For most this time period, an accurate description data from 1978-84, 1988-89, and the sample dates, total number of captured of the assemblage cannot be surmised, 2007-09 TREA data was inclusive of fishes differed only by a few hundred but the absence of the other nine SGCN all samples at all sites. The monitor- individuals from the two year average. is compelling. ing effort by Cicerello in 2000-01 was These differences were probably more One of the most interesting trends limited to one site at Alderdice Road, indicative of typical seasonal and an- observed in the 1999-2001 data, is this but was compared to the other data sets nual shifts in the Terrapin Creek fish is the first time Bluntnose Minnow, which encompassed the entire water- community. For example, the highest Emerald Shiner (Notropis atherinoi- shed. This decision was made since collection dates were typically ob- des), and Mississippi Silvery Minnow the Alderdice RD data collected by served in summer and early fall when (Hybognathus nuchalis) were observed TREA in 2007-09, when compared to young of year fishes are most abundant in the stream. The immigration of Mis- the combined data collected across all and most susceptible to the sampling sissippi Silvery Minnow and Emerald sites during this time period, was not gear used in this study. During the Shiner into the system may have been signigicantly different (p>0.5). And October 2007 sample, young-of year in response to channelization of both when comparing the 2000-01 data col- of several species were more prevalent the Obion River and Terrapin Creek. lected by Cicerllo at Alderdice RD to than during any other sample period These are typically riverine species that the 2007-2009 data collected by TREA (e.g. Johnny Darter, Western Creek are frequently found in the Mississippi at Alderdice RD, there was again no Chubsucker, Bluntnose Minnow, and River. Bluntnose Minnow, a common significant difference (p>0.5). In addi- Blacktail Redhorse). Young-of year species in small streams throughout tion, Smith (1994) stated that the fauna fishes are small enough that they would eastern North America, may have found from this site did not differ from other go through the mesh of the seine during its way into the system from waifs in sites in the watershed during the 1988- the early spring samples, so are under- the Mississippi River as well. Blunt- 89 analysis either. represented during this time period. nose Minnow is also a tolerant species Johnny Darter was the most com- Normal rates of mortality expected in and may have been able to capitalize on monly collected species across all four some of the short lived fishes in Ter- the channelized stream habitat. time periods. Four other species that rapin Creek (e.g. some darter species) The time periods from 1978 were most abundant in all four time have occurred by late fall and winter, – 1984, 1988-1989 (Smith 1994), 2000- periods include Bluntface Shiner, Creek further lowering catch rates during the 2001 (Cicerello 2004), and the data Chub, Brighteye Darter, and Firebelly late fall and early spring samples. from this study, 2007-2009, were all Darter. When comparing relative abun- Temporal differences in the fish compared based on relative abundance dance across the four time periods, assemblage of Terrapin Creek were of captured fishes. The differences in the 2007-09 assemblage was not sig- further compared qualitatively and numbers of reported fishes and col- nificantly different than that of any of quantitatively using data from as early lection techniques do not allow for the historic time periods. The relative

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

abundance of the fish community col- woody debris and whole trees would of the spring fed Beaver Slough. The lected by Cicerello in 2000-01 was also be introduced to the system. When water in Beaver Slough is perennial, not significantly different than that of trees and woody debris became lodged while that in the ditch is dependent on the 1988-89 community data collected downstream, cut banks and scour flows from the wetland. Sampling in by Smith. The relative abundance of and depostion patterns would change the ditch took place shortly after the species pulled from 1978-84 museum rapidly. These changes in scour and open wetland was drained, and flow record data, however, was significantly deposition patterns often decreased was still adequate to support fishes. different than the relative abundance of or increased the amount of pool, run, East and West Branch sites were fishes collected in 2000-01 and 1978- or riffle habitat in a sample reach, the both headwater sites that had intermit- 84 time periods. stream width, velocities, and instream tent flows in the summer and early fall. habitat. Some of the pooled areas in both sites Habitat Evaluation Substrates throughout Terrapin presumably had groundwater influx, as East Branch, West Branch, Al- Creek were predominantly a mixture they would remain cool and clear, and derdice RD, CR 1485, and the RT 97 of loose sand and gravel, with lesser continue to support fishes, even after site could all be characterized as low amounts of silt and clay in the down- complete isolation. gradient stream reaches with abundant stream reaches. The sand-gravel mix- sand and small gravel substrates, with ture was highly unconsolidated, espe- Historic Land Use varying quantities of woody debris. cially after high water events, with field The overall trend recognized from Each sampled section contained at least workers often sinking to their knees the Landsat images is a loss of dense one riffle-run-pool complex, but each or hips while sampling. Large woody vegetation (28 km2) and increases in typically had two or more. Habitat debris (LWD) was probably one of the bare soils and light vegetation from was analyzed at the beginning and end most important habitat types available 1986 to 2006. This was especially evi- of the two year sampling period, as in Terrapin Creek, providing stable sub- dent in the headwater area of the Terra- changes in the types and availability of strate for colonization by invertebrates, pin Creek watershed. Areas considered habitat were evident over the course of spawning habitat for fishes, and refuge light vegetation in the Landsat images the study. from high flows. Woody debris was can be old field, pasture, or row crop Quantitative assessment scores, present in every quantitative stream fields. The increase in light vegetation QHEI and Habitat Assessment, gener- site, and was prevalent upstream and and bare soil illustrates the transforma- ally decreased from the 2007 to 2009 downstream of each site as well. tion of wooded areas to agricultural evaluation. The one obvious exception Habitat in the swamp was typi- lands. was the RT 97 QHEI score. QHEI cal of a wetland, with no flow, soft, scores are the total habitat “points” detritus covered mud, and abundant Discussion out of a possible 100, and the Habitat aquatic vegetation in the summer, Despite the changes in land use Assessment Score has a maximum of mostly consisting of Duckweed (Lemna practices, channelization, and wetland 200 “points”. These scores do provide sp.). The swamp was divided into two draining, the simple comparison of rel- a benchmark for stream health, but in sections by a small berm. The smaller ative abundance of the Terrapin Creek the case of Terrapin Creek, they are eastern portion of the wetland held wa- fish assemblage over time indicates that probably more applicable for monitor- ter throughout the two year sampling the fish community may now be fairly ing trends. The decrease in the habitat period, while the large open water area stable. Although the relative abundance scores is most likely due to the tran- to the west was drained in the spring of fishes reported in 1978-84 and 1988- sitional stage this stream appears to of 2008. The permanent portion on the 89 was significantly different than that be going through. Raw, recently cut eastern edge is where sampling took of the fishes collected in 2000-01, the banklines, and unstable, embedded place for this study. only two species in greatest conserva- substrates lower the habitat evalua- The mud ditch was formed by wa- tion need that went down in absolute tion scores, and these attributes are ter running from the wetland to Beaver abundance across sample periods, were indeed present in Terrapin Creek. Bank Slough. Both Beaver Slough and the the Goldstripe Darter (Etheostoma par- sloughage and recently cut banklines ditch were less than 1.5 meters wide, vipinne) and Central Mudminnow (Um- are present throughout the stream. with soft silt and sand substrates. Both bra limi). The total number of Gulf Over the course of this study, newly sites were enclosed in dense canopy Darters (Etheostoma swaini) (n=183) formed or widened point bars became cover, with abundant detritus and small and Dollar Sunfish (n=253) observed present in the sample reaches, as well woody debris. The water in both sites in the 2007-09 was also relatively as the subsequent scour on the opposite was relatively clear, with the ditch wa- low, when compared to their relative bankline. As banklines shifted, new ter being considerably warmer than that abundance in other time periods. The

Annual Research Highlights 009 19 COMPLETED PROJECTS / Fisheries

discrepancy in sampling effort in the Literature Cited Aspects of Brown Madtom, Noturus wetland and slough would probably ac- Barbour, Michael T., Jeroen Gerritsen, phaeus, Life History in Northern count for most of the reduced numbers Blaine D. Snyder, and James B. Mississippi. Copeia (3) pp. 757-762. in Goldstripe Darter, Central Mudmin- Stribling. 1999. Rapid Bioassessment Cicerello, R. R. 2004. Assessment now, and Dollar Sunfish. The numbers Protocols for Use in Streams and of the Terrapin Creek Fish Com- of juvenile Blacktail Redhorse dropped Wadeable Rivers: Periphyton, Ben- munity, Terrapin Creek State Nature significantly over the course of the thic Macroinvertebrates, and Fish. Preserve, Graves County, Kentucky. 2007-09 study, and Burr and Gerwig Second Edition. EPA 841/B-99/002. Technical Report. Kentucky State (2009) reported missing year classes Office of Water, Washington, D. C. Nature Preserves Commission, from previous years in their findings as Bell, D., and T. J. Timmons. 1991. Frankfort, Kentucky. well. Annual or seasonal fluctuations Life History of the Brighteye Darter, Etnier, D. A., and W. C. Starnes. 1993. may impact the number of adults that Etheostoma lynceum (Pisces: Perci- The Fishes of Tennessee. University are able to ascend Terrapin Creek for dae), in Terrapin Creek, Kentucky. of Tennessee Press, Knoxville. spawning on successive years, but they Proceeds Southeastern Fishes Coun- Mayden, R. L., and S. J. Walsh. 1984. appear to maintain a viable population cil 23:1-6. Life History of the Least Madtom, in the stream. The other six SGCN Boschung, H.T., and R.L. Mayden. Noturus hildebrandi (Siluriformes: found in Terrapin Creek, including 2004. Fishes of Alabama. Smithson- Ictaluridae) with comparisons to Bluntface Shiner, Brighteye Darter, ian Books, Washington, D.C. Related Species. American Midland Brown Madtom, Firebelly Darter, and Burr, B. M., and D. A. Carney. 1984. Naturalist. 112:349-368. Least Madtom were all well represent- The Blacktail Redhorse, Moxostoma NatureServe. 2004. NatureServe Ex- ed in the most recent sampling period. poecilurum (Catostomidae), in Ken- plorer: An online encyclopedia of life tucky, with other additions to the [web application]. Version 4.7. Na- Management Implications State ichthyofauna. Transactions of tureServe, Arlington, Virginia. The purchase of the Terrapin Creek the Kentucky Academy of Science 45 Smith, W. D. 1994. Community Struc- State Nature Preserve was an impor- (1-2):73-81. ture and Spatiotemporal Variation of tant step in conserving this unique fish Burr, B. M., and R. M. Gerwig. 2009. Fishes in Terrapin Creek, Kentucky. fauna in Kentucky. As land use prac- Life History and Population Charac- Master’s Thesis Southern Illinois tices in this area shift to developed ag- teristics of Moxostoma poecilurum University Carbondale. Carbondale, ricultural areas, the persistence of this (Jordan), the Blacktail Redhorse Illinois. 188 pp. stream community is still threatened. (Cypriniformes: Stewart, J. S., C. S. Schieble, R. C. Semi-annual quantitative sampling is Catostomidae), in Terrapin Creek, Cashner, and V. A. Barko. 2005. recommended to monitor the Terrapin Graves County, Kentucky. Final Re- Long-term trends in the Bogue Chitto Creek fish community. Methods set port. Kentucky Department of Fish River fish assemblage: a 27 year per- forth in this study and the 2000-01 and Wildlife Resources, Frankfort, spective, Southeastern Naturalist (4). study (Cicerllo 2004) are quantifiable Kentucky. 81 pp. and repeatable. Continuation of one or Burr, B. M., and M. L. Warren, Jr. Funding Source: State Wildlife Grant both of these protocols at least every 1986. A Distributional Atlas of Ken- (SWG) and Three Rivers Environmental five years would allow for detecting tucky Fishes. Kentucky State Nature Assessments, LLC temporal shifts in the fish community. Preserves Commission Scientific and Whichever program is implemented in Technical Series No. 4. Comprehensive Wildlife Conserva- the future, additional effort needs to be Burr, B. M., and R. L. Mayden. 1982. tion Strategy: Appendix 3.3, Class included in the wetland and slough ar- Life History of the Brindled Mad- Actinopterygii: Priority monitoring eas. The one Lake Chubsucker (Erimy- tom, Noturus miurus, in Mill Creek, needs by taxonomic class. zon succetta) captured in the 2007-09 Illinois (Pisces: Ictaluridae). Ameri- survey came from the mud ditch, into can Midland Naturalist. 107:25-41. which the drained wetland was running. Carney, D. A., and B. M. Burr. 1989. This is a significant find for this area of Life Histories of the Bandfin Darter, Kentucky, and this species as well as Etheostoma zonistum, and the Fire- other, obligate wetland species may be belly Darter, Etheostoma pyrrhogas- overlooked. The permanent wetland ter, in Western Kentucky. Illinois habitat, as well as the portion that had Natural History Survey Biological been drained, could continue to support Notes 134:1-16. rare and important species. Chan, M. D., and G. R. Parsons. 2000.

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

Conservation status and habitat of the longhead darter, Percina macrocephala, in Kinniconick Creek, Kentucky

David J. Eisenhour, Joshua pated from the Cumberland, Kentucky, River, West Virginia, is based on few M. Schiering, and Audrey and Big Sandy River drainages (Kirsch observations (Welsh and Perry 1998). M. Richter, Morehead State 1893, Page 1978, Burr and Warren An additional study from the Little University 1986). Percina macrocephala was first River, Tennessee (Greenberg 1991) KDFWR Contact: Ryan Oster documented in Kinniconick Creek by offers some habitat and behavioral a specimen (UL, now SIUC) collected descriptions of P. williamsi. Habitat in 1938 and later by seven specimens has been described as silt-free pools collected by L. Kornman in 1981 from and raceways of small to large upland Introduction three sites (Warren and Cicerello 1983). rivers. The species typically avoids Percina macrocephala (Cope), the Geographic variation has been noted turbid streams and is often associated longhead darter, is a large darter found in this species; the Kinniconick popu- with boulders, coarse woody debris, or in small to medium upland streams lation is the only one in the state be- vegetation. throughout the northern Ohio River longing to an upper Ohio group (Page Documentation of the range and basin. However, because of its sporadic 1978). Prior to this study, however, abundance of this species provides distribution and its rarity in most areas the distribution and abundance of this information on its current status in the of occurrence (Burr and Warren 1986, species in Kinniconick Creek was un- creek and baseline data for comparison Etnier and Starnes 1993, Stauffer et certain. Despite Warren and Cicerello’s with later status surveys. Assessment al. 1995), it is considered “threatened” statement that Kinniconick Creek has of required habitat is important in ex- or “endangered” in most states in its a “healthy” population, no additional amining how changes in the use of the range; in Ohio it is probably extirpated specimens were reported from there watershed affect this fish. (Trautman 1981; NatureServe 2009). prior to this survey. In Kentucky this species is listed Most habitat descriptions for P. Objectives as “endangered” (KSNPC 2005) and as macrocephala or its sister species, P. We surveyed Kinniconick Creek, “S1” (critically imperiled) (Kentucky’s williamsi (Page and Near 2007), are Lewis County, Kentucky from early Comprehensive Wildlife Conservation limited to anecdotal accounts (Page summer to mid-fall of 2007 and 2008 Strategy 2005). Percina macrocephala 1978, Etnier and Starnes 1993, Jenkins for the longhead darter, Percina mac- is most common in the upper Green and Burkhead 1994, Stauffer et al. rocephala. Our goals were, for P. mac- River and Barren River systems (Burr 1995). The single quantitative study rocephala in Kinniconick Creek: (1) and Warren 1986). It is likely extir- of P. macrocephala habitat, from Elk to determine its distribution; (2) to es-

Longhead darter / David J. Eisenhour

Annual Research Highlights 009 1 COMPLETED PROJECTS / Fisheries

timate its population size; (3) to quan- For reaches that also were sampled tions; the dominant substrate type was titatively describe its preferred habitat. by backpack electrofishing and sein- recorded for each section. Depth and These data are compared with historical ing, the same distances were sampled. flow were measured at each corner of data and observed habitat conditions Sampling methodology of seining and the grid. Level of siltation was classi- to determine (1) changes in population electrofishing followed guidelines of fied as < 1 mm, 0.5-2 mm, or > 2 mm. size or range in Kinniconick Creek and KDOW (2008). All fishes were iden- Embeddedness was classified as < 33% (2) primary threats to this species in tified and Kentucky Index of Biotic of coarse substrates embedded with silt Kinniconick Creek. Integrity (KIBI) scores were calculated and sand, 33-67% embedded, or > 67% according to Compton et al. (2003). embedded. Methods Data analysis was performed us- Sampling station set-up Habitat analyses ing SAS 9.01 and followed methods We surveyed, via canoe, 69 stream Macrohabitat and microhabitat used by Mattingly and Galat (2002) and km (55 in 2007, 14 in 2008) to set up variables were collected and analyzed Osier and Welsh (2007) for univariate 198 sampling stations. Our sampling with methods similar to those Mattingly and multivariate comparisons, respec- stations (reaches) were defined as the and Galat (2002) used for Etheostoma tively. Variables with strongly non-nor- crest of one riffle to the crest of the next nianguae. For each reach snorkeled, mal distributions (e.g., flow) were log- riffle, and requiring that the reach con- we collected the following variables: transformed. Univariate comparison tains a pool. Reach length ranged from length (m), width (m), depth (m), water of macrohabitat and microhabitat use 36 to 3000 m. Because of time and temp (°C), dissolved O2 (mg/L), pH, was evaluated with t-tests (which ex- other logistic constraints and results conductivity (µS/cm), turbidity (NTU), amines differences in means of reaches from some preliminary sampling, we substrate, siltation, embeddedness, or microhabitats with and without P. sampled for darters only in the lower species richness, KIBI (shock+seine macrocephala) and Fisher’s exact test 54 stream km (155 reaches), in an area reaches only) (Compton et al. 2003), (a goodness-of-fit test that tests for bound from the town of Kinniconick to and watershed area. nonrandom habitat use). Multivariate Garrison. One of every three reaches Substrate composition was esti- comparisons were evaluated with prin- was randomly chosen, using a strati- mated for the entire reach as percent cipal component analysis (PCA). Mean fied random sampling method (Brown sand (0.06-2 mm), gravel (2-64 mm), differences of scores along a single PC and Austen 1996), to be surveyed for cobble (64-256 mm), boulder (>256 axis or multiple PC axes were evaluated P. macrocephala by snorkeling, so that mm), and bedrock. There were col- with analysis of variance (ANOVA) and a total of 55 reaches were snorkeled lapsed into a single variable, average multiple analysis of variance (MANO- (41 in 2007, 14 in 2008). Of these mean particle diameter. An additional VA), respectively. 55 reaches, 14 also were sampled by habitat variable was calculated accord- shocking and seining to evaluate the ef- ing to the methods described by Bain Results fectiveness of snorkeling. (1985), which assigns each substrate Darter survey category a number (bedrock = 1, sand We found P. macrocephala in Darter surveys = 2, gravel = 3, cobble = 4, and boulder 15 of the 55 reaches sampled. This Snorkeling was accomplished by = 5) and them multiplies each by the extends the known range in Kinni- two persons moving parallel upstream percent occurrence of the correspond- conick Creek to 50 stream km. Most through a reach. Positions of observed ing substrate, giving a substrate score longhead darters were found in the P. macrocephala were marked with a range of 1 (100% bedrock) to 5 (100% middle part of Kinniconick Creek, weighted flag. If multiple darters were boulder). between the mouths of Laurel Fork found in a small area (< 1 m2), only When P. macrocephala was found, and Town Branch. A total of 104 P. one flag was dropped but the minimum we collected microhabitat variables macrocephala were encountered, which numbers of darters were recorded. For at the point of observation and in ran- included 65 individuals from sampled reaches less than 120 m in length, the domly chosen, nearby areas that we reaches and 39 additional individuals entire reach was sampled. Longer sampled, but did not contain P. macro- observed, often from canoe or while reaches were subsampled by snorkeling cephala. These variables were depth wading, in reaches not sampled or in 40 m at each end of the reach and 40 m (m), current velocity (m/s), substrate portions of reaches not sampled. Both about in the middle of the reach. All (mean particle size), siltation, and em- young-of-the-year and subadults-adults other species observed while snorkeling beddedness. Substrate was measured were found; most of the young-of- were recorded for community compari- with a 1 m2 grid centered over the the-year were found in the lower part sons. flag. The grid was divided into 16 sec- of the sampled region. Also, during

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

the course of this study, R. Cicerello watershed area (P=0.0093) and high silt depth did not differ in microhabitats and R. Evans, while surveying Kinni- mean width (P=0.0133). Multivariate with and without P. macrocephala (e.g., conick Creek for mussels, observed P. comparisons were similar, indicating P. not significant with a t-test), usage of macrocephala at four sites. Visibility macrocephala tended to occupy more silted habitats was highly nonrandom (lateral Secchi disk distance) was not downstream reaches that are relatively (P=0.0076). That is, P. macrocephala significantly different (t-test, P=0.1851) deep, wide, and long with high turbid- tended to occupy areas of moderate between reaches with and without P. ity and coarse substrates, although silt, but avoided highly silted areas macrocephala, suggesting differences discrimination was not strong. No and highly “clean” areas. Multivariate of visibility among reaches did not af- reach-level variables were significant comparisons were similar, indicating P. fect our ability to detect darters while in comparisons of reaches containing macrocephala used microhabitats with snorkeling. adults vs. YOY. low flow and high depth. A MANOVA Analysis of microhabitat compared of PC 1 and PC 3 also indicates non- Habitat analysis measurements from 58 points (1 m2) random microhabitat use (P=0.0038). Analysis of macrohabitat com- with P. macrocephala to 100 points Adults occupied slightly greater depths pared variables from 15 reaches with P. without P. macrocephala. Univari- than YOY (P=0.0063) macrocephala to 40 reaches without P. ate tests indicated that P. macrocephala. Statistical comparisons macrocephala occupy detected only modest differences be- microhabitats with coarser tween reaches with and without P. mac- substrate, greater depth, rocephala. Univariate tests indicated and slower flow than mi- that P. macrocephala were significantly crohabitats without P. mac- associated with reaches having a large rocephala. Although mean

Number of individuals 1-2 3-6 7-12

YOY YOY and Adults Adults Culvert bridge

Records of adult and YOY P. macrocephala from Kinniconick Creek, Lewis County, 007-008.

Annual Research Highlights 009 3 COMPLETED PROJECTS / Fisheries

severe drought during the summer and early fall of 2007 and 2008, with record to near-record low flows recorded at the USGS gauging station (03237255, at Tannery) throughout the sampling period. Flows fell to zero, or nearly so, by mid-July in 2007 and by late August in 2008. At this time, lower Kinni- conick Creek (below mouth of Laurel Fork) flow was mainly interstitial seep- age through riffles; upper Kinniconick Creek consisted of isolated pools, with intervening, completely dewatered sections as long as 500 m. Low flow associated with drought likely caused increased silt build-up in raceways and other low-flow microhabitats. Thus, our finding ofP. macrocephala occupy- ing areas of “moderate silt” might reflect association with certain flow-depth microhabitats, instead of “preferring” Frequency histograms of microhabitat variables significantly associated with P. moderate silt. We often found P. mac- macrocephala absence-presence. rocephala in fairly shallow areas near riffles: areas that had no or almost no Overall health of fish communi- macrocephala to be uncommon to lo- current at very low streamflow (as in a ties did not differ between reaches with cally common in Kinniconick Creek severe drought), but would be expected and without P. macrocephala for KIBI below the mouth of Laurel Fork and to have stronger current at higher, scores or species richness. Fishes com- rare above the mouth of Laurel Fork. “normal” streamflow. Thus at more monly associated with P. macrocephala The population of P. macrocephala “normal” flow conditions, we expect were the minnows L. chrysocephalus, in Kinniconick Creek is likely one of to findP. macrocephala in slight, but L. fasciolaris, and P. notatus, a cen- the most robust in the state. Although measurable flow instead of areas with trarchid, L. megalotis, and the darters this species formerly was common and zero flow. E. blennioides, E. caeruleum, E. cam- widespread in the upper Green and Bar- In summary these darters most urum, E. zonale, P. caprodes, and P. ren River systems (Page 1983), it has frequently occur in areas just above maculata. apparently declined there. The only re- riffles, where there is little to zero flow cent collections from these systems that (but flow nearby), low silt, abundant we are aware of are three specimens boulders and cobbles, and depths of Discussion Status in Kinniconick Creek collected by DJE in 2005 in Russel 0.4-0.8 m. We occasionally encoun- Prior to this survey, P. macroceph- Creek and one specimen collected by tered P. macrocephala below riffles and ala was known from only eight speci- Matt Thomas (pers. comm.) in 2007 in rarely encountered them in the middle mens, mostly collected by L. Kornman the Green River mainstem. Although of long pools, usually when shallow in 1981 (Warren and Cicerello 1983) this study documented a Kinniconick water (a “saddle”) created slight flow. from a 25 stream km reach. We docu- population larger than previously pre- Most longhead darters were found in ment the species from about 50 stream sumed and relatively stable, P. macro- the lower and middle portions of Kin- km and conservatively estimate the cephala is still uncommon there, and niconick Creek, which typically had a total population in Kinniconick Creek except for E. variatum, the rarest darter substrate with more boulders, larger, to be 2000-5000 (given we snorkeled in Kinniconick Creek. We recommend deeper pools, and cleaner substrates. 5.7 km and assuming we saw 20-50% maintaining the “endangered” status of We are unsure whether this means they of the individuals present in sections this species in the state. are more successful in the deeper, boul- sampled). There is no evidence to sug- der habitat, or it merely reflects an as- gest that P. macrocephala has declined Habitat sociation with larger stream size. in Kinniconick Creek. We judge P. Kinniconick Creek experienced Habitat usage of P. macrocephala is similar to that reported for this spe-

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

Microhabitat of P. macrocephala in Kinniconick Creek. Left is in a long raceway. Right is a pool-riffle transition with points 3.7, 5.0, and 1.3 m above crest of monly hovers in the water column, it riffle. Arrows show location of darters./David J. Eisenhour gleans food from the substrate. We observed this species searching for prey cies in the Elk River, West Virginia or backpack electrofisher. In some while suspended slightly head-down, (Welsh and Perry 1998) and for P. cases, we observed P. macrocephala 5-20 cm above the substrate. Prey, in- williamsi (the sister species of P. mac- moving away from an active backpack cluding dragonfly and stonefly nymphs, rocephala) in Little River, Tennessee electrofisher, apparently sensing the was captured with a sudden dart down (Greenberg 1991). Both previous stud- electrical field from a distance and es- to boulder and cobble substrates. In- ies documented usage of areas with caping before they could be stunned, as creased silt input can be harmful to P. slow flow, depths of 0.4-0.8 m, coarse do pelagic minnows. macrocephala by (1) reducing benthic substrates, and moderately-high rela- invertebrate populations via increased tive siltation, often in riffle-pool transi- 2. Percina macrocephala is probably sedimentation, and (2) reduced visibil- tions. Welsh and Perry (1998) found P. very sensitive to siltation.—Siltation is ity from increased turbidity. macrocephala to occupy faster currents one of the most important commonly Our qualitative assessment from (10-20 cm/sec) than in our study (mean cited reasons for decline of stream fish this study is that siltation is a slight to = 2.7 cm/sec); however severe drought communities (Helfman 2007) and re- moderate, but not major problem in during our study resulted in little flow- duction of silt is usually recommended the mainstem of Kinniconick Creek. ing water outside of shallow riffles. in management of jeopardized fish Urban development and agriculture oc- species. We propose, however, that cupies little of the watershed, but is re- Management implications this species is particularly vulnerable sponsible for some silt input. Removal 1. Snorkeling is the most effective to siltation. The pools and slow race- of riparian vegetation and bank col- sampling technique. ways that this species occupies would lapse, often due to cattle access, is most Most longhead darters (74%) were be affected by sediment deposition common along upper portions of Kin- seen while snorkeling, but some were earlier than riffles, where most darters niconick Creek. Immediately below seen while canoeing or wading (20%), and benthic fishes reside. Etnier and these damaged riparian zones are patch- and a few were captured by electrofish- Starnes (1993) noted declines in pool- es of dense algal growth (indicating ing or seining (6%). These darters are inhabiting darters Etheostoma cinereum eutrophication) and increased turbidity. large and often suspend themselves in (ashy darter), Etheostoma marmor- The most important disturbance and midwater, making them fairly easy to pinnum (marbled darter), and Percina source of sedimentation is channeliza- see by snorkeling or from the surface. williamsi in the Little River, Tennessee, tion and gravel mining of the tributar- In many cases we saw numerous P. but no similar decline in riffle-inhabit- ies, especially Laurel Fork and Grassy macrocephala while snorkeling, but ing darters. Fork. McDowell Creek is a source of were unable to collect any with a seine Although P. macrocephala com- considerable sediment in the lowermost

Annual Research Highlights 009 5 COMPLETED PROJECTS / Fisheries

portion of Kinniconick Creek (R. Ev- tion that supplements populations by sources (KDFWR)), who “rediscov- ans, pers. comm.). Most other small migration in upper Kinniconick Creek, ered” P. macrocephala in Kinniconick tributaries to lower Kinniconick Creek a “sink.” The upper Kinniconick popu- Creek in the 1980s. We wish to thank (e.g., Town Branch, Spy Run) have lations may require immigration to sup- the following individuals for assist- been straightened and deepened; we plement limited reproduction (acting ing in fieldwork: R. Broadway, J. D. observed some to be “dug out” multiple as a “pseudosink”) or no reproduction Eisenhour, L. V. Eisenhour, T. Evans, times in a single field season. In Laurel (acting as a true sink). A. J. Farwick, S. Fryman, J. Taylor, M. Fork and Grassy Fork (and occasionally Some road crossings and other Thomas, and J. Thompson. R. Cicer- upper Kinniconick Creek) we observed anthropogenic disturbances can affect ello and R. Evans graciously provided active gravel mining and stockpiling, fish movements by blocking or limit- records of P. macrocephala observed with heavy equipment (bulldozers, ing migration (Warren and Pardew while snorkeling for mussels in 2007. dump trucks, backhoes) occasionally in 1998, Schaefer et al. 2003). Many road Funding was provided by the State the creek bed. crossings over Kinniconick Creek are Wildlife Grants Program, administered Some efforts are currently em- high bridges, such as those over KY 10 via KDFWR. Permits to work with ployed to reduce siltation in the water- and KY 59, which are not barriers for fishes were provided by KDFWR and shed. First, a section with eroding and fish movement. However, two at the Morehead State University IACUC. devegetated banks at the junction of upstream limit of P. macrocephala’s Indian and Kinniconick creeks is under- range in Kinniconick Creek are low- going restoration, which should reduce water concrete bridges with hanging Literature Cited silt input from that source (J. Zimmer- culverts. Upstream passage by fishes Bain, M.B. 1985. Quantifying stream man, pers. comm.). Second, some ac- is impossible at low water, and dif- substrate for habitat analysis studies. tion has been taken by KDOW to stop ficult at high water, because flow is North American Journal of Fisheries illegal gravel mining in Laurel Fork. funneled through the culverts, creating Management 5:499-506. We applaud these actions and strongly rapid currents with no cover. Warren Brown, M. L., and D. J. Austen. 1996. recommend continued monitoring, pro- and Purdew (1998) and Schaefer et al. Data management and statistical tection, and restoration of streams of (2003) found that road culverts limited techniques, pp. 17-62. In: B. R. Mur- the watershed. fish movements much more than other phy and D. W. Willis, eds., Fisheries types of road crossings. We suggest Techniques, 2nd ed. American Fish- 3. Road crossings should allow in- that construction of road crossings be eries Society, Bethesda, Maryland. stream movements of darters.—In engineered to ensure that they permit Burr, B. M., and M. L. Warren, Jr. Kinniconick Creek, Percina macro- upstream and downstream movement 1986. A distributional atlas of Ken- cephala likely exists as a metapopula- of fishes. tucky fishes. Kentucky Nature Pre- tion, with small, local groups of indi- serves Commission., Science Techni- viduals partly isolated by stretches with 4. Priority protection.—If certain sec- cal Series Number 4:1-398. unfavorable habitat (e.g., long, deep tions of reaches of Kinniconick Creek Compton, M. C., G. J. Pond, J. F. pools or long, steep riffles). Our sam- are to be protected, we suggest the Brumley. 2003. Development and pling occurred in two years with severe middle section, between the mouth of application of the Kentucky Index summer droughts, perhaps creating un- Laurel Fork and Town Branch. This of Biotic Integrity (KIBI). Kentucky usually poor quality habitat for P. mac- area has the least development, the Department for Environmental Pro- rocephala in upper Kinniconick Creek. “best” habitat (clear water, coarse, tection, Division of Water, Frankfort. We suspect that periodic extirpations clean substrates, and good riparian veg- Dias, P. C. 1996. Sources and sinks in occur in this portion of the stream dur- etation), and the highest concentrations population biology. Trends in Ecol- ing severe droughts; immigration from of P. macrocephala. In addition, this is ogy and Evolution 11:326-330. downstream areas is needed for recolo- the only section where we encountered Etnier, D. A., and W. C. Starnes. 1993. nization. In addition, the distribution another rare fish Notropis( ariommus, Fishes of Tennessee. Univ. Tennessee of adult and young P. macrocephala the popeye shiner), and where we most Press, Knoxville. strongly suggest that source-sink dy- frequently observed live mussels. Greenberg, L. A. 1991. Habitat use and namics (Pulliam 1988, Dias 1996) are feeding behavior of thirteen species present. Downstream areas, which Acknowledgments of benthic stream fishes. Environ- have a high density of P. macrocephala This project was inspired by dis- mental Biology of Fishes 31:389- and evidence of successful reproduc- cussions with Lew Kornman (Kentucky 401. tion, likely harbor a “source” popula- Department of Fish and Wildlife Re- Helfman, G. S. 2007. Fish conserva-

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

tion. Island Press, Washington, D.C. see River drainage related to Percina Jenkins, R. E., and N. M. Burkhead. macrocephala (Percidae, Ethostoma- 1994. Freshwater fishes of Virginia. tinae). Copeia 2007:605-613. American Fisheries Society, Bethes- Pulliam, H. R. 1988. Sources, sinks, da, Maryland. and population regulation. American Kentucky’s Comprehensive Wild- Naturalist 132:652-661. life Conservation Strategy. 2005. Schaefer, J. F., E. Marsh-Matthews, D. Kentucky Department of Fish and E. Spooner, K. B. Gido, and W. J. Wildlife Resources, Frankfort. http:// Matthews. 2003. Effects of barriers fw.ky.gov/kfwis/stwg/ (Date updated and thermal refugia on local move- 9/21/2005) ment of the threatened leopard darter, Kentucky Division of Water (KDOW). Percina pantherina, Environmental 2008. Methods for assessing bio- Biology of Fishes 66:391-400. logical integrity of surface waters Stauffer, J. R., Jr., J. M. Boltz, and L. in Kentucky. Kentucky Natural R. White. 1995. Fishes of West Vir- Resources and Environmental Pro- ginia. Proceedings of the Academy tection Cabinet, Division of Water, of Natural Sciences, Philadelphia Frankfort. 146:1-389. Kentucky State Nature Preserves Com- Trautman, M. B. 1981. Fishes of Ohio, mission (KSNPC). 2005. Rare and 2nd ed. Ohio State University Press. extirpated biota of Kentucky. Ac- Warren, M. L., Jr., and R. R. Cicerello. cessed online 28 August 2008 at 1983. Drainage records and conser- http://www.naturepreserves.ky.gov/ vation status evaluations for thirteen inforesources/reports_pubs.htm. Kentucky fishes. Brimleyana 9:97- Kirsch, P. H. 1893. Notes on collection 109. of fishes from the southern tributaries Warren, M. L., Jr., and M. G. Pardew. of the Cumberland River in Kentucky 1998. Road crossings as barriers to and Tennessee. Bulletin of the United small-stream fish movement. Trans- States Fish Commission 11:257-265. actions of the American Fisheries Mattingly, H. T., and D. L. Galat. 2002. Society 127:637-644. Distributional patterns of the threat- Welsh, S. A., and S. A. Perry. 1998. ened Niangua darter, Etheostoma Habitat partitioning in a community nianguae, at three spatial scales, with of darters in the Elk River, West implications for species conserva- Virginia. Environmental Biology of tion. Copeia 2002:573-585. Fishes 51:411-419. NatureServe. 2009. NatureServe Ex- plorer: An online encyclopedia of life Funding Source: State Wildlife Grant [web application]. Version 7.1. Na- (SWG) and Morehead State University tureServe, Arlington, Virginia. Avail- able http://www.natureserve.org/ex- KDFWR Strategic Plan. Goal 1. plorer. (Accessed: June 15, 2009). Strategic Objective 5. Comprehen- Osier, E. A., and S. A. Welsh. 2007. sive Wildlife Conservation Strategy: Habitat use of Etheostoma macula- Appendix 3.9; Class Actinopterygii tum (Spotted Darter) in Elk River, and Cephalaspidomorphi: Taxa spe- West Virginia. Northeastern Natural- cific research project #1. ist 14:447-460. Page, L. M. 1978. Redescription, distribution, variation and life history notes on Percina macrocephala (Per- cidae). Copeia 1978:655-664. Page, L. M., and T. J. Near. 2007. A new darter from the upper Tennes-

Annual Research Highlights 009 7 COMPLETED PROJECTS / Fisheries

Status Survey of the Northern Madtom, Noturus stigmous, in the Lower Ohio River

Donovan B. Henry, Leonard J. Greatest Conservation Need (SGCN) gear selectivity. Pitcher, and Collin Beachum, (KSNPC 2000). The collection of baseline data for Three Rivers Environmental The Northern Madtom is sporadic this species was also significant at this and rare in the upper Kentucky, and Assessments, LLC time due to the construction of the new Big Sandy, with isolated but apparently lock and dam near Olmstead, Illinois KDFWR Contact: Ryan Oster stable populations in the Licking and at RM 964.4. This structure is within Salt Rivers (Burr and Warren 1986), the area these fishes have most recently and appears to be extirpated from the been found. The effects of this dam upper Green River. In the Ohio River will be increased depth and reduced there were only three records of this flows upstream, altered hydraulic Introduction species before 1997. However, since regimen immediately downstream, and The Northern Madtom is a small, 1997, Northern Madtom specimens altered navigational patterns (Payne secretive inhabitant of large creeks have been collected four times from the and Miller 2002). These shifts in river and rivers where there is moderate to lower Ohio River bordering Kentucky. hydraulics impact sedimentation, sub- swift flows, and clean sand and gravel These recent collections and ongoing strate composition and substrate stabil- substrates (Etnier and Starnes 1993). sampling activities in the lower Ohio ity, all of which are crucial factors for This species is sporadic and uncommon River indicate that the Northern Mad- benthic species. in every state in which it occurs, and tom may be much more abundant in is disappearing from the margins of its these Kentucky waters than previously Methods range (Page and Burr 1991, Thomas thought. This population has likely Sampling for Northern Madtoms and Burr 2004, Scheibly et. al. 2008). been overlooked for many years due to was conducted in five sections of the In Kentucky, the Northern Madtom is difficulty sampling small, benthic fishes lower Ohio River between Smithland listed as special concern by KDFWR’s in large, dynamic systems such as the Dam and the confluence of the Ohio Comprehensive Wildlife Conservation Ohio River. Other factors may include and Mississippi Rivers. Four of these Strategy, had a global rank of G3 (Vul- the seasons and times in which sam- sample sections included areas where nerable), and is considered a Species of pling took place, as well as sampling specimens were recently encountered;

Northern Madtom / Matt Thomas

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

one below Lock and Dam 53, and where good habitat was present, but the current distribution of the Northern three between Lock and Dam nos. 52 the wadeable area of the site was small. Madtom in lower Ohio River in 2008- and 53. The fifth section was between Sampling effort was quantified by time, 2009. The number of sites per sample Lock and Dam 52 and Smithland Lock area, number of seine hauls, and/or reach was proportionate to the amount and Dam. Below Lock and Dam 53, number of trawl hauls, to facilitate of appropriate habitat. Extensive bars sampling was conducted throughout a comparisons among and within sample and gravel in main channel border habi- seven mile reach including River Miles sections, as well as to future sampling tat were most prevalent in the lower (RM) 966-973. This is in the area of efforts. three sample reaches (below LD 53, Olmstead and Mound City, Illinois. Sampling was conducted during Grand Chain area, and Joppa area), so The three sampled sections between September and October 2008, and a relatively high amount of effort was Lock and Dam 52 and 53 included a six March and July 2009. Winter and expended here. In addition, the recent mile reach near Grand Chain, Illinois spring sampling was limited due to collections of Northern Madtoms by from RM 955-961; a nine mile reach the prolonged high water event from SIUC, IDNR, and TREA were between near Joppa, Illinois from RM 945-954; December to June 2009. Sampling was Lock and Dam 53 and Lock and Dam and, a six mile reach near Metropolis, conducted at night, as well as in the 52. The reach in the area of Metropolis Illinois from RM 939-945. Sampling day, as madtoms are nocturnal in their is characterized by sandier substrates, locations between Lock and Dam 52 habits and are more readily collected at as evidenced by the repetitive dredg- and Smithland Lock and Dam were night (Burr and Stoeckel 1999.) ing in this reach, but some gravel scattered due to the scarcity of habitats Non-lethal sampling procedures habitats are present below the dam and likely to harbor Northern Madtoms. were used and handling of SGCN was along bars and channel borders. The Sample sites were selected by kept to a minimum to avoid mortality. entire pool from Lock and Dam 52 reconnoitering an area to locate clean Each Northern Madtom was enumer- to Smithland Dam was examined for gravel/cobble/sand substrates with at ated, measured to total length, and likely habitats by taking flow measure- least a minimal amount of flow that released. All other species were also ments and using ponar samples to de- could be effectively sampled. Sub- enumerated to characterize the fish as- termine substrates. Flows throughout strates in potential sample areas were semblage associated with the Northern the pool were sluggish to none, with evaluated with repeated ponar grabs Madtom, and further facilitate monitor- the exception of the area immediately throughout the reach. Areas with ing efforts in the lower Ohio River. All below Smithland Dam. The bedrock higher flows and coarser substrates vouchered specimens were deposited in outcrops below the dam, were the only that were less embedded were given the Southern Illinois University Fluid significant rocky substrates encoun- preference. These areas were usually Vertebrate Collection. tered throughout the remainder of the less than 20 feet deep along gravel Habitats were quantitatively and pool except revetment or river training bars (e.g. American Bar, Grand Chain qualitatively assessed at sites where structures. Although it is quite likely Bar, Sharps Bar, Little Chain Bar, etc), Northern Madtoms were collected and that Northern Madtoms could thrive tributary mouths, or the main channel habitats were qualitatively described for in the bedrock outcrops below Smith- border. areas where the species did not occur. land Dam, no feasible means could be Sampling was conducted with a Habitat parameters measured included determined to sample this area. With 4’x 8’ benthic trawl in non-wadeable water temperature, water velocity, the relative absence of quality habitat habitats at varying depths and distances substrate composition, depth of habi- elsewhere, few samples were taken in from shore. A pulse D/C electrofishing tat, depth of capture (if discernable), this reach. system was fitted to the benthic trawl to instream cover, and perceived threats. Sampling was conducted during enhance sampling efficacy. Each trawl Substrate categories included boulder September and October 2008, and site consisted of a minimum of three (>256 mm), cobble (964-256 mm), March and July 2009. Winter and minutes of downstream trawling, with gravel (2-64 mm), sand (0.06-22 mm), spring sampling was limited due to the sample time starting once the trawl was clay, detritus, muck-mud, and marl. prolonged high water event from early effectively deployed (i.e. on the bot- Sample sites were georeferenced with December to June 2009. During this tom and opened). Wadeable habitats a handheld Global Positioning System time, water levels never dropped to ide- were further sampled with a backpack receiver. al or even marginal levels for effective electrofisher and 6’ x 15’ minnow seine sampling, however, during the lowest with 1/8” mesh. Seine sites typically Results levels in mid-March 2009, trawling and consisted of ten hauls or kick sets at A total of 154 trawl sites and 23 seining was conducted in near shore a site. Less hauls were taken at sites seine sites were sampled to determine habitats.

