-:
ha

 

CREE RETURNS OF CATCMBLE RAINBOW

TROUT (SALMOSGMRDNERH) AND
BROWN TROUT (SALMO‘TRUTTA) FROM, '
AUGUSTA CREEK, WOO COUNTY.

MGCHTGAN, 1952-1956

Thesis for the Degree of 9h. D.

MW mm. umsm
Won-s E. Wifliam

i957

 

-~.

..

.o
VM—
. K .w

3‘
(W

t

I
'
f
\

This is to certify that the

thesis entitled

 

Creel Returns of Catchable Rainbow Trout
(Salmc gairdnerii) and Brown Trout (Salmc trutté)
From Augusta Creek, Kalamazoo County, Michigan 1952—1956.

presented by

l‘u'ells E. Williams

has been accepted towards fulfillment
of the requirements for

Ph. D

o u I 1 1 n .
. degree in Fisheries am Nlldllfe

Q

Major professor ‘

 

Date February 21, 19 58

 

0-169

- '—--—' h_._...—_._....- - _...._-—-.. _- __

 

CREEL REI'URNS OF CATCEZAfiE RAINBOW TROUT (SALMO GAIRDNERII)

 

AND BROCJN TROUT (SAL‘dO TRJTTA) FROM AUGUSTA CREEK,

 

KALAL‘ZA ZOO CCU NT Y, MICHIGAN , 1952-19 56

By

Hells Elwfiilliams

A THESIS

Sabmitted to the School for Advanced Graduate Studies of
Michigan State University in partial fulfillment of the

requirements for the degree of

DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY
Department of Fisheries and Wildlife

1957

a 5 ‘7; a:

Acknowl ed gement s

The author gratefully acknowledges the helpful assistance
of Professor Peter I. Tack, under whose most able supervision
the study was conducted. Sincere appreciation is also expressed
to Mr. Walter Lemmien, Forester, VLK. Kellogg Forest, for his
help in gathering and recording creel census data, and to Dr.
Dennis W. Strawbridge for his valuable suggestions and guidance
concerning statistical procedures. Particular thanks are also
given to Dr. Ergene W. Roelofs and Dr. Gordon E. Guyer for their

critical readings of the manuscript.

CREEL REflJRI-JS OF CAT CHABLE RAINBOJ TROUT (SAmo GAIRDNERII)
AND Baum TROUT (SALMO TRUTTA) FROM AUGUSTA CREEK,

KALAIIAZOO COUNTY, MICHIGAN, 1952-1956

By
:56“
Wells E. Williams

AN ABSTRACT

Suhnitted to the School for Advanced Graduate Studies of
Michigan State University in partial fulfillment of the
requirements for the degree of
DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY

Department of Fisheries and Wildlife

19 57

&pp raved {7”—

 

ABSTRACT

Analysis of data collected by the application of a manda-
tory creel count on a 2. try-mile section of Augusta Creek in south-
western Michigan over a five—year period revealed the following
information. Fishermen spent more than 20,700 hours angling, and
caught 6,91) trout; 6,062 were planted rainbow trout, 1479 planted
brown trout, 38h brown trout assumed to be native to the stream
or carried over from previous plantings, and one was a brook trout.

Nearly ninety percent of all trout creeled were taken by bait
fishermen, seven percent by fly fishermen, and six percent by an—
glers using artificial plugs and spinners.

Of a total of 10,570 trout stocked in the stream section,
6,255 were taken in the year in which they were planted, and 267
were taken in subsequent years for an over-all return to the creel
of 61.8 percent over the five-year period. This figure does not
include trout caught outside the experimental stream section.

The average catch per angler dropped from 2.1; trout in 1952
to 1.3 trout in 1956. This decrease is attributed to the increase
in angling pressure on the stream.

Approximately sixty percent of all angler visits to the stream
resulted in zero catches. It seems apparent that the percentage
of zero catches is a function of the number of hours fished, with

the more "patient" anglers recording the largest catches.

Only 8.3 percent of the anglers accounted for more than
fifty percent of the total number of trout caught during the
five-year study period. The frequency distribution of various-
sized catches can be represented by a curve similar to that of
the Pareto distribution of special abilities as applied to in-
comes in a stable society or home runs in baseball. This im-
plies that anglers' catches may be directly related to special
abilities of fishermen, and that some individuals have an in-
herited or acquired ability to catch fish, while others are not
so endowed.

The returns of planted trout from the Augusta Creek test
stream indicate that the present stocking policy is adequately
efficient, even though more than fifty percent of the anglers
reported no trout to the creel. It is possible that a substan-
tial percentage of planted trout are caught outside the experi-
mental area, and that the returns reported should be considered

minimum returns.

 

 

 

 

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Acknowledgements e e e e e e o o e e o O

T‘HIE OF CONT mTS O O O O O C O C O O C O

LiSt Of Tables 0 e e e e o e o o e e e o

LiSt Of Figures 0 e e e 0 o O o e e o O

I.

II.
III.

IV.

V.

VI.

VII .

INTRODUCTION 0 e o e o e o o o o o

A.
B.
C.

D.

Description and History of Augusta Creek
Early Investigations and Stocking Methods
Reason for The Study . . . . . . .

Regulations and Creel Count . . . . .

REVIENOFLITERATURE. . . . . . . . .

THESTOCKINGPROGRAM. . . . e e . . .

RESJLTSOF‘I'I-IECREEL CXJUNT. . . . . . .

A.

B.

C.
D.

E.

1952 Returns . . . . . . . . . .
1953 Returns . . . . . . . . . .
1951; Returns . . . . . . . . . .
1955 Returns . . . . . . . . . .

1956 Returns 0 e o e o o e e o 0

DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF CREEK. CCIINT DATA .

A.
B.

The Catch Distribution Curves . . . .

Fishing Success and Intensity . . . .

SUMMARY . g o o o o e e o o o o e

SHJECTED R‘EFEmCES Q Q Q o o O O O 0

III

maloxxnl-‘Hg

1h
18
18

23

32
35
38
38
52
67
69

II

Table I.

Table 11.

Tab]. e III.

Table IV.

Table V.

Table VI.

Table VII.

Table VIII.

Table II.

Table I.

Table II.

Table III.

Tabl B XIII.

Table XIV.

Table IV.

III

List of Tables

Planting Schedule for Augusta Creek in
Kellogg Forest, 19h1-l951. . . . . . . . .

Planting Schedule for Augusta Creek in
Kellogg FONSt, 1952-1956 0 e e e o o e 0

Monthly Simmary of Angling Data -
Augusta CI‘BBk, Michigan, 1952 e e e e e o e

aunmary of Angling Data from Augusta Creek,
Michigan, 1952-1956 e e e e e e o e e 0

Distribution of'Zero Catches (Unsuccessful Visits)

Distribution of Anglers Accounting for More
Than Fifty Percent of Total Catch . . . . .

Monthly Simmary of Angling Data - Augusta Creek,
Michigan,1953 oeeeeeeeoee

Percattage Distribution of Catch According
to Lure Used 0 o e o e o e e e e o 0

Monthly Sumnary of Angling Data -
Augusta Creek, Michigan, 19511 . . . . . . .

Monthly Summary'of Angling Data -
“130.8178 Creek, MiChiga-rl, 1955 O O 0

Monthly Summary of Angling Data -
Augusta Creek, Michigan, 1956 e e e e e e 0

Catch Freqrency Table - Augusta Creek,
Michigan, 1952-1956 0 e o ,e o e e o e 0

Frequency Distribution of Angler Trips by Catches
and Hours Fished, Augusta Creek, Michigan, 1952-

1956 e e e o e e e e e e e o e e 0

Percentage Frequency of Angler Trips by Catches
and Hours Fidred, Augusta Creek, 1952-1956 . .

Returns to Creel of Catchable Trait Plantings -
“311815! CI‘GBk, Michigan - 1952-1956 e e e e o

15

17

22
25

25

26

31

3h

37

h?

1.8

5h

 

 

Figure 1.

Figure 2a.

Figure 330

Figure 1;.

Figure 5.

Figure 6.

Figure 7.

Figure 80

Figure 9e

Figum 11.

Figure 12.

Figure 13.

Figure 11L.

List of Figures

Sketch Map of Augusta Creek, Michigan, Showing
Location of the Kellogg Forest . . . . . . 2

Photograph of Portion of Augusta Creek Flowing
Kellogg Forest in Southwestern mlichigan . . . 3

Photograph of Portion of Augusta Creek Flowing
through the Kellogg l'orest. (Note current de-
flectors at right and left of stream) . . . 1;

Days selected for the Random Sample, 1952
Angling Season 0 e o e o e o o o o e 19

Days Selected for the Random Sample, 1953
Angling season 0 e e e e e o e e e 0

Catch per Unit of Effort by Months, Augusta Creek,
Michigan, 1953-1956 e e e e e e o e e o 30

Catch Freqrency nistogram, Augusta Creek Data,
1952-1956 e e e e e e e e e e e e e 39

Catch Frequency Curves, 1952-1956 Catch Data . . ltl

Catch Frequency Curve as Plotted on Double-log
Paper 0 o e e o e e e e e e o o 0

Composite Catch Fre ency Oirve, Augusta Creek
Catch Data, 1952-19 6 e e e e o e e o 0 us

Catch Frequency Curves of Catch Glasses As Plotted
Against Catch categories 0 o e e e e e 0

Percentage Zero Catches by Catch Categories . . 51

Percentage Distribution of Trout Catches from
Augusta Creek, Michigan, 1952-1956 . . . . . 53

Average Annual Catch per Angler, 1952-1956 . . 55

Relationship Between Zero Catches and “umbers of
Anglers, 1952-1956 e e e e e o e e e o 57

Percentage of Zero Catches by Months, 1952-1956. 59

I.

Figure 15.

Figure 160

Figure 17.

Figure 180

Figure 190

Figure 2!) .

Figure 21.

Average Catch per Angler nour By-Months,

1952-1956 . . . .

Relationship between Numbers of Anglers,

Angler I1ours and Trout

Anglers' Daily Catches
Michigan, 1952 Angling

Anglers' Daily Catches
Michigan, 1953 Angling

Anglers' Daily Catches
Michigan, l95h.Angling

Anglers' Daily Catches
michigan, 1955 Angling

Anglers' Daily Catches
Michigan, 1956 Angling

Caught, 1952-1956 e

from Augusta Creek,
Season . . . .

from Augusta Creek,
Season 0 o O 0

from Augusta Creek,
season 0 o 0 O

frcn Augusta Creek,
Season 0 e O C

from Augusta Creek,
Season . . . .

61

62

63

6h

65

66

 

  

II t a , snidruli Emu

  

INTRODUCTION

Description and History of Augusta Creek

Augusta Creek is located in an area of glacial outwash plains
north of the village of Augusta, Michigan, in the southwestern por-
tion of the state.1 The stream section under consideration lies in
Ross Township, Kalamazoo County, Tier 1 south, Range 9 west, and flows
generally southward through sections 21,22 and 27 (Fig. l). The stream
is approximately twenty—five miles long, and is Joined by several small
tribztaries. It discharges into the Kalamazoo River in the village of
" Augusta.

The northern limit of the study area is highway 89; the southern ’ .
limit is the south prOperty line of a h85—acre tract of multiple-use
forest land donated to Michigan State University in 1932 by the late
W.K. Kellogg of Battle Creek, Michigan. This portion of the stream
is approximately 2.1; miles in length (Fig. l). The average width is
thirty feet. The depth varies from as little as one foot in mid-stream
riffle areas to more than four feet in some of the deeper pools. The
stream gradient through the forest is approximately 6.5 feet per mile;
the volume flow, measured to only moderate accuracy in the summer of
1957, was 61.0 cubic feet per second. Figures 2a and 2b give some in—

dication of the appearance of the stream section through the forest.

 

1
Source: Map of the Surface Formations of the Southern Peninsula
of Michigan. Mich. Dept. Cons. Geol. Sir. Div., 1955.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

   

 

 

 

 

—J-- T. l5.
*9“
Q.
a“
o l 2
=1 1 —1
Scale: 1 In. = 1 li.

 

Fig. 1. Sketch map of Augusta Creek, Michigan, showing location
of the Kellogg Forest

 

 

.newwnodz Eopmosnpsom 5
pmoaom mmoduom one. swoopep waged scone spammed Ho dogged a weapons edgmoponm

 

finite. . .D§M¢. _ u

.3 85mg

.‘Illt‘o

 

7...... ._ ., ..

.. :a....(./;
a I,” 1.1." a.
A ‘1’ ’.
._ a

M .

 

mllllllrlla. ital-la. I u .2 . t 11.2213. . .11.... alltiltfinla illfilll...

 

pecan so 0902

(IIIIPW. slum- .. -.ll

.nmmnmoposm mo poms...” one Puma pm myopooqoo
.vmoaom mmoaaod on» smegma mailed scone unnamed mo cofihom mo smgmoponm

 

.5 team

J.

 

Recent temperature records show simmer stream temperatures
to be fairly stable, ranging between fifty and seventy degrees
Fahrenheit. Only seldom does the temperature rise to more than
seventy degrees. The summer temperatures are regarded as being
well within the tolerance limits for trout. Winter conditions
are not especially severe canpared with other portions of the
state, and although the stream is covered by ice in most places
during the months of December, January and February, there is
seldom a snow covering over the stream for any extended period.

It is believed that originally most of the streams in the
state of Michigan were devoid of trout, including the streams of
the southern peninarla (Hubbs, Greeley and Tar-swell, 1932). A1-
thougr hgusta Creek 1. not listed by Brown (191.11), it is a per-
manart stream, and has been widely utilized by anglers for a num-

ber of years despite its moderate size.