Annual Research Highlights 009 9 COMPLETED PROJECTS / Fisheries

A total of 3,649 fishes representing sand, gravel, and cobble substrates, humps, and floating debris still proved 55 species and one hybrid in 13 fami- with less than 10% of sites containing difficult to maneuver around in night- lies were captured during this survey. silt, detritus, clay, or boulder. Positive time situations. The most commonly captured fishes sites always had some combination of Sampling ability was also one of were Freshwater Drum (Aplodinotus sand, gravel, or cobble substrates, but the limiting factors in accurately char- grunniens), Channel Catfish Ictalurus( some areas with what appeared to be acterizing the population below Smith- punctatus), Silver Chub (Macrhybop- identical, suitable habitat yielded no land Dam. The bedrock outcrops have sis storeriana), River Darter (Percina Northern Madtoms. extensive interstitial spaces, good flow, shumardi), Gizzard Shad (Dorosoma and abundant aquatic invertebrate colo- cepedianum), and Logperch (Percina Discussion nization. However, the jagged, irregu- caprodes). A number of reasons were sus- lar, configuration of the substrate with However, a total of only 28 North- pected as to why the collections of the abrupt depth changes make sampling ern Madtoms were collected during Northern Madtom in the lower Ohio for these fishes nearly impossible. these sampling trips. Nineteen were River have been so rare. Sampling dif- A second factor influencing the captured in the pool between Lock and ficulty is one of the primary barriers lack of information on this species Dam 52 and 53, and 9 were collected to determining the current population seems to be the paucity of quality habi- downstream of Lock and Dam 53. No status of this cryptic species. Due to tat. Northern Madtoms typically prefer Northern Madtoms were collected be- the nocturnal habits of madtoms, the gravel/cobble substrates with swift tween Lock and Dam 52 and Smithland number of captured specimens per unit flows. The remaining gravel habitats in Lock and Dam. Sizes of collected effort was five times higher in night- the lower Ohio are mostly in nonwade- Northern Madtoms ranged from 29-61 time trawl hauls versus daytime trawls able habitats along the main channel mm, with a single gravid female col- (20 captured at night vs. 4 during the border. These habitats are often the lected on 25 July 2009. day). This is even more significant result of dredge material placement for 20 of the 28 collected Northern when considering 105 of the 154 (68%) maintenance of the navigation channel, Madtoms were captured in night-time of the trawl sites during this survey as opposed to naturally forming gravel trawls, with only 4 captured in daytime were during the day. On several oc- bars from natural river processes. Re- trawls. Two Northern Madtoms were casions, a site sampled during the day duced flows in much of this stretch of collected during the one nighttime would yield no Northern Madtoms, the Ohio River, especially above Lock seine sample and two were collected in but when sampled immediately after and Dam 52, has caused habitat to be- the other 23 daytime seine samples. sunset, one or two individuals would come embedded from sand deposition, Northern Madtoms were captured be captured in the same locality. In ad- leaving only pockets of functional grav- in as little as a few inches of water to dition, the only seine site conducted at el habitats preferred by Northern Mad- depths of 14 feet, with sample sites night yielded two Northern Madtoms, toms. Locating these isolated pockets encompassing areas nearly 25 feet while the 23 combined day seine sites is very difficult, causing much of the deep. The average depth at positive yielded only two individuals as well. sample time to be spent over marginal sites (sites where Northern Madtoms Night trawls and day trawls were con- to inadequate habitats. were captured) was 5.5 feet, with the ducted in the same areas. The species An earlier concern with the low shallowest site being a seine site in less is likely buried in the substrate during catch rates of Northern Madtoms was than 8 inches of water. The average the daylight hours, and the ventures out gear selectivity. Capturing these small depth at sites without Northern Mad- to forage only at night. Trawl hauls benthic fish on the bottom of such a toms was slightly higher, 7.4 feet, with during daytime hours may drag over the large body of water is challenging. The considerable overlap in sampled depths top of buried madtoms; the trawl being addition of the electrofishing capabil- between sites with and without indi- unable to dig them out of substrates. ity to the trawl seemed to be effective, viduals being collected. Average flows Night trawling was conducted during as other catfishes, including Blue and where Northern Madtoms were found this survey on every sample date, but Channel Catfish, were often stunned in did not significantly differ from areas trawling at night is difficult and danger- the cod end of the trawl. In addition, where they were not collected, 0.28 ous in these river channel habitats with when examining the most abundant m/sec and 0.32 m/sec, respectively. sharply varying depths, barge traffic, taxa captured in this study, five of the Northern Madtoms were found in flows motor hazards, snags, etc. Night sites six most prevalent species were ben- as low as 0.03 m/sec and in swift cur- were carefully scouted during the day thic. These included two darters, River rents as high as 0.68 m/sec. and a course was laid with a Global Darter and Logperch, Channel Catfish, Nearly all sampled sites contained Positioning System, but snags, shallow Freshwater Drum, and Silver Chub.

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

The only non-benthic species found in men was collected while seining at an ly 800 Northern Madtoms are washed the top five captured species was the old wing dike by TREA personnel. It off of the traveling screens per year. At Gizzard Shad. This species is very was collected during high water and the Shawnee Steam Plant, the outfall abundant in the Ohio River, accounting had moved up to where the top of the channel and the intake channel are also for its high relative abundance in these structure keys into the shore. This area widely separated, so it is unlikely that samples. Given that the relative abun- is typically far out of the water. Sub- the same individuals come through the dance of captured fishes was so skewed sequent efforts during this survey to system repeatedly during collection pe- toward the benthic community, a more capture individuals at these sites were riods. Although this data suggests that effective gear type for these conditions unsuccessful. the rate of impingement of Northern may be difficult to design. In addition to the sampling con- Madtoms may be high at the Shawnee The unionid mussel commu- ducted during this survey, supplemen- Steam Plant, it also suggests that the nity may play an important role to the tary data on the current population of population may be more robust than Northern Madtom in the lower Ohio Northern Madtoms in the lower Ohio this study and previous sampling were River, providing interstitial spaces for River came from monitoring of the able to show. hiding and foraging, as well as cavities impingement mortality at the Tennes- The habitat in the intake channel at for spawning. The successful collec- see Valley Authority’s Shawnee Steam Shawnee is largely a silt bottomed cations of Northern Madtoms made near Plant just downstream of Metropolis, nal oriented perpendicular to the Ohio Joppa, Illinois in the mid 1990’s were Illinois on the Kentucky shore. Un- River. This canal fills with sediment when water levels were extremely low der Section 316(b) of the Clean Water to the point it requires periodic dredg- and the mussel beds typically under Act, the impingement mortality of fish ing to maintain ample depth from the many feet of water could be sampled and shellfish was characterized at all river to the plant. There are large metal with seines and backpack electrofish- facilities in the United States that, on bar racks where water first enters the ers (B.M. Burr pers.comm.). It was average, withdraw 50 million or more plant. Woody debris, detritus, leafpack, among these mussel beds that Northern gallons of water per day from their and organic and inorganic matter often Madtoms were found. In addition, respective source water body. A total collect along these racks. The debris U.S. Army Corps of Engineers person- of 38, twenty-four hour samples were in front of the racks was colonized by nel diving for unionid mussels down- collected at the Shawnee Steam Plant many groups of invertebrates, which stream of Olmstead on 5 September from June 2005 to June 2007. From were observed when pieces broke loose 2007, found Northern Madtoms in two these samples, 82 Northern Madtoms and were washed in with the impinge- different moribund unionid mussel were observed among the impinged ment collection (personal observa- shells. The two shells with madtoms fishes (Joe Vondruska pers. comm.). tion). The draw of water to the plant in them were collected in deep water Over two-thirds of the Northern Mad- from the river creates nearly constant along the main channel border (Steven toms impinged on the traveling screens flow through the debris. The habitat George pers. comm.) Northern Mad- at this facility were during the month created by the near constant flows, toms tucked into unionid mussel shells of January. The remaining one-third of abundant woody debris with interstitial buried in the river bottom may further impinged Northern Madtoms was made spaces, as well as the available forage lessen the efficacy of trawls or seines to up of one to three individuals per date colonizing the debris, may actually capture this species. throughout the remainder of the year. attract the Northern Madtoms to this Artificial substrates such as river Nearly 80% of the Northern Madtoms site. Reduced swimming ability in the training structures or revetment are also that were impinged and washed off of peak winter months may account for in- utilized by Northern Madtoms in this the screens were alive and apparently creased impingement during this time. stretch of river. Two of the sites which healthy enough to survive as they were Impinged Northern Madtoms specimens were collected in previous collected in the return outlet to the were often larger than those collected years were near Grand Chain and up- Ohio River. during the study, up to 84 mm. To de- stream of the Joppa boat ramp. Both of If a simple extrapolation from velop a length frequency distribution these sites consisted of man-made rock these 38 collection dates is done (not representative of the population in the dikes. The Grand Chain specimen, col- taking into account any of the numer- lower Ohio River, both data sets were lected by IDNR just downstream of the ous variables affecting impingement combined. Little has been done on the Grand Chain boat launch, came from rates at this particular facility) an esti- biology of the Northern Madtom other a pile of large rocks on the upstream mate of nearly 2.15 Northern Madtoms than reproductive data (Scheibly et. al. side of a private boat launch. Upstream per day are impinged. Over the course 2008). But it appears that the Age-0 of the city Joppa boat ramp, the speci- of a year, using this extrapolation, near- Northern Madtoms in the Ohio River

Annual Research Highlights 009 31 COMPLETED PROJECTS / Fisheries

reach approximately 50-54 mm, with the Shawnee Steam Plant impingement Kentucky. Journal of the Kentucky the Age-1 individuals ranging from 55- screens, with focus on the month of Academy of Science 69(2):178-186. 75 mm, and Age-2 ranging from 75-85 January since this is month with the Thomas, M.R. and B.M. Burr. 2004. mm. highest number of impinged individu- Noturus gladiator, a new species of This population of Northern Mad- als of Northern Madtoms during this madtom (Siluriformes: Ictaluridae) toms is most likely not as stable as it survey. from Coastal Plain streams of Ten- was pre-navigation, but it has continued The preferred habitat of several of nessee and Mississippi. Ichthyo- to persist in this stretch of the Ohio the unionid mussels in the Ohio River logical Explorations of Freshwaters River, despite the severe alterations to seems to overlap with that of the North- 15:351-368. the hydrology. Traditional sampling ern Madtom. Monitoring and preserv- methodologies are likely underesti- ing the remaining habitat with moderate Funding Source: State Wildlife Grant mating the population, and any future flows and coarse substrates, as well as (SWG), Three Rivers Environmental monitoring of the Northern Madtom in the unionid mussel populations, would Assessments LLC, Illinois Endangered the lower Ohio River should be limited be a critical step for the future preserva- Species Protection Board to nighttime sampling. tion of the Northern Madtom. Comprehensive Wildlife Conserva- Management Implications Literature Cited tion Strategy: Appendix 3.9 Class Threats to the Northern Madtom in Burr, B.M. and J.N. Stoeckel. 1999. Actinopterygii, Priority monitoring the lower Ohio River are likely related The natural history of madtoms needs by taxonomic class (p. 1). to alteration and maintenance of the (genus Noturus), North America’s di- system for navigation. The reduced minutive catfishes. American Fisher- flows caused by dams resulting in de- ies Society Symposium 24:54-101. position of fine sediments over rocky Burr, B.M. and M.L. Warren, Jr. 1986. habitats and physical dredging of the A Distributional Atlas of Kentucky river bottom appear to be the most con- Fishes. Kentucky State Nature Pre- sistent factors affecting this population. serves Commission Scientific and Much of the available gravel habitat in Technical Series No. 4. this stretch of river is heavily embedded Etnier, D.A. and W.C. Starnes. 1993. with little or no interstitial spaces for The Fishes of Tennessee. University benthic dwelling organisms to thrive. of Tennessee Press, Knoxville. Side casted dredge material is often KSNPC (Kentucky State Nature Pre- placed on these main channel border serves Commission). 2000. Rare and habitats, and may quickly cover the extirpated biota of Kentucky. Journal few exposed gravel habitats. Exposed of the Kentucky Academy of Science gravel and cobble bars give the appear- 61:115-132. ance of abundant rocky structures in Page, L.M. and B.M. Burr. 1991. A this stretch of river. However, wind and field guide to freshwater fishes of wave activity remove all sand and silt North America north of Mexico. on the exposed portion of the bar, just a Houghton Mifflin Company, Boston. few feet from shore, under the surface 432 p. of the water, these rocky substrates are Payne, B.S. and Miller A.C. 2002. typically buried by sand. The addition “Freshwater Mussels in the Lower of the lock and dam at Olmstead will Ohio River in Relation to the Olm- likely increase the amount of pooled sted Locks and Dam Project: Update habitat in the river, further reducing Through 2001 Studies,” ERDC/EL suitable gravel areas for this species. TR-02-31, U.S. Army Engineer Impingement data from the Shaw- Research and Development Center, nee Steam Plant may provide informa- Vicksburg, MS. tion and a population trend on Northern Scheibly, J.F., D.J. Eisenhour, and L.V. Madtoms since it is very difficult to Eisenhour. 2008. Reproductive biol- sample the natural habitat effectively. ogy of the Northern Madtom, Notu- Periodic samples should be taken from rus stigmosus, in the Licking River,

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

Genetic Diversity, Structure, and Recolonization Patterns of Black Bears in Eastern Kentucky

John Hast, John Cox, Songlin Luikart 1999). Microsatellite genetic Fei, and David Weisrock, markers are relatively resistant to deg- University of Kentucky; Steven radation as compared to other DNA, a Dobey and Jayson Plaxico, characteristic that has made them a fa- Kentucky Department of Fish vorite choice for mark-recapture-based population estimates (Settlage et al. and Wildlife Resources 2008). Microsatellites have been used Bear cubs / John Hast to investigate changes in population dy- Great Smoky Mountains. We propose namics of black bear populations faced Abstract that future management decisions be with habitat fragmentation (Dixon Black bears (Ursus americanus) tailored to each of these two distinctive et al. 2007a, Dixon et al. 2007b), to are thought to have returned to the Kentucky subpopulations and that determine levels of connectivity and Cumberland Plateau of Kentucky as the further investigation be conducted to gene flow between bear subpopulations result of recent recolonization events estimate population size and trends. (Smith and Clark 1994, Waits et al. and from successful establishment 2000, Csiki et al. 2003), and to evaluate of 14 translocated bears released in Introduction management actions such as conserva- 1996-1997. Current interest in hunting Large carnivores are frequently tion corridors and translocation events bears in Kentucky remains an important used as umbrella species (Noss et al. (Dixon et al. 2007b, Brown et al. 2009). justification for investigating black bear 1996), and there has been increased In the past 20 years, black bears population dynamics and structure. need to understand their population (Ursus americanus) in Kentucky have Microsatellite genetic markers and dynamics, range, and abundance. recolonized portions of their historic advanced statistical techniques have Biological sampling of large carnivores range in southeastern Kentucky, likely become accepted methodologies for can be problematic given the inherent as a result of emigration out of sur- investigating population structure, gene risk to both researcher and animal and rounding states from what may be flow, and other conservation parameters the fact that species of this group are considered a larger regional metapopu- for many animals, including large often cryptic and occur at low densities. lation. Additionally, Kentucky’s black carnivores. We used 20 microsatellite These logistical challenges often limit bear population was augmented via the markers to determine the genetic sample size and preclude use of certain 1997 translocation of 14 individuals diversity, structuring, and relative statistical tests (Creel et al. 2003). obtained from Great Smoky Mountains influence of bears in surrounding states When population dynamics of large National Park (Eastridge and Clark on bears in Kentucky. Black bears in mammals are in question, the greatest 2001, Clark et al. 2002). Research Kentucky occurred as two moderately challenge is often the collection of a conducted on bears in Kentucky has

diverged populations (Fst = 0.09); Big statistically robust sample size (Mills et thus far focused on habitat use, natality, South Fork and southeastern Kentucky al. 2000). and population estimation within bor- on or near Pine Mountain. Each Genetic techniques have emerged der counties along the recolonization of these two populations contained as an effective method for the study of front (Unger 2007, Fraray 2008, Jensen a level of expected heterozygosity wildlife populations (Taberlet and Lui- 2009); a definitive analysis of source similar to that of other well connected kart 1999). Microsatellite markers in population(s) for Kentucky black bear black bear populations, yet had a low particular have become a leading tool has yet to be conducted. Public interest number of migrants per generation (Nm for understanding fine-scale population in initiating a bear hunt in recent years = 0.97) that indicated little gene flow. dynamics (Selkoe and Toonen 2006). has made understanding the population Southeastern Kentucky bears were The use of microsatellite genetic mark- dynamics of Kentucky bears and their comprised of an equal admixture of ers coupled with advances in non-inva- relationship to bears in surrounding West Virginia and Virginia genotypes, sive sampling methods have provided states increasingly important to state while those in Big South Fork were new opportunities for increasing sam- wildlife managers.

closely related (Fst = 0.04) to their pling efficiency and safety of research- To assess the population dy- translocated source population in the ers and study animals (Taberlet and namics of Kentucky black bears, we

Annual Research Highlights 009 33 COMPLETED PROJECTS / Wildlife

established 3 research objectives: (1) Tennessee (GSMNP) by University of appropriate input files for data analysis. identification of subpopulation struc- Tennessee researchers conducting a Hardy-Weinberg equilibrium and link- ture within Kentucky and surrounding mark-recapture abundance estimation age disequilibrium were tested using states, (2) analysis of migration rate in Great Smoky Mountains National Genepop 4.0 (Raymond and Rousset between identified subpopulations, and Park. All hair samples were shipped to 1995) with a Bonferroni sequential (3) identification of source populations Wildlife Genetics International (WGI, correction applied to the P-values and their level of connectivity with http://www.wildlifegenetics.ca/) for mi- derived from the latter test (Rice 1989). Kentucky populations to help inform crosatellite analysis. Individuals were General population structure across the the delineation of management units for identified by using 8 microsatellite landscape was investigated using the black bear in the Commonwealth. markers having a heterozygosity >0.70 Bayesian clustering program STRUC- (G10B, G10H, G10J, G10P, G10M, TURE (Pritchard et al. 2007) and the Methods G10L, MU59, and MU23, D. Paetkau, K-means test in the GenoDive software Hair samples were collected from personal communication). All identi- package (Meirmans and Van Tienderen Kentucky black bear from 2006-2009 fied individuals were additionally ana- 2004). The most appropriate K value by live trapping (IACUC protocol # lyzed at 12 microsatellite markers for a (number of subpopulations) was deter- 626A2003), non-invasive hair snare full complement of 20 markers (G10B, mined by applying the Plateau method (Woods et al. 1999), and opportunisti- G10H, G10J, G10P, G10M, G10L, (Pritchard et al. 2007) to the graph cally by Kentucky Department of Fish MU59, M223, G1D, G1A, G10X, of the log probability of the data [LN and Wildlife biologists from road kill, G10U, MU50, Cxx20, Cxx110, G10C, P(D)] accompanying the STRUCTURE nuisance trapping, and poaching events 145P07, MU51, 144A06, and CPH9). output and by using the Pseudo-F rank- from the Pine Mountain (PM) and Big Individuals sampled by non-invasive ing method (Calinski and Harabasz South Fork (BSF) populations. To hair snare were also sexed. In-depth 1974) in GenoDive. Migration between investigate source populations, hair laboratory methods for the analysis of the identified subpopulations was samples were also collected from bear microsatellite loci are described investigated by using the population as- West Virginia (WV) by West Vir- by Paetkau and Strobeck (1994) and signment test in the GenoDive software ginia Department of Natural Resources Paetkau (2003). The Microsatellite package (Meirmans and Van Tienderen biologists, Virginia (VA) through the Analyzer software (Dieringer and 2004) at an alpha level of 0.002. Ad- use of non-invasive hair snares, and Schlötterer 2003) was used to produce ditionally the number of migrants per generation (Nm) was calculated in a pairwise fashion using the private allele method (Slatkin 1985, Barton and Slatkin 1986, Slatkin and Barton 1989) in Genepop 4.0 (Raymond and Rousset 1995). An analysis of molecular variance (AMOVA) was conducted in GenoDive to investigate the hierarchical level upon which genetic variation can be attributed using a matrix of squared Euclidian distances set at 999 permuta- tions (Meirmans and Goodnight 2006). As this AMOVA test is based on an analogue of Wright’s F statistic (Wright 1965) it is possible to infer measures of population differentiation such as Fst and Phi’st (Meirmans and Good- night 2006); the latter designed for the high levels of polymorphism found in microsatellite markers. These measures of population differentiation were calculated in a pairwise fashion between Figure 1: Genetic sampling location of black bears in the 009-10 Kentucky study the indentified subpopulations. Finally, (BSF: 19, Pine Mt: 8, WV: 9, VA: 8, and GSMNP: ). genetic parameters such as allelic diver-

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

P(D)], revealed a K value of 3 would be useful in illustrating population structure. STRUCTURE results at a K value of 3 indicated three distinct subpopulation groupings: (1) BSF and GSMNP, (2) VA, and (3) WV, with the Pine Mt. population being comprised of an admixture of VA and WV (Figure 2). Additionally, population assign- ment tests detected 19 individuals that were sampled from populations that did not match their genotype, thus these individuals can be considered migrants. After calculating the number of migrants per generation (Table 1), the greatest Nm value occurred between the BSF and GSMNP populations, with 3.09 migrants per generation. The WV and VA populations had the two highest Nm values with 1.47 and 2.15 migrants per generation, respectively. AMOVA analyses indicted that the vast majority of variation was contained at the within individual level (93.0%) with a global Fst of 0.064. Pairwise Fst and Phi’st calculations (Table 2) indicated that the PM population was most closely related Figure 2: STRUCTURE analysis at a K value of 3 (assumed number of to the VA and WV populations and least subpopulations) shown for each black bear population sampled in the southern related to the BSF population. Finally, Appalachian Mountains. The bar graphs attached to each population are allelic diversity was found to be greatest interpreted whereby the vertical axis represents percent inclusion into three in the Pine Mt. population which also identified bear subpopulations. Individuals were plotted on the horizontal axis. contained the highest level of heterozygosity. Conversely, the VA population contained the lowest level of allelic sity (A) and genetic diversity, described found to have a higher success rate than diversity, while the WV population had as expected heterozygosity (He), were those collected by non-invasive hair the lowest heterozygosity. calculated using Genepop 4.0 and the snare (D. Paetkau, personal communica- allele frequency test in the GenoDive tion). All samples, both collectively and Discussion software package. grouped as five sampled populations, Microsatellite genetic markers have were found to be in Hardy-Weinberg proven themselves useful in the study of Results equilibrium (P<0.05) with only five pair wildlife population dynamics by allow- Of the 258 hair samples sent to of loci (<1% of total pairs) showing ing for the use of less invasive sampling WGI for microsatellite analysis, 208 signs of linkage disequilibrium (P<0.05) methods and the use of field collected were successfully genotyped and at- as a result of non-random mating fol- sample substrates (Taberlet and Luikart tributed to 163 individuals (Figure 1) lowing Bonferroni sequential correction. 1999, Woods et al. 1999). In our case, from the five sampled populations (BSF The general subpopulation structure success rates were higher with those = 19; GSMNP = 22; PM = 84; VA = across the sampled populations indicated samples that were physically pulled 8; and WV = 29). One individual was the presence of two subpopulations from sedated, live-caught black bears, later removed from the GSMNP sample when using both the STRUCTURE yet non-invasive hair snares proved set for failure to amplify at one marker program set at a K value of 2 and the useful in obtaining samples from areas (MU50), leaving a total of 21 individu- K-means test in GenoDive. Applica- outside the core research range. als in this sample set. Samples collected tion of the plateau method to a graph We identified 2 well defined by physical handling of the animal were of the log probability of the data [LN subpopulations that were moderately

Annual Research Highlights 009 35 COMPLETED PROJECTS / Wildlife

in either area until population estimates are conducted. Population estimates in Pine Mt. BSF GSMNP WV VA conjunction with collection of demo- graphic data would allow construction of Pine Mt. ---- 0.0616 0.0617 0.04511 0.0405 predictive population models that could assess the impacts of various harvest BSF 0.9705 ---- 0.0454 0.1172 0.1172 regimes. We further recommend that tag GSMNP 0.9419 3.0881 ---- 0.0983 0.1094 numbers and season regulations should be tailored to each population given the WV 1.4744 0.5087 0.65 ---- 0.095 genetic distinctiveness and their relative isolation from each other. Implementa- VA 2.1534 0.6741 0.6985 0.9510 ---- tion of a conservative harvest strategy would facilitate further population Table 1: Pairwise comparison of the number of migrants per generation (Nm, growth of the species and recolonization bottom diagonal) and the number of private alleles contained in each population and establishment of bears throughout (P(1), top diagonal) of identified black bear populations in the southern the Cumberland Plateau. Measures that Appalachian Mountains. promote the establishment of an ecore- gional panmictic population of bears Management would likely enhance the long-term vi- diverged (Fst = 0.09); BSF and the PM Recommendations ability of this economically and ecologi- population in southeastern Kentucky. Our findings indicated the occur- cally important game species. The low number of detected migrants rence of 2 genetically distinct subpopu- (4 individual male bears) and the low lations of bears in Kentucky with limited number of migrants per generation (Nm Literature Cited gene flow between them. We speculate Barton, N. H., and M. Slatkin. 1986. A = 0.97) indicated that migration between that Interstate 75 may be a barrier that Quasi-equilibrium theory of the distri- these two populations was not sufficient inhibits gene flow between these two bution of rare alleles in a subdivided enough to dispel the effects of random populations, but that likely low popu- population. Heredity 56:409-415. genetic drift (Frankham et al. 2002). lation densities in the respective core Brown, S. K., J. M. Hull, D. R. Updike, Although radio-collared black bears populations may have also reduced dis- S. R. Fain, and H. B. Ernest. 2009. have been known to cross Interstate 75 persal and the potential for interchange Black Bear Population Genetics in (B. Augustine, personal communica- of individuals between them thus far. California: Signatures of Population tion), this road could be hampering the Because we know little about the rela- Structure, Competitive Release, and migration between these two Kentucky tive numbers for each, we suggest a very Historical Translocation. Journal of subpopulations. Alternately, the PM conservative approach in hunting bears Mammalogy 90:1066-1074. population’s close proximity to states with growing black bear populations (Pelton & Van Manen 1994; Wooding & Ward 1997) should allow for migrants Pine Mt. BSF GSMNP WV VA to enter from multiple alternate populations. The higher levels of Nm between Pine Mt. ---- 0.311 0.272 0.092 0.054 PM and the WV and VA populations (p=0.001) (p=0.001) (p=0.001) (p=0.031) indicated gene flow is possible into and out of these populations. This current BSF 0.09 ---- 0.135 0.408 0.279 (p=0.001) (p=0.001) (p=0.001) level of Nm and the fact that the PM population is comprised of an equal ad- GSMNP 0.076 0.042 ---- 0.331 0.227 mixture of two genotypes suggested that (p=0.001) (p=0.001) these bears are the result of recoloniza- WV 0.027 0.13 0.101 ---- 0.115 tion from bears in WV and VA. Addi- (p=0.001) tionally, the BSF population was found VA 0.014 0.081 0.063 0.045 ---- to be solely comprised of individuals of GSMNP origin with the addition of few Table 2: Pairwise comparison of F (bottom diagonal) and Phi’ (top diagonal) migrants from the PM population. st st for the five sampled populations of black bears in the southern Appalachian Mountains.

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

Calinski, R. B., and J. Harabasz. 1974. A Jensen, R. 2009. The effects of roads Settlage, K. E., F. T. Van Manen, J. D. dendrite method for cluster analysis. and space use and movements of Clark, and T. L. King. 2008. Chal- Communications in Statistics 3:1-27. black bears in Eastern Kentucky. lenges of DNA-based mark-recapture Clark, J. D., D. Huber, and C. Servheen. Master’s thesis. University of Ken- studies of American black bears. 2002. Bear reintroductions: lessons tucky, Lexington, Kentucky, USA Journal of Wildlife Management and challenges: invited paper. Ursus Meirmans, P. G., and C. Goodnight. 72:1035-1042. 13:335-345. 2006. Using the AMOVA framework Slatkin, M. 1985. Rare Alleles as Indica- Creel, S., G. Spong, J. L. Sands, J. Ro- to estimate a standarsized genetic tors of Gene Flow. Evolution 39:53- tella, J. Zeigle, L. Joe, K. M. Murphy, differentiation measure. Evolution 65. and D. Smith. 2003. Population size 60:2399-2402. Slatkin, M., and N. H. Barton. 1989. A estimation in Yellowstone wolves with Meirmans, P. G., and P. H. Van Tien- Comparison of Three Indirect Meth- error-prone noninvasive microsatel- deren. 2004. GENOTYPE and ods for Estimating Average Levels of lite genotypes. Molecular Ecology GENODIVE: two programs for the Gene Flow. Evolution 43:1349-1368. 12:2003-2009. analysis of genetic diversity of asexual Smith, K. G., and J. D. Clark. 1994. Csiki, I., C. Lam, A. Key, E. Coulter, J. organisms. Molecular Ecology Notes Black Bears in Arkansas: Character- D. Clark, R. M. Pace, K. G. Smith, 4:792-794. istics of a Successful Translocation. and D. D. Rhoads. 2003. Genetic Mills, L. S., J. J. Citta, K. P. Lair, M. K. Journal of Mammalogy 75:309-320. variation in black bears in Arkansas Schwartz, and D. A. Tallmon. 2000. Taberlet, P., and G. Luikart. 1999. Non- and Louisiana using microsatellite Estimating animal abundance using invasive genetic sampling and individ- DNA markers. Journal of Mammal- noninvasive DNA sampling: promise ual identification. Biological Journal ogy 84:691-701. and pitfalls. Ecological Applications of the Linnean Society 68:41-55. Dieringer, D., and C. Schlötterer. 2003. 10:283-294. Unger, D. 2007. Population dynamics, microsatellite analyser (MSA): a Noss, R. F., Howard B. Quigley, Mau- resource selection, and landscape platform independent analysis tool for rice G. Hornocker, Troy Merrill, and conservation of a recolonizing black large microsatellite data sets. Molecu- Paul C. Paquet. 1996. Conservation bear population. Ph.D. disertation, lar Ecology Notes 3:167-169. biology and carnivore conservation University of Kentucky, Lexington, Dixon, J. D., K. O. Madan, M. C. Woo- in the rocky mountains. Conservation Kentucky, USA. ten, T. H. Eason, J. W. McCown, and Biology 10:949-963. Waits, L., P. Taberlet, J. E. Swenson, M. W. Cunningham. 2007a. Genetic Paetkau, D. 2003. An empirical explora- F. Sandegren, and R. Franzen. 2000. consequences of habitat fragmentation tion of data quality in DNA-based Nuclear DNA microsatellite analysis and loss: the case of the Florida black population inventories. Molecular of genetic diversity and gene flow in bear (Ursus americanus floridanus). Ecology 12:1375-1387. the Scandinavian brown bear (Ursus Conservation Genetics 8:455-464. Paetkau, D., and C. Strobeck. 1994. arctos). Molecular Ecology 9:421- Dixon, J. D., M. K. Oli, M. C. Wooten, Microsatellite analysis of genetic 431. T. H. Eason, J. W. McCown, and D. variation in black bear populations. Woods, J. G., D. Paetkau, D. Lewis, Paetkau. 2007b. Effectiveness of a Molecular Ecology 3:489-495. B. N. McLellan, M. Proctor, and C. Pine Mt. BSF GSMNP WV VA regional corridor in connecting two Pritchard, J. K., X. Wen, and D. Falush. Strobeck. 1999. Genetic tagging of Florida black bear populations. Con- 2007. Documentation for structure free-ranging black and brown bears. servation Biology 20:155-162. software: Version 2.2. Retrieved 4 Wildlife Society Bulletin 27:616-627. 0.311 0.272 0.092 0.054 Pine Mt. ---- Eastridge, R., and J. D. Clark. 2001. April 20009 from . Population Structure by F-Statistics BSF 0.09 ---- 0.135 0.408 0.279 niques to reintroduce black bears. Raymond, M., and F. Rousset. 1995. with Special Regard to Systems of (p=0.001) (p=0.001) (p=0.001) Wildlife Society Bulletin 29:1163- GENEPOP (version 1.2): population Mating. Evolution 19:395-420. 1174. genetics software for exact tests and GSMNP 0.076 0.042 ---- 0.331 0.227 (p=0.001) (p=0.001) Frankham, R., J. D. Ballou, and D. A. ecumenicism. Journal of Heredity Funding Sources: Pittman Robertson Brisco. 2002. Introduction to conser- 86:248-249. (PR) and University of Kentucky WV 0.027 0.13 0.101 ---- 0.115 (p=0.001) vation Genetics. Cambridge Univer- Rice, W. R. 1989. Analyzing tables of sity Press, New York. statistical tests. Evolution 43:223-225. KDFWR Strategic Plan. Goal 1. VA 0.014 0.081 0.063 0.045 ---- Frary, V. J. 2008. Estimating abundance Selkoe, K. A., and R. J. Toonen. 2006. Strategic Objective 5. Comprehen- and distribution of the black bear (Ur- Microsatellites for ecologists: a sive Wildlife Conservation Strategy: sus americanus) in Kentucky. Master’s practical guide to using and evaluating Appendix 3.9; Class Mammalia: thesis, Indiana University of Pennsyl- microsatellite markers. Ecology Let- Taxa specific conservation project. vania, Indiana, Pennsylvania, USA. ters 9:615-629.

Annual Research Highlights 009 37 COMPLETED PROJECTS / Wildlife

Bias in GPS Telemetry Studies: A Case Study Using Black Bears in Southeastern Kentucky

Ben Augustine, Phil Crowley, (Hebblewhite et al. 2007, Hansen and the collar and satellites), the variable John Cox, and David Maehr, Riggs 2008), fix interval (time between GPS constellation and ranging errors University of Kentucky GPS locations; Cain et al. III 2005, create a level of background measure- Mills et al. 2006), and obstructions ment error that varies through time. KDFWR Contact: Steven Dobey between the GPS collar and satellites These measurement errors are small due to terrain (D’Eon et al. 2002), relative to the grain of typical habitat vegetation (D’Eon et al. 2002, Frair data (Rempel et al. 1995) and random et al. 2004, Hebblewhite et al. 2007, relative to animal-habitat associations, Introduction Sager-Fradkin et al. 2007), and animal but they may still introduce bias to re- Global Positioning System (GPS) behavior (D’Eon and Delparte 2005, source selection studies through habitat telemetry has been increasingly used to Graves and Waller 2006, Schwartz et al. misclassification (Visscher 2006) and study wildlife populations as it offers 2009). Under optimal GPS operating can skew movement path distributions a way to systematically collect large conditions (i.e. no obstruction between due to (DeCesare et al. 2005). Of amounts of relatively accurate animal location data consistently across diel periods and seasons even on remote and inaccessible landscapes (Schwartz and Arthur 1999). However, these data contain errors— both measurement error and missing fixes—that have been shown to bias the analysis of resource selection (D’Eon 2003, Friar et al. 2004, Viss- cher 2006), home range estimation (Horne et al. 2007), and movement patterns (DeCesare et al. 2005). The magnitude of bias in GPS telemetry datasets is linked to GPS collar performance that is in turn influenced by numerous factors such as the GPS satellite constellation (Moen et al. 1997), ranging errors (satellite clock errors, satellite ephemeris errors, multipath signals, receiver noise, etc.; Parkinson and Spilker Jr. 1996), collar model Black bear / John Hast

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

Table 1: Measurement error landscape covariate models within ΔAICc=7 of top model. n = 3. larger concern, however, are the forms of obstruction between the GPS collar and Model Parameters K -2LL AICc ΔAICc wi satellites that exacerbate background GPS measure- Cmodel Veg AS ment error and induce failed 1 AS*Cmodel AS*Veg 10 -85.19 -56.39 0 0.563 location attempts, leading Veg*ASATS to larger, systematic biases. Also of concern are how Cmodel Veg AS the collar model and fix 2 AS*Veg Veg*ASATS 9 -78.88 -53.96 2.43 0.167 interval interact with collar obstructions to determine Cmodel Veg AS the degree of bias in GPS AS*Cmodel 3 11 -85.38 -52.38 4.01 0.076 data sets. AS*Veg Veg*ASATS While sometimes ASATS*Cmodel ignored, the magnitude of Cmodel Veg AS these biases is not trivial, AS*Cmodel and resource selection, 4 AS*Veg Veg*ASATS 11 -85.34 -52.34 4.05 0.074 space use, and movement Cmodel*Veg pattern inferences must be made with caution, espe- Cmodel Veg AS AS*Cmodel cially for forest dwelling 5 AS*Veg Veg*ASATS 11 -85.19 -52.19 4.20 0.069 species with complex AS*ASATS behavioral patterns such as bears (Sager-Fradkin et al. Cmodel Veg AS 6 AS*Veg Veg*ASATS 10 -79.07 -50.27 6.12 0.026 2007). To better understand Cmodel*Veg the factors contributing to bias in resource selection, Cmodel Veg AS space use, and movement 7 AS*Cmodel AS*Veg 10 -78.94 -50.14 6.25 0.025 ASATS*Cmodel pattern inferences, and more specifically, how inferences Cmodel = collar model, AS = proportion available sky, Veg = forest or open, ASATS = may be biased in a study available satellites using GPS collars to infer black bear resource selection, space use, and movement patterns by creating a minimum convex polygon locations recorded by bear-deployed in eastern Kentucky, the performance around all GPS locations recorded by collars, and was exclusively within of two collar types (Lotek 3300L and collars deployed on bears and the study the Central Appalachian EPA Level 3 8000MGU) was assessed using station- area for stationary test collars was Ecoregion (Woods et al. 1996; Figure ary collar tests, and GPS performance chosen to minimize the time and cost 3.3). A very small portion of the bear- of animal-deployed collars for four col- of stationary collar tests while still rep- deployed collar study area in Virginia lar types (Lotek 3300S, 3300L, 4400M, resenting the full range of topographic and Tennessee fall within the Ridge and 8000MGU) was analyzed. obstruction and land cover types within and Valley Ecoregion, but very few the bear-deployed collar study area. GPS locations fall within the Ridge Study Area The bear-deployed collar study area fell and Valley Ecoregion (< 0.3%). The Two study areas were delineated within 3 states—Kentucky, Virginia, Central Appalachian Ecoregion is for this study—one defined by the area and Tennessee—and the majority of characterized by high elevations and a traversed by GPS-collared bears and GPS locations were located in Bell, dissected topography, and the majority a second, smaller study area nested Harlan, Perry, and Letcher Counties of the landscape is covered by mixed within the area traversed by GPS-col- in Kentucky; Wise and Lee Counties mesophytic forest (Woods et al. 1996). lared bears in which GPS collar tests in Virginia; and Claiborne County in Rugged terrain and infertile soils limit were conducted. The study area for Tennessee. The stationary test collar agriculture and human development so bear-deployed collars was delineated study area contained 53.3% of GPS the landscape remains largely forested, Kentucky elk / Joe Lacefield

Annual Research Highlights 009 39 COMPLETED PROJECTS / Wildlife

Figure 1: Mean measurement error (m) across a portion of the study area for the 3300L..

except for areas that have been surface From 2005-2009, GPS collars telemetry. Bears were immobilized mined (Woods et al. 1996). Open areas were deployed on black bears captured using a mixture of tiletamine and zo- within the study area are associated during the summer or during den visits lazepam (Telazol, Ford Dodge Labora- with active and reclaimed surface min- in the winter using procedures ap- tories, Fort Dodge, Iowa) at a dosage ing and small areas of human develop- proved by the University of Kentucky of 4.4mg/kg estimated body weight. ment. Roads and human development International Animal Care and Use Telazol was administered via jabstick are largely limited to valley bottoms Committee (protocol #626A2003). or dart rifle (Pnuedart, Williamsport, and surface mining is prevalent on From May-August, bears were captured PA). Collar models used in this study the Black Mountain complex and the using modified Aldrich snares (Johnson include: Lotek 3300S (2005-2007 highly-dissected mountains to the north and Pelton 1980), passive PVC snares production; Lotek Wireless, Ontario, of Pine Mountain. Within the study (Reagan et al. 2002), and culvert traps Canada), 3300L (2005-2007 produc- area, Pine Mountain remains largely baited with pastries, peanut butter, tion), 4400M (2006 production), and unaffected by deforestation, with only a and/or raspberry extract. Traps were 8000MGU (2008-2009 production), few areas cleared for human settlement checked twice daily. Den sites of all with the 8000MGU having the high- and two rock quarries. collared female bears expected to have est sensitivity and expected to have the cubs were investigated in February best performance. Methods and March. Den sites were located by Stationary Collar Test Collar Deployment on Bears aerial telemetry and subsequent ground Since all collar models varied in

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

hardware and firmware, it is reason- The relative effects of landscape ment errors were modeled to meet the able to suspect differential perfor- covariates on measurement error, and assumption of normality and separate mance between each model, but collar therefore, GPS performance in general, variance groups were used for each availability limited stationary collar were assessed using linear regression collar model. Two dimensional fixes testing to the two most commonly used after it was determined that a mixed recorded at a test site before a 3-D fix models in this study, the 3300L and model with a random intercept for test was obtained were removed as these the 8000MGU. Stationary collar tests site did not retain enough inter-site locations assume the collar is at the el- were conducted with a 1 hr fix interval variation to produce nonzero variance evation of the previously-recorded 3-D as this is the sampling interval of the estimates. Log-transformed measure- fix and can be highly inaccurate (Sager- majority of previously collected data Fradkin et al. 2007). To account for the and data currently being collected. The Table 2: Parameter Importance for fact that collars were not all deployed effect of landscape covariates on GPS measurement error concurrently, the mean number of satel- collar performance was assessed by lites in orbit over the test site during placing 8 GPS collars (4 8000MGU each trial was used as a variable in the and 4 3300L) at 18 test sites within the Parameters1 Importance model. While test sites occurred in two study area stratified across levels of forest types, preliminary investigation vegetative and topographic obstruction revealed the distinction between forest and recording locations. types was relatively unimportant, so the Cmodel 1 Vegetative obstruction was quanti- difference between open and forested fied using land cover classes derived areas was of most interest. Other vari- from 2001 NCLD (Homer et al. 2004), ables of interest were collar model, AS, updated to reflect land cover change Veg 1 and all two-way interaction terms. between 2001 and 2005 (Kentucky Division of Geographic Information Performance of Bear-deployed Collars 2007). Land cover types with simi- and Factors Influencing Performance lar levels of canopy obstruction were AS 1 To better understand the potential combined, creating three categories: 1) for bias in animal-deployed collars deciduous forest, 2) mixed forest, and across different collar models and fix 3) no canopy (barren land, grassland, intervals, the proportion of success- pasture, scrub/shrub, and developed). AS*Veg 1 ful fixes (hereafter, fix proportion) of An index of topographic obstruction bear-deployed collars were modeled as was quantified by calculating “available a function of collar model, fix interval, sky” (AS; D’Eon et al. 2002) from a and bear size/sex with linear regression digital elevation model (see Augus- Veg*ASATS 1 model using separate variance groups tine 2010 for more detailed methods). for the newer 8000MGU and the 3 old- Stationary collar testing was performed er models combined. Preliminary in- from 4 June – 12 June, 2009. Test vestigation demonstrated that these data sites were stratified across the three Cmodel*AS 0.782 were linear, despite being proportions land cover categories and available sky (Augustine 2010). First, and most im- values within the test collar study area. portantly, it was expected that all collar Available sky was discretized into six Cmodel*Veg 0.101 models have differing fix proportions, categories to facilitate adequate sam- leading to differential potential for bias pling across the full range of values. between collar models. Second, it was Eighteen test sites were selected with Cmodel*ASATS 0.101 expected that fix proportions decline each combination of available sky and as the fix interval increases as this has land cover represented. One 3300L and been theoretically justified and dem- one 8000MGU were placed at each test AS*ASATS 0.069 onstrated in the literature (Cain III et site concurrently and allowed to record al. 2005). Lastly, since a correlation locations for > 24 hours. Collars were between fix proportion and bear size suspended 1 meter off the ground on Cmodel = collar model, AS = has been observed (Graves and Waller a string tied between two trees, or on proportion available sky, Veg = forest 2006), this may be influencing fix pro- poles in open land cover types. or open, ASATS = available satellites portions and 3-D fix proportions in this

Annual Research Highlights 009 1 COMPLETED PROJECTS / Wildlife

Table 3: Top landscape covariate measurement Table 4: Bear-deployed collar fix proportion models. n = 8. error model coefficients. Response is log0 (measurement error). 8000MGU, Open, and 1 AS*8000MGU are reference categories for Model Covariates SK 2LL AICc ΔAICc Cmodel, Veg, and AS*Cmodel, respectively. Cmodel LFIX 1 7 -144.69 -125.00 0 LNECK Parameters1 Coeff. SE P Cmodel LFIX 2 7 -143.10 -123.41 1.59 Sex Intercept 0.698 1.368 0.615 3 Cmodel LFIX 6 -136.94 -120.14 4.86 Cmodel .4044 0.078 <0.001 3300L 4 Cmodel 5 -125.50 -111.46 13.54 Veg 6.143 1.653 0.001 Forest 5 Intercept only 2 -71.23 -64.68 60.32

AS -0.197 0.111 0.092 Cmodel = collar model LFIX = log0-transformed fix interval, AS*Cmodel LNECK = log -transformed bear neck size -0.315 0.131 0.024 0 AS*3300L means between each col- Mean measurement error was AS*Veg -0.633 0.132 <0.001 lar model were tested while 13.9 m (95% CI 10.3-19.0) and 8.4 m AS*Forest controlling for multiple com- (95% CI 6.5-11.0) for the 3300L and parisons using the “simulate” 8000MGU, respectively. The 3300L ASATS*Veg method which provides and 8000MGU recorded similar mean ASATS*Forest -.621 0.107 0.106 improved inference over the fix proportions (0.98, 95% CI 0.98-0.99 ASATS*Open 0.016 0.016 0.920 Tukey-Kramer method with and 0.99, 95% CI 0.98-0.99, respec- unbalanced data and unequal tively), but differed in 3-D fix propor- variances (Westfall et al. tions (0.768, 95% CI 0.67-0.86 and Cmodel = collar model, AS = 1999). Finally, fix propor- 0.97, 95% CI 0.97-1.00, respectively). proportion available sky, Veg = forest tions for bear-deployed After the removal of 2-D locations or open, ASATS = available satellites collars at 1 hour fix intervals at test sites that were not preceded were compared to fix propor- by 3-D locations, a random intercept data set. If this effect is present and of tions of stationary test collars deployed model could not be fit, so the model significant size, it should be accounted at forested sites to see if fix propor- and inferences presented here differ for in order to compare fix proportions tions are reduced by bear behavior to slightly from Augustine (2010) where across collars. Since neck size have the same degree across collar models. initial 2-D locations were erroneously been found to correlate with fix propor- Open test collar sites were not included not removed. There was considerable tion better than chest girth (Graves and in the estimate of stationary collar model selection uncertainty, with 7 Waller 2006), this variable was used. performance as black bears spend the models within 7 AICc units of the best Because the sex of the bear, rather than majority of their time in the forest. It supported model (Table 1). Variable the size of the bear, may influence fix was expected that fix proportions would importance values (Posada and Buckley proportions if sexes behave differently, differ less between bear-deployed and 2004) reflect that collar model, vegeta- an effect for sex was included. Fix stationary test collars for the 8000MGU tion, available sky, and the interac- interval and neck size effects were also as it should be less sensitive to obstruction between vegetation and available modeled after a log-transformation, as tion, in general. satellites appear in all 7 models and this transformation appeared to provide suggest the interaction between col- a slightly better linear relationship to Results lar model and available sky is well fix proportion (LFIX AND LNECK; Performance of Stationary Test supported. Model averaging led to a hereafter). Differences in least square Collars negligible difference in coefficient es-

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

17.7 m for the 3300L and 8000MGU, collars not yet retrieved (N = 2), and respectively. Measurement error was collars falling off before bears left dens predicted to be lowest on mountaintops, where collars were deployed (N = 1) urban areas, and active and reclaimed or collars falling off before 3 weeks of surface mines (Figure 1). Local mea- deployment (N = 1). surement error conditions varied widely Fix proportions ranged from 0.50 across the study area due to variation in to 0.86 for the 3300L, 0.48 to 0.74 for topographic obstruction. Pine Moun- the 3300S, 0.33 to 0.86 for the 4400M, tain was predicted to have relatively fa- and 0.87 to 0.97 for the 8000MGU. vorable GPS performance, while Black There was very strong support for dif- Mountain and the highly dissected ferential fix proportions across collar mountains north of Pine Mountain were models (ΔAICc = 46.78 between models predicted to have less favorable GPS 4 and 5, Table 4). Further, there was performance. substantial support for a fix interval effect ( ΔAICc = 8.68 between models Performance of Bear-Deployed 3 and 4), and LFIX was highly sig- Collars nificant in the top model (p < 0.001, From 2005-2009, 92 bears were Table 5). The top model predicted captured 138 times and 29 female dens a decline in fix proportion of 0.138 were investigated. 42 GPS collars were between fix intervals of 0.5 and 4 hr deployed on bears with several be- with the decline stabilizing near a fix ing redeployed for a total of 61 collar interval of 4 hr due to the log trans- deployments. The following number of formation. The bear size effect was data sets was acquired for each model: moderately supported (AICc=4.86), 3300S – 6, 3300L – 16, 4400M – 7, but the hypothesis of a bear size effect Adjusting frequency of antenna 8000MGU – 19. Causes of a collar de- and that of a sex-specific behavioral / Obie Williams ployment not resulting in an analyzable effect are essentially equally supported data set were collar failure (confirmed (AICc=1.59). Only the model with timates from the best supported model N = 7, suspected N = 1), store-on- both a fix interval and neck size effect which contains all the variables of high board collars not yet retrieved (N = 1), did not display outliers so this model importance, so the coefficients from 8000MGU collars deployed on bears was used to compare collar models fix the best supported model were used not living within cell phone service and proportions. The 8000MGU recorded for inference and prediction (Table 3). the highest fix proportion, followed The best supported model explained the Table 5: Top bear-deployed collar fix by the 3300L, then the 3300S, and majority of the variation between sites proportion model. 8000MGU is the the lowest was the 4400M. Mean for both the 8000MGU (92.1%) and reference category for Cmodel. fix proportions for all collars were 3300L (83.7%), demonstrating why the significantly different (pΔ0.01), except random intercept model estimated an between the 3300S and 4400L, which Model inter-site variance of zero. Coeff. SE P were marginally significantly differ- Term1 Measurement error was higher for ent (p=0.055), and between the 3300S the 3300L compared to the 8000MGU, and 4400L (p=0.945). Fix proportion higher in forest compared to open Intercept 1.225 0.115 <0.001 reductions due to bear behavior for the areas, and higher in areas with more 3300L were significantly larger than topographic obstruction. Measure- Cmodel the 8000MGU and predicted to be ~3 ment error increased more quickly with 3300S -0.307 0.043 <0.001 times as large (Table 6). increasing topographic obstruction for 3300L -0.165 0.028 <0.001 the 3300L and within forest. Finally, 4400M -0.340 0.043 <0.001 Discussion more available satellites led to smaller As expected, both forest and measurement errors in the forest, but LFIX -0.153 0.033 <0.001 topographic obstruction increased not in open areas where satellites are measurement error; however, since less limiting. Predicted mean mea- LNECK -0.180 0.033 0.015 topographic obstruction is more vari- surement errors across the study area able than the presence of forest cover ranged from 4.1 to 38.6 m and 3.0 to Cmodel = collar model in eastern Kentucky (Figure 1), it is

Annual Research Highlights 009 3 COMPLETED PROJECTS / Wildlife

Table 6: Fix proportions for bear-deployed 8000MGU and 3300L collars at a be smaller when ephemeris download is fix interval of 1 hour compared with stationary test collars at forested sites only less frequently interrupted, such as for with the same fix interval. Confidence intervals are nonparametric bootstrapped animals living in more open habitats or confidence intervals and not adjusted for multiple comparisons. animals whose behavior less frequently obstructs the GPS collar. It has been previously demon- Deployment %95 %95 strated that bedding behavior is the Model Mean Type Lower Upper major source of missing fixes on bear-deployed GPS collars (Graves and Stationary in Forest Waller 2006, Schwartz et al. 2009) and (n=12) 0.975 0.958 0.991 a significant proportion of the large 3300L Bear (n = 8) 0.742 0.654 0.820 reduction in fix proportions on animal- Reduction 0.233 0.154 0.322 deployed collars seen in this study is probably due to bedding behavior. Stationary in Forest Bias can be introduced if behaviors are (n=12) 0.987 0.971 0.984 8000MGU habitat-specific or if there are interac- Bear (n = 11) 0.923 0.911 0.934 tions between behaviors and habitat, Reduction 0.064 0.044 0.084 both of which have been demonstrated for GPS-collared bears (Heard et al. 2008). Habitat-specific bedding behav- likely the most important landscape substantial evidence for one over the ior will lead to fewer locations recorded covariate influencing GPS collar perfor- other. Fortunately, any bear size or in the habitats where bears choose to mance. Better performance in open sex effect should be less problematic bed, which are likely areas with high areas will lead to more locations being on newer, more sensitive collars which cover and farther from human activ- recorded around human development should be less influenced by behavior. ity and roads. Interactions between and on surface mines than in the forest This hypothesis is supported by the bedding and habitat will magnify the and may bias resource selection infer- larger decline in performance between effect of landscape covariates on GPS ences, especially for more nuisance- stationary and bear-deployed 3300L performance. Together, these effects prone bears that utilize areas of human collars, compared to the more sensitive of bedding can lead to substantial bias development and surface mines. Bias 8000MGU. While the decline in fix in resource selection inferences, home in resource selection inferences may proportion with increasing fix interval range estimation, and the analysis of also be induced in factors correlated recorded in this study (-0.153, 95% CI movement patterns. Fortunately, the with topographic obstruction, such -0.226 – -0.081) is not significantly newer 8000MGU appears robust to as distance to roads (especially major different than that recorded by Cain behavioral effects and should limit bias roads), distance to human development, III et al. (2005; -0.110, 95% CI -0.177 in GPS collar data sets. mixed and coniferous forest, distance – -0.043), the slightly larger estimate to streams, elevation, topographic in this study is probably more accu- Management position index, and slope. There was rate for animal-deployed collars since Reccommendations moderate support for the hypothesis Cain III et al. (2005) pooled station- Due to extensive forest cover and that the 8000MGU measurement error ary and animal-deployed collars and high levels of topographic obstruc- is influenced by topographic obstruc- did not estimate a separate slope for tion, eastern Kentucky is a challenging tion to a smaller degree than for the each. Animal-deployed collars should environment for GPS telemetry. Fur- 3300L, suggesting performance across benefit more from the greater amount ther, GPS telemetry is problematic for the landscape is more homogeneous for of valid ephemeris data stored in the animals that frequently behave in ways the 8000MGU. The 8000MGU was collar provided by shorter fix intervals that obstruct the antenna, such as bed- probably less influenced by topographic as ephemeris download should be more ding in thick cover or obstructing the obstruction because its greater sensitiv- frequently interrupted in animal-de- antenna with their bodies. This study ity enabled it to achieve higher 3-D fix ployed collars due to animal movement. demonstrates that newer, high sensitiv- proportions than the 3300L. Using the relationship estimated in ity collars are required to achieve high This study supports a fix interval this study, researchers should expect a fix proportions (>90%) and accept- effect on fix proportions and mod- decline in fix proportion of about 0.138 able levels of bias for black bears on erately supports a bear size or sex by increasing fix intervals from 0.5 to 4 this landscape. For species that live effect, but this analysis did not provide hr. The magnitude of this decline may in the open or do not behave in ways

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

that obstruct the antenna, such as elk, Understanding the causes of missed Rempel, R. S., A. R. Rodgers, and K. F. almost perfect fix proportions (>0.99) global positioning system telemetry Abraham. 1995. Performance of a are achievable with current technol- fixes. Journal of Wildlife Manage- GPS animal location system under bo- ogy (Cox, unpublished data). To ment 70:844-851. real forest canopy. Journal of Wildlife ensure correct management decisions Hansen, M. C., and R. A. Riggs. 2008. Management 59:543-551. are made, wildlife researchers should Accuracy, precision, and observation Sager-Fradkin, K. A., K. J. Jenkins, R. report fix proportions and wildlife rates of global positioning system A. Hoffman, P. J. Happe, J. J. Bee- managers should interpret these studies telemetry collars. Journal of Wildlife cham, and R. G. Wright. 2007. Fix with an understanding of the factors Management 72:518-526. Success and Accuracy of global posi- inducing bias in these data. Heard, D. C., L. M. Ciarniello, and D. tioning system collars in old-growth R. Seip. 2008. Grizzly bear behavior temperate coniferous forests. Journal Acknowledgements and global positioning system collar of Wildlife Management 71:1298- This study was supported by the fix rates. Journal of Wildlife Manage- 1308. Kentucky Department of Fish and ment 72:596-602. Schwartz, C. C., and S. M. Arthur. Wildlife Resources and a University Hebblewhite, M., M. Percy, and E. H. 1999. Radiotracking large wilderness of Kentucky administered USDA- Merrill. 2007. Are all global posi- mammals: integration of GPS and CSREES Special Grants –Precision tiong system collars created equal? ARGOS technology. Ursus 11:261- Resource Management. We would like Correcting habitat-induced bias using 274. to thank KDFWR for funding and as- three brands in the central Canadian Schwartz C. C., S. Podruzny, S. L. Cain, sistance with research activities. Rockies. Journal of Wildlife Manage- and S. Cherry. Performance of spread ment 71:2026-2033. spectrum global positioning collars Literature Cited Horne, J. S., E. O. Garton, K.A. Sager- on grizzly and black bears. Journal of Cain III, J. W., P. R. Krausman, B. D. Fradkin. 2007. Correcting home- Wildlife Management73:1174-1183. Jansen, and J. R. Morgart. 2005. range models for observation bias. Westfall, P. H., R. D. Tobias, D. Rom, R. Influence of topography and GPS fix Journal of Wildlife Management D. Wolfinger, and Y. Hochberg. 1999. interval on GPS collar performance. 71(3):996-1001. Multiple comparisons and multiple Wildlife Society Bulletin 33:926-934. Johnson, K. G., and M. R. Pelton. 1980. tests: using the SAS system. SAS DeCesare, N. J., J. R. Squires, and J. A. Prebaiting and snaring techniques for Institute Inc., North Carolina, USA. Kolbe. 2005. Effect of forest canopy black bear. Wildlife Society Bulletin Woods, A.J., Omernik, J.M., Brown, on GPS-based movement data. Wild- 8:46-54. D.D., and Kiilsgaard, C.W., 1996, life Society Bulletin 33:935-941. Moen, R., J. Pastor, and Y. Cohen. 1997. Level III and IV ecoregions of D’Eon, R. G. 2003. Effects of a station- Accuracy of GPS telemetry collar Pennsylvania and the Blue Ridge ary GPS fix-rate bias on habitat-se- locations with differential correc- Mountains, the Ridge and Valley, lection analyses. Journal of Wildlife tion. Journal of Wildlife Management and Central Appalachians of Vir- Management 67:858-863. 61:530-539. ginia, West Virginia, and Maryland: D’Eon, R. G., and D. Delparte. 2005. Parkinson, B.W., and J. J. Spilker Jr,, EPA/600/R-96/077, U.S. Environmen- Effects of radio-collar position and editors. 1996. Global positioning tal Protection Agency, National Health orientation on GPS radio-collar system: theory and applications. and Environmental Effects Research performance, and the implications of Volume 1. American Institute of Laboratory, Corvallis, Oreg., 50 p. PDOP in data screening. Journal of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Inc., Visscher, D. R. 2006. GPS measure- Applied Ecology 42:383-388. Washington, DC, USA. ment error and resource selection D’Eon, R. G., R. Serrouya, G. Smith, Posada, D. and T. R. Buckley. 2004. functions in a fragmented landscape. and C. O. Kochanny. 2002. GPS Model selection and model averaging Ecography 29:458-464. radiotelemetry error and bias in in phlogenetics: advantages of Akaike mountainous terrain. Wildlife Society Information Criterion and Bayesian Bulletin 30:430-439. approaches over likelihood ratio tests. Funding Sources: Pittman Robertson Frair, J. L., S. E. Nielsen, E. H. Merrill, Systematic Biology 53(5):793-808. (PR) and University of Kentucky S. R. Lele, M. S. Boyce, R. H. Munro, Reagan, S. R., J. M. Ertel, P. Stinson, P. G. B. Stenhouse, and H. L. Beyer. Yakupzack, and D. Anderson. 2002. KDFWR Strategic Plan. Goal 1. 2004. Removing GPS collar bias in A passively triggered foot snare Strategic Objective 5. Comprehen- habitat selection studies. Journal of design for American black bears to sive Wildlife Conservation Strategy: Applied Ecology 41:201-212. reduce disturbance by non-target Appendix 3.9; Class Mammalia: Taxa Graves, T. A., and J. S. Waller. 2006. animals. Ursus 13:317-320. specific conservation project.

Annual Research Highlights 009 5 COMPLETED PROJECTS / Wildlife

Factors Impacting Reproductive Success of Interior Least Terns (Sterna antillarum athalassos) in Western Kentucky

Caitlin Borck and Robert B. Frederick, Eastern Kentucky University; John Brunjes, Kentucky Department of Fish and Wildlife Resources

Introduction The interior least tern (Sterna antillarum athalassos) was listed as Endangered on June 27, 1985 (USFWS 1985). The interior least tern (hereafter least tern) was formerly a common summer resident along the Colorado, Red, Arkansas, Missouri, Ohio, and Mississippi river systems, but now only breeds in small, lo- Least tern chick / John Brunjes cal populations (Marks 1996). sippi rivers from Henderson to Hick- predators seem able to easily detect Least terns require flat sand bars or man, KY (Cuzio et al. 2005). Natural least tern nests (USFWS 2006). In islands that have little or no vegetation islands along this stretch of river addition, because least terns along this (Hardy 1957 as cited by Renken and (approximately 215 km) are being lost stretch of the river are usually limited Smith 1995, Carreker 1985). These due to changes in flooding patterns that to only two larger islands on the Mis- bare substrates are maintained by the allow vegetation to cover some areas, sissippi River and less than ten smaller scouring action created by regular and predators now have access to previ- islands on the Ohio River, some created flooding of river systems. ously protected sandbars (J. Brunjes, by the USACOE, they may be more Early losses of least terns were due pers. obs.). Least terns on this stretch of vulnerable to devastating losses than to the demands of the millinery trade river rely increasingly on islands made if they were distributed among more in the late 19th century, egg collection, by the United States Army Corps of sites with smaller colonies (Smith and random shooting, and human distur- Engineers (USACE) from dredged ma- Renken 1993). New islands, suit- bance (USFWS 2006). Currently, the terials (B. Vessels, USACE, Navigation able for least tern nesting, have been loss of nesting habitat due to chan- and Dredging Team Leader, Louisville created each year for at least the last nelization, dam and weir construction, KY office, pers. comm.). 7 years (beginning 2001) as a part of irrigation, and reservoir construction is Human disturbance of nesting sites normal navigation maintenance in the considered the greatest threat to least is considered the second greatest threat Ohio River (B. Vessels, USACE, pers. tern populations (TPWD 2008, USFWS to least tern populations (USFWS comm.). 2006). Changes in flooding regimes due 1990) while other causes of reproduc- Our objectives were to (1) record to these alterations have reduced the tive failure include depredation and basic reproductive data and compare number of suitable nesting sites avail- flooding (KCWCS 2005). Although the reproductive success of least terns able to interior least terns range wide. camouflaged eggs are nearly invisible nesting on man-made versus natural is- Small colonies of least terns are to off-roaders and others using islands lands, and (2) deter human disturbance supported along the Ohio and Missis- and beaches for recreational purposes, at least tern nest sites in Kentucky by

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

posting islands with signs designating on the Mississippi River (Figure 1). of nest initiation recorded. Searches area as critical nesting habitat. Little Potential nesting sites on this stretch for nest scrapings began on 7 June in is known about the tern colonies along of river were identified from records 2008 and 10 June in 2009 by using the Ohio River other than results from of previously used nesting sites (2005 binoculars (Nikon 10X42 Monarch general surveys. Reproductive success and 2007) provided by the Kentucky ATB) from a boat within 10 meters of was calculated to provide informa- Department of Fish and Wildlife colonies. We avoided landing during tion on the value of these islands. By Resources (KDFWR) and a helicopter initial surveys so that terns were not recording factors causing egg mortality over-flight in June 2009. Locations of disturbed or forced to abandon the site we planned to identify management man-made islands were provided by (Elliott et al. 2007). To evaluate nesting needs such as improvements in content USACE personnel after deposition sites and hatching success, nests (scrapes of substrate, placement of driftwood for each summer had been finalized. which contained eggs) were counted at on islands for cover, or possibly direct Once islands became exposed as rivers each site when first identified as a nest forms of predator control or additional approached summer pool, potential and individually marked (after allowing measures to reduce human distur- nesting sites were posted by KDFWR for colony initiation which took less bance. This project was necessary to staff with signs designating each area than one week) with a tongue depressor establish the status of nesting Interior as a restricted endangered least tern displaying a unique identification num- Least Terns in western Kentucky and nesting site 1 May through 31 August. ber (placed approximately 30 cm from to assess the value of current expendi- Islands created by the USACE (Mound each nest). The fate of each nest was tures on habitat protection and creation City, Paducah, and Cumberland) were recorded by using evidence observed (including creation of dredge islands). posted immediately upon completion. in and around nest (Szell and Wood- The goal was to produce results upon Alternative (non-island) sites were rey 2003). Small shell fragments or which to base future efforts with re- identified through reports of Interior absence of fragments, chick droppings spect to management of this important Least Tern sightings (B. Palmer-Ball, and tracks, and adult tracks indicated a species in this critical breeding region. pers. obs.). successful hatch. Large shell fragments Sites were monitored by boat or on and/or presence of tracks from species Methods foot by using binoculars every 3-7 days other than least terns indicated depreda- Our study took place on the Ohio for the arrival of least terns and dates tion (Rochelle Renken and Jennifer H. River from Paducah, Kentucky, to Stucker, pers. comm.). Absence of frag- where the Ohio and Mississippi rivers Figure 1. The 008 and 009 least tern ments and other evidence at a marked converge and from this point to the study area with nesting sites marked nest was recorded as unknown fate border of Kentucky and Tennessee and labeled. but assumed unsuccessful. During the first season (1 May to 31 Aug 2008), nests were also marked with modified surveyor’s flags due to the tall vegetation that quickly overgrew agricultural sites, making tongue depressors impossible to locate. We completed walk-throughs (Parnell et al. 1988) quickly and efficiently before 1000 h to minimize heat stress (Dugger et al. 2000). The walk-throughs were usually less than 15 minutes in duration and no surveys were done when ambient temperature exceeded 90 F, when adults must protect eggs (Elliott et al. 2007). If sites were too large for one or two researchers to complete walk-throughs in 15 minutes (islands on the Missis- sippi River), adults were observed to ensure they returned to nests within that time period and more time was spent on the site. We recorded clutch size (when nest was complete after 1-3 days, veri-

Annual Research Highlights 009 7 COMPLETED PROJECTS / Wildlife

Table 1: Summary of results for 008 and 009 breeding seasons of least terns in western Kentucky.

Date of Site Type of Number Number Hatching Nesting Average Causes of Site Initiation Colony Nests Eggs Success (%) Success (%) Clutch (%) Failure Industrial Arkema 24 June 14 21 90.5% 92.9% 1.50 Other Pond

Swan Lake 28 June 0.078 54 80 6.3% 9.3% 1.48 Depredation 2008 Depredation, Open Pond 26 June 1.653 89 157 0.6% 1.12% 1.76 Plowed under Natural KY Bend 11 June 316 675 0.0% 0.0% 2.13 Flooding Island Human Distur- Natural KY Bend Renest 29 June 185 350 16.8% 18.8% 1.82 bance, Depreda- Island tion, Storms Natural Middlebar South 30 June 59 98 0.8% 1.6% 2.92 Flooding Island Natural Middlebar 11 June 61 135 0.0% 0.0% 1.66 Flooding Island Human Distur- Natural Middlebar Renest 30 June 52 106 17.9% 19.2% 2.23 bance, Depreda- Island tion, Storms Dredged Mound City 22 July 13 20 0.0% 0.0% 1.54 Flooding Island

2009 Natural Monkey’s Eyebrow 13 July 10 15 0.0% 0.0% 1.50 Flooding Island Monkey’s Eyebrow Natural 22 July 2 4 0.0% 0.0% 2.00 Flooding Renest Island Human Distur- Dredged Paducah 30 June 42 82 2.4% 2.4% 1.95 bance, Island Depredation Natural Piper 10 July 5 11 27.3% 40.0% 2.20 Flooding Island Dredged Cumberland 31 July 1 2 0.0% 0.0% 2.00 Flooding Island Industrial Minor Flooding, Arkema 18 June 31 69 76.8% 74.2% 2.26 Pond Other

fied by following nest through to fate), mortality of chicks (Zickfoose 1985). initiation for all sites occurred during nest success, hatching success, and egg Walk-throughs were completed every the last week of June (Table 1). Average status (intact, damaged, missing, dep- three days at each site when weather clutch sizes were 1.7, 1.5, and 1.5, at redated, pipped, or hatched; Szell and permitted. Open Pond, Swan Lake, and Arkema, Woodrey 2003). Nest success was de- respectively. The season average was fined as the percentage of nests that had Results 1.6 eggs. The average nesting success at least one egg hatch, whereas hatch- During the 2008 nesting season (1 was 32% and the average hatching ing success was the percentage of eggs May 2008 to 31 August 2008), pro- success was 32% (n=3 sites). At Open that hatched out of all eggs on each site. longed flooding prevented terns from Pond and Swan Lake, the two agricul- Possible causes of nest failure, such nesting on islands on the Ohio and tural sites, there were 143 nests with as depredation, were also recorded. Mississippi rivers for the duration of 237 eggs. The largest colony, Open Fledging success was not measured the season. Only three colonies were Pond (89 nests), had a hatching success because it would have required band- found, all at non-island locations: Open of only 0.6% (1 egg) and a nesting ing which may have caused increased Pond, Swan Lake, and Arkema. Nest success of 1% (1 nest). Several nests

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

were accidentally plowed under (24 out nests and 69 eggs. success and average hatching success of 89 nests) while the remaining nests KY Bend, Middlebar, and for the man-made islands were <1% were depredated (63) or abandoned (2). Monkey’s Eyebrow all had initial (both were 0.8%). Average clutch Swan Lake (54 nests) had a hatching nesting attempts that failed due to was 1.8. Natural islands had a higher success of 6% and a nesting success of untimely flooding events. Renesting on average nesting success at 10% and a 9%. Of the total nests five hatched, 2 Monkey’s Eyebrow was also unsuc- hatching success of 8%. The average were abandoned, and 47 were depredat- cessful because of flooding. Middlebar clutch size was 2.1. Because only one ed. Arkema (14 nests) had a hatching South, Mound City and Cumberland man-made island had successful nests, success of 90% while nesting success suffered total losses because of flood- a statistical comparison of success on was 93%. Only one nest failed, crushed ing. Middlebar South had a hatching man-made versus natural islands was by Canada geese (Branta canaden- success of 18% but no chicks grew not appropriate. Arkema had the high- sis). Arkema had 19 eggs successfully old enough for flight and all remain- est reproductive success with a nesting hatch and older chicks were spotted at ing nests were flooded. On KY Bend success of 74%, hatching success of Arkema as the season progressed. On 9 37 nests out of 185 were destroyed by 77%, and average clutch size of 2.3. July 18 chicks were spotted accounting predators, 4 were directly destroyed by for all chicks hatched by that time. 4-wheelers, and 54 were abandoned or Discussion In 2009, least terns nested on both failed after several severe storms and During the 2008 season, prolonged man-made and natural islands in the periods of blowing sand. All others flooding and high-water prevented Ohio and Mississippi rivers from New were either successful (31) or could not least terns from nesting on islands in Madrid, Missouri, to Smithland, Ken- be determined to have failed or hatched the Ohio and Mississippi rivers. Both tucky. Of nine nesting colonies found, (59). Based on tracks, predators were agricultural sites suffered heavily from three were on man-made (dredged ma- found to be avian (10), an unknown predation. Several nests at one site were terial) islands (Mound City, Paducah, canine (26), and ants (1). On Middlebar accidentally plowed under (24 out of 89 and Cumberland), five on natural only one chick hatched while at least nests). The industrial pond had no pre- islands (KY Bend, Middlebar South, 11 out of 61 nests were depredated by a dation of eggs despite the presence of Middlebar, Monkey’s Eyebrow, and canine and many were abandoned after ring-billed gulls (Larus delawarensis) Piper), and one was the same industrial several storms. The Paducah site was during entire nesting season. Average pond island a man-made, dredge-material “island,” clutch size (1.6) and nesting success (Arkema) used in 2008. Nesting but actually was attached to land and, (32%) for these sites were both much attempts began on islands of the Mis- therefore, suffered mainly from preda- lower than found by others elsewhere sissippi River (KY Bend, Middlebar, tion (29 out of 42 nests) by a small on islands along the Mississippi river in and Middlebar South) and one island mammal. Only one nest had success- previous seasons (Smith and Ren- (Paducah) on the Ohio River in the sec- ful hatches (2 chicks), which occurred ken 1993, Szell and Woodrey 2003), ond week of June followed by nesting before the predation event. The remain- particularly lower on the agricultural on the industrial pond, Arkema (Figure ing nests were likely abandoned (12 fields because of easy access for preda- 2). By the third week in June, renesting nests) due to the heavy pressure from tors. Smith and Renken (1993) found attempts were being made (following predation and 4-wheelers. Arkema was average clutch size to be 2.1 to 2.5 flooding events) and nesting began on again the most successful site with a eggs and nest success to be 65%. In 1 the remaining islands of the Ohio River few failures caused by geese crushing of 4 years, their nest success was much (Mound City, Monkey’s Eyebrow, 4 nests, 2 instances of flooding, and 2 lower (51%) due to flooding. In another Piper, and Cumberland). Among sites, nests abandoned out of 31 nests. When study along the Mississippi River from mean clutch sizes ranged from 1.5 to comparing reproductive success (nest- Tennessee south to Mississippi, nesting 2.9 and average clutch size was 2.0 ing and hatching success) of least terns success was 97% in 1995, but only 40% (n=9 sites). Nesting success ranged on Arkema between 2008 (93%, 90%) in 1996 and 1997 due to flooding and from 0 to 74%, with an average of 13% and 2009 (74%, 77%) it appears 2008 predation (Szell and Woodrey 2003). for the season. Hatching success ranged was more successful, but there were Our industrial site, with a fenced pe- from 0 to 77%, with an average of 12% more nests in 2009 (30 versus 14 in rimeter and small islands on the pond, (Table 1). Total number of nests on 2008), so more young hatched. provided extra protection from flooding natural islands was 694 with 1,394 eggs Flooding and predation proved and predators where birds experienced laid. On man-made islands, the total to be the main causes of reproductive higher reproductive success than on number of nests was 56, with 104 eggs failure on both natural and manmade river islands or agricultural sites. laid. Arkema, the industrial site, had 31 islands. In 2009, both average nesting Average nesting success was only

Annual Research Highlights 009 9 COMPLETED PROJECTS / Wildlife

13% in 2009, but with more nests and after pressures from predators and hu- success of nesting sites with habitat an average clutch size of 2.0 eggs, this man disturbance, as has been observed suitability based on a published Habitat season was more successful than the at other sites (Massey and Atwood Suitability Index (HSI) model (Car- previous year, but still less success- 1981). Several traces of gull, heron, reker 1985) to verify the validity of ful than reported by others at other snake, and canine tracks were found on the model and identify specific habitat colonies during other years as dis- this island. The Paducah site, a man- characteristics that might be limiting cussed above. Most islands, dredged made, dredge-material “island” that reproduction, but because all islands and natural, suffered heavy losses due actually was attached to land, only had were plagued with predation, flooding, to flooding on both the Mississippi and one successful hatch. Other nests there and human disturbance, other potential Ohio Rivers. were depredated or were likely aban- factors listed in the model (e.g., percent Middlebar South had some hatch- doned due to the heavy pressure from aquatic habitat and number of disparate ing success but was flooded before predation and 4-wheelers. Several nests wetlands within 1.6-km of the colony, chicks could have reached flight age. were straddled by 4-wheeler tracks or percent vegetation cover, average stem On KY Bend depredation, 4-wheel- narrowly missed. In addition, fire pits height, and substrate composition) had ers, severe storms, and blowing sand and trash were found on the islands. In no measurable impact on island nesting were all causes of known failures while 2009 Arkema was again the most suc- success during the 2009 season. other nests there were either success- cessful site. ful or could not be determined to have According to Marks (1988) natural Management Implications failed or hatched. Because conditions sites consist of mainly sand and shell It is necessary to identify the often prevented nest searches, and with less than 10% silt/clay, which specific predators causing reproductive often storms wiped traces away, it is Marks says would make both natural failure in order to effectively protect possible that there was more pressure and artificial sites along the Ohio and breeding colonies (Kruse et al. 2001). from predators and human disturbance Mississippi rivers acceptable. This type Predation was more devastating in 2008 than could be verified (i.e., listed as of substrate would only be acceptable because, while the nesting sites in agri- unknown fate). Digging traces were according to Carreker (1985) if high cultural fields were protected initially, found around all debris and many nests, winds do not occur frequently during surrounded by the flooded parts of the which may indicate that many hatched May and June. Otherwise, the substrate field, by the end of the season the entire chicks were depredated. Considering would be too unstable. My islands field was mostly dry, allowing easy ac- that the island was again underwater also were almost bare of vegetation cess by predators. Depredation of entire before young could have reached flight and had more than enough aquatic colonies occurred during the final week age, it is certain few young survived. habitat and disparate wetlands within of incubation. Predator fencing would On Middlebar terns suffered from flight distance of colonies to make have increased reproductive success depredation and severe storms. Also, them all suitable for nesting (Carreker for these terns, but because this was an it is possible that terns on this island 1985). One of our original objectives alternative site used only when islands relocated to nearby Middlebar South had been to correlate the reproductive did not appear, it would be difficult to know exactly what area to fence until nests were initiated. Fence construction 350 329 at that time might disturb nesting terns. 300 In addition, the two agricultural fields were privately owned so fencing would 250 require landowner cooperation. Land 200 should be set aside and protected for 152 terns during flood years and measures 150 114 taken to attract least terns to these alter- 100 native nesting sites. Arkema was an at- 63 tractive alternative nesting site because

Nests Initiated 50 1 13 8 10 11 it was an island in a pond with fencing 0 surrounding it that kept predators out. Week 1 Week 2 Week 3 Week 4 Week 5 Week 6 Week 7 Week 8 Week 9 The site was also able to support a tern colony presumably large enough to Figure 2: Timeline of least tern nests initiated in Kentucky in 009 beginning the keep ring-billed gulls away from the first full week of May. These data include renests and are based on day nest was nesting area and was surrounded by found or, for nests found later in incubation, counting back from hatch date. habitat able to support other prey for

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

the gulls. The fencing surrounding this to post them. We reached the same con- Dugger, K. M., Ryan, M. R., and R. B. pond was effective because predators clusions, and found that most nesting Renken. 2000. Least Tern chick sur- were mostly mammals that could be sites had been disturbed by recreational vival on the lower Mississippi River. excluded or deterred and not avian users before we could post the islands. Journal of Field Ornithology 71(2): predators. Szell and Woodrey (2003) point out 330-338. In 2009 flooding was the major that placing signs at boat ramps to Elliott, M. L., R. Hurt, and W.J. Syde- cause of reproductive failure for least educate the public about nesting least man. 2007. Breeding biology and terns. Only the largest islands remained terns would have more impact. Public status of the California Least Tern above water long enough for incuba- education is important in order to stress Sternum antillarum browni at Alam- tion of eggs (Middlebar, KY Bend, how important islands, both natural and eda Point, San Francisco Bay, Cali- and Paducah). Smaller islands, and artificial, are to least terns. fornia. Waterbirds 30: 317-325. man-made islands created later in the In summary, interior least terns Haddon, P. C., and R. C. Knight. 1983. season were flooded before chicks had in western Kentucky face pressures A guide to little tern conservation. a chance to hatch, sometimes right from predation, flooding, and human Royal Soc. Protection of Birds. 114 after nesting was initiated. However, disturbance. Colonies on both natural pp. least terns nesting on the larger islands and artificial islands faced the same Hardy, J. W. 1957. The Least Tern in the faced more pressure from predators pressures. To protect this population in Mississippi Valley. Publications of the and human disturbance. This agrees the future, islands need to be managed Museum of Michigan State Univer- with a study by Burger (1984). Ac- so nesting terns are less vulnerable to sity, Biological Series 1: 1-60. cording to Smith and Renken (1993), predators or flooding, and the public Kentucky’s Comprehensive Wild- islands should be managed so that they needs to be educated on the value of life Conservation Strategy. 2005. are exposed for greater or equal to 100 these birds as well as the importance Kentucky Department of Fish and days to increase reproductive success of islands for their nesting. In addi- Wildlife Resources, #1 Sportsman’s of least terns. Man-made islands should tion, alternative sites that protect terns Lane, Frankfort, KY 40601. be made throughout the habitat to make during years of severe flooding as well http://fw.ky.gov/kfwis/stwg/(Date sure that the entire nesting population is as from predators, such as the fenced updated 9/21/2005). not affected by one catastrophic event pond site (Arkema) in this study, should Kirsch, E. M., and J. G. Sidle. 1999. Sta- such as flooding or predation (Kirsch also be created. Future management is tus of the interior population of least and Sidle 1999). These islands would necessary to aid interior least terns in terns (Sterna antillarum). Journal of be more effective if available earlier their recovery. Wildife Management 63: 470-483. in the season when flooding is less Kruse, C. D. Higgins, K. F., and B. A. likely to occur, and late nesters have Literature Cited Vander Lee. 2001. Influence of preda- been found to be less successful than Burger, J. 1984. Colony stability in tion on Piping Plover, Charadrius first-wave nesters (Massey and Atwood Least Terns. The Condor 86: 61-67. melodus, and Least Tern, Sterna antil- 1981). Islands should be composed of Burger, J. and M. Gochfeld. 1990. Nest larum, Productivity along the Mis- coarser, lighter-colored substrate, which site selection in Least Terns (Sterna souri River in South Dakota. Canadian terns prefer (Thompson et al. 1997). In antillarum) in New Jersey and New Field- Naturalist 115: 480-486. addition nests on natural islands were York. Colonial Waterbirds 13: 31-40. Marks, M. Species Management Ab- often found next to debris. This prefer- Carreker, R. G. 1985. Habitat suitability stract: Least Tern (Sterna antillarum) ence is supported by other research- index models: least tern. FWS/OBS- [Internet]. The Nature Conservancy; ers (Schweitzer and Leslie 1999) at a Biological Report 82 (10.103). 29 pp. 1988 [Cited 2010 Mar]. Available different site. Storms are another factor Cuzio, E., B. Palmer-Ball, G. Burnett. from http://conserveonline.org/li- that can cause reproductive failure, so 2005. 2005 survey of interior least brary/lete.doc islands need to have shrubs, driftwood, tern nesting colonies in Kentucky. Marks, M. 1996. Species Management or some other type of shelter (Hadden Kentucky Warbler 81: 99-103. Abstract Least Tern Sterna antillarum. and Knight 1983). Even though islands Dugger, K. M., Ryan, M. R., Galat, D. The Nature Conservancy. 15 pp. were posted, this did not seem to deter L., Renken, R. B., and J. W. Smith Massey, B. W. and J. L. Atwood. 1981. 4-wheelers from using islands for 2000. Reproductive success of the Second-wave nesting of the California recreation. Szell and Woodrey (2003) Interior Least Tern (Sterna antilla- Least Tern: age composition and re- have found that posting signs on islands rum) in relation to hydrology on the productive success. Auk 98: 596-605. is not effective because of how large Mississippi River. River Research and Parnell, J. F., Ainley, D.G., Blokpoel, some island are and the work required Applications 18: 97-105. H., Cain, B., Custer, T.W., Dust, J.L.,

Annual Research Highlights 009 51 COMPLETED PROJECTS / Wildlife

Kress, S., Kushlan, J.A., Southern, (SWG) and Eastern Kentucky University W.E., Stenzel, L.E., and B.C. Thomas. 1988. Colonial waterbird management KDFWR Strategic Plan. Goal 1. in North America. Colonial Water- Strategic Objective 5. Comprehensive birds 11 (2): 129-345. Wildlife Conservation Strategy: Ap- Schweitzer, S. H. and D. M. Leslie. pendix 3.2; Class Aves: Taxa specific 1999. Nesting habitat of least terns research project #3. (Sterna antillarum athalassos) on an inland alkaline flat. American Mid- land Naturalist 142: 173-180. Smith, J. W. and R. B. Renken. 1993. Reproductive success of Least Terns in the Mississippi River Valey. Colo- nial Waterbirds. 16(1): 39-44. Spear, K. A., Schweitzer, S. H., Good- loe, R., and D. C. Harris. 2007. Ef- fects of management strategies on the reproductive success of Least Terns on dredge spoil in Georgia. Southeastern Naturalist. 6(1): 27-34. Szell, C. C. and M. S. Woodrey. 2003. Reproductive ecology of the Least tern along the Lower Mississippi River 26:35-43. Texas Parks and Wildlife Division. Sept. 2008. Interior Least Tern (Sterna antillarum athalassos). Accessed Nov 2008 [Available http://www.tpwd.state. tx.us/huntwild/wild/species/leasttern/] 5 pp. Thompson, B. C., J. A. Jackson, J. Burger, L. A. Hill, E. M. Kirsch and J. L. Atwood.1997. Least Tern In The Birds of North America, No. 290 (A. Poole and F. Gill, Eds.). The Academy of Natural Sciences, Philadelphia, PA, and American Ornithologists’ Union, Washington, DC. USFWS. 1985. Interior population of the least tern determined to be endangered. Federal Register 50: 21784- 21792. USFWS. Sept. 2006. California Least Tern 5-year review Summary and Evaluation. Carlsbad, California. 29 pp. Zickefoose, J. 1985. Least tern/piping plover recovery program. Final report to The Nature conservancy, Connecti- cut Chapter. 22 pp.