Early Investigations and Stocking Methods

Experimentation first began on Augusta Creek during the arm-
ner of 1931;, when insect strveys and habitat alteration projects
were initiated in an attempt to improve the stream for trout. A
considerable number of stream alteration devices such as deflec-
tors, wing dams and digger logs were installed, and plantings of
willow cuttings and spruce and cottonwood seedlings were made along
the stream banks. Angling was reportedly poor, and it was believed
that increasing cover would reduce water teumeratures, and instal-

ling inprovement devices world aid in scouring out deeper pools

and moving silt accumulations fran the stream bottom. Morofsky,
Tack and Lemmien (1919) reported that the alterations resulted in
increased numbers and types of trout food organisms, and also in-
creased trcut catches, but ,srggest that angling pressrre increas—
ed evar more rapidly than the yield.

Prior to l9h6 the managenent policy was to stock the stream
with eastern brook trout, Salvelimrs fontinalis, since it was
considered at that time to be a suitable brook trout stream. The
species fared poorly; the stocking program failed to provide satis-
factory angling except for a short period during the early part of
the fishing season. Little sustained angling was offered after
the first few weeks, and catches were relatively poor.

In 19116, the stocking program was altered to include the
planting of brown trout (_Sal__m_q 231.32) of catclnhle size (seven
inches or more in length). It appeared that angling was provid-
ed on a more srstained basis, but returns were still less than ef-
ficient.

The planting program was again altered in 1952. It was then
thought practical to replace brown trout plantings with those of
catchable rainbow trout (M gairdnerii). The present study
deals prim0.rily with the rainbow trout phase of the planting

program.

Reason for the Study
The purpose of the present study was to determine the effect
of the rainbow trout stockings upon the angling returns, to find

what the effects of increased exploitation have been upon the

 

fishery, and to compare catch returns for various years of the
study. It was also of interest to determine whether catch distri-
butions were a function of the number of hours fished, or if they

were explained as distributions of special ability among anglers.

Regulations and Creel Count

The primary objectives of the stream management program on
Augusta Creek are l) to provide recreational facilities for as
many individuals as possible, and 2) to attempt to supply satisfactory
angling for all fishermen utilizing the stream in the Kellogg Forest
area.

The angling regulations in effect on Augusta Creek are the same
as for any other trout stream in the state of i‘ichigan, but in addi-
tion, all anglers fishing the stream within the property boundaries
of the Kellogg 1“orest must obtain a special permit, issued annually
without cost by the forester in charge. There is also a stipulation
that all anglers fishing the stream section are required to check
out at the termination of each fishing trip and to supply information
as to numbers and species of trout caught, hours spent angling, baits
or lures used in taking fish, and markings on creeled fish (if any).
There is no restriction made as to the number of special permits is-
sred. This mandatory creel count has been in Operation at the Kellogg
Forest since 19111. All fishermen are directed to leave the prOperty
by a single roadway; this permits a complete intensive creel census

of all catches made within the boundaries of the Kellogg Forest area.

REVIEW OF LITERATURE

The creel count, or creel census, has been recognised as
a primary tool in fishery research. In accomplishing a yield
analysis, two methods are ordinarily adapted, l) the generi.
cenms, covering a randan sampling of angling over a broad area,
and 2) the intensive censrs, restricted to certain selected
waters only. Both of the methods can provide valuable informa-
tion. Lagler (1952) lists various data of importance that may
be gathered by the use of the censrs.

A prOperly conducted creel count is know to furnish an ex-
cellurt check on resrlts of stocking procedures, exploitation
of a fishery and the effectiveress of aanaguent methods. The
ideal count is an intmsive one, rarely achieved in practice,

' in which every angler on the stream is interviewed, and all catch-
es are observed and recorded. Only a one-mndmd-percmt, seven-
day-a—week creel count can achieve this ideal.

Studies by Mottley (19h?) and Cooper (1951) mggest that vari-
ability of population estimates the to moveaent, catchability and
mortality are ninimd, and that little migration of trout from the
stream section where plantings were Iade was noted. ShetterCl9h7)
reported migrations of as far as tar miles from the point of release
by rainbow trout. In a later study, Shatter (1950) rqrorted that
most hatchery fingerling trout recovered as legal fish were taken

less than one mile from the locality of release.

 

 

Unconfirmed reports by anglers fishing Augusta Creek sug-
gest some migration of planted trout. The forester in charge
of the Kellogg Forest area asserted that "many" planted trout
are taken each year both above and below the stream section in
which they were released.

Schuck (1912) stated that the yield of trout is closely as-
sociated with the density of the trout pOpulation in a stream.
on this basis, catches of planted trout should be directly depen-
dent upon the actual number of stocked individuals, especially in
those streams with little or no natural recruitment to the popula-
tion. Chamberlain (1910) stated that the stocking of excess numbers
of trout can be detrimental, and that the catch should determine
the number to be stocked. He suggested that overstocking spoils
the immediate fishing, and that most of the planted trout are lost,
and do not enter materially into subsequent catches.

Chamberlain (l9u2) also found that stocking of legal-sized
trout yielded the best returns where fishing pressure was intense,
and that spring plantings gave higher returns than fall plantings.
Experiments by Shetter and Hazzard (19111, 19h2) demonstrated that
in most Michigan streams, from two to six times as many hatchery
trout were caught from Spring plantings as from fall plantings.
Smith (191:1) conducted a creel census and tagging study on the Salm0n
Trout River in the northern peninsula of Michigan and found that
fall plantings of legal-sized brook trout gave only a one percent
return to the creel, while those stocked in the spring gave returns

of nearly twenty percent. He made the further observation that the

10

spring-planted trout provided more sustained angling throughout
the entire angling season than those planted in the fall. In-
vestigations by Shetter (19h?) afforded additional data in sup-
port of the view that spring plantings of legal-sized trout yield
higher returns to the creel than fall plantings.

Other eXperiments indicate that plantings of fingerling or
yearling trout are not profitable where fishing pressures are in-
tense. A three—year investigation of several “ichigan streams by
Shetter (1939) disclosed that plantings of sub-legal (fingerling)
trout were not practical. None of the streams provided returns
of more than 1.6 percent of the total number stocked. Experiments
at tiunt Creek, Michigan in later years by the same investigator
(Shetter, 1950) gave returns of slightly more than two percent.
Chamberlain and Halloway (l9h2) and Chamberlain (1910) also pro-
mulgated the view that fingerling trout plantings yield unsatis-
factory returns in terms of catchable trout. Qlestionaires sent
to various states to determine trends in current fishery programs
during l9h6 revealed that only three of twenty-one states qlestion-
ed about trout propogation and planting reported good success with
the stocking of fingerlings or trout fry in streams, while nine of
then reported the practice as fair, and thirteen classified their
results as poor. (Eicher, l9h6).

Stocking of sub-legal trout at Augusta Creek was discontinued
in 19146 because angler returns were considered unsatisfactory. A
planting program providing immediate angling for increasingly grow-

ing numbers of fishermen on the stream was needed.

ll

Plantings of legal-sized hatchery trout are now considered
to be the most efficient for meeting demands of fishermen for
trout. Information concerning creel returns from stocking catch-
able trout can be found in much of the literature (Shetter and
Hazard, 191:1; Chamberlain, 19h23 Schuck, 191a; Owner, 1951;

Vestal, 195,43 Nialson, Reed, Reimers and Kennedy, 1957).