Funding Sources: State Wildlife Grant

2 Kentucky Department of Fish & Wildlife Resources Longear sunfish / Obie Williams Project Highlights

Annual Research Highlights 2008 PROJECT HIGHLIGHTS / Fishes

Alligator Gar Propagation and Restoration in Western Kentucky

Ryan A. Oster, Steve Marple, and Matt Thomas Kentucky Department of Fish and Wildlife Resources

he alligator gar (Atractosteus Tspathula) is the largest of the living gars and one of the largest freshwater fishes in North America. These fish are capable of reaching lengths of over 9 feet and weights of over 300 lbs. Alligator gar / Matt Thomas The largest reported size of an alligator Steam Plant (1975), the mouth of the cally contained alligator gar and which gar is 9 feet, 8 inches. This specimen Ohio River (Ballard/Carlisle County), still provide suitable habitat for optimal weighed approximately 302 lbs. Its the mouth of Bayou du Chein (Fulton survival of alligator gar. native range once occurred from the County), and Kentucky Lake at Cypress During 2009, a total of 4,726 al- Florida panhandle west into the Gulf Creek embayment (Calloway County, ligator gar were stocked by the KD- Coastal Plain to Veracruz, Mexico and 1977). Currently, the alligator gar is FWR. Pfeiffer Fish Hatchery produced throughout the Mississippi River Basin, listed as endangered by the Kentucky 4,476 of these fish, while Minor Clark including the lowermost Cumberland State Nature Preserves Commission Fish Hatchery produced 250 gar. Size and Tennessee Rivers. In Kentucky, and is listed as a “Species of Greatest at stocking ranged from 7.3 to 13.6 the alligator gar is native to the Ohio, Conservation Need” by the Kentucky inches. Alligator gar were stocked in Mississippi, and lower Cumberland and Department of Fish and Wildlife Re- the following areas: (1) Clarks River; Tennessee River systems. sources Wildlife Action Plan. (2) Phelps Creek; (3) Bayou Creek; Little is known about the biology The last alligator gar to be veri- (4) Tradewater River; (5) Deer Creek; and habitat of this species in Kentucky fied in Kentucky was in 1977 when a (6) Obion Creek; (7) Massac Creek; and throughout the majority of its na- dead specimen was found floating in (8) Bayou de Chein; and (9) Mayfield tive range. In its southern range, the Kentucky Lake near the Cypress Creek Creek. An additional twelve alligator alligator gar typically inhibits big riv- embayment. In an effort to restore this gar were implanted with telemetry tags ers, swamps, bayous, and brackish species back to the waters of the Com- to conduct a preliminary movement waters. The alligator gar is the most monwealth, the Kentucky Department and habitat evaluation study of recently salt tolerant of all the gar species. In of Fish and Wildlife Resources (KD- stocked fish. A more in-depth telem- Kentucky, the alligator gar occupied FWR) implemented a captive propaga- etry study is being planned for 2010. sluggish pools, backwaters, and embay- tion and stocking program in 2009. In Sampling for this first year-class of ments of big rivers and larger reservoirs partnership with the United States Fish stocked alligator gar will begin during in western Kentucky. Female alligator and Wildlife Service (USFWS), the the summer/fall of 2010. gar tend to grow larger than males and KDFWR has committed to a long-term reach sexual maturity at 11 years and restoration effort of this species. Annu- Funding Source: State Wildlife Grant live in excess of 50 years. Males reach ally, the KDFWR will receive alligator (SWG) sexual maturity at 6 years and live up to gar fry from the Private John Allen 26 years. National USFWS Fish Hatchery. These KDFWR Strategic Plan. Goal 1, Ob- Sightings of alligator gar in Ken- fry will be reared at both the Pfeiffer jective 5. Comprehensive Wildlife tucky have been tied to five areas. Fish Hatchery and Minor Clark Fish Conservation Strategy: Appendix These areas include the Cumberland Hatchery prior to being released into 3.2; Class Actinopterygii and Cepha- River (3 miles below Dycusburg in the wild. Alligator gar stocking sites laspidomorphi: Priority Research 1925), the Ohio River at Shawnee will be those areas that have histori- Project #8.

4 Kentucky Department of Fish & Wildlife Resources Fishes / PROJECT HIGHLIGHTS

Distribution and Ecology of the Blackfin Sucker (Thoburnia atripinnis) in the Upper Barren River, Kentucky

At present, 20 sites have been sampled, including the fourteen historic sites provided by the KSNPC previously holding records of blackfin suckers. Two sites are new records for blackfin suckers. A total of ten families and 46 species, comprised of 6,138 individuals have been collected with only 21 blackfin suckers (0.34%) found at six sites. Blackfin suckers were typically found in low flow runs and pools (<1 m/s), streams 5 to 10 meters in width and typically less than 1 foot Blackfin Sucker / Matt Thomas deep. Adults were almost always captured in habitats Garrett Stillings and Sherry Current data on distribution and conser- that contained undercut bedrock crev- Harrel, Eastern Kentucky vation needs of blackfin suckers in the ices or large flat rocks. According to University Upper Barren River is lacking, thus, the the Kentucky Division of Water’s Rapid purpose of this study is to update this Bioassessment Protocol, Long Creek KDFWR Contact: Ryan Oster information, with emphasis on changes had more supporting habitat for aquatic from historic distribution. life. The Barren River proper has the he highly distinctive catostomid, Spatial coordinates of fourteen best water quality and diversity based TThoburnia atripinnis, blackfin historic sample sites were provided by on the fishes collected. Also, blackfin sucker, is hypothesized to be a relict Kentucky State Nature Preserves Com- suckers are positively associated with species endemic to the priority conser- mission (KSNPC). Current sample elegant madtoms and negatively associ- vation area of the Upper Barren River sites are representative of prime condi- ated with banded sculpins and creek drainage of Kentucky and Tennessee, tions for blackfin suckers. Each site chubs. Sampling is still ongoing, but spanning four counties in Kentucky was sampled using backpack electro- low numbers of blackfin suckers dis- (Allen, Barren, Metcalfe and Monroe). fishing gear. Current collections of all covered thus far are cause for concern. Due to its endemic distribution, low fishes in these historic and new sites historic abundance and human induced will aid in: (1) identifying the abun- impacts, the blackfin sucker is consid- dance of blackfin suckers in the Upper Funding Source: State Wildlife Grant ered a “species of greatest conservation Barren River, KY; (2) assessing the fish (SWG) and Eastern Kentucky Univer- need” by the Kentucky Department of community structure and comparing sity Fish and Wildlife Resources. With the the biotic integrity of each tributary of creation of Barren River reservoir in the Upper Barren River; (3) comparing KDFWR Strategic Plan. Goal 1, Ob- 1964 and the landscapes’ heavy agricul- habitat characteristics among tributaries jective 5. Comprehensive Wildlife tural usage, prime habitat for blackfin to assess physical habitat alterations; Conservation Strategy: Appendix suckers has greatly declined. Four iso- and (4) identifying any correlation with 3.2; Class Actinopterygii and Cepha- lated tributaries are currently known to other fishes of the Upper Barren River laspidomorphi: Priority Research hold populations of blackfin suckers. system Survey Project #2.

Annual Research Highlights 009 55 PROJECT HIGHLIGHTS / Fishes

West Creek Fish Barrier Removal – Harrison County, Kentucky

Ryan A. Oster, Kentucky islands having little or no gene flow in or out of the Department of Fish and stranded populations, thus Wildlife Resources; Alex making these populations Barnett, Harrison County Judge more susceptible to cata- Executive; Chris Minor, The strophic events, localized Nature Conservancy. disturbances, and disease. One such area where fish migration has become he Licking River is identified as restricted is West Creek at Ta Tier II Priority Conservation the location of a low-water Area and a mussel conservation area in ford approximately ¾ mile the Kentucky Department of Fish and upstream from its conflu- Wildlife Resources’ (KDFWR) Wild- Fish Barrier After / Ryan Oster ence on the Licking River. life Action Plan. There are 18 mussel This low-water ford is one species and two fish species listed in connectivity to the main channel due to of two maintained by Harrison County, the action plan as “Species of Great- obstructions such as dams, low-water both of which prevent fish migration est Conservation Need” (SGCN) in the fords, and poorly designed culverts. As during part of the year and require con- Licking River watershed. The mussel a result of these structures, fish species siderable maintenance. species include the Elktoe, Slippershell, have lost the ability to migrate through- In 2009, the KDFWR, in coop- Fanshell, Elephantear, Butterfly, Cat- out large portions of many of these eration with Harrison County and spaw, Northern Riffleshell, Snuffbox, tributaries. In addition, mussel spe- The Nature Conservancy funded the Longsolid, Pocketbook, Round Hicko- cies (that rely upon host fish species in removal of this low-water ford and rynut, Sheepnose, Clubshell, Rough order to reproduce) have also become replaced it with a modern bridge cross- Pigtoe, Pyramid Pigtoe, Rabbitsfoot, heavily impacted as a result of the loss ing. This new bridge crossing allows Salamander Mussell, and Little Spec- of ability for fish migration. The life- for adequate fish migration and passage taclecase. The Clubshell and Fanshell cycle of freshwater mussels depends throughout the entire season. Prior to are also federally endangered species. highly upon fish migration as a conduit removal of the existing low-water ford, The fish species of “greatest conserva- for dispersal to establish new popula- KDFWR biologists conducted a bio- tion need” include the Northern Mad- tions and maintain existing populations. logical assessment downstream and up- tom and Spotted Darter. Barriers that block host fish species stream of the site. These assessments The Licking River conservation from upstream reaches prevent fish and will be conducted for two years follow- area is an important area for conserving mussel species from reaching poten- ing removal of the ford to document the aquatic diversity; however, many tribu- tially better habitat. As a result, up- response of both the fish and mussel taries of the Licking River have lost stream reaches may become biological community to this project. Removal of the low-water ford is anticipated to help increase fish and mussel species diversity and abundance within this section of West Creek.

Funding Source: State Wildlife Grant (SWG) and Harrison County, Kentucky

KDFWR Strategic Plan. Goal 1, Ob- jective 5. Comprehensive Wildlife Conservation Strategy: Appendix 3.3. Fish Barrier Before / Ryan Oster Priority Conservation Action #181.

6 Kentucky Department of Fish & Wildlife Resources Fishes / PROJECT HIGHLIGHTS

Description and Geography of Restricted Range Kentucky Fish Endemics

Lisa J. Hopman and Brooks It is the purpose of this research to N. flavus will also be performed, along M. Burr, Southern Illinois determine the extent of the difference with genetic analysis. Preliminary data has shown Cumberland River Stonecats University at Carbondale between these two distinct Stonecat populations from typical N. flavus and to be different enough from typical KDFWR Contact: Matt Thomas to determine if either warrant elevation Stonecats to warrant being described to species status. Museum specimens as a new species. This new species of from throughout the geographical range madtom will be endemic to southern he Stonecat (Noturus flavus) is of N. flavus have been obtained along Kentucky and northern Tennessee with- one of the most widely distrib- T with specimens for the two morphs. in the upper Cumberland and Tennessee uted members of the genus , Noturus Trawling for small-eyed Stonecats River drainages. commonly referred to as madtoms within the Mississippi River and field (family Ictaluridae). This fish is found trips to collect Cumberland River Ston- Funding Sources: State Wildlife Grant throughout Mississippi River tributar- ecats will begin in the spring of 2010. (SWG) and Southern Illinois University ies ranging laterally from southern Areas underrepresented by museum at Carbondale parts of Canada to northern Alabama collections will be focused on. We will and longitudinally from Montana to also focus on sampling the Mississippi KDFWR Strategic Plan. Goal 1, Ob- Vermont. In Kentucky is re- N. flavus River below the mouth of the Ohio Riv- jective 5. Comprehensive Wildlife stricted to the eastern part of the state er. Morphometric analysis will be per- Conservation Strategy: Appendix found within the Ohio River, Licking formed on museum and collected speci- 3.2; Class Actinopterygii and Cepha- River, Kentucky River, Salt River, and mens using a 31 measurement truss laspidomorphi: Priority Survey Proj- Cumberland River drainages. Madtoms to determine any differences between ect #2. can be distinguished from other cat- typical N. flavus, Cumberland River fishes in Kentucky due to their attached Stonecats, and small-eyed Stonecats. adipose fin, and is identified N. flavus Histological examination of the eyes of by its gray-brown coloration, posterior premaxillary tooth patch extensions, and pale marking at posterior dorsal fin base. It has been observed that two unique morphs of N. flavus exist which differ from the typical Stonecat found elsewhere. Stonecats found in the channels of the Mississippi River (below the mouth of the Missouri River) and Missouri River have smaller eyes than Stonecats taken elsewhere. It is not yet known if Stonecats are found in the Mississippi River below the mouth of the Ohio River and whether or not they also have small eyes. N. flavus found within the Cumberland River drainage downstream of Cumberland Falls and part of the Tennessee River drainage have a unique dorsum pattern on the head which is not seen in Stonecats from other regions. These Cumberland River Stonecats also appear more dor- so-laterally flattened anteriorly. Noturus flavus Cumberland River Morph / Matt Thomas

Annual Research Highlights 009 57 PROJECT HIGHLIGHTS / Mollusks

Augmentation of the Slippershell Mussel, Alasmidonta viridis in Guist Creek, Kentucky

Juvenile Slippershell Mussel / Monte McGregor Monte A. McGregor, Adam at the time of release. and reproduction, as well as changes in C. Shepard, J. Jacob Culp, Before the augmentation, a quanti- the entire mussel community in Guist Fritz Vorisek, and Jim Hinkle, tative survey was completed and 3 spe- Creek. The KDFWR will use this re- cies, including the Slippershell Mussel, lease of the Slippershell Mussel as a Kentucky Department of Fish were found in low densities. A total of test model for future augmentations of and Wildlife Resources 32 m2 quadrats were sampled, yielding two federally endangered mussels: the 4 individual mussels. Densities at the Cumberland Elktoe (Alasmidonta at- n August 2009, the Kentucky site were extremely low (.13 per m2 for ropurpurea) and the Littlewing Pearly- IDepartment of Fish and Wildlife all mussel species). Only 1 individual mussel (Pegias fabula). released 22 tagged individuals of the of the Slippershell Mussel was found rare freshwater mussel, the Slippershell during the quantitative survey. A 5 m x Mussel, into Guist Creek, KY. Cur- 5 m release area was then chosen based Funding Sources: Endangered Species rently, the Slippershell Mussel has no on habitat stability and the presence of Act (Section ) funds, U.S. Fish and special concern listing in Kentucky, Slippershell Mussels. All individuals Wildlife Service but is listed as imperiled or critically were released in the area and allowed to imperiled in many surrounding states. bury in the substrate. KDFWR Strategic Plan: Goal 1. The released individuals were propa- This site will continue to be moni- Strategic Objective 5. Comprehen- gated at the Center for Mollusk Conser- tored by quantitative surveys on a regu- sive Wildlife Conservation Strategy: vation for approximately 1.5 years and lar basis. It will be monitored regularly Appendix 3.2, Class Bivalvia. Prior- were a mean length of 20.3 millimeters to examine juvenile survival, growth, ity Survey Project #3.

8 Kentucky Department of Fish & Wildlife Resources Mollusks / PROJECT HIGHLIGHTS

Augmentation of the Snuffbox, Epioblasma triquetra in the Rolling Fork River, Kentucky

Monte A. McGregor, Adam ber 2007), an extensive quantitative sur- in the entire mussel community in the C. Shepard, J. Jacob Culp, vey was completed at the release site on Rolling Fork River. The KDFWR will Fritz Vorisek, and Jim Hinkle, the Rolling Fork River. Mean mussel use this release of the Snuffbox as a densities were high (20.5 per m2 for all test model for future augmentations of Kentucky Department of Fish species) and a total of 20 species were federally endangered mussels in the and Wildlife Resources found during the survey. No Snuffbox same genus, including the Cumberland mussels were found during the survey, Combshell (Epioblasma brevidens) and but relict shells of the species were the Oyster Mussel (Epioblasma capsae- n September 2009, the Kentucky located at the site. Based on the 2007 formis). IDepartment of Fish and Wildlife quantitative data and a qualitative ex- released 50 tagged individuals of the amination of habitat stability, a 5 m x Snuffbox, a freshwater mussel that is 5 m release area was selected. All ju- Funding Source: Endangered Species listed as a species of special concern in venile Snuffbox mussels were released Act (Section ) funds, U.S. Fish and Kentucky, into the Rolling Fork River, in the area and allowed to bury into the Wildlife Service KY. The released individuals were substrate. propagated at the Center for Mollusk This site will continue to be moni- KDFWR Strategic Plan: Goal 1. Conservation for approximately 1.5 tored by quantitative surveys on a regu- Strategic Objective 5. Comprehen- years and were a mean length of 19.15 lar basis. It will be monitored regularly sive Wildlife Conservation Strategy: millimeters at the time of release. to examine juvenile survival, growth, Appendix 3.2, Class Bivalvia. Prior- Prior to the augmentation (Septem- and reproduction, as well as changes ity Survey Project #3

10-month-old juvenile mussels / Monte McGregor

Annual Research Highlights 009 59 PROJECT HIGHLIGHTS / Mollusks

Five Year Quantitative Monitoring at Thomas Bend on the Green River, Kentucky

Monte A. McGregor, Adam C. Shepard, J. Jacob Culp, Fritz Vorisek, Jim Hinkle, Kentucky Department of Fish and Wildlife Resources

n September 2009, the Kentucky IDepartment of Fish and Wildlife Re- sources completed the second quantitative survey of the mussel community at Thomas Bend on the Green River, KY. The first survey was completed in September of 2004 and the site will be continually monitored every five years. Quantitative sampling / Monte McGregor The purpose of long-term monitoring is to examine changes in mussel com- tuted over 60% of the total number of only the 2004 data from the 20 meter munities over time. The KDFWR is es- mussels at the site (see Table 1). stretch of river that was re-sampled in pecially concerned with state and feder- 2009. ally listed species, and long-term moni- Comparison of 2004 Quantitative Species richness was greater in toring provides an effective method to Survey to 2009 Quantitative Survey 2009 with 31 species found compared track densities, growth, and recruitment To examine changes in the mus- to 25 in the same 20 meter sampling in these populations. sel community over 5 years at Thomas stretch in 2004 (Table 1 and Figure A total of 177 m2 quadrats were Bend, species richness and evenness, 1). Evenness was similar, but slightly sampled in 2009, yielding 31 mussel as well as community densities, were greater in 2009, exhibited by Figure 1. species. Mean mussel density at the compared between 2004 and 2009. In 2004 and 2009, the community was site was 6.67 per m2. Two of the 31 Fanshell (Cyprogenia stegaria) densi- dominated by one species: the Mucket, species are federally endangered: the ties and size classes were also evalu- Actinonaias ligamentina. In 2004 Fanshell (Cyprogenia stegaria), and the ated. In 2004 the area sampled was Muckets constituted over two-thirds Rough Pigtoe (Pleurobema plenum). 100 meters long, and in 2009 only 20 of the entire community and in 2009 The four most common species consti- meters long. This analysis will utilize Muckets constituted about one-third of

30 1 25 0.1 2009 20 0.01 2004 15 0.001 10 Proportional Abundance Proportional 0.0001 5 0 10 20 30 40 Abundance Rank 0 0-10 11-20 21-30 31-40 41-50 51-60 >60 FigureFigure 2: Size 1: Classes Graph of Fanshell of Rank-Abundance (Cyprogenia stegaria) fromCurves 2009 survey of 00 data. and 009 Mussel Communities. Proportional Abundance Figure 2: Size Classes of Fanshell (Cyprogenia stegaria) from is30 log-scaled. 009 survey data. 25

6015 Kentucky Department of Fish & Wildlife Resources

0 0-10 11-20 21-30 31-40 41-50 51-60 >60

Figure 3: Size Classes of Fanshell (Cyprogenia stegaria) from 2004 survey data. Mollusks / PROJECT HIGHLIGHTS

the community. Mean densities of all Table 1: Species species were similar for both surveys: collected during 2009 2 2 6.67 per m in 2009 and 7.39 per m . quantitative sampling in Relative Fanshell densities were much greater 009 and 00 and their Species Name Abundance (%) in 2009, with a mean of .31 per m2 relative abundances. Actinonaias ligamentina 32.01 compared to only .08 per m2 in 2004. Cyclonaias tuberculata 13.63 There was also a greater range of size classes in Elliptio dilatata 7.71 2009 with more obvious 2004 Quadrula metanevra 7.37 recruitment compared to Amblema plicata 5.76 Species Name Relative 2004 (Figures 2 a nd 3). Abundance (%) Pleurobema sintoxia 5.08 Overall, there was Actinonaias ligamentina 66.86 Cyprogenia stegaria 4.57 little variation in the Cyclonaias tuberculata 7.44 Megalonaias nervosa 4.57 mussel community from Amblema plicata 4.29 Quadrula pustulosa 4.49 2004 to 2009. The most Quadrula metanevra 3.08 Fusconaia subrotunda 2.79 noticeable differences were the number of Megalonaias nervosa 2.72 Lampsilis ovata 2.46 species and the mean Fusconaia subrotunda 2.29 Tritogonia verrucosa 1.95 density of Fanshells. Pleurobema sintoxia 1.72 Pleurobema cordatum 1.10 Although there were 6 Quadrula pustulosa 1.65 Ptychobranchus fasciolaris 1.10 more species found in Elliptio dilatata 1.57 Lampsilis fasciola 0.85 2009 than in the same Lampsilis ovata 1.36 Obliquaria reflexa 0.76 20 meter area in 2004, Ptychobranchus fasciolaris 1.29 Truncilla truncata 0.68 all of those species were Cyprogenia stegaria 1.15 Lasmigona costata 0.42 found in the entire 100 meter stretch of the 2004 Tritigonia verrucosa 1.00 Leptodea fragilis 0.42 survey. This site will Lasmigona costata 0.64 Alasmidonta marginata 0.25 continue to be monitored Obliquaria reflexa 0.57 Elliptio crassidens 0.25 by quantitative surveys Truncilla truncata 0.57 Ligumia recta 0.25 on a regular basis every Pleurobema cordatum 0.50 Pleurobema plenum 0.25 five years, and trends in Plethobasus cyphyus 0.36 Potamilus alatus 0.25 the Fanshell populations Quadrula cylindrica 0.29 Quadrula cylindrica 0.25 as well as in the entire Leptodea fragilis 0.21 Strophitus undulatus 0.25 mussel community will be examined. Lampsilis fasciola 0.14 Lampsilis cardium 0.17 Elliptio crassidens 0.07 Ellipsaria lineolata 0.08 Ligumia recta 0.07 Fusconaia flava 0.08 Funding Source: En- Pleurobema plenum 0.07 Plethobasus cyphyus 0.08 dangered Species Act Strophitus undulatus 0.07 Quadrula quadrula 0.08 (Section ) funds, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service 12

KDFWR Strategic Plan: Goal 1. 10 Strategic Objective 5. Comprehen- 8 sive Wildlife Conservation Strategy: Appendix 3.2, Class Bivalvia. Prior- 6 ity Survey Project #1and #2. 4

0 0-10 11-20 21-30 31-40 41-50 51-60 >60 Figure 3: Size Classes of Fanshell (Cyprogenia stegaria) from 00 survey data.

Annual Research Highlights 009 1 PROJECT HIGHLIGHTS / Mollusks

Augmentation of the Cumberland Bean, Villosa trabalis and its host fish, the Striped Darter, Etheostoma virgatum in Sinking Creek, Kentucky mussels during previous qualitative surveys. All juvenile Cumberland Bean mussels were released in the area and allowed to bury in the substrate. After the mussel augmentation, all Striped Darters were released upstream. This site will continue to be monitored by quantitative surveys on a regular basis. It will be monitored regularly to examine juvenile survival, growth, and reproduction, as well as changes in the entire mussel community in Sinking Creek. KDFWR will also continue to survey Sinking Creek to determine the Striped darter, host to Cumberland Bean / Matt Thomas presence and densities of the Striped Darter, a fish host critical to the recruitment of the federally endangered Cum- the host. Monte A. McGregor, Adam berland Bean. C. Shepard, J. Jacob Culp, In September 2009 the Kentucky Fritz Vorisek, and Jim Hinkle, Department of Fish and Wildlife and the United States Fish and Wildlife Funding Source: Endangered Species Kentucky Department of Fish Service released 42 tagged individu- Act (Section ) funds, U.S. Fish and and Wildlife Resources als of the Cumberland Bean and 43 Wildlife Service Striped Darters into Sinking Creek. The released mussels were propagated KDFWR Strategic Plan: Goal 1. he Cumberland Bean is a federally at the Center for Mollusk Conservation Strategic Objective 5. Comprehen- endangered species and is listed as for approximately 1.5 years and were a T sive Wildlife Conservation Strategy: Endangered by the Kentucky State Na- mean length of 16.7 millimeters at the Appendix 3.2, Class Bivalvia. Prior- ture Preserves Commission. It is con- time of release. The released Striped ity Survey Project #3. sidered extirpated in three of the states Darters were collected as juveniles in in the species’ historic distribution (Na- nearby White Oak Creek and tureserve 2009). Sinking Creek, KY held in captivity for 2 years, serv- harbors one of the last healthy, repro- ing as fish host and propagation ducing populations of the Cumberland study animals. Prior to the aug- Bean. Just like all freshwater mussels, mentation, a quantitative mussel the Cumberland Bean requires a fish survey was completed and 3 host. It has been documented that the species were found in fairly low fish hosts for the Cumberland Bean are densities (mean of .83 mussels various darter species, including the per m2). No Cumberland Bean Striped Darter (Layzer and Anderson mussels were located during 1991). Research done at the Center for the survey, but 1 individual was Mollusk Conservation has determined found in the survey area after that the best fish host for the Cumber- sampling was completed. A 5 m land Bean is the Striped Darter, and x 5 m release area was then se- while it has no special concern listing lected based on habitat stability and the Juvenile Cumberland Bean mussels / in Kentucky, it has an important role as presence of multiple Cumberland Bean Monte McGregor

62 Kentucky Department of Fish & Wildlife Resources Crayfish / PROJECT HIGHLIGHTS

The Conservation Status of Cambarus veteranus (Big Sandy Crayfish) in Kentucky

Roger Thoma, Midwest species is also found in West Virginia’s, Habitat conditions were recorded at Biodiversity Institute and Virginia’s Big Sandy and Guy- each site sampled. was found at KDFWR Contact: Danna Baxley andotte River basins. Work outside Cambarus veteranus Kentucky, in Virginia (Thoma, 2008) 11 of 30 sites sampled, an increase of 7 and West Virginia (Channell, 2004) has new localities. All four sites previously shown C. veteranus to be under stress known to harbor the species continue to n The Crayfishes of Kentucky, Tay- with declining populations and distribu- retain populations. Only two of the 11 Ilor & Schuster (2004) reported the tions. In light of these facts a study was populations were found to be healthy, presence of Cambarus veteranus at 4 undertaken to determine if Kentucky one of which is considered threat- sites in the Big Sandy River basin. The populations of C. veteranus are display- ened. The other 9 populations were ing similar stress observed to be very low in abundance responses as VA & and individuals appeared to be stressed. WV populations. Numerous additional streams were vis- Four coun- ited but not sampled due to unsuitable ties (Pike, Martin, conditions and habitat. The two healthy Floyd, & Letcher populations were from lower Shelby – in part) within the Creek of Levisa Fork and Russell Fork historically docu- at Breaks Interstate Park. The Shelby mented range (Big Creek population had the species pres- Sandy River basin) ent at all 3 sites sampled. The Shelby of C. veteranus in Creek population was the most signifi- eastern Kentucky cant discovery of the project. All other were sampled. populations were closely associated Sampling was con- with the mainstem Tug, Levisa, and ducted with the aid Russell Forks. of a 4’X6’ seine, Heavy sediment loads, a condition hand, and/or shovel. not tolerated by C. veteranus, impacted many of the streams in the study area. C. veteranus / Roger Thoma Mining activities resulted in most of these conditions. Numerous stream reaches have also been modified and/or channelized and now provide poor quality habitat that lacks rock/rubble substrates. Cambarus veteranus is a large bodied species that requires large flat rocks for its habitation. If such rocks are absent or imbedded in soft sediments the species will be absent from the area.

Funding Sources: State Wildlife Grant (SWG) and Midwest Biodiversity Insti- tute

KDFWR Strategic Plan. Goal 1. Strategic Objective 5. Cambarus veteranus wide view

Annual Research Highlights 009 3 PROJECT HIGHLIGHTS / Crayfish

The Conservation Status of Cambarus parvoculus (Mountain Midget Crayfish) in Kentucky

Roger Thoma, Midwest hand, and/or shovel. Habitat conditions a small tributary of the Obey River Biodiversity Institute were recorded at each site sampled. basin in western Clinton County. Three KDFWR Contact: Danna Baxley This study found only one popu- other sites in the Obey basin were lation of C. parvoculus in Kentucky sampled (all in Clinton Co.) and none (blue pentagon). Most of the sites (17 were found to harbor C. parvoculus or of 35 sites) harbored Cambarus distans, C. distans. The presence of limestone at n The Crayfishes of Kentucky, Tay- the boxclaw crayfish (red dots), a spe- the surface in Clinton Co. has resulted Ilor & Schuster (2004) reported the cies closely related to C. parvoculus in few suitable streams for members of presence of Cambarus parvoculus at 13 and C. jezerinaci, both physically and the subgenus these species belong to. sites in the upper Cumberland and Ken- ecologically. To date no overlapping tucky River basins. The species has also populations of these three species have Funding Sources: State Wildlife Grant been reported from Georgia, Tennessee, been found in Kentucky. The three sites (SWG) and Midwest Biodiversity Insti- and Virginia (Hobbs, 1989). Taylor & reported by Taylor & Schuster in the tute Schuster recommended genetic stud- Big South Fork basin were sampled and ies of C. parvoculus and the closely found to harbor C. distans. The single KDFWR Strategic Plan. Goal 1. related Cambarus jezerinaci to discern collection of C. parvoculus came from Strategic Objective 5. their relationship. A study was conducted (Thoma& Fetzner, 2009) that found the populations considered C. parvoculus in the upper Kentucky River and Cum- berland River upstream of the Big South Fork were more closely related to C. jezerinaci than to C. parvoculus. It may be, based on genetic data, that the Kentucky populations deserve full species recog- nition, but the authors did not address that issue in their study. In this study, four counties (Whitley, Mc- Creary, Wayne, & Clinton) within and near the historically documented range of C. parvoculus in southeastern Kentucky were sampled. Populations east of this area had already been studied and found not to be C. parvoculus. Sam- pling was conducted with the aid of a 4’X6’ seine, C. parvoculus / Roger Thoma

64 Kentucky Department of Fish & Wildlife Resources Crayfish / PROJECT HIGHLIGHTS

Response of Crayfish Populations to Restored Stream Habitats in Disturbed Portions of East Fork Little Sandy River Basin, Lawrence & Boyd Counties, Kentucky

Roger Thoma, Midwest Cambarus thomai Biodiversity Institute (Little Brown KDFWR Contact: Mudbug) 3 sites, and Orconectes Danna Baxley cristavarius (Spiny Stream Crayfish) all sites. A preliminary he Kentucky Depart- assessment of resi- Tment of Fish and Wild- dent crayfish com- life Resources is in the pro- munities reveals cess of restoring much of the two general results; East Fork Little Sandy River. juvenile crayfish The stream was historically dominate modified impacted by several channel stream sections, and modification efforts. Much adult crayfish num- of the mainstream is domi- bers appear to be nated by low quality habitat negatively related and shifting beds of excess to the abundance of fine sediments. East Fork Little Sandy pre restoration / Joseph Zimmerman sand. Preliminary A three-year study on site observa- of crayfish populations in the basin sampling was conducted with a 4’X6’ tions indicate conditions for crayfish has been instituted. The first year’s seine or, if waters were to shallow or populations (and fish) could be greatly sampling was conducted this sum- small, by hand and dip-net. enhanced with the addition of a slab mer (2009). Five sites were sampled, Four species of crayfish were en- rock dressing in restored riffles and three modified and two restored. The countered in the system; Cambarus stream bank areas. Once all areas to three modified sites are currently being bartonii cavatus (Appalachian Brook be restored are addressed and the sys- restored and will be sampled again in Crayfish) all sites,Cambarus dubius tem begins to settle down/recover it is 2011, after a full year’s recovery. 2009 (Upland Burrowing Crayfish) 1 site, anticipated crayfish populations will establish at healthier numbers.

Funding Sources: State Wildlife Grant (SWG) and Midwest Biodiversity Insti- tute

KDFWR Strategic Plan. Goal 1. Strategic Objective 5. Comprehen- sive Wildlife Conservation Strategy: Appendix 3.3. Priority Conservation Action #80, #120, #164, and #185.

East Fork Little Sandy post restoration / Joseph Zimmerman

Annual Research Highlights 009 5 PROJECT HIGHLIGHTS / Reptiles and Amphibians

Status Survey of the Alligator Snapping Turtle (Machrochelys temminckii) in Kentucky

Danna Baxley and John MacGregor, Kentucky Department of Fish and Wildlife Resources

he alligator snapping Tturtle (Machrochelys temminckii) is the largest freshwater turtle in North America and has a limited distribution within rivers draining into the Gulf of Mexico. Unique identifying features of the alligator snapping turtle include a huge head, strongly hooked jaw, and three keels along the carapace. This turtle is considered relatively seden- tary and is often found lying motionless on the bottom of Alligator Snapping Turtle / U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service slow-moving rivers, oxbow lakes, and slow to reproduce, commercial harvest is will continue to focus on known historic slough-like habitats. Radio-telemetry not sustainable; consequently the species locations, we also plan to deploy baited studies have shown that these turtles is now protected throughout its range. hoop nets in areas that are not known prefer to spend time in waters shaded Status assessments conducted in mul- to harbor alligator snapping turtles, but by dense forest, in areas with undercut tiple states have revealed population de- appear to harbor suitable habitat for the banks, log jams, and ample underwater clines, and Natureserv lists this species species. During the 2009 field season, structure. The alligator snapping turtle as “critically imperiled” in Illinois and no alligator snapping turtles were de- is a bottom feeder and uses trickery and Kansas and “Imperiled” in Kentucky, tected in Kentucky. Field efforts will deception to outwit prey. While lying Missouri, Oklahoma, and Tennessee. continue in 2010 and 2011 in hopes of motionless underwater, these turtles are In Kentucky, the distribution of the identifying viable populations of this known to slowly wiggling a worm-like alligator snapping turtle is not well un- rare turtle Kentucky. structure on the upper surface of the derstood, and this species is considered tongue. Fish are enticed into the turtle’s a “Species of Greatest Conservation widely open mouth, tricked into thinking Need.” The first step towards manag- Funding Source: State Wildlife Grant the tongue lure is a worm. Historically, ing and conserving Alligator Snapping (SWG) alligator snapping turtles were prized Turtles populations in Kentucky is to for their meat, and the enormous size of identify remaining populations, and KDFWR Strategic Plan. Goal 1. Stra- these turtles (up to 300 lbs) made com- important habitats used by these popula- tegic Objective 5. Comprehensive mercial trapping profitable. During the tions within the state. Beginning in June Wildlife Conservation Strategy: Ap- 1960’s, Campbell’s Soup company pro- of 2009, the Kentucky Department of pendix 3.2, Priority Research Project duced a canned turtle soup made from Fish and Wildlife Resources initiated a #1, Priority Survey Project #1, #2, and alligator snapping turtles. Since this state-wide status assessment of the Alli- #4. species is long-lived (100+ years) and gator Snapping Turtle. Although efforts

66 Kentucky Department of Fish & Wildlife Resources Reptiles and Amphibians / PROJECT HIGHLIGHTS

Effects of Phragmites Removal on Species of Greatest Conservation Need at Clear Creek WMA

Howard Whiteman and amphibian, and reptile diversity. American black duck (Anas rubripes) Tom Timmons, Department On 22-August-2009 KDFWR and and the American bittern (Botaurus of Biological Sciences and Ducks Unlimited carried out a chemical lentiginosus). Additionally, we have detected differences in the sizes of Watershed Studies Institute, treatment of Phragmites australis on the CCWMA. An aerial application of turtles inhabiting Phragmites versus Murray State University a glyphosate herbicide was conducted non-Phragmites areas, suggesting that KDFWR Contact: Danna Baxley on approximately 300 of the 858 acres resource limitation in the presence of at a rate of ten gallons per acre. These Phragmites may be reducing turtle 300 acres comprise our experimental growth rates. However, understanding ommon reed (Phragmites austra- site. A site on the WMA that is invaded the effects of the Phragmites treatments Clis) is an aquatic plant native to by Phragmites but did not receive on these and other species will require the United States that has successfully chemical treatment serves as a control further data collection during 2010-11. invaded numerous wetland habitats be- site. Another site on private land near Because removing Phrag- yond its native range. Phragmites mites via herbicide spraying is has been implicated in dramatic a critical management goal with habitat changes, causing shifts in unknown implications on the CC- plant and animal communities. WMA environment and the SGCN Aerial herbicide spraying of Phrag- within it, our project will be an mites is considered effective for important step in understanding population control, but herbicides the ecological effects of removing can have unforeseen consequences Phragmites from wetlands where toward non-target organisms and it dominates, and of utilizing her- ecosystem processes. Unfortu- bicides for such manipulations. nately, few studies have determined By understanding the effects of the effects of Phragmites eradica- this management on SGCN at tion on wetland animal communi- Clear Creek, wildlife biologists in ties, although species such as fish, Phragmites / Amy Krzton Presson Kentucky will have the necessary reptiles, and amphibians are likely insight to prescribe future Phrag- to be affected. the WMA where Phragmites has not mites removal at this site, other WMAs, Phragmites is particularly in- yet been established serves as a non- and other important state lands. nocuous at the Clear Creek WMA Phragmites control site. (CCWMA), where it dominates the Using a variety of sampling tech- landscape, has likely altered wetland niques, including hoop traps, minnow Funding Source: State Wildlife Grant hydrology, and has caused numerous traps, seines, electroshocking, auto- (SWG), Watershed Studies Institute and access problems, particularly for water- mated recording devices (frogloggers), Department of Biological Sciences, fowl hunters. Numerous SGCN inhabit and water chemistry analysis, we have Murray State University, and Ducks Clear Creek, and may also be affected sampled these three sites repeatedly Unlimited. by large-scale Phragmites removal. since July 2009. Thus far, we have However, no formal survey work has recorded several SGCN within the KDFWR Strategic Plan. Goal 1. been conducted to determine the effects CCWMA, including western lesser Strategic Objective 5. Comprehen- of large scale Phragmites eradication sirens (Siren intermedia), bird-voiced sive Wildlife Conservation Strategy: on SGCN. Thus, the goal of this study treefrog (Hyla avivoca), copperbelly Appendix 3.2, Class Reptilia. Priority was to use aerial herbicide treatment water snakes (Nerodia erythrogaster Research Project #1, Priority Survey in an effort to eradicate Phragmites, neglecta), western cottonmouth (Ag- Project #1. Class Actinopterygii and and to understand the effects of such kistrodon piscivorus leucostoma), the Cephalaspidomorphi. Priority Re- management on SGCN, as well as fish, lake chubsucker (Erimyzon sucetta), search Project #1.

Annual Research Highlights 009 7 PROJECT HIGHLIGHTS / Songbirds and Raptors

Investigating local declines of Rusty Blackbirds in Kentucky

to its inclusion as a Species of Great- there for the first time in over five est Conservation Need in Kentucky’s years in 2010. We mist-netted for 23 State Wildlife Action Plan. Range- hours in Cleaton KY (using 2, 12 m wide, the Rusty Blackbird has been 34mm mesh nets) and 8.5 hours at steeply declining with estimates of an Surrey Hills Farm (using 2, 3 m 36mm 85-99% population drop over the past mesh nets). We captured and banded 40 years. The cause for this alarming 32 Rusty Blackbirds (25 males, 8 fe- decline is not known and the increas- males) and recaptured one male Rusty ingly sparse and erratic winter distri- Blackbird which had been banded at bution of the Rusty Blackbird makes the same site earlier that season (Table it challenging to learn more about as a 1). We also took blood and feather basis for conservation efforts. samples from red-winged blackbirds In 2010, KDFWR initiated a (Agelaius phoeniceus) (3) European Rusty Blackbird / Brainard Palmer-Ball project focused on capturing Rusty starlings (Sturnus vulgaris) (4) and Blackbirds in order to obtain blood brown-headed cowbirds (Molothrus and feather samples for contribution to ater) (9). Samples taken from non-tar- Kate Heyden, Kentucky several analyses going on within the get species will be used for compari- Department of Fish and Wildlife International Rusty Blackbird Techni- sons of contaminant loads. Resources; David Evers and cal Working Group (IRBTWG). It is Blood samples collected during Samuel Edmonds, BioDiversity hoped that data collected through this this project will be contributed for use Research Institute; William project will further our understanding in genetics, contaminants, diet and of Rusty Blackbird declines in Ken- blood parasites analyses conducted Barnard, Norwich University; tucky and throughout their range. by various members of the IRBTWG. Claudia Mettke-Hofmann, For this project, Rusty Blackbirds Feather samples will be analyzed for Liverpool John Moores were captured during January and stable isotopes, genetics and contami- Northern Harrier / Kate Heyden University; Keith Hobson, February 2010 in baited mist-nets at nants. This project will continue in Environment Canada; and Terry two locations: Cleaton Baptist Church, 2011 in order to strengthen sample Muhlenberg Co. and Surrey Hills size. We look forward to receiving Chesser, National Museum of Farm, Jefferson Co. Rusty Blackbirds results which will help direct research, Natural History (as many as 100) have been sighted monitoring and conservation attention in Cleaton for 10 years or more dur- for this species. ing Christmas Bird Counts. Although sightings of up to 200 Rusty Black- he Rusty Blackbird (Euphagus birds were common during winters at Funding Sources: State Wildlife Grant Tcarolinus) breeds in the boreal Surrey Hills Farm in the 1970’s and (SWG) wetlands of Alaska, Canada and the 80’s, Rusty Blackbirds were observed northeastern United States KDFWR Strategic Plan. and spends its winter in the AGE Goal 1. Strategic Objective flooded forests of the south- 5. Comprehensive Wildlife eastern United States. Once Second After After Conservation Strategy: Ap- locally common at several lo- Sex Total Year Hatch Year Second Year pendix 3.2. Priority Survey cations in central and western Project #3. Kentucky, wintering flocks Female 3 5 8 of Rusty Blackbirds have be- Male 9 15 24 come more spotty and ephemeral in the past 30 years. Total 12 5 15 32 The resulting conservation Table 1: Age and sex of Rusty Blackbirds captured during concern for this species led January and February 010 in Kentucky.

68 Kentucky Department of Fish & Wildlife Resources Songbirds and Raptors / PROJECT HIGHLIGHTS

Evaluating the Effects of Grassland Management on Raptor Habitat Use at Peabody WMA

Kate Heyden and Danna Baxley, (SWAP), has been regularly observed at maicensis) (54) was the most common Peabody WMA with enough frequency Kentucky Department of Fish species detected. to provide a sample size necessary for Measurement of vegetation vari- and Wildlife Resources analysis. Consequently, we structured ables occurs at small mammal trap- the revised protocol to ensure we cap- ping grids at the time that the traps are ture ample data for harriers and their picked up for winter and summer. Four aptor surveys at Peabody Wildlife prey species. This project began in vegetation variables, as well as soil RManagement Area (WMA) have December of 2008 and we plan to con- compaction are measured at each plot: been conducted since 2002, first by an tinue it for 3 years. vegetation height, vegetation heteroge- Eastern Kentucky University graduate Raptor surveys are being conduct- neity, vegetation density, and percent student, Mark Vukovich (2002-2003), ed once each month (December, and cover of vegetation type (at two levels). and then continued year-round by January-July). Thirty randomly placed In order to obtain estimates of KDFWR personnel (2004-2007). The small mammal abundance, we are data collected from 2002-2007 suggest conducting small mammal trapping raptor habitat use may differ between in NWSG fields and fields containing fields which have undergone manage- non-native vegetation. Small mammal ment for native warm-season grasses traps are laid out in randomly placed (NWSG) and those which have been 7 x 7 grids which consist of 49 double left unmanaged. However, these sur- traps placed 10 m apart. Six grids per veys were not structured to provide year are sampled in winter and summer conclusive results on differences in for small mammals: three grids located habitat use. Thus, in 2008 we re-evalu- in each field type. Small mammal ated the survey protocol to obtain a trapping took place in March and July dataset with sufficient sample size and 2009. A total of 240 individuals of 10 standardization to evaluate the effects Northern Harrier / Kate Heyden species were captured. The most com- of grassland management at Peabody mon species captured was the Prairie WMA on raptor habitat use by deter- points are stopped at along roads at Vole (Microtus ochrogaster). mining if raptor habitat use differs be- Peabody WMA which dissect grassland Intensive grassland management tween fields managed for warm-season habitat, where a 3-minute, single-ob- continues to occur at Peabody WMA. grasses and unmanaged fields. These server point count is conducted. Spe- Since Peabody WMA is inarguably one two habitat types result from a combi- cies, age, sex, behavior and location of the more significant tracts of grass- nation of several management actions is recorded for each raptor individual land habitat for breeding and wintering for which we have digital records: and its location is marked on an aerial raptors in Kentucky, we hope to learn NWSG plantings, burning, strip-disk- image. Raptor locations are digitized through this project how widespread ing, and herbicide applications. If a for each detection and will be used in grassland management will affect local difference in raptor habitat use is found future analyses along with season-spe- raptor habitat quality and populations. between habitat types, we hope to gain cific management maps provided by the knowledge through this project on WMA manager to record the habitat determining which habitat-related vari- available at each survey area. During able may be influencing raptor habitat 2008-2009 surveys, a total of 108 rap- Funding Sources: State Wildlife Grant use: small mammal abundance or vege- tors, representing nine species were (SWG) tation attributes. Thus, this project will detected. Four species of greatest con- have three components: raptor surveys, servation need (SGCN) were detected KDFWR Strategic Plan. Goal 1. small mammal sampling and vegeta- including: Bald Eagle (Haliaeetus Strategic Objective 5. Comprehen- tion sampling. The Northern Harrier leucocephalus) (2), Mississippi Kite sive Wildlife Conservation Strategy: (Circus cyaneus), a species of greatest (Ictinia mississippiensis) (1), Northern Appendix 3.2. Priority Research conservation need (SGCN) listed in Harrier (30), and Osprey (Pandion hali- Project #2 and #6, Priority Survey Kentucky’s State Wildlife Action Plan aetus) (2). Red-tailed Hawk (Buteo ja- Project #3.

Annual Research Highlights 009 9 PROJECT HIGHLIGHTS / Songbirds and Raptors

Evaluating the Effects of Grassland Management on Nesting and Migrating Songbirds at Shaker Village of Pleasant Hill

Kate Heyden, Kentucky mm mesh) were opened at sunrise and During operation, eight or nine mist Department of Fish and Wildlife operated for at least 4 hours. Nets were nets (32 mm mesh) were opened at sun- checked and cleared of birds every 40 Resources rise and operated for at least 4 hours. minutes, or as needed due to weather We netted for a total of 329.94 net conditions. We netted for a total of 340 hours for an average of 36.66 net hours net hours for an average of per day of operation. There were 254 uring the spring of 42.5 net hours per day of captures of 37 species, for a capture D2009, KDFWR initi- operation. There were 369 rate of 0.77 birds per net hour. Three ated a songbird banding captures of 34 species, for SGCN were captured during fall netting station at Shaker Village a capture rate of 1.09 birds including Blackburnian Warbler (Den- of Pleasant Hill in Mer- per net hour. KDFWR droica fusca), Brown Creeper (Certhia cer County. The station personnel, Shaker Village americana) and Northern Bobwhite followed the Monitoring staff and volunteers banded (Colinus virginianus). Not surprisingly, Avian Productivity and birds with US Geological several species were caught in migra- Survivorship (MAPS) Survey (USGS) aluminum tion at Shaker Village that had not been protocol, set forth by the leg bands. Morphological caught during the breeding season, Institute of Bird Popula- measurements and plum- raising the total species captured at the tions and operated on eight age characteristics were banding station overall to 55. Field dates between May 27 and recorded including breed- Golden crowned kinglet / Sparrow (Spizella pusilla) and Song July 30, 2009. The sta- ing condition, wing chord, Ben Leffew Sparrow (Melospiza melodia) were the tion contains open grass- mass, fat stores, the extent most commonly captured species dur- dominated areas, as well as patches of of flight feather and body molt, and the ing the migration season and overall. shrubs and wooded edge. Although a degree of feather wear. When possible, Since this banding station captured few native grasses, shrubs and forbs are birds were aged and sexed using the a diverse and substantial sample of present in small numbers, the vegeta- degree of skull pneumaticization and/or species in 2009, KDFWR would like tion is primarily made up of non-native, plumage characteristics, including the to continue research at this site, last- old field vegetation. On the landscape, presence or absence of molt limits. ing though 2018. The station location the station is surrounded by hayfields, Eleven individuals of three Species of and net locations will not change. The cornfields and native warm-season Greatest Conservation Need (SGCN) as large-scale changes occurring on the grass (NWSG) fields. listed in Kentucky’s State Wildlife Ac- landscape at Shaker Village offer a This location was chosen for the tion Plan (SWAP) were captured during unique opportunity for this cooperative MAPS station in order to evaluate the the nesting season, including Grasshop- project which will provide vital infor- effects on nesting grassland birds by per Sparrow (Ammodramus savanna- mation for conserving grassland birds the intensive management continually rum), Willow Flycatcher (Empidonax in Kentucky by quantifying the effects occurring on the surrounding landscape traillii) and Canada Warbler (Wilsonia of NWSG conversion on nesting and for the establishment of NWSG fields. canadensis). migrating songbirds. A substantial portion (500 acres) of the KDFWR also initiated a migration surrounding area within 2.5 miles of songbird banding station at Shaker Vil- Funding Source: State Wildlife Grant the station was converted to NWSG in lage of Pleasant Hill in 2009. Songbird (SWG) 2009, with more conversions expected banding continued through fall 2009 at in the next few years. The area which the same banding site, using the same KDFWR Strategic Plan. Goal 1. contains the MAPS station will likely mist-net locations. The migration Strategic Objective 5. Comprehen- be converted to NWSG sometime in banding station operated during fall on sive Wildlife Conservation Strategy: the next 5 years. Thus netting began in nine dates between 3 September and 5 Appendix 3.2. Priority Research 2009 in hopes to obtain baseline data. November to investigate the use of this Project #2 and #6, Priority Survey During operation, 10 mist nets (32 site by SGCN and neotropical migrants. Project #3.

0 Kentucky Department of Fish & Wildlife Resources Songbirds and Raptors / PROJECT HIGHLIGHTS

Monitoring the Effects of WMA Forest Stand Improvements on Songbirds

Kate Heyden, Kentucky removal of invasive/exotic species) Funding Source: State Wildlife Grant Department of Fish and Wildlife on songbirds. Survey locations were (SWG) established in 2009 for 10 WMAs. Resources, Todd Jones-Farrand, Although FSI has not yet occurred at KDFWR Strategic Plan. Goal 1. Central Hardwoods Joint these sites, the 2009 survey will pro- Strategic Objective 5. Comprehen- Venture; and Shawchyi Vorisek, vide valuable baseline data for this sive Wildlife Conservation Strategy: Kentucky Department of Fish long-term monitoring strategy. Data Appendix 3.2. Priority Research and Wildlife Resources from these surveys were also used to Project #2 and #6, Priority Survey validate Habitat Suitability Index mod- Project #3. els which had been developed jointly n 2009, KDFWR worked with the by the Lower Mississippi Valley JV and ICentral Hardwoods Joint Venture the Central Hardwoods JV. (JV) to establish survey routes and In May-June, 2009, KDFWR com- protocol for monitoring the effects of pleted 14 survey transects containing future WMA forest stand improvement 7-12 points. There were 565 detections (FSI) projects (e.g. oak regenera- of focal species, 178 of which were for tion, edge feathering, cedar removals, SGCN (Table 1). White-eyed vireo nest / Kate Heyden

Dr. James Green KY Adair Kleber Lloyd Central Peabody Taylors- Yellowbank R. Rich River River Species WMA WMA WMA KY WMA WMA ville WMA WMA Total WMA WMA WMA Acadian Flycatcher 1 2 14 2 1 4 2 4 30 Black and White Warbler 1 1 2 Bell’s Vireo 18 18 Blue-gray Gnatcatcher 1 11 1 2 9 1 2 7 6 40 Brown Thrasher 4 3 4 5 1 17 Carolina Chickadee 1 2 1 2 4 1 3 5 19 Cerulean Warbler 1 1 Eastern Wood Pewee 5 1 2 6 3 7 1 6 31 Field Sparrow 10 3 8 15 35 71 Blue-winged Warbler 1 1 1 3 Great-crested Flycatcher 2 3 1 3 4 13 Hooded Warbler 1 1 Kentucky Warbler 7 5 11 1 2 3 29 Northern Bobwhite 3 4 1 19 27 Northern Parula 1 1 4 1 5 4 16 Orchard Oriole 2 1 3 Pilieated Woodpecker 2 2 5 1 4 14 Prairie Warbler 16 1 13 12 3 8 53 Prothonotary Warbler 2 1 3 Red-headed Woodpecker 1 1 2 White-eyed Vireo 19 2 2 3 8 2 2 38 Worm-eating Warbler 1 3 1 5 Wood Thrush 8 1 1 2 11 1 1 12 37 Yellow-breasted Chat 2 10 16 2 29 2 2 18 3 1 85 Yellow-throated Vireo 2 3 1 1 7 Total- All Species 28 63 91 31 64 34 60 117 24 51 565

Total- SGCN 15 26 15 18 5 13 18 42 9 17 178 Table 1: Species detections during 009 FSI surveys. SGCN are highlighted in yellow.

Annual Research Highlights 009 71 PROJECT HIGHLIGHTS / Songbirds and Raptors

Sharp-shinned Hawks in Kentucky: Detection, Abundance, Nest-Site Selection, and Breeding Success

Gary Ritchison and Tyler Kentucky and throughout its breeding Rankin, Eastern Kentucky range. Successful management requires University information concerning where and how many birds are breeding and their KDFWR Contact: Shawchyi habitat requirements. This study began Vorisek in 2009 and sought to address the following objectives: (1) survey several areas throughout Kentucky where ecause so little is known about previous observations indicate that Bthe abundance of Sharp-shinned Sharp-shinned Hawks may currently Sharp-shinned nest / Tony Englert Hawks at any level (continental, region- be breeding to determine their distribu- al, state, and local), assessing possible tion and abundance, (2) locate as many and (3) determine important reproduc- effects of forest management practices nests as possible and quantify those tive parameters for as many nests as and habitat loss and degradation on features of habitat apparently important possible, include clutch sizes, hatching their population status is currently not in selection of breeding territories and success, and fledging success. To meet possible. The reason for this lack of in- nest sites by Sharp-shinned Hawks, these objectives, road surveys, involv- formation is that Sharp-shinned Hawks ing the broadcast of three types of are the most secretive, and most dif- calls, are being conducted in at least ten ficult to census, of any of North Amer- counties throughout Kentucky between ica’s forest-breeding raptors. Based July 2009 – June 30, 2010. Where on few studies and small sample sizes, Sharp-shinned Hawks are detected, Sharp-shinned Hawks will apparently areas will be searched for evidence of nest in most forest habitats, particularly a nest and, for each nest, clutch sizes, those with at least some conifers. How- hatching success, and fledging success ever, there is clearly a need to learn will be noted. Habitat characteristics more about Sharp-shinned Hawks in of all nest sites will be quantified and Sharp-shinned nest / Mike Matthews analyses conducted to compare the characteristics of successful nests, unsuccessful nests, and random sites. Developing an effective survey method for breeding Sharp-shinned Hawks and providing new information about the habitat requirements of nesting Sharp- shinned Hawks will make this study of importance not only for biologists in Kentucky, but for biologists throughout the breeding range of Sharp-shinned Hawks.

Funding Sources: State Wildlife Grant (SWG)

KDFWR Strategic Plan. Goal 1. Strategic Objective 5. Comprehen- sive Wildlife Conservation Strategy: Appendix 3.2. Priority Survey Proj- Sharp-shinned chicks / Mike Matthews ect #3.

2 Kentucky Department of Fish & Wildlife Resources Migratory Shorebirds and Waterbirds / PROJECT HIGHLIGHTS

American Woodcock Nocturnal Field Usage During Spring Migration in Central Kentucky

Andy Newman and Charles Central Kentucky WMA and the Blue escape from predators and may also Elliott, Eastern Kentucky Grass Army Depot. ATVs equipped offer thermal protection on cold nights. with spotlights were used to locate A majority of birds captured exhibited University; John Brunjes, birds. If possible birds were captured, moist soil on bills, indicating active Kentucky Department of Fish banded, sexed, and aged. Flagging feeding in the fields. and Wildlife Resources was used to mark locations of birds in As the remainder of the data is fields. Habitat type, dominant vegeta- analyzed it should offer insight into tion, distance and composition of dense woodcock ecology and allow for more cover, percent cover, and field size were efficient management of woodcock on merican Woodcock (Scolopax recorded. both public and private land. Providing Aminor) are small migratory shore- In two field seasons, over 400 quality stopover sites will allow more birds that range throughout the eastern woodcock were located and 110 were birds to reach breeding grounds in bet- United States. A majority of woodcock banded. Woodcock were located in ter body condition; and hence exhibit winter in the southeast and coastal a variety of fields, e.g., managed old higher reproductive potential. states and breed in the northern part of fields (bush hogged), mowed fields, na- their range. They prefer dense thick- tive grasses, hayed fields, burned fields, ets of young growth forest for diurnal and pasture. Highest densities of birds Funding Source: State Wildlife Grant cover and nesting. At dusk they fly were observed in fields that had over- (SWG) and Eastern Kentucky Univer- into fields for roosting, feeding, and head cover and sparse ground cover. sity courtship during spring. Since the in- Dominant species that comprised over- ception of woodcock monitoring in the head cover consisted of blackberry (Ru- KDFWR Strategic Plan. Goal 1. late 1960’s, populations have exhibited bus spp.), goldenrod (Solidago spp.), Strategic Objective 5. Comprehen- long-term declines. Removal of bot- dogwood (Cornus spp.), and sumac sive Wildlife Conservation Strategy: tomland forest and mechanized farm- (Rhus spp.). Short distances to over- Appendix 3.2. Class Aves. Priority ing practices have reduced amount of head cover allow woodcock to quickly Survey Project #3. wintering habitat available. In northern breeding, areas changes in forest management have resulted in fewer tracts of early-successional habitat that woodcock prefer for nesting and roosting. While woodcock do breed in Kentucky, a majority of the birds pass through the state during migration in early spring and late fall. Limited research documenting habitat preferences for migrating woodcock has been conducted. During the springs of 2009 and 2010 potential nocturnal roosting habitats were searched for woodcock on the Miller-Welch Woodcock / USFWS

Annual Research Highlights 009 73 PROJECT HIGHLIGHTS / Migratory Shorebirds and Waterbirds

Marsh Bird Monitoring in Kentucky

Wetland / Erin Harper Erin Harper, Kentucky detection probability. Ten focal species were observed during surveys. The Department of Fish and Wildlife cies migrate through Kentucky, and of most abundant were Wood Ducks (4 broods with a total of 33), Great Blue Resources those, five species are known to breed in Kentucky, including King Rails Herons (24), Great Egrets (13), and (Rallus elegans), American Bitterns Little Blue Herons (11). Surveys will (Botaurus lentiginosus), Least Bitterns continue next year with a few changes. he loss and alteration of emergent (Ixobrychus exilis), Common Moor- More sites will be surveyed to increase Twetland habitat in North America hens (Gallinula chloropus), and Pied- the probability of observing focal spe- appears to be the cause of declines billed Grebes (Podilymbus podiceps). cies. Many sites were located on private of marsh bird populations that are Because emergent wetland habitat is lands and/or inaccessible, thus, next dependent on this habitat. There is a limited, most of these species are fairly year sites will be focused more on general lack of information on status uncommon. Survey locations were Wildlife Management Areas, since they and population trends of marsh birds, random sites chosen by the U.S. Fish contain much of the state’s emergent so the North American Marsh Bird and Wildlife Service (USFWS) and wetlands and are more accessible. Monitoring Program was designed to based on the National Wetland Index develop standardized protocols used (NWI). Routes used for surveys were Funding Source: State Wildlife Grant in national monitoring efforts. Marsh located in the Bluegrass and Purchase (SWG) bird surveys were conducted in April regions. Sites were surveyed three and May in Kentucky as part of a pilot times between April 15 and May 31. KDFWR Strategic Plan. Goal 1. study. Marsh birds are often secretive, Focal species observed during surveys Strategic Objective 5. Comprehen- thus rarely seen or heard by observ- included Least Bittern (1), Pied-billed sive Wildlife Conservation Strategy: ers. Therefore, broadcast vocalizations Grebes (6), and American Coot (Fulica Appendix 3.2. Class Aves. Priority of target species are used to improve americana-). Seven non-focal spe- Survey Project #3 and #4.

Wetland / Erin Harper

4 Kentucky Department of Fish & Wildlife Resources Migratory Shorebirds and Waterbirds / PROJECT HIGHLIGHTS

Pilot Study- Post-Season Banding of American Black Ducks in Kentucky

Rocky Pritchert, Kentucky Department of Fish and Wildlife Resources

astern The American black duck E(Anas rubripes), is a fairly common species found throughout eastern North America sometime during its annual cycle (Longcore et al. 2000 b). Occasionally called “black mallard”, this species nesting range extends from the Maritime Provinces in eastern Can- ada, the New England states westward through Quebec and most of Ontario in Canada as well as Michigan and Wis- consin in the northern United States. Black ducks primarily winter in the mid-latitude states of the eastern United States. Major wintering areas extend from the coastal regions of New Jersey American black duck / U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service southward to the Carolinas and west- countered along the eastern seaboard 60%. The greatest decline occurred ward into Kentucky and Tennessee. (Fronczak, 2009). Through the years from the late 1950’s through the mid In Kentucky, American black a very rich waterfowl heritage has de- 1970”s. Since then, the trend has ducks are commonly observed from veloped around pursuit of black ducks slowed in the Atlantic Flyway region December through March in backwater to the point where some hunters set out but continues in the western areas in the sloughs and embayments of major riv- exclusively just to hunt this species. Mississippi Flyway (Fronczak, 2009). ers, beaver ponds, flooded timber and This heritage created a great deal of The causes of this decline are not well other isolated wetlands across the state. interest in black duck hunting and the understood. Researchers and managers While black ducks may be encountered species in general. In the Mississippi proposed several hypotheses to explain anywhere in Kentucky then, the species Flyway, black ducks have not received the decline of black ducks including is proportionately more common as the same degree of attention as seen possible over-harvest, competition and one moves from west to east. The larg- among waterfowl hunters on the eastern hybridization with mallards, decrease est concentrations are reported along seaboard. Although not actively pur- in quality and quantity of wintering and the Ohio River from Cincinnati east sued by Mississippi Flyway waterfowl breeding habitat, environmental con- to Ashland. Other areas having good hunters, it is still considered a major taminants and recently climate induced numbers of black ducks include; the species of interest especially by the changes (Conroy et al. 1989, Rusch et region around Cave Run Lake in Bath eastern half of the flyway where over al. 1989, Longcore et al. 2000 a, Nudds and Rowan counties, Green River Lake 74% of the total black duck harvest oc- et al. 1996, Zimpfer and Conroy 2006). in Adair and Taylor counties and the curs (Fronczak, 2009). Research into each of these hypoth- wetlands on Bluegrass Army Depot in While black ducks are common eses has provided valuable insight into Madison County. throughout their range, winter num- black duck ecology and management. Black ducks are an important spe- bers have declined sharply in the two However, the population remains below cies for waterfowl hunters especially flyways. Since the late 1950’s, the desired levels and recent data paint a in the Atlantic Flyway. In many areas, number of black ducks counted on mixed picture of population growth they are second only to mallards (Anas wintering areas during the mid-winter making the status and sustainability Harvested elk / KDFWR platyrhyncuous) in dabbling ducks en- waterfowl survey has declined about of the American black duck uncertain.

Annual Research Highlights 009 75 sustainability of the American black duck uncertain. In response to this decline the black duck was identified as a “species of international concern” by the U.S. and Canadian federal governments and a “species of greatest conservation” need by 23 states in the Mississippi and Atlantic Flyways. The Black Duck Joint Venture (BDJV) was established in 1989 as the first species joint venture under the North American Waterfowl ManagementPROJECT Plan (NAWMP) HIGHLIGHTS to lead a coordinated / Migratory monitoring, research, Shorebirds and and Waterbirds communications program to restore the population to 640,000 breeding black ducks.

Total Totalnumber number of American of American black black ducksducks observed on Literature Cited observedmajor on major wintering wintering areas areas from 1995-2009. 1995-2009 Conroy, M.J., G.R. Constanzo, and 800000 D.B. Stotts. 1989. Winter survival

700000 of female American black ducks on the Atlantic coast. Journal of Wild- 600000 life Management 53:99-109. 500000 Fronczak, D. 2009. Waterfowl harvest and population survey data: Esti- 400000 mates of U.S. harvest, hunting activ- 300000 Black Ducks ity, and success derived from state-

Number Wintering 200000 federal cooperative harvest informa- American Black Ducks tion program. USFWS Div of Mig. Number Wintering American American Wintering Number 100000 Bird Manage. Unpubl. Rep. 95p. 0 Longcore, J. R., D.G. McAuley, D.A. Clugston, C.M. Bunck, J. Girouz, C. 1995 1958 1961 1964 1967 1970 1973 1976 1979 1982 1985 1988 1991 1994 1997 2000 2003 2006 2009 Ouellet, G.R. Parker, P. Dupuis, D.B. Year Stotts, and J.R. Goldsberry. 2000 a. Total Wintering American Black Ducks Survival of American black ducks radio-marked in Quebec, Nova Sco- In response to this decline the black for the 2009-10 wintering period. tia, and Vermont. Journal of Wildlife duck wasIn 2008, identified the Black as a Duck“species Joint of Venture alongKDFWR with its biologist Federal initiated(i.e., US trap-Fish and Management 70: 238-252 Wildlifeinternational Service concern” and Canadian by the U.S.Wildlife and Service)ping and efforts State after and the Provinc waterfowlial Partners season in the Longcore, J.R., D. G. McAuley, G.R. AtlanticCanadian and federal Mississippi governments Flyways and have a agreedin to February conduct 2010a 5-year in areas pilot whereeffort to black assess Hepp, and J.M. Rhymer. 2000 b. the“species usefulness of greatest of a 2-season conservation” banding need program ducks to monitor were documentedchanges in black during duck the vital rates American black duck(Anas rubripes). overby 23 time. states The in Mississippithe Mississippi and Atlanticand At- Flyway2009-10 Councils aerial passed winter a Jointsurveys. Resolution We In The birds of North America, No. encouraginglantic Flyways. Federal, The State, Black and Duck Provincial Joint paattemptedrtners to participate to band at in Sloughs the pilot and effort Yel- 481 (A. Poole and F. Gill, eds.). The throughVenture in-kind (BDJV) contributions was established of personnel in timelowbank and equipment. WMAs adjacent Each state to the or Ohioprovince birds of North America, Inc., Phila- was1989 issued as the a bandingfirst species objective joint basedventure upon theirRiver respective in west-central winter numbers.part of the Kentucky’s state delphia, PA. objective is 25 black ducks for the 2009-10 wintering period. under the North American Waterfowl on private lands along the Ohio River Nudds, T. D., M.W. Miller and C. D. KDFWR biologist initiated trapping efforts after the waterfowl season in February Management Plan (NAWMP) to lead a near Lewisport in northeast Kentucky. Ankney. 1996. Black ducks: har- 2010 in areas where black ducks were documented during the 2009-10 aerial winter coordinated monitoring, research, and A permanent swim in trap was used at surveys. We attempted to band at Sloughs and Yellowbank WMAs adjacent to the Ohio vest, mallards, or habitat? Proceed- Rivercommunications in west-central program part of to the restore state onthe private Sloughs lands WMAalong theand Ohio portable River swim-in near ings of the International Waterfowl Lewisportpopulation in to northeast 640,000 Kentucky. breeding black A permanent type swim traps in were trap usedwas usedat all at other Sloughs loca- WMA Symposium 7:50-60. andducks. portable swim-in type traps were used at tions.all other A rocketlocations. net wasA rocket also triednet was on alsose- Rusch, D.H., C. D. Ankney, H. Boyd, In 2008, the Black Duck Joint lected locations in the northeast part of J.R. Longcore, F. Montalbano, III, Venture along with its Federal (i.e., US the state. Traps sites were extensively J.K. Ringleman, and V.D. Stotts. Fish and Wildlife Service and Cana- baited and monitored through February. 1989. Population ecology and dian Wildlife Service) and State and Biologists reported black ducks harvest of American black duck: a Provincial Partners in the Atlantic and present at all trap sites. However, review. Wildlife Society Bulletin Mississippi Flyways have agreed to heavy snow and ice limited our ability 17:379-406. conduct a 5-year pilot effort to assess to travel to sites in the northeast and Zimpfer, N.L. and M.J. Conroy. 2006. the usefulness of a 2-season banding set traps during the most opportune Models of production rates in Ameri- program to monitor changes in black times. Capture and banding efforts can black duck populations. Journal duck vital rates over time. The Mis- were only successful at Sloughs WMA of Wildlife Management 70:947-954. sissippi and Atlantic Flyway Councils this past year where we banded 84% of passed a Joint Resolution encouraging Kentucky’s quota. While we had very Funding Sources: State Wildlife Grant Federal, State, and Provincial partners limited success this past year because (SWG) to participate in the pilot effort through of weather, we did learn a great deal in-kind contributions of personnel time from our efforts which should improve KDFWR Strategic Plan. Goal 1. and equipment. Each state or province banding success during the remaining Strategic Objective 5. Comprehen- was issued a banding objective based years of this pilot study. sive Wildlife Conservation Strategy: upon their respective winter numbers. Appendix 3.2. Class Aves. Priority Kentucky’s objective is 25 black ducks Survey Project #3.

6 Kentucky Department of Fish & Wildlife Resources Small Game / PROJECT HIGHLIGHTS

Avian Response to Production Stands of Native Warm-Season Grasses

Andrew West and Patrick Keyser, and biofuels may have the potential to and a fourth time to measure vegetation affect substantially more area due to (species composition, density, height, Center for Native Grasslands market-based incentives they provide to and litter cover and depth). Management, University of landowners. Although these production Seed production fields in Hart Tennessee practices and their effect on grassland County had the highest species richness KDFWR Contact: John Morgan birds have been studied to a limited having all nine target species, while the extent in the Great Plains, they have not grazed fields in Monroe Co. and control rassland birds such as the been evaluated in the East or South. fields in McMinn Co. had more birds GHenslow’s sparrow, dickcissel, Therefore, this project will ex- per field (14). Northern bobwhite was and northern bobwhite have declined amine production stands of NWSG in detected in all treatment types. Field more than any other guild of birds in Kentucky and Tennessee. Treatments sparrows were the most abundant spe- the United States. Much of this is due that we are evaluating are control (fal- cies detected with 40% of total; red- to the loss of habitat resulting from low), forage (grazing and haying), winged blackbirds and eastern mead- the conversion of native warm-season seed, and biofuel production fields of owlarks were the next two most abun- grasses (NWSG) that once dominated NWSG. In 2009, we monitored 95 dant. Surveys will continue in 2010 on the prairies and savannahs of the Mid- fields across three sites: Hart (seed pro- the same fields. Statistical models are west and Mid-South. Large crop fields, duction and control) and Monroe Coun- being developed and will be finalized pastures, or urban areas now cover ties (haying, grazing, and control) in following the 2010 field season. much of the birds’ former range. The Kentucky, and McMinn County (biofu- Farm Bill has restored some habitat for els, haying, and control) in Tennessee. Funding Sources: Pittman Robertson these birds through the Conservation Each field was visited four times, three (PR) and the University of Tennessee Reserve Program (CPR), but popula- for 10-minute point counts to assess tions continue to decline; the scale of presence of 9 target species (northern KDFWR Strategic Plan. Goal 1. this and other Farm Bill programs is bobwhite, eastern meadowlark, prairie Strategic Objective 5. Comprehen- too small on most landscapes to impact warbler, field sparrow, Henslow’s spar- sive Wildlife Conservation Strategy: breeding bird populations. Other uses row, grasshopper sparrow, red-winged Appendix 3.2. Class Aves. Priority for NWSG such as haying, grazing blackbird, horned lark, and dickcissel), Research Project #2 and #8.

Percent of species detected over three visits for each treatment by location site. Species code: red-winged blackbird (RWBL), prairie warbler (PRAW), northern bobwhite (NOBO), horned lark (HOLA), Henslow’s sparrow (HESP), grasshopper sparrow (GRSP), field sparrow (FISP), eastern meadowlark (EAME),and dickcissel (DICK). 100% 90% RWBL 80% PRAW 70% NOBO 60% HOLA 50% HESP 40% GRSP 30%

Percent of total FISP birds dectected 20% EAME 10% DICK 0% Hart Hart Monroe Monroe Monroe McMinn McMinn McMinn Control Seed Control Graze Hay Control Biofuel Hay Site (treatment)

Annual Research Highlights 009 77 PROJECT HIGHLIGHTS / Small Game

Northern Bobwhite Population Ecology on Reclaimed Mined Land brood survival. These parameters will be monitored along with hunting pressure and changes in habitat condition resulting from the experimental habitat manipulations. Analysis will include evaluation of survival in relation to habitat quality for winter home ranges, nest sites, and brood ranges. We are trapping using funnel traps baited with cracked corn and milo. Trapped birds are being banded with aluminum leg-bands, and fitted with necklace-style radio transmitters (6.0 g). To estimate home ranges, document habitat use, and estimate survival rates, radiotagged birds are being located 3 times/week. Fall population estimates are being obtained using a fall covey Radio-tagged bobwhite being released on Peabody WMA / Evan Tanner census and telemetry data. Hunting mortality will be estimated through band recovery during quota hunts and Evan Tanner and Patrick Keyser, over 200,000 hectares of potential radio telemetry. Nest success, nest pro- Center for Native Grasslands habitat have been created in Kentucky. ductivity, and brood survival will all be Management, University of However, establishment of dense stands evaluated via telemetry. Habitat quality of sericea lespedeza and other exotic Tennessee will be monitored in both winter and species is common on reclaimed sites, breeding seasons through vegetation KDFWR Contact: John Morgan and has led to unfavorable habitat for sampling across all sites. bobwhite quail. Research regarding the Being the first year of this project, dynamics of bobwhite populations on preliminary data analysis has not been egion-wide declines of northern reclaimed mined lands – and other hab- completed. Since trapping first started Rbobwhite (Colinus virginianus) itat types in the Mid-South – is lacking, in mid-September 2009, a total of 59 populations have become more pro- and information on how this important birds have been caught on the Sinclair nounced and widespread throughout the game species responds to management unit and 151 on the Ken unit. Crude species’ range with an annual decrease on these sites is needed. mortality rates are 80% and 77% (Sin- of -3.0% between 1966-2007, based on Two units (Sinclair and Ken) of the clair), and 56% and 39% (Ken) for the the Breeding Bird Survey. This decline Peabody Wildlife Management Area, treatment and controls, respectively. can largely be attributed to the loss of a reclaimed mine site, were chosen for useable habitat as a result of increased this study. Both units were assigned Funding Source: Pittman Robertson use of clean farming practices, reliance control and treatment areas encom- (PR) and the University of Tennessee on non-native forage grasses, and loss passing roughly equal amounts of key of early successional habitat. habitat types. Management of treat- KDFWR Strategic Plan. Goal 1. One opportunity for increasing ment areas will include prescribed fire, Strategic Objective 5. Comprehen- bobwhite habitat is management of re- disking, spraying, and establishment of sive Wildlife Conservation Strategy: claimed mine sites. Under the Surface food plots. This project will investigate Appendix 3.2. Class Aves. Priority Mining Control and Reclamation Act of bobwhite population responses to these Research Project #2 and #3. 1977, early successional habitats have habitat improvements including mortal- been established to minimize the im- ity rates (hunting/non-hunting) by sex pact that surface mining has on wildlife and age class and fecundity, including populations and unique habitat types; nest success, nest productivity, and Quail pair / Joe Lacefield

8 Kentucky Department of Fish & Wildlife Resources Small Game / PROJECT HIGHLIGHTS

Bobwhite Focal Area Activity and Monitoring in Kentucky

John Morgan and Ben Robinson, significant investment of Kentucky Department of Fish KDFWR dollars for 3 fo- and Wildlife Resources cal areas. Peabody WMA, Clay WMA, and Straight Creek were given funds to expand their capacity to orthern Bobwhite (Colinus virgin- manage habitat. Peabody Nianus) have experienced dramatic and Clay WMA monitor- declines across large portions of their ing data will be analyzed range, including Kentucky. In April in 5 to 7 years for progress 2008, “Road to Recovery: The Blue- with respect to bobwhite print for Restoring the Northern Bob- and grassland birds. Al- white in Kentucky” was published by though monies were in- the Kentucky Department of Fish and vested on Straight Creek, Wildlife Resources (KDFWR). This questions regarding future plan set the course for focused habitat mining activity have restoration efforts on public and private eliminated the site from lands. The goal is to generate a tem- significant investment in plate for broader restoration activities habitat in the future. American black duck / U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service in the Commonwealth. The next phase of To date, 6 of the 11 focal areas focal area implementa- identified in the plan are engaged in tion is area-specific plans. monitoring for population levels of Private land areas will set bobwhite and a suite of grassland song- 5-year habitat goals in- birds. They include Livingston County, In 2009, monitored focus areas cluding 2 year benchmarks. They will Peabody WMA, Sinking Creek, Hart were categorized by habitat type. The be strategic in nature as work requires Co, Bluegrass Army Depot, Clay effort required local biological staff access to private lands. Therefore, WMA, and Straight Creek. Although to classify every acre of the area to a management activities cannot always formal data analysis will not take place standardized list of habitat types. Bi- be planned explicitly, because staff do for several more years, bobwhite are ologists visually documented each acre not have access to all properties. Pub- present in every focal area. Livingston from the road or on foot. In circum- lic land focal areas provide the platform County presents the best opportunity stances where access was impossible, for specific management actions. They for success in the short-term, because we deployed a helicopter to visually will follow KDFWR’s WMA Plan it has the strongest population of wild inspect the location. Data were trans- which includes field level planning over bobwhite compared to the other areas. ferred from large printed maps into a a 5-year period. Peabody WMA has a geodatabase using ArcGIS. Over completed management plan and Clay time, local biologists will update WMA has a draft plan nearly complete. the habitat classification based on restoration activity and track main- Funding Source: Pittman Robertson tenance work on existing habitat. (PR) and Kentucky Department of Fish Ultimately, we will evaluate bird and Wildlife response to changes in habitat in a 5-7 year period. Some focal KDFWR Strategic Plan. Goal 1. areas may be evaluated for longer Strategic Objective 5. Comprehen- periods of time if little restoration sive Wildlife Conservation Strategy: activity has occurred. Appendix 3.3. Priority Conservation Quail pair / Joe Lacefield This year marked the first Action #19, #63, #80, and #120.