Another consideration involved in trout- stocking is that of
the inability of some species to survive winter conditions.

This inability is believed to be characteristic of hatchery trout
(Hewitt, 1938; Hazzard, 191:1; Maciolek and Needham, 1952). The
studies of Needham (19h?) suggest that this inability is associat-

ed with the severity of winter conditions. He found over-winter

loss of brown trout in Convict Creek, California to be about sixty
per-cert, regardless of the age of the trout. Nielsen, Reed, Reimers
and Kennedy (1957) reported that some planted trout exibited an
ability to srrvive equal to that of resident brown trout of canparable
size.

Several states have used "test‘I strems (Lord, 1935) in studying
mortality rates, exploitation, survival and catchability of trout.
Among these test streams are Furnace Brook, Vermont; Blah, Convict
and Scpaw creeks in California; Pigeon River and Hunt Creek in Michi-
gan. The studies on mgrsta Creek can also be considered test stream
emeriments.

Host of the test streams have been provided with some type of

stream alteration structures to alter habitat conditions. These

 

12

structures, and their relation to trout papulations have been
investigated by several noted workers. Among the investigations
are those of Tarzwell (1931, 1935, 1936, 1937, 1938), Hazzard
(1937), Shetter (19147) and Boussu (1951;). Doctor Clarence M.
Tarswell could well be called the pioneer of stream alteration
in Michigan.

One of the most comprehensive reports of the effects of
stream alteration on trout papulations was that of Shetter, Clark
and Hazzard (19h?) on Hunt Creek, Michigan. in eight-year study
of changes in the stream attributed to the use of current deflec-
tors showed a total catch increase of 18) percent, even with an
increase of 61; percent in angling pressrre. The studies were car-
ried on for three years before alteration structures were instal-
led and for five years following installations. Morofsky, Tack
and Lernmien (19149) gave evidence that stream alteration struc-
tures placed in a section of Augusta Creek within the present study
area resulted in increases in the numbers and types of trout food
organisms, and also in increases in the total trout catch from the
stream.

Of considerable interest to both the angler and the fishery
biologist is the percentage yield of planted trout to the creel.
The highest return noted in the literature was a record 92.2 per-
cent return of planted catchable rainbow trout reported from flash
creek test stream in California (Vestal, 1951;). It should be en-

phasized that the experimental stream section in the above study

 

13

had been provided with weirs to prevent emigration of planted
trout from the planting locality. Cooper (1951) reported re—
turns of 31.5 to 39.7 percent from marked resident brown trout
of~the Pigeon River, Michigan. Returns from plantings of legal—
sized trout at the Augusta Creek test stream reached 141; percent
in 19117, and were thought to be unusually high for the state of
Michigan at that time (Morofsky, Tack and Lemmien, 191:9). Later
analysis of creel count records from the same section of stream
(Shideler, 1952) showed returns of 60.2 and 211.0 percent for the
years 1950 and 1951 respectively. Chamberlain (19:42) considered
returns of planted trout to be adequate if they reached sixty per—

cent of the number stocked.

it

THE STOCKING PROGRAM

Studies first began on Augusta Cred: on a continuous
basis in 1931;. Prior to 19116, the stream was regarded as a
brook trout stream, as plantings indicate (table I). With
the exception of three earlier brown trout plantings in 1921;,
1927 and 1931» the stream had been planted consistently with
brook trout (Morofeky, Tack and Lemien, 191$). Fingerling
and yearling trout were planted until 19111;; after that time,
only legal-sized trout have bear planted. The stocking sche-
drle for the years 19111 througr 195]. is giver in table I.

The creel count was not carried out on an organised basis
before 19116, and remlts of the earlier plantings are not avail-
able. in interesting study of creel count data taken during
the brorn trout phase of manage-ct involving the same strem
section was presented by arideler (1952) , in which data were
grouped into visit categories in an effort to indicate a rela-
tionship between angling freqrency and angling access. The
conclusion made was that anglers freqrenting the stream most
often were able to take more trout because of familiarity with
the stream.

Planting experiments with legal-sized rainbow trout began
in 1952. A few brook trout continued to appear in angler's
creels through 1952, but after that time, they disappeared en-

tirely from the catch.

 

 

‘ a e ‘ l ‘
J ‘— g ' ) .
, , , ' r. H , . ~ ‘- r . -
- - . A s . n '\,.. J O
V I ‘ I\ s ‘ -‘ r ' .
. . 1 1 1 n. . . ‘- g . _ . J - 1 h
v r ; , r! ' . r , '4
' v 1 1 _ 3 r , . \ I: I .‘ I I " - ‘
~ I A _‘ - v , (- ~ I l
. J _ ' x « - . x . - n 1 J
V v
, . \ , . _ I . r I '1 ' “
_ . ., (A . . . , . . . . 4‘ x , u -~
i , \ . ‘ . e .
\4 4 . ,. p ,4 V ‘ \' v . ‘4 .
‘- , , . \ ,a - t 4 i V ’ , .. p
- \ - r . < 7 . ' l I ' 1 .
— , V ' r sv s ; ‘ ' y r - ..
.4 7 L . k _ . , ._ 1 _ . _ - .1 f c .
, . . , . . , » . ._ 1 ’ ' ' ,
L p L .a $(J i r a x . . ‘ a) - t ’ ‘ 1 ' ‘
. - , a , , ‘.‘ . . '_ . - . ' . ,_ 1
—~ .‘ a , \ L '1. 1 - i; e - J J A c ’ (:1 ‘1 ’\ “ ‘1 ~ ’ .
1' . . , (10‘ - , - r J . s r ' - ‘-' ‘ -’
- _ u . . , h‘ . \ . .
. .
. If f.\ (' I. 1" 1 ‘I“" ' '. A ‘ ' - ' ‘. " ‘ V
.1 _.I i ‘ ‘w ,A \I . . u ' ‘l ‘ ‘1 '5
r r ‘ ' '1 H I t ‘
,, p » t . . , u 1 , - e v - - I " ' ' '
_ . I ‘ ' ‘ ' . ‘ . | .’ ,.‘ .‘ ‘ F ‘ . . 1
u l ' ' r‘a {a ' I V "
I o u 3 I ' I ’- ' ‘ ’- ' M I
"' . A I u ' . - . (J J , 1 1 . ., ' ~ I 4 1‘
I ‘ 1‘ . .
. ‘ ‘ I I" -. . - 1. 3‘ ‘ ' I . ' '
‘ > . . A u v _ r I ‘
. 1' l ' ‘
' ” ' r‘ "\ ‘ v , _ w . -A ‘~. ‘ .
. i ' -. ‘ a . ‘ ‘ . J I‘ ' ‘ - _-‘ ‘ l —
1 a w ‘
.. - . , p I _- 1 v - ,_ a 0-. .. -‘ -, , » - ~ --.
.~ 1 i -- , ~~-" K ‘ "- .
. . , . . . - .
r r-‘ . s h l rr " ‘ -. ‘ -- v 1 I er ‘ ~ " '
_ . b A .\1 t r,» 1 a r - '4‘. ' ‘ 5 I ’~ '1" 1: . ‘ i
_ . a k ‘f
a, , » . ~ « ~ - . . p a - , \
r , ‘ 1' _ x , i I A r J I! " ‘ ‘ r', 0‘ '
'3 N ‘0 . ‘ ,A ‘ "" - ' , ‘ ’ , \ - ‘ a
— r .f‘ n, . . 1 . . ‘ | k ‘ . . f! , ,~

eo-

 

 

Planting Schedule for Auguta Cred: in Xe].21.ogg'1?orest, min-1951.