Annual Research Highlights 009 79 PROJECT HIGHLIGHTS / Small Game

Efficacy of Surrogate PropagationTM As a Quail Restoration Technique in Central Kentucky

Ben Robinson, Danna Baxley, is marketed as a way to establish hunt- tem Guide to release a target of 300 Joe Lacefield, and John Morgan, able populations of game birds, which quail per year. All released birds will Kentucky Department of Fish will survive, reproduce, and provide be banded. Fall covey counts, spring hunting opportunities well after release whistle counts, callback trapping, and and Wildlife Resources (www.quailrestoration.com). The Sur- controlled hunt surveys will be con- rogatorTM unit houses a heater, food, ducted to collect data on survival and and water and houses 125 day-old quail recruitment of SurrogatorTM birds. uail restoration has emerged as chicks until the chicks are 5 weeks old. Although limited in scope (one study Qone of the most difficult prob- Surrogate PropagationTM is based on the site), the data from this project will lems in wildlife conservation today. idea that quail chicks develop their nat- be used to determine the efficacy of Although the solution to this problem ural survival instincts within the Sur- this system to restore quail on isolated is not yet clear, the cause of quail rogatorTM unit, imprint on the area, and Bluegrass Region farms, where habitat population declines across the south- have limited human contact, creating an restoration may not be effective due to east is well understood. Decreases in ideal situation for birds to survive and a lack of a “source” population. quail numbers are a direct response to reproduce (www.quailrestoration.com). widespread habitat changes through- The goal of this project is to as- out the southeast. Historically, much sess the efficacy of the SurrogatorTM Funding Sources: Kentucky Depart- of Kentucky was characterized by as a quail restoration technique on two ment of Fish and Wildlife woodlots and small farms with fallow privately owned farms totaling approxi- fields and brushy fencerows of shrubs, mately 750-acres in Woodford County, KDFWR Strategic Plan. Goal 1. briars, native grasses, and forbs. To- Kentucky. This multi-year project will Strategic Objective 5(vol. III - pgs. day, our landscape is much different follow protocols in the Quail Restora- 63-65). as Kentucky farms have become larger tion Technologies SurrogatorTM Sys- and cleaner with very little cover for quail. Fallow fields are now rare and fescue has replaced native grasses. These changes decreased quail brood rearing and foraging habitat and created a landscape where predators easily detect and prey upon quail chicks and adult birds. Over the past 15 years, state fish and wildlife agencies across the southeast have collectively moved towards a habitat-based restoration initiative to improve quail populations. Simultaneous with the shift of the public sector away from pen- reared quail restoration efforts, a new technology for quail restoration-The Surrogate PropagationTM system- emerged from the private sector and quickly gained momentum as a restoration tool. The SurrogatorTM, designed by Quail Restoration Technologies is a self-contained field unit that Surrogator / Ben Robinson

80 Kentucky Department of Fish & Wildlife Resources Bats / PROJECT HIGHLIGHTS

Foraging and Roosting Ecology of Rafinesque’s Big-eared bat in Kentucky

Joseph S. Johnson and Michael bouts and investigating J. Lacki, University of Kentucky connections between the KDFWR Contact: Brooke Slack habitats used while foraging and the abundance of available insect prey in habitats used and not afinesque’s big-eared bat Co( - used by bats. This task Rrynorhinus rafinesquii) is one includes a dietary analy- of North America’s rarest bat species, sis of fecal samples cou- and is listed as a species of concern by pled with sampling of the state of Kentucky. Due to the spe- insect populations with cies’ rarity, there is an increasing need light traps distributed to identify habitat features which are across the landscape. important to reproductive populations While it is too early during the summer maternity season. to make strong conclu- Two of the basic needs of summer sions from data gathered colonies are roosting and foraging habi- in the 2009 field season, tats. Previous research has shown that some of our findings Rafinesque’s big-eared bat roosts in from western Kentucky hollow trees, caves, buildings and other show bats’ strong associ- man-made structures. Rafinesque’s ation with forested habi- big-eared bat, like other big-eared bat tats, and the diversity of species, primarily feeds on moths and day-roosts we located possesses several adaptations that help will be published in the it capture preferred moth prey. Forest proceedings from the types known to be used for roosting Symposium on Conser- and foraging activities are diverse, and Rafinesque’s big-eared bat / Joe Johnson vation and Management include bottomland as well as upland of Big-eared Bats in the forested habitats. Ballard Wildlife Management Area and Eastern United States. At the end of While much has been learned is comprised primarily of bottomland our three years of research, we hope to about these bats, the majority of stud- hardwood forest. The study area in cen- understand the daytime and nighttime ies have focused on populations in tral Kentucky is Mammoth Cave Na- habitat requirements of Rafinesque’s regions south of Kentucky where avail- tional Park. The Park is topographically big-eared bat in central and western able habitats, and therefore habitat use, diverse, and represents upland forests Kentucky. This knowledge will result in likely differ from that present in the that starkly contrast with the seasonally recommendations for habitat manage- Commonwealth. In light of these dif- flooded forests of western Kentucky. ment for the species, including how to ferences, we embarked on a three-year Our work at both locations en- protect or enhance roosting and forag- study, funded by the Kentucky Depart- compasses many facets of the species’ ing habitats, and recommendations on ment of Fish and Wildlife Resources, to ecology. By following bats tagged with how to design artificial roosts. help land managers better understand radiotransmitters to day-roosts across the behaviors and habitat requirements the summer season we are gathering Funding Sources: State Wildlife Grant of Rafinesque’s big-eared bat in cen- data on the characteristics of these (SWG) and University of Kentucky tral and western Kentucky. Beginning roosts, including features of the roosts in May of 2009, we began capturing themselves, characteristics of adjacent Comprehensive Wildlife Conserva- and fitting Rafinesque’s big-eared bats forests, and conditions (including tem- tion Strategy: Appendix 3.2, Class with miniature radiotransmitters at perature, humidity and light levels) Mammalia, Prioritized Research two study locations. The study area in inside the roosts. We are also tracking Projects 1 and 4, and Survey Project western Kentucky is centered on the bats during their nighttime foraging 1

Annual Research Highlights 009 81 PROJECTPROJECT HIGHLIGHTSUPDATES / / Bats

Surveillance and Monitoring of Cave Roosts for Abnormal Emergence Behavior by Rare and Endangered Bats in Kentucky

Michael Baker and Mylea uses the beam-break “GateKeeper” bat emergence behavior. The system Bayless, Bat Conservation system to conduct continuous monitor- is limited by its inability to distinguish International; David Redell, ing of the bats at prioritized sites and among bat species. To address this Wisconsin Department of to automatically alert state and other limitation, Anabat acoustic detection Natural Resources; and Brooke biologists to the possible presence of systems can be used at selected sites to abnormal bat behavior, enabling “early provide an index to the percentage of Slack, Kentucky Department of detection” of potential WNS symptoms. each species present by analyzing the Fish and Wildlife Resources Additionally, BCI biologists and volun- frequency range and shape of recorded teers are assisting KDFWR bat calls and assigning them to the ap- with deployment and main- propriate species groupings. Results tenance of AnaBat acoustic from the GateKeeper and AnaBat sys- detection systems at a num- tems currently operating are not yet ber of priority hibernacula available. to determine the efficacy of GateKeeper systems will provide this technology as yet an- additional long-term benefits, outside other potential “early warn- of their potential utility as an “early ing” indicator. warning” system of WNS in Kentucky. Cave and mine hi- Benefits include, but are not limited bernating bats face many to, estimates of population sizes (with threats. At present, the pau- associated measures of error), mea- Surveillance bats / Bat Conservation International city of unbiased population sures of overwinter mortality (natural census information and the and otherwise), information regarding lack of year-round data regarding bat “normal” (and “abnormal” in the event behavior at priority roosting sites frus- that a site becomes affected by WNS) trate conservation efforts. The Gate- year-round bat behavioral ecology with n light of the alarming geographic Keeper system developed by David regard to entry and exit from hiber- Ispread of White-nose Syndrome Redell (Bat Ecologist for the Wisconsin nacula, information on the peak tim- (WNS), a disease responsible for the Department of Natural Resources) is a ing of fall entry and spring emergence deaths of more than one million bats measure to overcome these challenges into/from sites, and nightly emergence in hibernacula of the Eastern United to conservation and to provide surveil- timing and bat numbers from sites used States since 2006, BCI is working lance for the imminent threat posed by as maternity sites in summer months closely with KDFWR and other part- WNS. Once installed and calibrated, (including measures of fecundity). If ners to utilize technology to provide this system allows for automated the AnaBat acoustic detection portion information regarding abnormal monitoring of bat entry/exit behavior at of this project proves to be efficacious, emergence behavior by Indiana myo- hibernacula through the use of paired BCI and KDFWR may continue this ef- tis (Myotis sodalis), Gray myotis (M. infrared beams aimed across cave and fort, pending availability of funding. grisescens), and Virginia big-eared bats mine site entrances. GateKeeper sys- (Corynorhinus townsendii virginianus) tems can be used to electronically index Funding Source: State Wildlife Grant at priority hibernacula in Carter, Ed- bat activity levels without large travel (SWG) and Bat Conservation Interna- monson, and Lee counties, Kentucky. and time commitments or the biases tional Clinical signs of WNS include “ab- associated with using human observers normal winter bat behavior” including for traditional bat exit counting. With Comprehensive Wildlife Conserva- bats moving to cold areas nearer the en- occasional maintenance, the system tion Strategy: Appendix 3.2, Class trances of hibernacula and bats emerg- will function full time, year-round, Mammalia, Prioritized Research ing in large numbers from hibernacula and can be used to study relationships Projects 1, 3, and 4, and Survey Proj- during winter months. This project between environmental variables and ect 1.

82 Kentucky Department of Fish & Wildlife Resources Habitat Management / PROJECT/ PROJECT HIGHLIGHTS UPDATES

Implementation of Habitat Restoration and Improvement Practices on Kentucky Wildlife Management Areas in the Bluegrass Region

Josh Lillpop and Jacob Stewart, velopment pressure, they serve as ideal multiple management goals. The team Kentucky Department of Fish areas for long-term habitat restoration marked approximately 125 acres for and Wildlife Resources and improvement efforts. Implementing forest stand improvement efforts and management and restoration practices removed invasive bush honeysuckle in these areas will benefit multiple from 100+ acres at Curtis Gates Lloyd lthough only 7% of Kentucky species of greatest conservation need Wildlife Management Area. Five ver- Ais publicly-owned, these areas (SGCN) and will address nearly a doz- nal pools were created on this manage- are significant in terms of long-term en conservation actions listed in Ken- ment area to provide breeding habitat resource conservation. The Kentucky tucky’s Wildlife Action Plan. Although for the Northern Leopard frog. On Department of Fish and Wildlife Re- these public lands have associated land the Blue Grass Army Depot, the team sources (KDFWR) owns or leases 77 managers and biologists, current levels removed thirty acres of cedar trees in Wildlife Management Areas (WMAs) of funding and personnel are oftentimes efforts to re-establish native short grass comprising well over one million acres not adequate to achieve goals outside of prairie habitat. Approximately 200 of public land. WMAs in Kentucky are routine management, particularly goals acres of fescue were sprayed on Cen- managed with multiple goals in mind; specific to Kentucky’s Wildlife Action tral Kentucky Wildlife Management specifically, resource managers seek to Plan. To address this problem, KD- Area, and there are plans to plant warm maximize the value of these areas for FWR established a habitat restoration season grass/forbs on this area in 2010. both game and non-game wildlife spe- and improvement team to implement The team also created 25 brush piles cies while optimizing the recreational Wildlife Action Plan Actions on public on WMAs in the Blugrass region, and opportunities for Kentuckians. Since lands within the Bluegrass Region of created and installed over 55 nesting these areas are in long-term public Kentucky. structures including: rocket bat houses, trust, and are not directly threatened During 2009, the Habitat Improve- barn owl boxes, American kestrel boxes with many of the problems associated ment Team focused on the Bluegrass and bluebird boxes. with privately-owned lands such as de- Region of Kentucky and accomplished The team plans to continue habitat improvement efforts on public lands in 2010, moving to the Northeast region of Kentucky. In subsequent years, the team will rotate throughout the state to assist land managers and biologists with projects aimed at improving habitats for species of greatest conservation need.

Funding Sources: State Wildlife Grant (SWG)

KDFWR Strategic Plan. Goal 1. Strategic Objective 5. Compre- hensive Wildlife Conservation Strategy: Appendix 3.3, Priority Conservation Action #14, #32, #62, #99, #101, #118, #120, #129, Cedar tree removal / Ben Robinson #156, #185.

Annual Research Highlights 009 83 Quail pair / Dave Baker Project Updates

84 Kentucky Department of Fish & Wildlife Resources Sport Fishes / PROJECT UPDATES

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

catchable-size fish to sustain quality fishing opportunities to a diverse group of anglers. Lakes are stocked up to four times annually with catchable-size catfish (13-16”) and up to three times annually in the cool months with rainbow trout (8-12”). Bass and sunfish populations are continually monitored to ensure natural reproduction is meet- ing the needs of the anglers. A standard set of creel limits was established for all FINS lakes to assist in spreading out angler harvest of fish and ensure fishing opportunities can be enjoyed by as many people as possible. Daily limits for each angler fishing a FINs lake includes five rainbow trout, four catfish, one largemouth bass over 15 inches, and 15 bluegill or other sunfish. Information kiosks have been Urban fishing / Marc Johnson erected at nearly all of the lakes to dis- perse information to the public about cal governments, the lake owners have Dane Balsman, Kentucky the program. Additionally, the program committed to cover 25% of the cost of Department of Fish and Wildlife has been intensively marketed through fish stockings. With the cooperative press releases, social media, radio, tele- Resources agreement, KDFWR works with the lo- vision, license vendors, boat shows, and cal parks departments to provide tech- the KDFWR website. Stocking rates nical guidance, arrange fish stockings, and fishing pressure will be continually and promote fishing in the park lakes. n an effort to boost declining fish- monitored. Attitude and creel surveys The KDFWR is also working with local ing license sales in recent years, are ongoing at several FINs lakes. An I parks departments to host clinics and and increase fishing opportunities, exploitation study is planned to begin fishing derbies. A rod loaner program the Kentucky Department of Fish and in the fall 2010 to assess fishing harvest is being implemented at many of these Wildlife Resources (KDFWR) has and stocking rates. The goals of the lakes to provide equipment at no cost expanded the Fishing in Neighbor- FINs program include increasing fish- to novice anglers that may not yet own hoods (FINs) program. The FINs ing access, recruiting new anglers and equipment. program began in 2006 with five lakes retaining existing anglers, and provid- These lakes are conveniently lo- in Louisville, Frankfort, and Northern ing quality fishing opportunities to a cated near large populations of people Kentucky, but in 2009 expanded to 29 large population of people close to their without the need to travel far from lakes in 17 counties. There are now homes. quality fishing opportunities in most home to find good fishing. In 2010, large cities across the Commonwealth approximately 90,000 trout and 70,000 as well as many smaller cities around catfish will be stocked in the FINs lakes the state, courtesy of the FINs pro- to provide fishing opportunities to lakes Funding Source: Sport Fish gram. Many of the lakes in the FINs that in the past were overfished due to Restoration Program (Dingell-Johnson) program are owned by city and county their size and fishing pressure exceed- municipalities. As part of a cooperative ing the resources capabilities. These KDFWR Strategic Plan. Goal 2, agreement between KDFWR and lo- lakes will require routine stockings of Strategic Objective 3.

Annual Research Highlights 009 85 PROJECT UPDATES / Sport Fishes

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

Dane Balsman, Kentucky small sunfish and largemouth bass. species including largemouth bass and Department of Fish and Wildlife In 2007, the KDFWR stocked 417 channel catfish. flathead catfish that ranged in length Prior to 2009, sampling efforts Resources from 8.4 to 36.0 inches in an attempt to had yielded low numbers of flathead reduce overabundant sunfish numbers catfish. To ensure that flathead catfish and improve growth of sunfish and were not being harvested by anglers, a Jolly Lake, a 175 acre largemouth bass populations. Again catch and release only regulation was A.J. impoundment located in 2009 the KDFWR stocked 308 implemented September 1, 2009. This in Campbell County, Kentucky has flatheads that ranged from 3.0 to 25.4 regulation was critical to ensure that historically contained a sub-par sport inches. Flathead catfish were obtained the stocked flathead catfish remain in fishery for sunfish and largemouth bass. from Georgia Department of Natural the lake. Sunfish and largemouth bass The Kentucky Department of Fish and Resources as part of their non-native sampling are conducted annually dur- Wildlife Resources (KDFWR) has tried flathead catfish eradication program. ing the spring and fall to determine several alternative management actions All flathead catfish were fin-clipped abundance, size structure, age, and in an attempt to improve growth of sun- prior to stocking to differentiate from growth. Additionally, channel catfish fish and largemouth bass. Management native flatheads in subsequent sam- are sampled in the fall with tandem actions have included stocking interme- pling attempts. The hypothesis of hoop nets to determine abundance, size diate-sized largemouth bass to improve the project was that the stocking of a structure, age, and growth. Sampling recruitment and stocking of blue catfish top-level predator would reduce densi- of flathead catfish has yielded low to consume overabundant sunfish. Un- ties of overabundant, slow growing numbers of fish. Sampling has been fortunately, these management actions sunfish. Ultimately, this should help conducted at various times of the year, have proven unsuccessful in terms of improve size structure and growth rates and with different DC pulse electro- decreasing the density of overabundant, of sunfish and possibly other sport fish fishing settings with little luck. Trot lines and jug lines have also been used for sampling. Little information exists on effective ways to sample for flathead catfish in small impoundments. Restrictive harvest on flathead catfish, looking for improved flathead catfish sampling methods, and continued monitoring of sunfish and largemouth bass populations should determine if flathead catfish are affecting sport fish populations.

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

KDFWR Strategic Plan. Goal 1, Objective 5.

Flathead catfish / Kathryn Emme

86 Kentucky Department of Fish & Wildlife Resources Sport Fishes / PROJECT UPDATES

Evaluation of Trophy Brown Trout Regulations and Stocking Strategies in the Lake Cumberland Tailwater

Dave Dreves and David Baker, seasonal growth rates. Wolf Creek Na- in., 3) fish between 15 and 20 in., 4) fish Kentucky Department of Fish tional Fish Hatchery (WCNFH), the sole greater than 20 in. There was very low and Wildlife Resources source of trout for Kentucky, is currently return of stocked fingerling brown trout at their maximum production of catch- in later electrofishing samples. How- able-size (8.0 in) trout. Though smaller ever, it is possible that difficulties associ- rout (Oncorhyncus spp. and Salmo trout can be produced at WCNFH in ated with marking small fish may have Tspp.) sport fisheries in Kentucky’s greater quantities and at a lower cost, confounded the results. After comple- reservoir tailwaters are unique and im- it is necessary to determine if stock- tion of this research, the KDFWR will portant resources. These fisheries were ing smaller fish is an effective fisheries gain further information necessary to created in reservoir tailwaters having management strategy. Since 1997, the optimally manage the Lake Cumberland coldwater discharges for either the entire KDFWR evaluated the use of fingerling tailwater brown trout fishery. year or a portion of the year. The Lake (3.0 in) brown trout stockings to deter- Cumberland tailwater trout fishery is mine if their survival was high enough the largest in Kentucky with more than to warrant stocking more, smaller fish in Funding Source: Sport Fish Restora- 75 miles of suitable habitat available the Lake Cumberland tailwater. tion Program (Dingell-Johnson) throughout the entire year. The Lake The implementation of the trophy Cumberland tailwater receives the larg- regulations resulted in increased num- KDFWR Strategic Plan. Goal 1, est stocking in the state with approxi- bers of brown trout in four length cat- Strategic Objective 5. mately 161,000 rainbow (O. mykiss) and egories: 1) all sizes, 2) fish less than 15 38,000 brown (S. trutta) trout stocked per year. Growth and survival of stocked trout in the Cumberland River are sufficient to create a high quality trout fishery with opportunities to catch trophy-size fish. The Kentucky Department of Fish and Wildlife Resources (KDFWR) implemented new regulations in 1997 to take advantage of the trophy growth potential. The brown trout minimum size limit was set at 20 in and the creel limit was 1 fish. Starting in 1997 and continuing through 2009, fall electrofishing has been used to collect data on brown trout distribution and relative abundance. Trout have also been batch marked in the hatchery with microwire tags and/or fin clips to facilitate mark-recapture population estimates and growth rates. Monthly sampling has been used to track Trophy brown trout / John Williams

Annual Research Highlights 009 87 PROJECT UPDATES / Sport Fishes

Investigation of the Walleye Population in the Rockcastle River and Evaluation of Supplemental Stocking of Native Strain Walleye

Dave Dreves and David Baker, generally do not make large spawning walleye to the existing population. We Kentucky Department of Fish migrations up rivers in the spring, but collect native strain walleye from the and Wildlife Resources rather spawn within the lake or reser- Rockcastle River each spring and trans- voir. Before advances in genetics, it port them to Minor Clark Fish Hatchery was erroneously assumed that all wall- to be used as broodfish. These walleye eye were the same and these stocked are spawned and resulting fish are rior to impoundment in 1952, the walleye would perform well in lotic reared to fingerling size (1.5 in). Fin- PCumberland River was known environments. It is now believed that gerling walleye were marked with oxy- for tremendous spring runs of walleye the majority of these walleye, because tetracycline (OTC) prior to stocking. (Sander vitreum) that provided a very of their lentic origins, made their way Target stocking rates were a minimum popular regional fishery. This fishery back down into the lake and remained of 20 fingerling/acre (180 fingerlings/ included the Rock- mile) for 6 years. We castle River, a tributary conduct electrofishing to the Cumberland surveys during various River which enters seasons and locations at what is now the throughout the 54 miles headwaters of Lake of the mainstem Rock- Cumberland. What castle River to monitor was not known his- the walleye population. torically was that these Captured walleye are native walleye are a measured, weighed, genetically distinct tagged, released, and fin stock adapted for lotic clips are taken for ge- (river) environments. netic analysis. Walleye spawning runs To date, all wall- at Lake Cumberland eye captured in the rapidly declined in the free-flowing section of late 1950’s and early the Rockcastle River 1960’s due to a variety Rockcastle walleye / John Williams have been found to be of factors including: 1) genetically pure native lack of spawning sites due to the inun- within the reservoir. Fortunately, no walleye. The overwhelming majority dation of rock shoals by the impound- Erie strain walleye were ever stocked of walleye examined were stocked fish, ment; 2) over-harvest of adults during by the KDFWR above the inundated indicating no natural recruitment of na- spawning runs; and 3) acid mine pollu- portion of the Rockcastle River. Con- tive walleye from 2002 to 2007. After tion of spawning areas. The Kentucky sequently, Kentucky’s unique strain of six consecutive years of stocking, na- Department of Fish and Wildlife Re- walleye still exists in the Rockcastle tive walleye stocking was discontinued sources (KDFWR) first stocked walleye River, while Lake Cumberland contin- to determine the effect of stocking on in the Cumberland River, above Lake ues to support the Erie strain. the production of natural year-classes. Cumberland, in 1973 in attempts to There are two main goals of this No stocking will continue for three improve the declining walleye fishery study: 1) to assess the genetic origin consecutive years. in the river. These broodfish were not of the existing walleye population in from rivers in Kentucky, but were fish the Rockcastle River and what, if any Funding Source: Sport Fish Restoration from Lake Erie origins, what we now temporal and spatial differences ex- Program (Dingell-Johnson) know as “Lake Erie strain” walleye. ist between the native strain and the The Erie strain walleye evolved in a Lake Erie strain; and 2) to evaluate the KDFWR Strategic Plan. Goal 1, lentic (lake) environment, thus they contribution of stocked native strain Strategic Objective 5.

88 Kentucky Department of Fish & Wildlife Resources Sport Fishes / PROJECT UPDATES

Evaluation of White Bass Stocking to Enhance Existing Reservoir Populations

Dave Dreves and David Baker, over a number of years will give insight Kentucky Department of Fish into factors affecting recruitment in and Wildlife Resources Kentucky white bass populations. Be- ginning in 2003 and continuing through 2007, white bass fingerlings were stocked at a density of 30 fish/acre, and all stocked white bass were marked as fingerlings with OTC (oxytetracycline) to facilitate mark-recapture population estimates and analysis of growth rates. White bass were sampled, using experimental gill nets, with a preferred minimum catch of 100 age-1 white bass. In addition, spring electroshocking was conducted in the headwaters of each of the study reservoirs to allow White bass / Dave Dreves the determination of the contribution of stocked white bass to the reproductive stock. he white bass (Morone chrysops) white bass populations were going to Contributions of stocked fish have been is native to the southern Great undergo variable recruitment and the T variable but in general the contribution Lakes, Mississippi River basin, and popularity of the fishery was often sea- was higher at Dewey Lake. Begin- Gulf Coastal drainages and is notorious sonal, fisheries managers preferred to ning in 2008, white bass fingerlings for having highly variable recruitment. live with the cyclic nature of the fishery were no longer stocked at both Barren However, the factors affecting recruit- and focus management efforts on other River Lake and Dewey Lake to allow ment in reservoirs are not yet complete- species. Current angler dissatisfaction the monitoring of the impact of no ly understood. Since the 1980’s, many over poor white bass populations in stocking on the production of natural Kentucky reservoirs have experienced Kentucky reservoirs that historically year-classes. The study will continue severe declines in white bass popula- had very popular fisheries has resulted for an additional 4 years with no stock- tions, especially Barren River Lake and in the need to try to develop new man- ing to follow the impacts of previously Dewey Lake. The cause of the declines agement strategies. stocked year-classes and evaluate the in white bass fisheries at either lake are This study aims to determine if strength of natural year-classes in the not completely understood, but may be the stocking of white bass fingerlings absence of stocking. related to a number of factors includ- at Barren River and Dewey Lakes can ing increased siltation and deficiencies enhance the existing white bass popu- in physical parameters such as rainfall lations and recruit to the reproductive Funding Source: Sport Fish and/or reservoir inflow during consecu- stock, ultimately leading to the restora- Restoration Program (Dingell- tive years. tion of a self-sustaining high quality Johnson) Typically, resource agencies have fishery. Concurrent monitoring of expended very little effort managing white bass population changes in rela- KDFWR Strategic Plan. Goal 1, white bass populations. Realizing that tion to other biotic and abiotic variables Strategic Objective 5.

Annual Research Highlights 009 89 PROJECT UPDATES / Sport Fishes

Evaluation of a 15-20 Inch Protective Slot Limit and 5 Fish Creel Limit on Rainbow Trout in the Lake Cumberland Tailwater

Dave Dreves and David Baker, Kentucky Department of Fish and

ver the last decade, the OKentucky Department of Fish and Wildlife Resourc- es (KDFWR) has attempted to optimize stocking practices in the Lake Cumberland tailwater to increase the quality of the put-and-take rainbow trout fishery. The KDFWR commission passed new regulations for rainbow trout to be implemented on March 1, 2004. These regulations were a 15-20 inch protective slot limit with a creel limit of 5 trout per day (only one of which may be over 20 inches). These regulations are expected to Cumberland River rainbow trout / Dave Dreves protect enough rainbow trout to prevent overharvest and tible to angling. The survival, growth, capacity in the tailwater. We also con- increase quality, yet still allow for a and contribution to the population of ducted a creel survey in 2006 and 2009 put-and-take fishery. the two rainbow trout strains will be to assess changes in angler catch rates, The primary goal of this project is monitored by conducting electrofishing harvest rates, and pressure in compari- to evaluate the effectiveness of these surveys for fish previously marked with son to the 2002 creel survey. Initial re- more restrictive regulations on rainbow fin clips. sults of the strain analysis revealed that trout in Kentucky’s most valuable trout Changes in the size and structure the domestic Arlee strain rainbow trout fishery. Additionally, Wolf Creek Na- of the rainbow trout population as a re- grew more slowly and suffered higher tional Fish Hatchery annually stocks sult of the change in size and creel limit mortality than the McConaughy strain. a minimum of 5 strains of rainbow will be evaluated by relative abundance Creel survey results indicated that the trout, and long-term performance of estimates from fall nocturnal electro- Arlee strain was harvested at a much these various strains in the Cumberland fishing surveys. Periodically during higher rate. Results of this research tailwater is unknown. As part of the the project, we will clip the adipose fin will be used to guide management of special regulation evaluation, we differ- of a cohort of fish and then determined this important Kentucky tailwater. entially batch marked and stocked two monthly growth rates of rainbow trout rainbow trout strains in the tailwater during their first growing season by col- (one domesticated strain and a relative- lecting those fish during monthly elec- Funding Source: Sport Fish Restora- ly wild strain). The goals of the strain trofishing. This analysis near the end tion Program (Dingell-Johnson) evaluation were to determine if there of the study will show if growth rates is differential growth and survival, and have slowed down, indicating the trout KDFWR Strategic Plan. Goal 1, if the wild strain fish are less suscep- population has reached the carrying Strategic Objective 5.

90 Kentucky Department of Fish & Wildlife Resources Sport Fishes / PROJECT UPDATES

Preliminary Assessment of Bluegill and Redear Sunfish Populations in Small Impoundments

Dave Dreves and David Baker, limit restrictions (Cedar Creek Lake of each lake and relate these character- and Greenbo Lake) for bluegill have istics to population dynamics. Kentucky Department of Fish ever been imposed by KDFWR. Beginning in spring 2006 and and Wildlife Resources When considering harvest restric- continuing through 2009, we collected tions such as length limits, estimates bluegill and redear sunfish by electro- of exploitation, natural mortality, and fishing gear during May in each of the epartment-owned small impound- growth rates are more valuable than 3 study lakes. Fall electrofishing was Dments in central Kentucky are other measures such as size structure also conducted to calculate relative noted for providing good fisheries for or angler catch rates. Preliminary data weights of both species. We visited both bluegill (Lepomis macrochirus) is necessary to calculate growth and each lake at least monthly from May and redear sunfish L.( microlophus). mortality rates for bluegill and redear through October to monitor physico- One technique employed by the KD- sunfish in these small impoundments chemical conditions. Several stations FWR to manage for bluegill fisheries is before those fisheries can be managed were established at each study lake to not stock shad in these waters or se- effectively with length limits. Given where we measured monthly tempera- lectively remove them from impound- the absence of data to support harvest ture/dissolved oxygen profiles at 2 ft. ments to be managed for sunfish, thus restrictions, the goals of this study are intervals and turbidity was measured eliminating a potential competitor and to: 1) determine the growth, mortality, with a Secchi disk. We plan to com- leaving bluegill as the primary prey of and exploitation of bluegill and redear pare the fish population data with the largemouth bass. The direct and indi- sunfish in three central KY impound- physical observations made at each lake rect effects of gizzard shad have been ments (Beaver, Elmer Davis, and and trends will ultimately be analyzed. shown to negatively affect both bluegill Corinth Lakes); 2) calculate a recruit- A number of bluegill and redear sun- growth and population size structure. ment index; and 3) monitor the sea- fish greater than 6 inches were tagged No size limits and very limited creel sonal physicochemical characteristics at Beaver Lake in 2008 and Elmer Davis Lake in 2009 for year-long angler exploitation studies. A similar study will be conducted on Corinth Lake in 2010. These data will then be used to model various regulation schemes to determine if minimum size limits or creel limits can be used to enhance the bluegill or redear sunfish populations in the study lakes and/or applied to other lakes across the state. The expectation is that the conclusions generated by this research will result in increased quality of bluegill and redear sunfish fisheries in small impoundments in Kentucky, thereby leading to increased angler satisfaction.

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

KDFWR Strategic Plan. Goal 1, Bluegill sunfish / Dave Dreves Objective 5.

Annual Research Highlights 009 91 PROJECT UPDATES / Sport Fishes

Investigation of the Restoration of Native Walleye in the Upper Barren River

Dave Dreves and David Baker, The broad goal of this project is to re- ing mortality using mesh-lined barrels Kentucky Department of Fish establish a reproducing native strain secured in the river. To monitor and walleye population to the Barren River assess stocking success, we sample and Wildlife Resources upstream of Barren River Lake. An walleye in the spring at multiple sites established population of native wall- using pulse DC electrofishing gear, alleye is a freshwater fish native eye in the Barren River will serve as a and a sample of walleye are collected Wto most of the major watersheds source of broodstock for potential na- such that weight and length measure- in Kentucky, including the Barren River tive walleye restorations in other Ken- ments and sex ratios can be recorded. watershed located in southwestern tucky River systems and will create a In 2008, we began marking stocked Kentucky. By the late-1800’s, grow- walleye sport fishery in the upper Bar- fingerlings with oxytetracycline (OTC) ing concern for declining fisheries ren River. In order to accomplish these such that recruitment and growth rates prompted the stocking of Kentucky restoration goals, we collected native of stocked fish may be determined. Rivers and lakes by the U.S. Fish Com- strain walleye from Wood Creek Lake Walleye sampling in the Barren River mission and the Kentucky Game and in the spring and transported these fish is slated to continue for up to 8 years to Fish Commission. In 1912 and from to Minor Clark Hatchery to be used as allow the reproductive potential of the 1914-1917, these two agencies stocked broodfish. Walleye were spawned and stocked walleye population to reach a walleye fry in various rivers and resulting fish reared to fingerling size point where natural recruitment is pos- streams throughout Kentucky, including (1.5 in.) in ponds, then stocked in the sible and detectable. the Barren River. Unfortunately, it was Barren River in late May or early June. not yet known that the Lake Erie strain We used a stocking rate of a minimum Funding Source: Sport Fish Restora- walleye used in the stocking efforts are of 20 fingerlings/acre (180 fingerlings/ tion Program (Dingell-Johnson) adapted to lentic (lake) environments, mile), and we plan to continue these unlike the native Kentucky walleye efforts for up to five years. In addition KDFWR Strategic Plan. Goal 1, which are adapted to lotic (river) envi- to stocking, we assess 24-hour stock- Strategic Objective 5. ronments. Biologists later realized that these northern walleye are genetically distinct from native Kentucky walleye; as a result, it is believed that the majority of these stocked northern walleye could not survive in the river environment or were ultimately confined to lake systems (e.g. Lake Cumberland). Another walleye stocking attempt (4.15 million walleye fry) in the Barren River occurred in 1966, in response to low population numbers, shortly after the river was impounded in 1964. Since there are no known recent reports of walleye from the Barren River or Bar- ren River Lake, it is suspected that the “northern” strain fry stockings in 1917 and 1966 were not successful and the native population in the river has been lost. Although the Barren River is impounded, there are approximately 31 miles of unimpounded mainstem of the Barren River above the reservoir. Barren River walleye fingerlings / Dave Dreves

9 Kentucky Department of Fish & Wildlife Resources Sport Fishes / PROJECT UPDATES

The Evaluation of a 40-in Muskellunge Minimum Length Limit at Buckhorn Lake

Christopher W. Hickey, Kentucky tion on the fishery while it was still The muskellunge population at protected by the original size and creel Buckhorn Lake experienced several Department of Fish and Wildlife limits. With the implementation of the changes as a result of this trophy regu- Resources new trophy regulation, it was essential lation. When compared to data from to continue with the same sampling prior to the regulation change, there protocol in order to recognize any were substantial increases observed in he muskellunge Esox masquinongy changes to the population that could be the number of fish that were Δ 30 and Tis an ecologically and economi- attributed solely to the new regulation. 40 inches. The average length of cally important sportfish in many states Each year muskellunge were stocked muskellunge that was harvested from with temperate fresh water ecosystems. at the same density, and the individual the lake had increased for 36 inches Fisheries management strategies for year-classes were marked with a unique to 42 inches. And the examination of this species are most often directed fin clip so that researchers could identi- stomach contents indicated that the towards establishing trophy trophy regulation did not result fisheries through the use of in an increase of muskellunge highly-restrictive regulations. preying on other sportfish In Kentucky, the muskellunge populations. In some degree, population at Buckhorn Lake the 40-inch minimum size limit was first established in 1996. had accomplished what it was It is sustained solely through enacted to do. Unfortunately, annual stockings by the Ken- during the final years of the tucky Department of Fish and study, anglers experienced a Wildlife Resources (KDF- lower catch rate for muskel- WR), as there is no natural re- lunge. Even though the drop in production of muskellunge in catch was not directly related to the lake. In 2003, an attempt the 40-inch minimum size lim- to establish a premier muskel- it, angler satisfaction and sup- lunge fishery at the lake report for the trophy regulation sulted in the development of a had decreased substantially by Big musky pulled from Buckhorn Lake / Chris Hickey more restrictive regulation that the time the final creel survey replaced the original 30-inch was conducted in 2008. Unre- minimum and 2 fish daily limit. The fy the age of the fish without having to lated to results of this study, Buckhorn new regulation increased the size limit sacrifice them for otolith examination. Lake’s muskellunge population has un- of muskellunge to 40 inches and re- The primary sampling for the project dergone another regulation change. In duced the creel limit to one fish per day. was conducted annually via electro- 2010, Buckhorn lake joined the 2 other This new regulation was the first of its fishing in late winter/early spring and reservoir muskellunge fisheries in Ken- kind for muskellunge in Kentucky, and lengths and weights were taken on all tucky, which are all now regulated by there were several goals that research- fish that were sampled. Stomach con- a 36 inch minimum size limit. A new ers were expecting from its implemen- tents were also examined on over 200 project is in effect that will monitor the tation. Most of the expected benefits muskellunge to determine if the new changes that all three of these muskel- were centered on a noticeable increase regulation resulted in an increased con- lunge fisheries could experience due to in the numbers of large muskellunge (Δ sumption of other sportfish. In addition the new regulation. 30 inches) at Buckhorn Lake, as well as to the annual sampling, a creel survey a boost in the anglers’ catch and their was conducted in 2005 and 2008. The satisfaction with the fishery. creel surveys were used to find out if Funding Source: Sport Fish Restora- The muskellunge population has the new trophy regulations had a position Program (Dingell-Johnson) been monitored from the first year that tive impact on the anglers’ catch and the fish were introduced into Buckhorn to determine their level of satisfaction KDFWR Strategic Plan. Goal 1, Lake, which provided reliable informa- towards the fishery. Strategic Objective 5.

Annual Research Highlights 009 93 PROJECT UPDATES / Sport Fishes

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

Christopher W. Hickey and Ryan the largemouth bass fishery needed to from year to year as their numbers Kausing, Kentucky Department reach its trophy potential. In order to are much more dependent on the suc- encourage the creation of a trophy fish- cess of each largemouth bass spawn. of Fish and Wildlife Resources ery even further, the KDFWR placed a Stomach contents of the largemouth highly restrictive 20-inch minimum size bass sampled in the summer indicate limit and 1 fish a day creel limit for all that they are feeding primarily on fish largemouth bass at Cedar Creek Lake. and crayfish. The initial fish forage Sportfish were initially stocked of largemouth bass was bluegill and into Cedar Creek Lake during the first redear sunfish. But as different forage two years following the completion of species, i.e. Brook silversides and giz- the construction phase. Every spring zard shad, have become more abundant and fall, the largemouth bass fishery is in Cedar Creek Lake, they have showed sampled via nocturnal electrofishing to up in the stomach contents of large- assess largemouth bass density, length mouth bass with more consistency. The A trophy from Cedar Creek Lake / frequency, size structure, condition, age and growth analysis from the 2007 photo submitted and recruitment success. An additional subsample indicated that the large- sampling for largemouth bass is con- mouth bass at Cedar Creek Lake were lack bass are the most sought after ducted each summer to examine their growing, on average, 3 – 4 in. a year. Bgame fish in Kentucky. Although stomach contents in an effort to keep And finally, the comparison of the two ample opportunities exist for quality track of their diet, and document any creel surveys is an excellent indicator bass angling around the state, a true changes in their food habits as the res- as to how popular Cedar Creek Lake “trophy bass” lake in Kentucky previ- ervoir gets older. A subsample of large- has become with anglers. When com- ously did not exist. Successful creation mouth bass was collected in the spring pared to 2005, the creel survey of 2009 of a trophy bass lake depends on many of 2007 for age and growth analysis showed a 350% or more increase in at factors including: largemouth bass via otolith examination. Creel surveys least 6 categories including total fishing growth rates, bass condition, available were conducted in 2005 and 2009 to effort, total catch of all sportfish, the forage base, degree of competition with determine fishing pressure, the anglers’ number of fishing trips, and the catch other predatory species, and complete catch rate, and their satisfaction with of largemouth bass. It was also deter- regulatory control by the state agency. the fishery. And finally, early summer mined in 2009 that 80% of bass anglers Cedar Creek Lake, the newest of diurnal electrofishing is used each year were satisfied with the current status of Kentucky’s reservoirs, was the state’s to assess forage quality by collecting the fishery. The largemouth bass popu- best chance of creating such a trophy data on the density, length frequency, lation will continue to be monitored bass fishery. The KDFWR realizes and size structure of bluegill and redear very closely at Cedar Creek Lake, and that this is a very unique opportunity in sunfish. another age and growth analysis will that the construction of a new reservoir The 20-inch minimum length limit be used in the near future to determine is extremely limited in both Kentucky at Cedar Creek Lake appears to be suc- if their growth rates have started to and throughout North America. The cessfully protecting largemouth bass slow down as the reservoir gets older. construction of Cedar Creek Lake, as they grow to be larger fish. The But the developing presence of differ- which was completed in 2002, also number and corresponding catch rate of ent forage species in the food habits gave the department a perfect opportu- 20 in largemouth bass has increased of largemouth bass could provide the nity to strategically place fish habitat every year since the first one showed fishery with more potential of achieving throughout the lake. Once this 784 acre up during sampling in 2006. In 2009, a trophy status. lake was allowed to fill with water, it total of 18 largemouth bass Δ 20 in were reached full pool very quickly by the observed during spring sampling alone, Funding Source: Sport Fish Restora- spring of 2003. Historically, the pro- which is the most that were sampled tion Program (Dingell-Johnson) ductivity of a reservoir is its highest for since the reservoir was impounded. In the first few years following impound- contrast, the catch rate of largemouth KDFWR Strategic Plan. Goal 1, ment, and this was to be the start that bass < 20 in. has been more variable Strategic Objective 5.

9 Kentucky Department of Fish & Wildlife Resources Sport Fishes / PROJECT UPDATES

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

Christopher W. Hickey and Ryan impoundments. As a result, two addi- sampling with tandem hoop nets from Kausing, Kentucky Department tional lakes that were not among those one year to the next is often explained of Fish and Wildlife Resources that had the new 12-inch minimum size by a difference in sampling conditions. limit were sampled concurrently as By 2007, channel catfish at all the study control lakes. The study began looking lakes were being sampled proficiently. n Kentucky, 80-100 public fishing at variety of methods (i.e. late spring It was soon determined that the new lakes and small impoundments are I hoop nets, fall gill netting, and fall 12-inch minimum size limit at two of stocked annually with approximately hoop nets) to sample channel catfish. the experimental lakes was protecting 150,000 hatchery-reared channel cat- Ultimately, tandem hoop nets in the the smaller catfish too well. These fish. These annual stockings are neces- fall were chosen as the most effective lakes had very high numbers of channel sary to maintain catchable populations method to catch a representative sample catfish below the 12-inch mark, which of channel catfish, as a result of poor for each lake. The channel catfish led to concerns that more fish could natural reproduction, low survival, and at all six lakes were sampled with 5 result in stunted growth. The stocking high harvest rates. These channel cat- sets of baited tandem hoop nets that rates of these two lakes were decreased fish are commonly stocked at a length were soaked for 72 hours before being by more than a half in order to prevent of 6.0-12.0 in and at densities of 10-25 pulled. In the beginning, all channel any further back up of channel catfish < fish/acre. Limited creel data indicates catfish were counted, measured, and 12.0 in. The other 2 experimental lakes that anglers harvest anywhere between released back into the lake. Later in the contain channel catfish populations that 30% and 63% of the channel catfish project, weights were taken to deter- have been relatively stable since the during each stocking year. Prior to mine the condition of this fish, and in study began with a relative density and 2004, there were no size and/or creel the upcoming year, 2010, a subsample length frequency of established catfish limits on these channel catfish, and of channel catfish will be collected at populations. The control lakes in this the small size at harvest and low catch each lake for age and growth analysis project contained catfish populations rates that were characteristic at many of via otolith examination. Largemouth that would have been expected in lakes Kentucky’s small impoundments was a bass and bluegill were also monitored with a lot of angling pressure and no good indication of overharvest. Begin- in each study lake to determine if the regulations to protect the fish. The ning in 2004, a 12.0-in minimum size 12-inch minimum size limit on channel overall amount of catfish sampled at the limit was implemented at eleven state- catfish had any noticeable impact on control lakes was substantially lower owned small impoundments to help sportfish populations in the lake. than any of the experimental lakes and improve populations of channel catfish. The sampling for this project be- the length frequencies of the channel This research project was developed to gan in 2006, but because the protocol catfish were erratic. A good indication measure the effectiveness of the 12.0-in for tandem hoop nets had not been that the high harvest rates of channel minimum size limit, and determine if established yet, the year was more of a catfish in these lakes was indiscrimi- it can be used at other small impound- learning period for researchers. It was nate in terms of size of the fish. Other ments throughout the state to improve determined that a lot of variability in sportfish appear to be unaffected by the the quality of the channel catfish fish- presence or absence of the regulation, ery. as there has yet to be any trends in the In this project, four state-owned sportfish populations that have been lakes with the new 12-inch minimum correlated with the 12-inch minimum size limit were chosen to be monitored size limit on channel catfish. for any changes in their channel catfish populations as a result of the new Funding Source: Sport Fish Restora- regulation. Unfortunately, during the tion Program (Dingell-Johnson) years prior to the implementation of the 12-inch minimum size limit, there KDFWR Strategic Plan. Goal 1, is very little data concerning channel Strategic Objective 5. catfish populations in Kentucky’s small Channel catfish / Chris Hickey

Annual Research Highlights 009 95 PROJECT UPDATES / Sport Fishes

Evaluation of Kentucky’s Largemouth Bass Stocking Initiative

Christopher W. Hickey and Ryan the majority of the fish. Kausing, Kentucky Department But in 2009, most of these reservoirs did not of Fish and Wildlife Resources experience the weaker year classes that they had in the past, and in return, tocking of largemouth bass is an more (smaller) lakes ben- Sextremely common management efitted from this. That practice throughout the continental year 14 different lakes United States. In Kentucky, stocking were stocked as part of has long been used as a management the BSI, which was the tool to enhance largemouth bass fish- most lakes that have been eries, but limited space at the state’s stocked since the incep- two hatcheries requires the smart use Fin clipping a bass fingerling / Chris Hickey tion of the program. Not of largemouth bass production. For only were more lakes instance, stocking largemouth bass for each of the 34 lakes in the project stocked, but the rate at which large- fingerlings on top of a strong natural using historical data. The first predic- mouth bass were stocked increased as spawn is not only an inefficient use of tive equation was based on the overall well. In the past, the most that any lake resources, but the stocked fish could age-0 CPUE of largemouth bass and could receive was 10 fish/acre. But this compete too much with the natural the second equation came from the rate usually meant that field biologists year-class possibly resulting in poor age-0 CPUE of largemouth bass Δ 5.0 were less able to accurately determine condition of all fish involved. It would inches. The equation that yielded the the contribution that the stocked large- be ideal to have a system in place that most accurate prediction, based on mouth bass made to the year-class be- would be used to identify the year-class p-values, was to be used for that lake. cause very few were being recaptured strength of age-0 largemouth bass be- When field biologists conduct routine in the following spring. The new stock- fore any stocking takes place. In this fall sampling for largemouth bass, they ing rate at 15 fish/acre will hopefully system, any lakes that exhibit strong report the catch rates of age-0 fish to lead to increased recaptures of stocked to average natural reproduction of researchers. This value is plugged into largemouth bass, which would make largemouth bass would not be stocked, the equation and the result is checked it easier to quantify what contribution which allows for limited largemouth against the mean year-class strength for they made to the natural population. bass resources to be stocked only at the lake. If the predicted value is above As the BSI continues over the next few those lakes that need it because of the or equal to the mean, then that lake years, the equations that are used to below average natural production (year- is left alone. But if that same value predict year class strength will likely class). Kentucky’s Largemouth Bass is below the mean, then it is stocked become more accurate. This increased Stocking Initiative (BSI) attempts to do with largemouth bass fingerlings. The accuracy will make the BSI a stronger just that by developing a protocol that amount of fish that are stocked (fish/ tool, which helps with the management identifies what lakes are in need of bass acre) is based on how far below the of largemouth bass fisheries, makes stocking because they exhibit signs of a mean the predicted value falls. Any for even more efficient use of limited weak age-0 year-class. hatchery produced largemouth bass hatchery resources, and, ultimately, The BSI, which began in 2005, that are used in the BSI receive a fin benefits the angler by decreasing the takes a proactive approach of identify- clip to distinguish them from naturally likelihood of the weak year classes that ing weak year-classes of largemouth produced fish and to identify the year at lead to a reduction in their catch rates. bass by indexing densities and sizes of which they were stocked. age-0 fish in the fall and relating these The BSI has been used to de- Funding Source: Sport Fish Restora- densities to age-1 fish of the same year termine where largemouth bass are tion Program (Dingell-Johnson) class collected the following spring. stocked in Kentucky each year since Two predictive equations and the mean 2005, and in some years the larger high KDFWR Strategic Plan. Goal 1, year-class strength were developed priority lakes and reservoirs received Strategic Objective 5.

9 Kentucky Department of Fish & Wildlife Resources Sport Fishes / PROJECT UPDATES

Preliminary Assessment of a Newly Established Blue Catfish Population in Taylorsville Lake

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

n Kentucky, blue catfish have started Ito provide for some important fisheries outside of the banks of its major rivers. Several small lakes and reservoirs that were only recently stocked with blue catfish have developed into high quality sport fisheries, and some with trophy potential. But the population dynamics of these relatively new fisheries have only recently been studied and are still not well known. One reservoir in particular was first stocked with blue catfish in 2002 and yet the fishery has already gained a great deal of popularity with anglers from all over the state. With what appears to be a limitless gizzard shad population and Blue catfish / Chris Hickey an annual stocking of 8 fish/acre, the fish that were caught. By the summer limit to help reduce harvest of blue blue catfish population at Taylorsville of 2009, a creel survey was underway, catfish. In conjunction with the results Lake was rapidly reaching the status of and the blue catfish population was of the exploitation study and decreasing a high quality fishery. The purpose of sampled in the same manner as it was catch rates of blue catfish, the KDFWR this study has been to collect data on previously. implemented a 15 catfish per day/per- the blue catfish population at Taylors- The initial sampling in 2007 indi- son with only one fish allowed over 25 ville Lake and to determine any suit- cated that the blue catfish population at inches. This regulation will become ef- able management options that can be Taylorsville Lake was in good shape. fective in March 2011 and will pertain used to create and sustain a high quality From both the upper and lower ends of to both channel and blue catfish. The fishery with the potential for a trophy the lake, a total of 590 blue catfish were blue catfish at Taylorsville Lake will component. sampled for a catch rate of 236.0 fish/ continue to be stocked and monitored The data that was collected at hour. The sampling in 2008 was only in 2010, and otoliths from the 2009 Taylorsville Lake prior to this study in- used to collect fish to be tagged for the sample will be examined for age and dicated that the blue catfish population exploitation study, which had 120 tags growth analysis. was doing well with growth rates of 3 reported over the 1 year period. Of the – 5 inches a year, and most fish reach- 120 blue catfish reported, 97 (or 81%) ing 20 inches in only 5 years. In 2008, were harvested by the anglers. It was Funding Source: Sport Fish Restora- an angler exploitation was conducted during this time period that several an- tion Program (Dingell-Johnson) by tagging 1,000 blue catfish and re- glers began to express concerns about leasing these fish back into Taylorsville their decreasing catch rates and the KDFWR Strategic Plan. Goal 1, Lake. The exploitation study lasted one possibility of over-harvest of blue cat- Strategic Objective 5. year and a reward system was used to fish. Numerous anglers petitioned the encourage anglers to report any tagged KDFWR to implement a size and creel

Annual Research Highlights 009 97 PROJECT UPDATES / Sport Fishes

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

Christopher W. Hickey and Ryan based solely on their size at stocking. through 2012, at a point when there is Kausing, Kentucky Department And since it is known that their growth enough data to make management deci- of Fish and Wildlife Resources does not rapidly increase until they sions regarding optimal stocking sizes start feeding primarily on fish, it was of blue catfish in Kentucky’s small im- hypothesized that blue catfish that are poundments. lue catfish stocking in some of already large enough to consume fish Surprising in 2008 and 2009, near- BKentucky’s small impoundments when they are stocked may have greater ly 80% of the micro-wire tagged blue initially began as a possible tool to growth potential. The purpose of this catfish collected were from fish stocked improve bluegill fisheries. Although study is to evaluate the growth of two at the smaller size class; suggesting that the blue catfish was not the ideal preda- different stocking sizes of blue catfish. smaller sized blue catfish survive better tor in Kentucky lakes to control the In order to answer this question, than the larger size class. The mean bluegill populations, they themselves two distinct size classes (Δ 10 inches length of these fish had increased to just soon became a popular fishery at and Δ 12 inches) of blue catfish were over 10 inches, indicating little growth small impoundments where they were stocked into three small impoundments had occurred in this size class. There stocked. Unfortunately, the growth at a rate of 10 fish/acre for each size was no noticeable growth of fish from rates of these fish were erratic, and class. These impoundments previously the larger size class that was stocked in many of these blue catfish populations contained blue catfish populations that 2007, or in any of the blue catfish that had some fish that were the same age exhibited the disparity in growth rates were stocked in 2008. It is unlikely but differed in length by as much as 15 for fish of the same age class. Since that stocking mortality was higher for inches. This large disparity in growth 2007, age-1 blue catfish are stocked blue catfish in the larger size class, was not easily explained but there was annually during late summer at each and there is considerable research that a possibility that the size at stocking study small impoundment. All stocked comes to the same conclusion. It has was an early factor that dictated how blue catfish are marked with coded mi- been considered that the fishing pres- large the blue catfish would grow in cro-wire tag to identify which stocking sure on the blue catfish at these lakes these small impoundments. A literature size-class they belong to during future is much higher than was initially an- review indicated that no studies existed sampling efforts. Sampling of blue ticipated. With the substantially lower that have evaluated survival and growth catfish is conducted annually during sampling rate of fish that were stocked of blue catfish in small impoundments late summer using low-pulse electro- at Δ 12 in., as well as, those blue catfish fishing. All blue stocked prior to this study, it is feasible catfish collected that these catfish are being harvested by are measured anglers. There are currently no regula- and checked for tions on blue catfish at these lakes and the presence of there has even been anecdotal evidence coded micro- from anglers about catching (and har- wire. Relative vesting) fish that have a fin clip. More abundance of data will be collected to clearly define each size-class the size at stock that is best suited for is monitored the growth and survival of blue catfish to determine in small impoundments. which size class survives, grows, and contributes Funding Source: Sport Fish Restora- to the anglers tion Program (Dingell-Johnson) catch. This is a long-term project KDFWR Strategic Plan. Goal 1, slated to continue Strategic Objective 5. Marking blue catfish prior to stocking / Chris Hickey

98 Kentucky Department of Fish & Wildlife Resources Sport Fishes / PROJECT UPDATES

Impacts of Spawning Habitat Manipulation on Largemouth Bass Year-Class Production in Meldahl Pool, Ohio River

Doug Henley and Nick Keeton, (2 experimental and 2 controls) has that factors such as weather, water lev- Kentucky Department of Fish been monitored each spring and fall els, and temperature may play a more and Wildlife Resources with nocturnal electrofishing surveys to important factor in determining repro- evaluate the success of the nesting box- ductive success of bass in Ohio River es and habitat. Black bass have utilized lectrofishing data from previous embayments. the nesting structures each spring since studies indicated that a relatively E 2006 in varying degrees each spring. poor largemouth bass population ex- Catch rates of different age groups of ists in Meldahl Pool (Maysville area) Funding Source: Sport Fish Restora- bass in each experimental embayment as compared to other pools in the river. tion Program (Dingell-Johnson) indicate that providing artificial nest- For example, in previous years, Mark- ing structures can enhance recruitment. KDFWR Strategic Plan. Goal 1, land Pool (Cincinnati area) had large- However, preliminary analysis suggests Strategic Objective 5. mouth bass catch rates that were 2.3 fold greater than those found in Mel- dahl Pool. In addition, largemouth bass year-class strength was also 2.5 fold greater in Markland than in Meldahl Pool. Young-of-the-year (YOY) surveys indicate that largemouth bass year- class production may be limited by the lack of suitable spawning habitat. Spawning substrates, such as gravel and cobble, in tributaries and embayments have been covered with silt. The occurrence of cover in these embayments has also declined. The possibility exists that largemouth bass spawning success could be enhanced through introduction of high quality supplemental spawning structures and cover. Two embayments received supplemental spawning structures and habitat (Bracken Creek and Big Snag Creek); while 2 other embayments were used as controls with no addition of spawning structures or cover (Big Turtle Creek and Big Locust Creek). Approximately 100 supplemental spawning structures were placed in Bracken and Big Snag Creek in 2005. These structures have been monitored for activity each spring since that time. Nursery habitat (evergreen trees and blocks) have been placed in each embayment near the nesting boxes to provide habitat for young bass once hatched. Each of the four embayments Spawning habitat project / Doug Henley

Annual Research Highlights 009 99 PROJECT UPDATES / Sport Fishes

River Sport Fish Surveys – Ohio River

Ohio River blue catfish / Doug Henley

Doug Henley and Nick Keeton, along the length of the Ohio River. All Ohio River. The three upper states of Kentucky Department of Fish states are concerned with the status of Pennsylvania, Ohio, and West Virginia both black bass and sauger because consider this fish a species of special and Wildlife Resources of their importance to sport anglers. concern. They have programs that Monitoring of these species helps each stock or protect paddlefish populations. agency and the partnership as a whole The lower three states allow commer- to keep track of population trends that cial harvest of paddlefish populations he Ohio River Fish Management may need special actions to ensure their within their reach. TTeam is a working group of 6 viability over time. Other species such Work will continue in the Ohio states that border the Ohio River. The as blue, channel, and flathead catfish River through the auspices of the Ohio list of states includes Illinois, Indiana, are important to multiple user groups. River Fish Management Team. This Kentucky, Ohio, West Virginia, and Ohio and West Virginia manage these is to ensure that fish issues common to Pennsylvania. Administrators from species as sport fishes, whereas Indi- each state are addressed in a uniform these states have been working in uni- ana, Kentucky, and Illinois must split manner for the benefit of the resource son to manage fisheries issues on the the importance of catfish between sport and the user. Ohio River common to each state. Bi- anglers and commercial fishers. Moni- ologists conduct field surveys annually toring commercial catch in the Ohio to monitor select species that are im- River has been done since 1999. Col- Funding Source: Sport Fish Restora- portant to each state and its users. The lection of population data of each spe- tion Program (Dingell-Johnson) list of species monitored includes black cies began in 2004 in the lower reach bass, sauger, paddlefish, and catfish. and in 2009 in the upper reach of the KDFWR Strategic Plan. Goal 1, Population data is collected on Ohio River. Paddlefish is a species of Strategic Objective 5. target species for a variety of reasons inter-jurisdictional importance in the

00 Kentucky Department of Fish & Wildlife Resources Sport Fishes / PROJECT UPDATES

River Sport Fish Surveys – Kentucky River

Doug Henley and Nick Keeton, the winter/spring of 2002-2003. Sev- in select pools of the upper Kentucky Kentucky Department of Fish eral fishery districts were responsible River. Hybrid striped bass were also and Wildlife Resources for sampling specific tailwater areas stocked to provide an additional game during this period. From that survey, fish species in the Kentucky River. four mid to upper river tailwaters were In 2006, the Kentucky Department chosen for further monitoring. The goal of Fish and Wildlife began stocking he Kentucky Department of Fish of this study is to provide and evaluate sauger fingerlings into the Kentucky Tand Wildlife implemented a percid the potential to establish a self-sustain- River. The initial stocking of sauger (sauger and walleye) study along the ing sauger and white bass recreational was 76,320 fingerlings (1.5 – 2.0 inch). entire reach of the Kentucky River in fishery through time-limited stockings Since then a total of 435,830 sauger have been stocked in the Kentucky Riv- er. Both white and hybrid striped bass stockings have occurred during this same period with the exception of 2007 for white bass. To date, nearly 254,722 white bass fingerlings and 3,078,798 hybrid striped bass fry or fingerlings have been stocked. Sauger and white bass fingerlings were marked with oxytetracycline (OTC) at the hatchery and this mark is used to differentiate between stocked and naturally repro- duced fish. For the fourth year, spring nocturnal electrofishing surveys were conducted in 2009 in the tailwaters of Dams 5, 10, 11, and 12. Sauger catch rates this spring were much greater than those observed the previous spring. Surveys were also conducted in the Kentucky River in the fall. These surveys consisted of 6 nocturnal electrofishing transects in the upper and lower pool areas below each dam surveyed in the spring. The catch rate of sauger continues to increase as walleye catch rates decline. OTC marks on fish collected indicate that the majority of sauger sampled are stocked fish. Re- production of stocked sauger at a level to sustain a population has not been documented to date.

Funding Source: Sport Fish Restora- tion Program (Dingell-Johnson)

KDFWR Strategic Plan. Goal 1, Trophy blue catfish / Doug Henley Strategic Objective 5.

Annual Research Highlights 009 101 PROJECT UPDATES / Sport Fishes

Ohio River Supplemental Stocking Survey

Doug Henley, Christopher increased angler satisfaction. stocked into Markland Pool embay- W. Hickey and Nick Keeton, Markland Pool has a total area of ments. Kentucky Department of Fish approximately 27,874 surface acres of Surveys conducted since 2007 water with an estimated 3,177 acres of indicate that stocked largemouth bass and Wildlife Resources backwater areas. In order to attempt to are contributing to the total bass popu- make a difference through supplemen- lation. Catch rates of fingerlings the ngler concerns over the decline in tal stocking, it was determined that we first fall after being stocked have been Alargemouth bass in the Ohio River would stock approximately 2,041 acres high. During the fall of 2007, 74% of became apparent to the Kentucky De- (16 embayments) on both the Indiana the fingerling largemouth bass sampled partment of Fish and Wildlife in 1997. and Kentucky sides of the river. The were stocked fish. Stocked fingerlings Research was initiated to document surface area of these 16 embayments contributed between 59% and 62% to largemouth bass populations in specific represents 64% of the total backwater the samples observed during the falls of pools of the Ohio River in an effort to identify causes for these declines. Large- Bass tournament ready to weigh in / Chris Hickey mouth bass reproduction is thought to be negatively influenced by a number of variables including water levels, limited spawning habitat, and extreme siltation in spawning areas. Largemouth bass year-class production in the Ohio Riv- er appeared to be primarily impacted by habitat degradation through embayment siltation and loss of cover for young bass. Supplemental stocking in large riverine systems has been shown to benefit largemouth bass population levels. Because these stockings are complex, the exact contribution of these fish depends upon natural Stocking largemouth bass in the Ohio River / Chris Hickey production, carrying capacity, and the relative survival of stocked area and 7% of the total area of the 2008 and 2009. These fingerlings will and naturally produced fish. However, pool. A stocking rate of 100 fingerling be monitored as they grow into harvest- stocking appears to be the next logical bass per acre was the target for each able sized fish in the future. step in largemouth bass management embayment. Stocking embayments options for the Ohio River. Supple- ranged from 0.5 miles above Markland Funding Source: Sport Fish Restora- mental stocking may be a means to en- Dam to approximately 64 miles up- tion Program (Dingell-Johnson) hance year-class strength of largemouth stream. A total of 206,200 largemouth bass in some embayments of the Ohio fingerlings that ranged from 1.7 and 2.0 KDFWR Strategic Plan. Goal 1, River. This would in turn result in the in (mean=1.8 in) were stocked in June, Strategic Objective 5. improvement in the largemouth bass 2009. The 2009 stockings represent fishery in that pool, which may result in the third year that fingerling bass were

02 Kentucky Department of Fish & Wildlife Resources Sport Fishes / PROJECT UPDATES

Black Bass Tournament Results in Kentucky

abundance throughout confusion experienced by the research- the state. In addition, ers who analyze the data. the summarized data will The number of tournaments par- also be useful to bass an- ticipating in the project has generally glers when planning fu- increased each year from the start, and ture fishing trips and help in 2009, 355 tournaments reported them understand that nor- their catch data. This is a substantial mal fluctuations (small increase from the first year of the proj- increases or decreases) ect in 1999, when only 110 tourna- that occur in bass popula- ments participated. In 2009, 61% of tions. all scheduled tournaments reported When the program their catch data, which was the highest first started, researchers reporting rate ever and an excellent in- sent packets containing dicator of the project’s popularity con- Bass tournament ready to weigh in / Chris Hickey information about the sidering that participation is voluntary. project to bass clubs and Tournament catch data was reported Christopher W. Hickey and Ryan other known tournament organizers from 29 different water bodies through- Kausing, Kentucky Department from all over Kentucky. Over time an out Kentucky. From the 355 tourna- of Fish and Wildlife Resources online system of scheduling tournaments that reported catch data, it was ments and reporting catch data has determined that 15,456 anglers brought made the process much more efficient. in 22,587 bass that weighed a total of Participation in the project has grown 54,883 lbs. The number of bass caught he KDFWR routinely samples exponentially since it began in 1999 by tournament anglers decreased from Tblack bass populations in reser- because of information passed on by 2008, but the total weight it took to win voirs and small impoundments through- tournament organizers and the ongoing a tournament actually increased. The out the state and each year performs efforts of researchers. The tournament mean winning weight for a tourna- creel surveys on a limited number of data is analyzed at the end of each year ment in 2009 was 13.30 lbs, which was water bodies. The current databases, after reminders are sent out to anyone up from 13.14 pounds in 2008. The particularly with respect to angler suc- who scheduled a tournament. The highest winning weight was 29.0 lbs cess and angler catch rates, are very catch data is analyzed in such a way at Kentucky Lake and the biggest bass limited. The high cost of conducting that it provides tournament anglers with caught in a tournament was 8.51 lbs creel surveys for consecutive years to invaluable information, and still gives from Guist Creek Lake. This project assess relationships between bass popu- resource managers further data on the produces a lot of different results that lations and angler catch often makes it black bass fisheries in their lakes and are presented in the annual report, and unfeasible. Thus in 1999, the KDFWR rivers. These results are published in much of this data is used to identify began to tap into another source of an annual report, which is mailed to all trends in angler catches at several popu- angler success and catch rates when it participating tournaments, along with lar tournament lakes and rivers in Ken- began to collect data from black bass new tournament catch report cards that tucky. This project will likely continue tournaments in Kentucky. This invalu- are to be used during the current year. for years to come as it becomes more able data on fishing pressure, catch, and The annual reports are also made avail- popular with tournament anglers, and success rates of tournament anglers will able to the public via the department’s the data that is collected continues to be be used to build a long-term database website. In 2010, a couple changes a good tool for resource managers. to monitor trends in black bass fisheries were made to the catch data that is re- by lake and on a statewide basis. These ported to researchers. This was the first data, in combination with survey data time that any major changes were im- Funding Source: Sport Fish Restora- collected by biologists during routine plemented since the project began, but tion Program (Dingell-Johnson) sampling, will increase the ability of these changes will reduce that amount resource managers to explain and fore- of data the tournament organizers need KDFWR Strategic Plan. Goal 1, cast changes in black bass population to keep track of and help clear up any Strategic Objective 5.

Annual Research Highlights 009 103 PROJECT UPDATES / Sport Fishes

Relative Survival, Growth and Susceptibility to Angling of Two Strains of Brown Trout in the Lake Cumberland Tailwater Dave Dreves and David Baker, Kentucky Department of Fish and Wildlife Resources

rout (Oncorhyncus spp. and Salmo Tspp.) sport fisheries in Kentucky’s reservoir tailwaters are unique and important resources. These fisheries were created in reservoir tailwaters having coldwater discharges for either the entire year or a portion of the year. The Lake Cumberland tailwater trout fishery is the largest in Kentucky with more than 75 miles of suitable habitat available throughout the entire year. The Lake Cumberland tailwater receives the largest trout stocking in the state with approximately 161,000 rainbow (O. mykiss) and 38,000 brown (S. trutta) trout stocked per year. Growth and survival of stocked trout in the Cumberland River are sufficient to create a high quality trout fishery with opportunities to catch trophy-size fish. Since the brown trout fishery in the Lake Cumberland tailwater is managed as a trophy fishery, it is imperative that stocked brown trout grow rapidly and reach trophy size in as short a time period as possible. Over the last 15 A trophy brown trout from the Lake Cumberland tailwater / Dave Dreves years, the Kentucky Department of Fish and Wildlife Resources (KDFWR) has of brown trout stocked in the Lake brown trout is needed to optimize the used regulations and stocking practices Cumberland tailwater. Like a previ- stocking practices of brown trout and to enhance the trout fishery in the Lake ous rainbow trout strain analysis, the meet angler expectations of the Lake Cumberland tailwater. One further PR strain is a more “domesticated” Cumberland tailwater trout fishery. In- way to optimize stocking includes de- hatchery strain while the SC strain is formation gained from this study will termining the most suitable strain of considered to be relatively “wild”. Pre- help to enhance the management of the trout for the physical conditions and liminary results from this study showed trophy brown trout fishery in the Lake management goals of a particular fish- that growth was similar between the Cumberland tailwater. ery. Characteristics such as movement, two strains but the SC strain was much mortality, growth and susceptibility to more abundant after one growing sea- Funding Source: Sport Fish Restora- angling are of particular importance. son than the PR strain. An evaluation tion Program (Dingell-Johnson) In 2007, a comparison was con- of the relative survival, growth and ducted between the Plymouth Rock susceptibility to angling of two addi- KDFWR Strategic Plan. Goal 1, (PR) and Sheep Creek (SC) strains tional stockings of PR and SC strains of Strategic Objective 5.

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

Status, Life History, and Phylogenetics of the Amblyopsid Cavefishes in Kentucky

Benjamin M. Fitzpatrick and continued survival of these species. data now suggest the existence of two Matthew L. Niemiller, University Three species of Amblyopsid cave- undescribed species that are unique to of Tennessee fishes occur in Kentucky: Spring Cave- Kentucky. Finally, we are conducting fish Forbesichthys( agassizii), Northern surveys and collecting specimens of in- KDFWR Contact: Ryan Oster Cavefish Amblyopsis( spelaea), and vertebrate cave organisms to determine Southern Cavefish Typhlichthys( sub- species distributions and community terraneus). Although these species have associations. ver 95% of subterranean species been known to science since the early Surveys over the past year have Oin North America are consid- 1840s, little is known about the demog- focused on determining the status, dis- ered vulnerable or imperiled, mainly raphy and persistence of local popula- tribution, and abundance of the Spring because of habitat degradation and tions and the systematic relationships Cavefish in surface springs, spring runs, restricted geographic ranges. Un- among species and among populations and streams in central and western fortunately, data on the distribution within species. Here we investigate the Kentucky. A spring and spring run in and status of cave-obligate species is status, distribution, ecology, and threats Warren County that has been the sub- incomplete or lacking entirely, mak- to populations of these cavefishes. In ject of repeated research and surveys ing conservation and management particular we are conducting surveys over the past 50 years continues to decisions difficult. Additionally, spe- and status assessments for each species support a large (>10,000 individuals/ cies with large distributions are often within the state including both searches hectare) population of Spring Cavefish thought to represent species complexes, of historic and new localities, while despite significant agricultural develop- consisting of multiple, morphologically obtaining life history data and acquir- ment in adjacent habitat during the last indistinguishable species. Therefore, a ing tissue samples for genetic analyses. 20 years. Cave surveys were discontin- need exists to document subterranean We also are using molecular techniques ued until further notice in March 2009 diversity, diagnose cryptic lineages, and to investigate cryptic diversity, particu- after the U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service identify threats that impinge upon the larly in Typhlichthys, where preliminary and KDFWR issued cave advisories to slow the spread of White Nose Syndrome afflicting millions of bats in the Northeast United States. This research will provide KDFWR with important data regarding the status, distribution, life history, and genetics of these species. In addition, data acquired on other cave fauna can also be used when making conservation and management decisions.

Funding Source: State Wild- life Grant (SWG), University of Tennessee

KDFWR Strategic Plan. Goal 1. Strategic Objective 5. Comprehensive Wildlife Con- servation Strategy: Appendix 3.9; Class Actinopterygii and Cephalaspidomorphi: Taxa Spring cavefish / Matthew Niemiller specific research project #1.

Annual Research Highlights 009 105 PROJECT UPDATES / Non Game Fishes

Propagation and Reintroduction of the Kentucky Arrow Darter (Etheostoma sagitta spilotum) in the Upper Kentucky River Drainage Matthew Thomas and Stephanie visual census techniques. maining in the substrate were captured Brandt, Kentucky Department of On December 18, 2008, a total in an overflow apparatus. During the Fish and Wildlife Resources of five (n = 5) individuals, including remainder of the week of March 16- Crystal Ruble, Patrick Rakes, 2 males, 2 females, and 1 juvenile 20, additional spawning episodes were Melissa Petty, and J. R. Shute, were collected as broodstock from Big observed. Between March 20 and April Conservation Fisheries, Inc. Double Creek, Red Bird River drain- 15, additional eggs and larvae were age, in the upper Kentucky River basin. collected from tanks and placed into At CFI, these fish were initially held in grow-out tubs. Cannibalism of smaller/ he Kentucky Arrow Darter, Ethe- isolated aquaria to undergo quarantine younger larvae by larger/older juveniles Tostoma sagitta spilotum, has a lim- and aquarium acclimation. Fish were was suspected as a reason for reduction ited range in the upper Kentucky River then transferred to three tanks: adult in numbers. Newer larvae were sub- drainage, all of which is in Kentucky. males and females were divided among sequently placed a tub separate from Recent analyses of morphological two 30 gallon tanks and the juvenile larger/older individuals. and genetic data have shown that E. s. in a separate 20 gallon tank. Cover By the end of May, a total of ap- spilotum and E. s. sagitta (Cumber- was provided in the form of slab rocks, proximately 150 juveniles survived out land River drainage) represent distinct PVC pipes, and black plastic slabs on of approximately 450 larvae, amount- evolutionary lineages and should be a mixed gravel substrate. Fish were ing to about 33% larval survivorship treated as separate management units provided live blackworms, redworms, (typical of that observed for other spe- for conservation management purposes. mealworms and live Daphnia as a first cies). On July 15, a total of 110 imma- A status survey of E. s. spilotum in the food. Live glassworms (dipteran larvae) ture individuals (average 50.8 mm total Kentucky River basin has shown that and frozen bloodworms (chironomids) length) were tagged with fluorescent populations have declined considerably and other frozen foods were also pro- pink visible elastomer implant (VIE) during the past two decades. Kentucky vided as the fish became acclimated to marks and released in Sugar Creek, a Arrow Darters were detected in only captivity. Winter conditioning included tributary of Red Bird River that lies 29 of 50 historic streams sampled in reduction of water temperatures to as within the Daniel Boone National 2007 and 2008. This has led the U.S. low as 4-5°C and photoperiod short- Forest in Leslie County, Kentucky. Fish and Wildlife service to consider ened to 9 hours of light. Reproductive Despite monthly follow-up survey this taxon as a candidate for listing as condition was then induced by gradual- attempts, no tagged fish were recap- threatened or endangered. Conserva- ly increasing water temperatures, pho- tured, suggesting that either they did tion Fisheries, Inc. (CFI), with support toperiod, and food quantity offered, in not survive or moved beyond the area from Kentucky Department of Fish concert with natural seasonal changes. of stream surveyed. Another attempt and Wildlife Resources (KDFWR), is On March 11, 2009, two mature at reintroducing individuals in Sugar developing captive propagation proto- females were added to the 70 gal Creek is anticipated for late summer cols for reintroduction of the Kentucky tank with the dominant male and two 2010, depending on success of spring Arrow Darter into streams within its smaller females. The male immedi- captive spawning efforts. native range to restore populations that ately began courting the largest female. have been extirpated. Reintroduction Spawning commenced the next day Funding Source: State Wildlife Grant sites are being chosen where habitat (March 12), with the female burying Program (SWG), Conservation Fisher- conditions are suitable and there is the eggs in the sand substrate. Spawn- ies, Inc. some level of protection (e.g., within ing behavior was captured on video. wildlife management area or national On March 16, eggs (n = 71) measuring KDFWR Strategic Plan. Goal 1, forest boundaries). Survival and move- approximately 1.6-1.8 mm diameter Strategic Objective 5. Comprehen- ment patterns of released fish will be were collected and photographed. Eggs sive Wildlife Conservation Strategy: assessed through mark-recapture meth- developed quickly, as evidenced by Appendix 3.2; Class Actinopterygii ods and through periodic monitoring eyed embryos, and were slightly ad- and Cephalaspidomorphi: Taxa spe- using non-invasive methods, including hesive. Larvae hatching from eggs re- cific research project #8.

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

Propagation and Reintroduction of the Cumberland Darter (Etheostoma susanae) in the Upper Cumberland River Drainage

Matthew Thomas and Stephanie stock from Barren Fork, Indian Creek quickly rose to over 70°F. Brandt, Kentucky Department of watershed, in the upper Cumberland By the end of July, 2009, 60 juve- Fish and Wildlife Resources River basin. At CFI, these fish were niles were alive and being maintained initially held in isolated aquaria to in six 20 gallon tanks. These individu- Crystal Ruble, Patrick Rakes, undergo quarantine and aquarium ac- als were marked with visible implant Melissa Petty, and J. R. Shute, climation. Fish were then transferred to elastomer (VIE) tags and released into Conservation Fisheries, Inc. three 20 gallon tanks, each containing n Cogur Fork (Indian Creek-upper Cum- = 10, 10, and 11 individuals, respective- berland basin) on August 25. Total ly. Cover was provided in the form of length (TL) of these darters averaged he Cumberland Darter, Etheosto- slab rocks, PVC pipes, and black plas- approximately 30-50 mm at the time of , has a limited range in Tma susanae tic slabs on a mixed gravel substrate. release. A follow-up survey to deter- the upper Cumberland River drainage, Fish were provided live blackworms, mine survivability of tagged darters was most of which is in Kentucky. A pro- redworms, mealworms and live Daph- conducted on October 13. The section posed rule is currently in review to fed- nia as a first food. Live glassworms of stream in which the darters were erally list this species as endangered, (dipteran larvae) and frozen blood- released on August 25 was surveyed us- because of recent range curtailment and worms (chironomids) and other frozen ing a backpack electrofisher for 3,776 fragmentation resulting from habitat foods were also provided as the fish seconds. Two tagged darters (42 and degradation. Conservation Fisheries, became acclimated to captivity. Win- 45 mm TL) were recaptured in a pool at Inc. (CFI), with support from Ken- ter conditioning included reduction of the upstream end of the release section. tucky Department of Fish and Wildlife water temperatures to as low as 4-5°C Capture depth was 0.5 m, with little or Resources (KDFWR), is developing and photoperiod shortened to 9 hours of no current over sand with patches of silt captive propagation protocols for rein- light. Reproductive condition was then and detritus. A single larger individual troduction of this species into streams induced by gradually increasing water (54 mm TL) without a tag was captured within its native range to restore further downstream in a pool at a populations that have been extirpated. depth of 0.5 m in gentle current over Because of the apparent rarity of this sand with patches of leaves. The species, captive propagation and rein- larger size of this individual and lack troduction is considered an appropri- of any evidence of a tag suggest it ate tool for its recovery and eventual was not one of the released fish, but delisting. Artificially propagated indi- rather a native individual that immi- viduals are being released within the grated into Cogur Fork from Indian watershed from which brood stock Creek. Another attempt at reintro- are taken, to avoid mixing potentially ducing individuals in Cogur Fork is unique evolutionary lineages. Re- anticipated for late summer 2010, introduction sites are being chosen Cumberland darter / Matt Thomas depending upon success of spring where habitat conditions are suitable captive spawning efforts. and there is some level of protection temperatures, photoperiod, and food (e.g., within wildlife management areas quantity offered, in concert with natural Funding Source: State Wildlife Grant or national forest boundaries). Survival seasonal changes. On April 7, 2009, (SWG), University of Tennessee and movement patterns of released males and females were observed to be fish will be assessed through mark-rein breeding condition. Several spawn- KDFWR Strategic Plan. Goal 1. capture methods and through periodic ing events subsequently occurred in Strategic Objective 5. Comprehen- monitoring using non-invasive meth- the aquaria and seven clutches ranging sive Wildlife Conservation Strategy: ods, including visual census techniques. from 7-80 eggs were produced, each Appendix 3.9; Class Actinopterygii On December 18, 2008, a total of guarded by a single male. On April 25, and Cephalaspidomorphi: Taxa spe- 31 individuals were collected as brood- many eggs were lost when temperatures cific research project #1.