Table I

15

 

 

Year Species Average largth Number
191.1 Brook trout Iearlings 1,000
191:1 Brook trmt 3 months 6,000
191;]. Brook trout 7 months 1,000
l91r2 Brook trout Yearlings 500
1910 Brook trout Iearlings 1,200
19m; ' Brook trout 7' .10? 300
1916 Brown trout 8" 700
191.6 Bron trout 7- - 8- 1,600
19h? Brown trout 8%. 800
was Brown trout 7%”.9iw 2,100
191;? Brown trout Legals 2,300
19% Brown trout " 1.500
1951 Brown trout " 500

 

16

The plantings were distritnted more or less randomly through-
out the stream section at various times during the fishing season,
uth planting freqrencles ranging from as few as four in 1953 to
nine in 1956. All trout planted were furnished by the state trout
hatchery at Wolf Lake, Michigan, and were transported and releas-
ed by personnel of the Michigan State Department of Conservation.
The trout were variously marked either by tagang or removal of
fins; in some cases, markings were not deened necessary. A com—
plete planting schedule is given in table II for years lsfi- to
1956.

The deparhnmt of Fisheries and Wildlife of lichigan State
University is reaponsible for administering both the creel count
and the management program, with forestry personnel residing on
the property making the actual creel counts, and being paid a
monthly stipend for the service.

is stated by Davis, 1938, two of the most important objec-
tives in trout stream managenart are l) to provide satisfactory
fishing at a reasonable cost, and 2) to provide fairly good angl-
ing througrout the entire fishing season. These two objectives
are considered of paramount importance in the managenent of the
Augusta Creek fishery.

et

 

Table II

17

Planting Schedule for Augusta Creek in Kellogg Forest, 1952-1956.

 

 

the 1956 seasar, beginning on U2h/S6.

One additional planting was made on 8/ 22/56

Planting Species Average sise Number Identifica-
Date Stocked tion mark
Mir/52 Rainbow trout 7- - 9- 500 None
5/16/52 I a 7a _ 9a 500 a
6/12/52 - - 7- am 500 -
3/19/52 I s 7s .10.! 500 s
1J10/ 53 Rainbow trout 8%- 500 m clipped
5/22/53 I w 8%s 500 s s
6/11/53 " ' 8%! 500 s u
8/26/53 a s ms 500 a s
Viz/Sh Rainbow trout 10' 500 LP clipped
14/27/51; ' " 7' 320 Jar-tagged
5/13/51; - - 10* 500 LP clipped
6/22/51‘ I e 8a 500 a s
8/12/51: a I 90 3,0 I s
L 250 rainbow trout planted each All legals
week for seven weeks beginning 7" and over
on M 26/ 55. One additional plant- 2,000 None
ing was made on 8/15/ 55.
Both rainbow and brown trout were ill legals
planted, 125 of each species each 7' and over
wed: for the first eight weeks of 2,250 AD clipped

 

 

, -_V....v—q-p—.‘ —-— - -————._-— ”a- —-r.

 

 

 

'1

'u

ll

-e-— .

V:
a...

I

-‘

18

RESILTS OF THE CREEL COUNT

1952 Returns

The 1952 returns were based on a restricted, stratified sample
of twenty-two days selected before the ppening of the fishing sea-
son (Fig. 3a). On these sampling days, data were collected from
both srccessful and unsuccessful anglers; on all other days during
the season, records were kept only of the srccessful visits to the
stream section. It was therefore necessary to extrapolate from the
sampling data to determine zero catches and total hours spent angl-
ing. Thus zero catch figures and estimated total hours fished are
accurate only in so far as the sample was representative of the en-
tire fishing season.

During 1952, 607 anglers were issued Special permits, and fish-
ed 108 days out of a total of 135 days in the fishing season. This
was an increase of twelve percent in the number of anglers over the
preceding year. A total of 1,251 visits were made to the stream,
and anglers spent approximately 3,250 hours in the pursuit of their
sport. The total yearly catch was recorded as 1,1r82 trout, of
which 1,305 were rainbow trout (88.1 percent), 176 were brown trout
(11.9 percent) and only one a brook trout. The 1,305 rainbow trout
made up 62.5 percmt of the 2,000 planted in 1952, for an increase
of 2h.2 percent over 1951 returns of planted trout.

Bait fishermar spent 886 hours at the sport during the twenty-

two days sampled, and accounted for 90 percent of the total catch.

Fly fishermen spent 789 hours and caught 9 percent of the trout, while

anglers using plugs or spinners or spinners fished only 8 hours and

19

Figure 3.. Days selected for the
random sample, 1952 angling season.

APRIL MAY JUNE
SHTWTFSSHTWTFSSHTWTFS

123h5 @2312®h567
6789101112 h56789® 891011121311;
131h1516171819 111213®L§1617 @1 13192021

202122232125.1I.22122232h 22232h25.728

2930 25262728299» 2930

JULY AUGUST SETEMBER
SKTWTFSSMTWTFSSHTWTFS

123145 1 1236956
©78910®12 3115678378910111213
13®l5 16 17 18 19 10 ll 12 13®15 16 @15 16 17 18 19 20
$2122@1L25 26 1718.20212223 2.222321r25 2627
2728293031 2h2526@282930 282930

31

Days circled are those selected for the stratified sample
for 1952e

accounted for the remaining portion of the catch. The average
catch per angler during 1952 was 2.11 trout per angler hour. There
were 637 successful visits to the stream section, and approximately
611; visits yielded no trout to the creel. Only eleven percent of
the total trips produced 55.9 percent of the entire season's catch.
The most successful month was May, and the poorest was duly. The
angling intensity was also highest in May, and lightest in July.
One angler caught thirteen trout, and one caught twelve (this was
the last year that a fifteen-trout limit was in effect in Michigan).
Eleven anglers caught ten trout each. Eighty-four rainbow trout

of those stocked in 1952 were caught in the following year, bring-
ing the total return of 1952 plantings to 69.11 percent. This re-
turn was the highest recorded for any year during the five-year
study period. Monthly creel census data for 1952 are given in
table III; a canplete summary of data for the five—year period is
shown in table IV.

Table III

Monthly Summary of Angling Data - Augusta Creek, Michigan, 19521/

 

 

Apr. May Jun. Jul. Aug. Sqt .