Annual Research Highlights 009 107 PROJECT UPDATES / Non Game Fishes

Lake Sturgeon Restoration in the Upper Cumberland River Drainage in Kentucky

Matthew Thomas, Steven sissippi basin stock (Wisconsin River). have been present at the lake sturgeon Marple, and Stephanie Brandt, These eggs are hatched at the Pfeiffer release events. Kentucky Afield televi- Kentucky Department of Fish Fish Hatchery in Frankfort, Kentucky, sion has also featured the reintroduc- and Wildlife Resources and the young are reared to an average tion effort for this rare species in the of 7.5-8.5 inches total length. Since Cumberland River. spring 2008, young lake sturgeon have Two reports of lake sturgeon cap- he Lake Sturgeon is considered been released annually at two loca- tured by anglers were received in 2009, Tcritically imperiled in Kentucky, tions in the upper Cumberland River both of which were in the upper reaches where it is currently limited to the drainage. The Cumberland River at the of Lake Cumberland (mouth of Buck Ohio and Mississippi rivers. In 2007, mouth of Laurel River received 959 fish Creek and near Jasper Bend). Active the Kentucky Department of Fish and (average 7.4-8.5 inches) in 2008 and and passive sampling procedures aimed Wildlife Resources (KDFWR) initi- 2,004 fish (average 7.5 inches) in 2009. at recapturing stocked lake sturgeon to ated a long-term (20+ years) project to The Big South Fork Cumberland River estimate survival and movement pat- restore a self-sustaining population of at the Alum Creek access area received terns will commence in 2010. lake sturgeon to the upper Cumberland 716 fish (average 7.4 inches) in 2008 River drainage, where the species oc- and 1,973 fish (average 7.5 inches) in curred historically. The project area ex- 2009. Young lake sturgeon were dif- Funding Source: State Wildlife Grant tends from Wolf Creek Dam, upstream ferentially marked by sequentially Program (SWG) to Cumberland Falls, including major removing two adjacent scutes in the tributaries such as the Rockcastle River lateral series to distinguish year classes: KDFWR Strategic Plan. Goal 1, and Big South Fork. left anterior scutes 1-2 for 2007, right Strategic Objective 5. Comprehen- Since 2007, fertilized eggs have anterior scutes 1-2 for 2008, and left sive Wildlife Conservation Strategy: been obtained annually from the anterior scutes 3-4 for 2009. Local Appendix 3.2; Class Actinopterygii Wisconsin Department of Natural print media (Times Tribune, Corbin, and Cephalaspidomorphi: Priority Resources taken from the upper Mis- KY) and Corbin High School students Research Project #8.

Juvenile lake sturgeon reared at Pfeiffer Fish Hatchery / Steve Marple

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

Analysis of the Environmental Requirements for the Ashy and Olive Darters in the Rockcastle River

Michael C. Compton and darters were collected from 4 plots at 2 Christopher M. Taylor, Texas sites. Development of occupancy esti- Tech University mation models is near completion. A KDFWR Contact: Ryan Oster cluster analysis of the abiotic variables for each plot identified 4 general habitat types. The habitat types varied based on the degree of differences in sub- he integrity of rivers and the per- strates, flow, depth, and the presence of Tsistence of aquatic life are under large woody debris. An Indicator Spe- constant pressure from agricultural cies Analysis suggested both of the tar- practices, urban sprawl, road develop- get species were associated with habitat ment, deforestation, and mining activi- type ‘C’, which can be characterized ties. The effects of these disturbances primarily as cobble/boulder substrates upon the landscape have a direct and with a fair amount of sand present indirect impact on the aquatic biota (roughly 20%), moderate flow, large and their environment. The Rockcastle Rockcastle River / Michael Compton boulders present (typically with a B- River is no exception to these threats axis greater than 0.75 m), and a mean and is of immense concern given that it absence data of the two species within depth of 0.31 m. Currently over 60 fish has an exceptionally high aquatic bio- 30 stream reaches of the Rockcastle community collections have been made diversity and contains numerous unique River. Data will be collected during and a total of 56 species have been col- species to Kentucky. Two species, the the summer months of 2008-2010 to lected. Field work in 2010 will focus ashy darter and the olive darter, are of determine what stream reaches within on target species data collection to particular interest given their presence the Rockcastle River watershed are in- validate the occupancy models and to within the Rockcastle River watershed habited by the species, and within those complete the remaining fish community and their overall rarity within the Com- stream reaches, what microhabitats surveys throughout the watershed. The monwealth. are used by the species. In addition, importance of the data is to ultimately Historically the ashy and olive fish community data will be collected identify and model the environmental darters inhabited numerous stream to determine the overall health of the conditions and habitat preferences of systems within the Cumberland and watershed and to determine if any spe- the target species, which will provide Tennessee River drainages among six cies association exist between the ashy KDFWR the needed information to southeastern states, but their distribu- and olive darters and any other species ensure the species existence within the tion has become fragmented overtime within the river. Rockcastle River but also to enhance and their populations have declined. In 2009, thirty randomly selected conservation efforts in other watersheds Although various aspects of life his- sites within the larger river sections of that contain or historically have con- tory are known for both species, many the Rockcastle River were sampled. tained ashy and olive darters. aspects are not fully understood, such Using a backpack electrofisher, fishes as habitat preferences, tolerance to im- were sampled from 3 x 10 m plots Funding Source: State Wildlife Grant pacts, or a current conservation status. that were systematically distributed Program (SWG), Texas Tech. Univer- In Kentucky, it is perceived that the throughout each site. Environmental sity Rockcastle River contains the best pop- variables such as water quality, sub- ulations of the two species; therefore, strate, depth, and flow were measured, KDFWR Strategic Plan. Goal 1, the watershed provides an excellent to associate with target species oc- Strategic Objective 5. Comprehen- setting to model habitat preferences and currences. A total of 482 plots were sive Wildlife Conservation Strategy: environmental conditions for the target sampled within the 30 sites. A total of Appendix 3.2; Class Actinopterygii species. Occupancy estimation models 98 ashy darters were collected within and Cephalaspidomorphi: Taxa spe- will be developed based on presence- 50 plots at 18 sites. A total of 5 olive cific research project #1.

Annual Research Highlights 009 109 PROJECT UPDATES / Non Game Fishes

Distribution, Habitat, and Conservation Status of Rare Fishes in Kentucky

Matthew Thomas and Stephanie of Kentucky’s fish Brandt, Kentucky Department of fauna in response Fish and Wildlife Resources to a rapidly changing ecosystem, periodic surveys are needed to establish pecies of Greatest Conservation data for long-term SNeed (SGCN) were recognized trend assessment. in the Kentucky Wildlife Action Plan, Within Ken- based on levels of endemism, lack of tucky, a large por- knowledge of current population status, tion (38%) of fish distribution, and life history character- SGCN are either istics, and potential importance as hosts entirely distrib- to rare mussel species. Currently, 59 of uted or have the largest portion of their From top to bottom, left to right: the state’s 241 native species are on this distributions west of the Green River Northern Starhead Topminnow, list, many of which are also on the cur- basin. More than 80% of the available Redspotted Sunfish, Taillight Shiner, rent List of Rare and Extirpated Biota records for these species (based on Inland Silverside, Central Mudminnow, of Kentucky managed by the Kentucky vouchered specimens) are now more and Swamp Darter / Matt Thomas State Nature Preserves Commission than ten years old, justifying the need (KSNPC), and five species listed by the for new surveys to determine the cur- distributional and abundance data are U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (US- rent status of populations. prioritized. Species identification, FWS) as threatened or endangered. Beginning in 2007, survey efforts gender (when possible), total lengths Compiling a list of SGCN was a with the following objectives were ini- (when >20 individuals), and habitat fundamental step towards formulating tiated: 1) update information on distri- condition are recorded and compared a comprehensive conservation strategy butions of SGCN, estimate the current with previous records. Photographs for fishes under Kentucky’s Wildlife status and size of populations, and es- and/or vouchers of specimens are taken Action Plan (http://fw.ky.gov/kfwis/ tablish baseline data where needed; and from each sample event for verifica- stwg/); however, there remains a need 2) document locations and condition of tion. Habitat variables are correlated to acquire new data on distributions, critical habitat and provide information with presence/absence and abundance population size and structure, and on potential recovery and management data to assess levels of imperilment of habitat conditions to accurately assess measures for these species. Baseline populations of each species. This infor- the current status of these species in data on new populations and updated mation will be used to make decisions Kentucky. This information will be information on the distribution and sta- on where to implement conservation critical to future efforts aimed at re- tus of SGCN and their habitats is essen- measures and establish fixed long-term covery and restoration of these species. tial to developing effective conservation monitoring sites at areas supporting Furthermore, given the dynamic nature policies and management practices. All large concentrations of SGCN. new data are initially entered into the EDAS (Ecological Data Application Funding Source: State Wildlife Grant System) database, then transferred and (SWG) maintained in the KFWIS (Kentucky Fish and Wildlife Information System) Comprehensive Wildife Conservation database. Strategy: Appendix 3.9, Class Acti- Sample localities are based on nopterygii and Cephalaspidomorphi. records available in databases (i.e., KD- Priority monitoring needs by taxo- FWR, KSNPC, and others) and other nomic class (p.1). Establish protocols, areas where habitat conditions might schedules, and sites for long-term Three Ponds Nature Preserve, Hickman support those species. The rarest spe- population monitoring to assess sta- County / Matt Thomas cies and those most in need of updated tus and trends for priority species.

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

Development of In Vitro (Artificial) Laboratory Culture Methods for Rearing Juvenile Freshwater Mussels.

Christopher Owen, Kentucky utilize a broad spectrum of fish hosts. undulatus (Creeper), Toxolasma parvus State University; James Host-specific or threatened and endan- (Lilliput) and Villosa taeniata (Painted Alexander, University of gered species had not been successfully Creekshell). Of these eight species, Louisville; Monte McGregor, metamorphosed in vitro. In addition, C. stegaria, E. capsaeformis and L. no literature existed describing the ‘fit- abrupta are the first reports of federally Kentucky Department of Fish ness’ of individuals metamorphosed in listed endangered species to success- and Wildlife Resources vitro, using various metrics as percent fully metamorphose in vitro. transformation, lipid reserves, and sur- Successful artificial culture tech- vival rate for comparison. niques will allow KDFWR wildlife ropagation of freshwater mussels Control of microbial contamination managers and other mussel propagators Phas been somewhat limited to spe- composes the single largest hurdle with a new and more effective method for cies in which we know the host. For in vitro mussel culture. Improvements the conservation of freshwater mus- these species, host fishes may be un- to the in vitro culture medium and sels. The development of an in vitro known or difficult to handle and/or col- protocol have proved effective in con- culture technique not only allows mus- lect in adequate numbers for conven- trolling microbial contamination and sel propagators to bypass the need for tional fish-host propagation methods. resulted in the successful metamorpho- a fish host, but the technique has the Despite availability of glochidia and sis of sixteen mussel species. Of the potential to create significantly more hosts, even under the best laboratory sixteen species to metamorphose, eight juveniles than does propagation tech- conditions, transformation rates to the represent new species to be success- niques involving fish hosts. This ability juvenile stage are variable and mostly fully metamorphosed in vitro. These is important particularly for species of unpredictable. eight species include: Anodonta sub- the most dire conservation need, in- Over the years, in vitro metamor- orbiculata (Flat Floater), Alasmidonta cluding endangered or threatened mus- phosis of glochidia has been success- viridis (Slippershell mussel), Cypro- sel species found in limited population ful with only a few common species, genia stegaria (Fanshell), Epioblasma size, with threatened or endangered fish including Ligumia recta, Lampsilis capsaeformis (Oyster Mussel), Lamp- hosts or skewed sex ratio (availability siliquoidea and Utterbackia imbecillis, silis abrupta (Pink Mucket), Lasmi- of gravid females). all of which are host-generalists that gona costata (Fluted-shell), Strophitus With the elimination of deleteri- ous effects of microbial contamination, research is now focused on the nutritional requirements of the culture medium with various species. Brood stock condition, which may play a significant role in overall success of in vitro cultured juveniles, is also being investigated.

Funding Source: State Wildlife Grant (SWG), Kentucky State University, University of Louisville

KDFWR Strategic Plan: Goal 1. Strategic Objective 5. Comprehen- sive Wildlife Conservation Strategy: Appendix 3.2, Class Bivalvia. Prior- ity Research Project #1. In vitro L. siliquoidea / Christopher Owen

Annual Research Highlights 009 111 PROJECT UPDATES / Big Game

Genetic Characteristics of Restored Elk Populations in Kentucky

009 elk hunt / Gabe Jenkins Virginia Dunn, Steve Demarais growth and reproductive potential. and source populations. and Bronson Strickland, Future management decisions, such as A preliminary genetic analysis Mississippi State University; hunting season regulations, need to be shows eastern Kentucky elk with high made with the genetic structure of the levels of genetic diversity throughout Randy DeYoung, Texas A&M population in mind. the restoration zone. A preliminary University; Tina Brunjes, Last year the KDFWR and Missis- analysis of physical comparisons shows Kentucky Department of Fish sippi State University began a project to that eastern Kentucky elk seem to be and Wildlife Resources evaluate the genetic makeup and physi- larger than some of the source state elk. cal characteristics of the eastern Ken- During summer of 2010, the remainder tucky elk herd. During fall and winter of the genetic samples will be pro- 2008 and 2009, biologists, guides and cessed and all analyses completed. This astern Kentucky currently has hunters sampled tissue or hair and body information will allow the KDFWR to Ea thriving elk (Cervus elaphus) and antler measurements from harvest- make future management decisions that population, thanks to restoration ef- ed elk. We will use DNA taken from will promote elk population health. forts by the Kentucky Department of these samples to evaluate the genetic Fish and Wildlife Resources (KDFWR) makeup of the elk across the restoration Funding Source: Pittman Robertson beginning in 1997. Retention of genetic area and compare this to their source (PR), Mississippi State University, diversity is important to the success of populations in western states. Compar- Texas A&M University wildlife populations, including elk. Ge- ing physical measurements allows us to netic diversity is important to individual evaluate the health of the population as KDFWR Strategic Plan. Goal 1. and population survival, adaptiveness, it relates to genetic potential in restored Strategic Objective 5.

2 Kentucky Department of Fish & Wildlife Resources Furbearers / PROJECT UPDATES

Status of the River Otter in Kentucky

Erin E. Barding & Michael J. models for otters Lacki, University of Kentucky in Kentucky will be constructed KDFWR Contact: Steven Dobey based on reproductive measurements taken from n an effort to restore self-sustain- carcass analysis Iing populations of otters throughout including preg- suitable habitat in Kentucky, KDFWR nancy rates and released 355 river otters (Lontra ca- average litter nadensis) among 14 sites in the central sizes. The model and eastern part of the state during will predict and 1991-1994. In 2006, the high frequen- estimate popula- cy and quantity of reports of river otter tion growth in occurrence and activity throughout the the state. state prompted KDFWR to implement Stomachs River otter / Tim Daniel a statewide trapping season. There has were removed never been a comprehensive effort to from all otters and dissected to identify populations, such as Micropterus spp., research the Kentucky otter popula- contents for the food habits portion of exhibit declining trends, this may war- tion before or after the reintroduction. this study. Fish and crayfish were the rant adjustments to river otter harvest Therefore, it is imperative to determine main prey items, occurring in 86 and protocols, such as a zone system with the status of the river otter throughout 27 percent of all stomachs examined larger bag limits in areas where concern Kentucky in order to implement appro- which contained food, respectively. for bass populations overlap with areas priate management strategies for this Six species of crayfish in 4 genera of high otter densities. species in the state. The objectives of have been identified, none of which our research are to 1) determine the dis- are listed as threatened or endangered Funding Source: Kentucky Depart- tribution and relative abundance of ot- in Kentucky. We identified 8 families ment of Fish and Wildlife ters in Kentucky; 2) determine popula- of fish in the diet of river otters. The tion demographics, including reproduc- most frequently consumed fish family FWR Strategic Plan. Goal 1, Strate- tive characteristics of otter populations was Centrarchidae (66%), with sunfish gic Objective 5b. in Kentucky; 3) describe food habits of (Lepomis, Am- river otters in Kentucky; 4) create habi- bloplites spp.) and tat models for river otters in Kentucky; crappie (Pomoxis 5) create a river otter population model. spp.) (51%), rather A total of 78 river otter sign sur- than black bass veys were conducted from Sept. 2006 (Micropterus spp.) - June 2008. When survey data is com- (9%), important bined with trapping data, river otters items in the diet. were reported in every major basin in We recommend the state. Riparian and landscape mea- that KDFWR surements were collected during the monitor sportfish 2007-08 surveys, which will be used to populations in create a predictive habitat model for ot- areas with high ters in Kentucky. river otter densi- We have performed 170 necropsies ties to determine on trapper-donated river otter carcasses whether otters are from the 2006-08 trapping seasons. We negatively impact- found signs of reproductive activity in ing fish popula- over half of the females. Population tions. If sportfish Pregnant tract of female otter / Erin Barding

Annual Research Highlights 009 113 PROJECT UPDATES / Reptiles and Amphibians

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

Will Bird and Phil Peak, believe targeted species can be found. surface of the ground where they could Kentucky Herpetological Society These locations are on state, federal, remain undetected. There are species of KDFWR Contact: John and private lands. Once permission is reptiles and amphibians for which AC granted to conduct surveys we use dif- has proven less effective. When target- MacGregor ferent methods for locating specimens ing these species we use box style fun- based on their nel traps to assist in their location and biological also search natural forms of cover such requirements. as rocks and logs. Because they The information about where are ectotherms specimens are located is recorded in a we are able very precise manner so that these loca- to utilize Ar- tions can be visited and monitored into tificial Cover the future in order to continue to moni- (AC) to locate tor populations and dynamics. Since the many of the project began we have secured many animals we new survey locations in areas targeted search for. by the CWCS and continue to gather Heavy metal information and data for species of objects that interest. absorb heat from the sun’s Funding Source: State Wildlife Grant Scarlet kingsnake / Will Bird rays and pro- (SWG) vide protec- n the course of developing Ken- tion from the elements are set out at Comprehensive Wildlife Conserva- Itucky’s Comprehensive Wildlife our study sites. We also deploy large tion Strategy: Appendix 3.4, Class Conservation Strategy (CWCS) it was wooden boards which retain moisture Reptilia: Prioritized Survey Projects determined by KDFWR that more even during the drier months and pro- 1, and 2. and Class Amphibia: Prior- baseline data needed to be collected in vide refuge for many of the creatures ity Survey Projects #1 and 2. order to execute effective conservation that might otherwise stay far below the action plans for our native reptile and amphibian species. While general distributions for reptiles and amphibians in Kentucky have been determined, more detailed distribution and abundance records need to be collected so that the populations of these animals can be monitored over time. Many of the records that we have in our current database are decades old and very vague. Species for which baseline data is most needed from all groups of reptiles and amphibians have been identified as have the regions within Kentucky where this information should be gathered. Locating reptiles and amphibians can be difficult. We begin the process by identifying locations where we Northern leopard frog / Will Bird

4 Kentucky Department of Fish & Wildlife Resources Habitat Management / PROJECT UPDATES

Bottomland Hardwood and Riparian Restoration in Obion Creek/Bayou de Chien Watersheds

Shelley Morris and Jeff Sole, The NRCS. A presentation was given that ing as part of a developing wetland Nature Conservancy was an overview of the project area, mitigation bank project. conservation practices, and cost share We plan to continue this project KDFWR Contact: Danna Baxley programs, including SWG. Partners through 2010 and hope to continue our then also spoke briefly about how they partnerships with federal, state, and lo- fit into the conservation picture for the cal partners to restore habitat, improve he Obion Creek/Bayou de Chien area. This event did not result in any water quality, and abate threats to spe- Twatersheds have been identified SWG projects; however, there were a cies of greatest conservation need with- by multiple agencies and organizations few individuals that expressed interest in the Obion Creek/Bayou de Chien as high-priority conservation in other conservation programs, primar- Watersheds. areas. The majority of the bottomland hardwood forests within these two watersheds have been negatively impacted by incompatible forestry or agricultural practices; consequently, most of the streams have very little riparian vegetation and are in need of restoration attention. Beginning in 2008, we sought to achieve the following conservation objectives on private lands within these two watersheds: restore four miles of riparian cover, promote implementation of streambank stabilization projects such as grade stabilization, cedar revetments, and rock veins, plant 150 acres of bottomland hardwoods, conduct prescribed burns to improve habitat in target areas, and create ephemeral pools for pond- Future restoration site / Shelly Morris breeding amphibians. In November of 09, TNC hosted ily WRP. Funding Source: State Wildlife Grant a SWG landowner outreach event in Currently, projects are being devel- (SWG), The Nature Conservancy Clinton, Ky. With assistance from oped with USFWS to work on headcut KDFWR, invitations were sent to ap- repair in the headwaters of Bayou du Comprehensive Wildlife Conserva- proximately 70 local landowners and an Chien. This would serve to reduce tion Strategy: Appendix 3.4, Pri- invitation was also printed in the local sedimentation caused by bank erosion. oritized taxa-specific conservation paper. The event was held at a local The endemic Relict Darter is known actions, Class Mammalia; Appendix restaurant with free lunch for attendees. from this area and it is a key conserva- 3.3, Conservation Action # 7, #14, Attendance was rather low, only about tion target for the project area. Habitat #32, #80, #97 #120, and #129. a dozen people. However, given the loss due to sedimentation is noted as a area, this was considered a success by key threat to this fish. Also, one land- the partners. Partners in attendance owner adjacent to the Obion WMA has were TNC, KDFWR, USFWS, and expressed interest in doing a tree plant-

Annual Research Highlights 009 115 PROJECT REFERENCES 2007-2009

Maternal Antibody Transfer and Meningeal Worm Infection in Published Research Kentucky Elk Volume II ...... 13 Culp, J.J., A.C. Shepard, and M.A. McGregor. 2009. Fish hosts and conglutinates of the pyramid pigtoe (Pleurobema rubrum). Genetic Characteristics of Restored Elk Populations in Kentucky Southeastern Naturalist 8(1):19-22. Volume II ...... 62 Volume III ...... 112 Dzialak, M.R., K.M. Carter, M.J. Lacki, D.F. Westneat, and K. Anderson. 2009. Activity of post-fledging peregrine falcons in different rearing and habitat conditions. Southeastern Naturalist 8(1):93-106. Small Game (Quail, Squirrels, Harris, D., C. Elliott, R. Frederick, and T. Edwards. 2009. Habitat characteristics associated with American woodcock (Scolopax Rabbits)

minor Gmelin) nests in central Kentucky. The Journal of the A New Approach to Mast Surveys in Kentucky Kentucky Academy of Sciences 70(2):114-144. Volume I ...... 35 Hartman, P.J., D.S. Maehr, and J.L. Larkin. 2009. Habitat selection Monitoring Efforts for Northern Bobwhite Populations in Kentucky by cerulean warblers in Eastern Kentucky. The Wilson Journal of Volume I ...... 36 Ornithology 121(3):469-475. Assessment of Habitat Value for Recovering Disturbed Warm-Season Hopkins, R.L. 2009. Use of landscape pattern metrics and multiscale Grass Using Multi-Cover Habitat Assessment Model for the data in aquatic species distribution models: a case study of a Northern Bobwhite freshwater mussel. Landscape Ecology 29:943-955. Volume II ...... 25

Hopkins, R.L. and B.M. Burr. 2009. Modeling freshwater fish Avian Response to Production Stands of Native Warm-Season Grasses distributions using multiscale landscape data: A case study of six Volume III ...... 77 narrow range endemics. Ecological Modelling 220:2024-2034. Northern Bobwhite Population Ecology on Reclaimed Mined Land . Larkin, J.L., D.S. Maehr, J.J. Krupa, J.J. Cox, K. Alexy, D.E. Unger, Volume III ...... 78 and C. Barton. 2008. Small mammal response to vegetation and spoil conditions on a reclaimed surface mine in eastern Kentucky. Bobwhite Focal Area Activity and Monitoring in KY Southeastern Naturalist 7(3):401-112. Volume III ...... 79 Lynch, W.L., and C.N. Moreira. 2008. Nest arrival vocalizations of Efficacy of Surrogate PropagationTM As a Quail Restoration Technique the Turkey Vulture Cathartes aura (Cathartidae: Falconiformes). in Central Kentucky Vulture News 59:3-6. Volume III ...... 80 Vukovich, M. and G. Ritchison. 2008. Foraging behavior of Short- Eared Owls and Northern Harriers on a reclaimed surface mine in Kentucky. Southeastern Naturalist 1(1):1-10. Turkey

Wild Turkey Reproduction in Kentucky Volume I ...... 38 Big Game (Elk and Deer)

Assessment of Reproductive Output for White Tailed Deer in Kentucky Volume I ...... 26 Furbearers

Chronic Wasting Disease Surveillance in Kentucky Distribution, Population Status and Habitat Characteristics of the River Volume I ...... 27 Otter (Lontra canadensis) in Kentucky Volume I ...... 18 Using FLIR (Forward-Looking Infrared Radiography) To Estimate Elk Volume III ...... 113 Density and Distribution in Eastern Kentucky Volume I ...... 10 Geographic Distribution and Prevalence of Cytauxzoon felis in Wild Volume II ...... 9 Felids Volume II ...... 63 Meningeal Worm (Parelaphostrongylus tenuis) Infection Rate and Effects on Survival of Reintroduced Elk (Cervus elaphus nelsonii) in Kentucky Volume I ...... 22 Bear Hunters’ use of the Kentucky Department of Fish and Wildlife Colonization of the Black Bear in Eastern Kentucky: Conflict and Resources’ Telecheck System Tolerance Between People and Wildlife Volume II ...... 7 Volume I ...... 13

6 Kentucky Department of Fish & Wildlife Resources PROJECT REFERENCES 2007-2009

Black Bear Resource Selection, Demographics, and Movement Patterns Volume II ...... 58 in Kentucky Volume I ...... 11 Grassland Songbird Survey Volume II ...... 60 Volume II ...... 59

Estimating Black Bear Populations in Kentucky Investigating Local Declines of Rusty Blackbirds in Kentucky Volume I ...... 21 Volume III ...... 68 Volume II ...... 17 Evaluating the Effects of Grassland Management on Raptor Habitat Genetic Diversity, Structuring, and Recolonization Patterns of Black Use at Peabody WMA Bears in Eastern Kentucky Volume III ...... 69 Volume II ...... 61 Volume III ...... 33 Evaluating the Effects of Grassland Management on Nesting and Migrating Songbirds at Shaker Village of Pleasant Hill Bias in GPS Telemetry Studies: A Case Study Using Black Bears in Volume III ...... 70 Southeastern Kentucky Volume III ...... 38 Monitoring the Effects of WMA Forest Stand Improvements on Songbirds Volume III ...... 71

Birds Sharp-shinned Hawks in Kentucky: Detection, Abundance, Nest-Site Songbirds and Raptors Selection, and Breeding Success Volume III ...... 72 Ecological and Behavioral Interactions Between Golden-Winged and Blue-Winged Warblers in Eastern Kentucky Volume I ...... 20 Migratory Shorebirds and Colonial Nesting Assessing Avian use of land enrolled in Conservation Practice 33 Waterbirds (CP33), Conservation Reserve Program Volume I ...... 42 Avian Influenza Monitoring throughout Kentucky Volume II ...... 70 Volume I ...... 28 Volume II ...... 71 Assessing Raptor Populations of Peabody Wildlife Management Area and Throughout Kentucky Migratory Shorebirds, Colonial Water Bird, and Woodcock Volume I ...... 43 Investigations Volume I ...... 29 Cooperative Cerulean Warbler Forest Management Project Volume II ...... 72 Volume I ...... 44 Monitoring and Management of Kentucky’s Waterfowl Monitoring Priority Songbird Populations Volume I ...... 30 Volume I ...... 45 Volume II ...... 73

Population Status and Reproductive Success of the Bald Eagle in Monitoring Giant Canada Goose Populations in Kentucky Kentucky Volume I ...... 31 Volume I ...... 46 Volume II ...... 74

Population Status and Reproductive Success of the Peregrine Falcon in Mourning Dove Banding in Kentucky Kentucky Volume I ...... 32 Volume I ...... 47 Reproductive Success of the Interior Least Tern in Kentucky Vocalizations of adult Turkey Vultures as they Arrive at Nest Sites Volume I ...... 33 during the Nesting Season Volume II ...... 53 Volume I ...... 48 Volume III ...... 46

The Common Raven in Cliff Habitat: Detectability and Occupancy Proactive Wood Duck Management in Kentucky Volume II ...... 54 Volume I ...... 34

An Evaluation Tool for Avian Monitoring Programs Volume II ...... 55 Bats Estimating Abundance of Species of Concern in the Central Hardwoods Region Determination of Bat Species Within Interior Forested Areas Using Volume II ...... 56 Anabat II Systems and Mist-Netting in Daniel Boone National Forest Golden-Winged Warbler Monitoring Volume I ...... 15

Annual Research Highlights 2008 PROJECT REFERENCES 2007-2009

Cave Protection and Monitoring of Federally Listed Bat Species in Evaluating the Present Status of Mussel Resources in Kentucky: Kentucky Quantitative and Qualitative Survey and Monitoring Efforts Volume I ...... 40 Volume I ...... 51

Identifying and Protecting Hibernation Roosts for Endangered Bats in Advances in the Propagation of Rare and Endangered Mussel Species Kentucky Volume II ...... 46 Volume I ...... 41 Volume II ...... 37 Successful Reintroduction of Two Endangered and Two Candidate Mussel Species to the Big South Fork Cumberland River, Kentucky Effects of Orientation and Weatherproofing on the Detection of Volume II ...... 47 Echolocation Calls in the Eastern United States. Volume II ...... 34 Successful Augmentation of the Fatmucket, Lampsilis siliquoidea, in the Elkhorn Creek, Kentucky Foraging and Roosting Ecology of Rafinesque’s Big-eared bat in Volume II ...... 48 Kentucky Volume III ...... 81 Freshwater Mollusk Monitoring in the South Fork Kentucky River System Surveillance and Monitoring of Cave Roosts for Abnormal Emergence Volume II ...... 49 Behavior byRare and Endangered Bats in Kentucky Volume III ...... 82 Augmentation of the Slippershell Mussel, Alasmidonta viridis in Guist Creek, Kentucky Volume III ...... 58 Reptiles and Amphibians Augmentation of the Snuffbox, Epioblasma triquetra in the Rolling Fork River, Kentucky Life History and Population Assessment of the Western Cottonmouth in Volume III ...... 59 Western Kentucky Volume II ...... 50 Five Year Quantitative Monitoring at Thomas Bend on the Green River, Status Assessment and Conservation of the Eastern Hellbender Kentucky Volume II ...... 51 Volume III ...... 60

Inventory, Monitoring, and Management of Amphibians and Reptiles in Kentucky Volume I ...... 39 Crayfish Volume II ...... 52 Volume III ...... 114 The Conservation Status of Cambarus veteranus (Big Sandy Crayfish) in Kentucky Status Survey of the Alligator Snapping Turtle (Machrochelys Volume III ...... 63 temminckii) in Kentucky Volume III ...... 66 The Conservation Status of Cambarus parvoculus (Mountain Midget Crayfish) in KY Effects of Phragmites Removal on Species of Greatest Conservation Volume III ...... 64 Need at Clear Creek WMA Volume III ...... 67 Response of Crayfish Populations to Restored Stream Habitats in Disturbed Portions of East Fork Little Sandy River basin, Lawrence & Boyd Counties, Kentucky Volume III ...... 65 Mollusks

Development of a Bivalve Diet for Use in Early Stage Juvenile Freshwater Mussel Culture Fishes Volume I ...... 17 Palezone Shiner Status Survey and Habitat Delineation Volume I ...... 24 Development of In Vitro (artificial) Laboratory Culture Methods for Rearing Juvenile Freshwater Mussels Volume I ...... 49 A Survey of Fishes in Terrapin Creek, Kentucky Volume III ...... 111 Volume I ...... 56 Volume III ...... 115 Endangered Species Recovery in Kentucky: Restoring the Freshwater Mussel via Population Augmentation Conservation Status and Habitat of the Longhead Darter in Kinniconick Volume I ...... 50 Creek, Lewis County Kentucky Volume I ...... 57 Volume II ...... 69 Volume III ...... 21

8 Kentucky Department of Fish & Wildlife Resources PROJECT REFERENCES 2007-2009

Databasing and Geo-Referencing Fish Collection for Kentucky Monitoring and Management of Ohio River Sport Fisheries Volume I ...... 58 Volume I ...... 72 Volume III ...... 100 Distribution, Habitat, and Conservation Status of Icthyofaunal Species of Greatest Conservation Need Monitoring Trends in Black Bass Fisheries Volume I ...... 59 Volume I ...... 73

Evaluation of a 12.0-in Minimum Size Limit on Channel Catfish in Ohio River Largemouth Bass Supplemental Stocking Study Kentucky’s Small Impoundments Volume I ...... 74 Volume I ...... 60 Volume III ...... 102 Volume III ...... 95 Preliminary Assessment of a Newly Established Blue Catfish Evaluation of a 15-20 Inch Protective Slot Limit and 5 Fish Creel Limit Population in Taylorsville Lake on Rainbow Trout in the Lake Cumberland Tailwater Volume I ...... 75 Volume I ...... 61 Volume III ...... 97 Volume III ...... 90 Preliminary Assessment of Bluegill and Redear Sunfish Populations in Evaluation of a 40-Inch Muskellunge Minimum Length Limit at Small Impoundments Buckhorn Lake Volume I ...... 76 Volume I ...... 62 Volume III ...... 91 Volume III ...... 93 Relationships Between Primary Productivity and creation of a Trophy Evaluation of Kentucky’s Largemouth Bass Stocking Initiative Largemouth Bass Fishery: Monitoring and Management of Cedar Volume I ...... 63 Creek Lake Volume III ...... 96 Volume I ...... 77 Volume III ...... 94 Evaluation of the Growth of Two Different Stocking Sizes of Blue Catfish Stocked into Three North Central Kentucky Small Taxonomic Resolution, Life History, and Conservation Status of the Impoundments Undescribed “Sawfin” Shiner and Kentucky Arrow Darter Volume I ...... 64 Volume I ...... 78 Volume III ...... 98 The Use of Flathead Catfish to Reduce Stunted Fish Populations in a Evaluation of Trophy Brown Trout Regulations and Stocking Strategies Small Kentucky Impoundment in the Lake Cumberland Tailwater Volume I ...... 79 Volume I ...... 65 Volume III ...... 86 Volume III ...... 87 Urban Fishing Program in Kentucky Evaluation of White Bass Stocking to Enhance Existing Reservoir Volume I ...... 80 Populations Volume III ...... 85 Volume I ...... 66 Volume III ...... 89 Using GIS-based Technology for Aquatic Conservation in the Upper Green River Drainage, Kentucky Impacts of Spawning Habitat Manipulations on Largemouth Bass Year- Volume I ...... 81 Class Production in Meldahl Pool, Ohio River Volume I ...... 67 Life History and Population Characteristics of Moxostoma poecilurum, Volume III ...... 99 the Blacktail Redhorse, in Terrrapin Creek, Graves County, Kentucky Investigation of the Restoration of Native Walleye in the Upper Barren Volume II ...... 27 River Volume I ...... 68 Analysis of the Environmental Requirements for Etheostoma cinereum Volume III ...... 92 and Percina squamata in the Rockcastle River Volume II ...... 41 Investigation of the Walleye Population in the Rockcastle River and Volume III ...... 109 Evaluation of Supplemental Stocking of Native Strain Walleye Volume I ...... 69 Captive Propagation and Reintroduction of the Cumberland Darter and Volume III ...... 88 Kentucky Arrow Darter in Southeastern Kentucky Volume II ...... 42 Lake Sturgeon Restoration in the Upper Cumberland River System Volume III ...... 107 Volume I ...... 70 Volume III ...... 108 A Survey of Fishes of Rock Creek, Kentucky, with Emphasis on the Impact of Stocking Rainbow Trout on Native Fishes Life History and Population Status of the Blacktail Redhorse in Volume II ...... 43 Terrapin Creek, Graves County, Kentucky Volume III ...... 9 Volume I ...... 71

Annual Research Highlights 008 119 PROJECT REFERENCES 2007-2009

Status, Life History, and Phylogenetics of the Amblyopsid Cavefishes Evaluation of Warm Season Grass Thinning Treatments on Green River in Kentucky Wildlife Management Area: Spring Disking, Glyphosate, and Select Volume II ...... 44 Herbicides Volume III ...... 105 Volume I ...... 83

Status survey of the Northern Madtom, Noturus stigmosus, in the Grassland Management and Restoration in Kentucky Lower Ohio River Volume I ...... 84 Volume II ...... 45 Volume III ...... 28 Impacts of Herbicide Application Following a Late Summer Burn, KDFWR Headquarters Relative Survival, Growth and Susceptibility to Angling of Two Strains Volume I ...... 85 of Brown Trout in the Lake Cumberland tailwater Volume II ...... 77 Volume III ...... 104 Maximizing Wildlife Habitat and Cattle Production on T.N. Sullivan Black Bass Tournament Results in Kentucky Wildlife Management Area Volume III ...... 103 Volume I ...... 86

Alligator Gar Propagation and Restoration in Western Kentucky Mill Branch Stream Restoration Project, Knox County, Kentucky Volume III ...... 54 Volume I ...... 87

Distribution and Ecology of the Blackfin Sucker Thoburnia( atripinnis) Native Warm Season Grass Suppression Treatments in Harrison County in the Upper Barren River, Kentucky Volume I ...... 88 Volume III ...... 55 Quail Unlimited Warm Season Grass Test Plot Project on Kentucky West Creek Fish Barrier Removal – Harrison County, Kentucky River Wildlife Management Area Volume III… ...... 56 Volume I ...... 89

Description and Geography of Restricted Range Kentucky Fish Shorebird Management Unit Creation and Invasive Willow Control Endemics Volume I ...... 90 Volume III ...... 57 Use of Temporary Electric Fencing to Eliminate Deer damage to River Sport Fish Surveys – Kentucky River Sunflower Plantings on the Blue Grass Army Depot Volume III ...... 101 Volume I ...... 91

Distribution, Habitat, and Conservation Status of Rare Fishes in Bottomland Hardwood and Riparian Restoration in Obion Creek/Bayou Kentucky de Chien Watersheds Volume III ...... 110 Volume II ...... 64 Volume III ...... 115

Restoration of Bur Oak on the Clay Wildlife Management Area by Habitat Restoration / Management Means of Direct Seeding Volume II ...... 65 An Investigation of Herbicide Treatments to Eradicate Autumn Olive on Taylorsville Lake Wildlife Management Area Natural Grassland Survey of the Original Barrens-Prairie Region of Volume I ...... 52 Kentucky Volume II ...... 67 Sericea Lespedeza Control on Peabody Wildlife Management Area Volume I ...... 53 Implementation of Habitat Restoration and Improvement Practices on Kentucky Wildlife Management Areas in the Bluegrass Region Use of Rodeo Herbicide to Control Phragmites australis on Peabody Volume III ...... 83 Wildlife Management Area Volume I ...... 54

Using Varying Frequencies of Prescribed Fire in Combination With Herbicide Applications to control Sericea Lespedeza on Peabody Wildlife Management Area Volume I ...... 55

Direct Seeding of Shrubs/Brambles on Reclaimed Mine Ground on Bugling elk / Dan Crank Peabody Wildlife Management Area Volume I ...... 82 Volume II ...... 78

20 Kentucky Department of Fish & Wildlife Resources KDFWR Contacts / PROJECT HIGHLIGHTS

ore information regarding David Baker [email protected] Mthe project summaries within Dane Balsman [email protected] this publication can be obtained by Jim Barnard [email protected] contacting the KDFWR authors or Danna Baxley [email protected] contacts listed below. Stephen Bonney [email protected] Stephanie Brandt [email protected] General questions can be directed to: John Brunjes [email protected] The Kentucky Department of Tina Brunjes [email protected] Fish and Wildlife Resources Brian Clark [email protected] # 1 Sportsman’s Lane Dan Crank [email protected] Frankfort, KY 40601 Jacob Culp [email protected] 1-800-858-1549 Steven Dobey [email protected] [email protected] Dave Dreves [email protected] Dave Frederick [email protected] Scott Freidhof [email protected] Chris Grasch [email protected] Brian Gray [email protected] Scott Harp [email protected] Erin Harper [email protected] Doug Henley [email protected] Christopher Hickey [email protected] Jim Hinkle [email protected] Kate Heyden [email protected] Nick Keeton [email protected] Joe Lacefield [email protected] Josh Lillpop [email protected] Charlie Logsdon [email protected] William Lynch [email protected] John MacGregor [email protected] Steve Marple [email protected] John Morgan [email protected] Monte McGregor [email protected] Wes Mattox [email protected] Ryan Oster [email protected] Laura Patton [email protected] Jayson Plaxico [email protected] Rocky Pritchert [email protected] Ben Robinson [email protected] Adam Shepard [email protected] Brooke Slack [email protected] Jacob Stewart [email protected] Matt Thomas [email protected] Fritz Vorisek [email protected] Shawchyi Vorisek [email protected] Karen Waldrop [email protected] Eric Williams [email protected] Bugling elk / Dan Crank

Annual Research Highlights 009 11