 

Days in month i) 31 30 31 31 30
Days fished 5 27 211 18 21 13
1“urnber of visits 169 182 86 56 811 60
Hours fished 1491 188 61 55 113 19
Hours fished- bait 1‘62 152 116 52 31 37
Hours fished - fly 29 18 15 3 13 11
Hours fished - plug 0 8 0 0 0

tverage catch/visit 1.8 2.3 2.9 2.1 2.7 2.14
Rainbow trout catch 2118 360 232 111 212 1112
Brown trout catch 611 59 23 8 17 5
Total catch 312 121V 255 119 229 117
Catch by bait . 278 363 223 110 191 123
Catch by £11.: 28 27 2h 8 20 1h
Catch with plugs 0 30 ' 8 1 17 10

Q/Based on data from partially restricted random sampling of 22
days of the 1952 fishing season, plus records of successful

trips only.
Total includes one brook trout

ammary of Angling Data from Augusta Creek, Michigan, 1952-1956.

Table IV.

22

 

 

 

Year: 1952 1953 1951; 1955 1956
’Days in fishing
season 135 1112 1112 135 135
Days actually
timed 108 11h 136 126 132
Number of anglers 607 736 917 1,050 1,102
Number of angler
visits 1,251 1.973 1,113 2,036 1,928
Total hours fished 3,252 11,096 3,683 5,25h 11,1182
‘vemge OttdI/Vidt 102 007 1.0 007 007
Average catch/angl-
ing hair 00“ 0.3 001‘ 003 0.3
Mean average catch/
angler 2.11 1.5 1.6 leh 103
Number of rainbow
trout mght ' 1,305 1:065 13.126 1:377 872
Number of bran
trout caught 176 62 58 51 527
Number of visits/
mile of stream/day 6.11 7.7 5.9 8.9 8.1
Hours fished/day/
mile of stream 16.? 19.9 15.0 23.2 18.8

 

23

1953 Returns

The creel count in 1953 was administered in much the same
manner as in the previous year. Again, a 22-day sample was select-
ed before the season's Opening for a restricted, stratified sampling
of the year's angling (Fig. 3b), and only partial data were taken on
all other days from successful fishermen only.

Records indicate that 111; days were fished from a total of 1112
days in the fishing season. A total of 736 anglers made approximately
1,570 visits to the experimental stream section and caught 1,127
trout, of which 1,065 were rainbow trout and 62 were brown trout.

In all, 11,096 hours were. spent fishing, and the average catch per
angler visit was found to be 0.7 trout, or 0.3 trout per angling
hour.

The number of unsuccessful visits increased considerably over
the previous year, rising to 56.14 percent of the total in 1953 (table V).
Thus, more than one-half of the fishermen trips resulted in no trout
to the creel, with a small minority of anglers catching the greater
portion of the trout (table VI).

The catch of 0.8 trout per angler hour in June was the highest
rate of the year, and the lowest was recorded in the month of July

(table VII). As in 1952, the largest monthly catch was in May, when
angling intensity was high.

214

Figure 3b.

APRIL MAY JUNE
SITWTFSSHTWTFSSMTWTFS

1 2 3 h 1 2
567891011 @h567.9 789101112@
1213111151617 18 10®12131h1516 1h1516®81920

19 20 21 22 232h@ 171819.21 22 23 21 22 23 21125 26@
.n282930 21125.7282930 282930
31

JULY HJGUSI‘ SETEIBER
SMTWTFSSMTWTFSSMTITFS

12311

1
5663891011 23h®678 67891011®
12 1311115.? 18 9101112®m 15 131111516171819

192021222321125 16171819m®2 20212223312526
@oarzzwon 2321125 272829 27282930
30

Days circled are those selected for the stratified sample
for 1953.

Ifable Va

Distribution of Unsuccessful Visits (Zero Cathhes)

 

 

 

Year: 1952 1953 195k 1955 1956
Number of *
visits: 618* 887 855 1,305 1,270

Percentage: h9.1 56.h 59.2 63.9 65.8

 

Figures are based on 22-day samples.

Tab]. 8 VI.

Distribution of Anglers Accounting for More Than Fifty Percent
of Total Catch

Tsar: 1952 1953 195k 1955 1956

 

Number 117 9b 126 181 178

Percentage 9.h 6.0 8.h 8.9 9.2

 

Monthly ammary of Angling Data - Augusta Creek, Michigan,

Table VII

26

19 5111/

 

Month: Apr. May Jun. Jul. Aug. Sept.
Days in month 30 31 30 31 31 30
Days fished 6 28 27 22 21 10
Number of visits 180 205 121 87 50 113
Total hours fished 502 598 319 219 123 118
Hours - bait 1192 1188 2511 131 99 98
Hours - fly 10 71 63 88 2h 20
“ours - plug 0 0 2 0 0 0
Average catch/
visit 1.6 1.6 2.2 1.0 1.6 1.9
Average catch/
hour 0.6 0.6 0.8 0.11 0.6 0.7
Rainbow troit
caught 266 301 260 83 78 77
Brown trout
caught 111 3h 11 3 3 E
Total catch 280 335 2611 86 81 81
Cltdl - bait 273 282 225 61. 71. 69
Catch — fly 7 53 32 22 7 7
Catch - plug 0 0 h o 0 0

 

Based on data fron partially-restricted randon sample of 22
days of the 1953 season, plus records of successful trips.

The catch distribution by lure used varied only slightly
from that of 1952, with bait fishermen again taking the greatest

number of trout (table VIII).

Table VIIIe

Percentage Distribution of Catch According to Lure Used

 

M

 

Year: 1952 1953 l95h 1955 1955
Lure:

Bait 88.9 87.6 91.h 88.3 79.0
F1133 901 lleh Sal 2e3 Bes

Plugs 1.9 0.h 3.1 9.h ll.h

 

28

1951.; Returns

In 1951;, the loo-percent creel census was undertaken. All
creels were closely checked, and fishemen were interviewed re-
gardless of whether or not they were successful in taking trout.
Accurate data on lures used, hours fished, total catch, Species
caught and planting marks (if any) were recorded. Although the
method was known to be extremely time-consuming, it was thought
necessary for collecting accurate data on yields and angling in-
tensity.

The stream was fished on 136 days out of 1112 in the 19511
season. Nine hundred seventeen anglers made 1,11113 trips to the
stream and spent 3,683 hours in catching 1,1126 rainbow trout and 58
brown trout, or a total of 1,1181; for the season.

The average catch per angler hour increased to 0.11, return-
ing to the 1952 figure. The total catch for the year was the high—
est for any year during the study. The highest monthly catch and
the most intensive angling effort occurred in May, but the most
successful month as measured by the catch per angling hour was in
June, when it rose to 0.6 trout. A complete summary of angling
data for 19511 is given in table IX.

As in 1952 and 1953, more than one—half of the total year's
catch was taken during the first few weeks of the fishing season.
Returns show that nearly sixty percent of the catch was taken be-

fore the end of May, only 38 days after the Opening of the season.

29

More than ninety percent of the year's catch was made by anglers
using bait. The catch by fly fishermen declined from previous
years, while plug fishermen increased their yield slightly over
the 1952 figure (table VIII).

Nearly sixty percent of the fishennen visits in 19514. result-
ed in zero catches (table V). This high percentage of zero catches
is an indication of the continuing increase in angling pressure on
the stream.

The catch per angling hour was lower than in 1953 in every
month, as seen from Fig. 11. The catch per hour was highest in the
months of June and Septanber, and lowest in July.

During the 19511 season, 320 rainbow trout "psychologically
trained" by avoidance responses to take food only from underneath
the water airface were planted in the experimental section of stream
to test any possible differences in catchability between these
trout and normally ciltured rainbow trout planted at the same time.
It was assumed that the conditioned trout would be more difficult
to catch, and thus would provide more sustained angling throughout
the entire fishing season. hperiments with the trained trout are
presently being carried out at the Tobacco River in the central
part of the state, but a comprehensive report of the work has not
been published. According to data gathered from the Augusta Creek
study, no significant advantage was apparent in stocking the trained
trout. Of the 320 trained trout planted in 19511, sixty percent were

returned to the creel, as compared to a return of approximately

Fig. )1. Catch per unit of effort by months, Augusta
Creek, Michigan, 1953—1956

0.8-

006'”

 

Ooh"N

HOUR

0.8-

ANGLER

ER

 

 

 

 

 

«a: .08-
o 1953 \ /
————— 1958
’06“ 1955 \ /
.Ob— \/
l I I I l T
April May June July August September

MONTH

Table II.

Monthly Summary of Angling Data - Augusta Creek, Michigan, 19511

 

 

 

Month: Apr. May Jun. Jul. Aug. Sept.
Days in month 33 31 30 31 31 %
Days fished 7 31 27 29 30 12
Number of visits 355 553 157 125 193 60
Total hours fished 1,022 1,350 375 310 1.63 13h
Hours-bait 990 1,161.1 33.9 289 11211 116
Hours - fly 17 121. 1.0 1.1 30 252
Hours - plug 15 61 16 10 10 117
Average catch/ 1.1 0.8 1.5 0.9 1.3 0.7
visit

0.11 0.3 0.6 0.3 0.5 0.3
Average catch/
hour
Rainbow trout 368 his 2211 111 21.11 39
caught
Brown trout 28 1h 7 2 5 2
caught
Total catch 396 1151. 231 113 2119 111
Catch - bait 381 1103 218 99 229 27
Catch - fly 7 22 6 12 15 lh
Catch - plug 8 25 7 1 5 0

 

32

fifty-eight percent from the 2,000 normally-cultured trout plant—

ed during the same season.

1955 Returns

The stream was fished on 126 of the 135 days canprising the
1955 season. One—thousand—fifty fishermen Spent 5,253 hours in
catching 1,377 rainbow trout and 51 brown trout for a total year-
ly catch of 1,1128 trout. 0f the total number of rainbow trout
taken, 1,325 were from the 1955 plantings. Diring the following
year (1956), 53 additional rainbow trout from the 1955 plantings
were taken, bringing the total of 1955-stocked rainbow trout to
1,378, nearly sixty-nine percent of the number planted.

The catch per angler hour was less than in the preceding
year in all months except August and May; the figure for those
months ranained the same (Fig. )1). In July, the catch per unit
of effort dropped to a new low of 0.011 trout per hour. Diring
that month, anglers spent 269 hours in catching only twelve trout.

The percentage of zero catches increased to 63.9, deSpite the
fact that more than 2,000 trout were planted. It is interesting
to note that again, a very small number of anglers accounted for
more than fifty percent of the total year's catch (table VI).

Bait fishermen again proved to be the most successful from the
standpoint of numbers of trout caught. Fly and plug fishermen to-
gether took only a small part of the total catch (table VIII).

The number of anglers increased by nearly fifteen percent
over the 1951; season, although the rate was less than in the pre-

vious year, when the number increased by 25 percent over 1953.

33

The average catch per angling hour drOpped to 0.3 trout,
returning to the 1953 level. The average annual catch per ang-
ler was l.h.trout. In 1955, nearly 63 percent of the total year‘s
catch was creeled in the first glarter of the fishing season. A

complete summary of 1955 angling data may be found in table X.

311

Table I.

Monthly Summary of Angling Data - Augusta Creek, 1Michigan, 1955

 

 

 

 

 

Month 8 AP re May Jun e Jul e m g a Sept e
Days in month 30 31 30 31 31 30
Days fiShed 1 31 30 27 27 10
Number of visits 170 986 532 122 160 66

Total hours fished 1.68 2,655 1,1119 268 357 188

Hours- bait 11111; 2,383 1,259 205 285 136
“ours - fly 16 82 52 32 52 39
Hours - plug 8 190 108 31 20 13
Average catch/

visit 0.9 0.7 0.7 0.1 0.6 0.5
Average catch/

hour 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.011 0.3 0.2
Rainbow trout

caught 153 703 379 11 95 36
Brown trout 10 22 17 1 1 0
caught

Total catch 163 725 396 12 96 36
Catch — bait 158 635 358 10 77 23
Catch - fly 1 5 h 0 111 9

Catch - plug 11 85 311 2 5 h

 

35

1956 Returns

Angling permits were issued to 1,102 individuals during
1956, a slightly larger number than that issued in 1955. Anglers
fished 132 days of a total 135 days in the 1956 fishing season.
Fishermen made 1,928 visits to the stream, and expended 11,1182
hours of effort in catching 1,399 trout, of which 872 were rain-
bow trout and 527 were brown trout. Of the rainbow trout creel...
ed, 819 were from 1956 plantings and 53 from plantings of prior
years. Four hundred seventy-nine of the brown trout entering the

catch were from 1956 plantings. The return for rainbow trout
was over 65 percent, and that for brown trout nearly 50 percent,
bringing an over-all return to the creel of approzdinately 58 per-
cent for the year. It is expected that a few more individuals from
the 1956 plantings will appear in the 1957 catch.

Eighty-two percent of the total catch for the year entered
into the creel before the season was one-half over. There were
1,270 unsuccessful visits made during the year, or 65.8 percent
of the total visits made in 1956. This was the highest percentage
of zero catches recorded during the five-year study-(table V).

The average hourly catch was highest in June and lowest in
April. However, only three days were fished in April, even though
275 fishermen visits were made.

One hundred seventy-eight anglerscaught more than fifty percent
of the total number of trout recorded in 1956. This makes up only

9.2 percent of the anglers (table VI).

36

In general, the rate of catch was higher than in 1955, al-
though the lowest rate for the entire five-year period was re-
corded in April, 1956. The catch per angler hour was less than
that of any month in either'1953 or 195h, with the exception of
the month of May, when the rate was the same as in 195h.

A complete summary of 1956 angling data by months can be

found in table II.

Table 11.

Monthly Summary of Angling Data - Augusta Creek, Michigan, 1956

 

 

 

 

May

37

:—

 

 

Honth: Apr. Jun. Jul. Aug. Sept.
Days in month 30 31 33 31 31 30
Days fished 3 31 30 29 31 8
Number of visits 275 1,031 298 11.1 111 71
Total hours fished 51.2 2,1155 7141 325 251 169
Hours - bait 525 2,155 537 2111 182 1511
Hours - fly 5 111.1 110 118 117 1.1
Hours - plug 12 186 91. 36 22 11
Average catch/
visit 0.2 0.8 1.2 0.2 0.7 0.8
Average catch/
hour 0.1 0.3 0.5 0.2 0.3 0.3
Rainbow trout
caught 116 11611 220 30 60 52
Brown trout
caught 19 331 133 22 20 2
Total catch 65 795 353 52 80 5h
Catch - bait 65 6611 236 36 61 1111
Catch - fly 0 22 611 ll 18 1;
Catch — plug 0 100 53 5 1 l

 

 

 

38

DISCIJ SSION AND ANALYSIS OF CREEL CCIINT DATA

The Catch Distribution Curves

During the five-year period, 2,922 fisherman trips resulted
in catches of one or more trout. The catch fremlency distribu-
tion is presented in Fig. 5. It is readily apparent that the dis-
tribution does not follow a normal bell-shaped curve, but that of
a parabolic curve with essentially the same characteristics as
that of the W distribution applied to incomes. That is to
say, it follows the general distribution of special abilities as
described by Davis (19111) for billiard scores, home runs in base-
ball or incomes in a stable society. Although Pareto's law is not
universally acceptable to all econometricians because of its rigid
form and gaierality, no one has as yet exhibited a stable social
order which has not followed the Pareto pattern (Davis, 191.11).

The law, as modified by Davis can be stated as follows: When
the origin of measurement is sufficiently high, the distribution
of incomd in a stable society can always be given by the empirical
formula E 8 LYE, where _Y_ is the number of persons having an income
of 5 or greater, and g is approadmately 1.5.

It seens reasonable to the author that if angling catch distri-
butions are in agreenent with distributions of other Special abili-
ties, they should follow a similar distribution curve, and the law
could be stated: The catch distribution in g 4533.21.91.53 fishe , 11393

the origin 9}." measurenent is sufficiently hig, will be given by the

CATCH FREQ] mar

1600

1100

1200

1000

39

Fig. 5. Catch frequency histogram fran Augusta Creek

data, 19 52—19 56

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[1H m

 

101.1 1213

Since the actual number of visits to the stream by indivi-
dual anglers was not known, the 1 values in this instance repre-
sent the number of fisherman visits, rather than the number of
anglers, but the analysis should still follow the same pattern.
Data plotted for years 1952 through 1956 appear to conform to a
parabolic curve of the type applicable to incomes and billiard
scores (Fig. 6).

It seens apparent that the catch data from Augusta Creek
can he graduated by the parab01ic curve. For the purposes of
this analysis, that portion of the catch frequency which can he
graduated by the curve 1': aI'g , is referred to as a Pareto
distribution. When logarithms are calculated for both sides of
the above equation, it follows that

Log. 1': Log. a - gLog. X,
from which it may be seen that the distribution, if plotted on
double Log. paper appears as a straight line with negative lepe
(Fig. 7).

The least-squares method was employed to find the equation
for the curve indicated by the Augusta Creek data. A catch-fre—
qrency table was first constructed (table XII), using logarithms
of X and Y, determining their products, and calculating values of
squared I terms. ‘Unsuccessful angler visits were exCluded from

the calculations for obvious reasons.

 

 

1952-1956 catch data

—- 1952

: *1956

 

CATCH

Catch frequency curves,

 

‘— " E 19514

 

“ ‘ | \ _
' \
‘l
-

‘
"
‘
-

 

 

 

 

 

 

Fig. 7e

FREQUENCY
'6’.

 

 

Catch frequency curve as plotted on double-log
paper, showing straight-line relationship

N.’
4;.“
01-
o
‘6
'V
o

IOO

1:2

Table XII

Catch Frequency Table - Augusta Creek, Michigan, 1952-1956

 

:-
E

t

 

‘

j

 

 

 

 

 

Catch, anulative Log.X Log.Y Log.I°Log.Y (LogJ) 2
(1) frequency
(Y)

1 2922 0 .00000 3. 146568 0.00000 0.00000

2 1601. 0 .30103 3. 20520 0.961186 0.09062

3 901 0.h7712 2.951.72 1.170976 0. 22761:

1. 5m. 0.60206 2.73560 12.614699 0.362u8

5 3145 0.69897 2.53782 . 1.77386 0.148856

6 220 0.77815 2.3112172 1.82275 0.60552

7 151 0.81.510 2.17898 1.81.186 0.711719

8 97 0.90309 1.98677 1.791123 0.81557

9 6h 0.95m; 4 1.80618 1.72353 0.91057

10 1.1 1.00000 1.61278 1.61278 1.00000

11 5 1.01.139 0.69897 0.72790 1.08819

12 3 1.07918 0.h7712 0.511189 1.161763

13 1 1.11391. 0.00000 0.00000 1.21086

Totals: 9.79h27 26.00222. 15.83301 8.70513

The following eqiations are derived from the above table:

(1) 13 Log. a - 9.791.273 - 26.0022h
(2) 90791127 Logo I. - 807031-33 . 15083301

From these equations,

Log. 8 - 1‘013’476,

g - 2083326

 

 

 

 

Thus, the curve in logarthmic form was found to be
Log.Y = b.13h76 - 2.83326Log.!.

It appears therefore, that if the distribution follows the
Pareto pattern for a small sample such as that taken from Augusta
Creek, it could also hold true for all stable fisheries, regardless
of the type of gear used. The implication made here is that some
anglers possess an inherent or acquired ability to catch fish,
while others do not.

Frequency curves by years are represented by plotting the
number of trout caught per trip against the catch frequency (Fig.6).

A composite curve for the five-year period is shown in Fig. 8.

FREQUENCY

CATCH

 

Fig. 8.

Composite catch frequency curve, Augusta Creek
data, 1952-1956

1.5

 

250-4

200-1

100.
o T l j— I l
0 2 h 6 8 10

CAT CH

be

Since it appears that there may be a relationship between
catch freqiencies and Special ability of fishennen which cannot
be attributed to chance alone, it was of interest also to compare
the precentage of unsuccessful trips with the number of hours
fished. It would seen reasonable to assume that the proportion
of unsuccessful visits grows less as the number of angling hours
is increased. The percentage of zero catches (unsuccessful trips)
would therefore be a function of the number of hours fished.

It was found that zero catches made up the greater portion
of the catch frequency in nearly every hour category (table XIII);
it would seem that catch alone is not a valid measure of the expert-
ness of anglers. It is apparent however, that in general, the per-
centage of zero catches decreased as the number of angling hours
increased.

In order to find a possible relation between zero catches (in
this instance, those visits resulting in no trout to the creel) and
time fished, the trips were grouped into classes according to the
number of hours spent angling. The catch frequency was then deter-
mined for each of these catch categories or classes, and the per-
centage of the total number of visits in all categories was calculated.
The relationships can be seen from table XIV. Only those days on
which zero catches were recorded were included in the calculation.
Thus only twenty-two days of the 1952 and 1953 seasons were used.

When the catch was held constant and the number of hours was

plotted on) sani-log paper against the catch frequency in each catch

h?

 

 

H N eH mH mN 3 mm 3 SH HaN gm SHH SR .2369

I I I I H I H I I N H I I o.NH..H.HH

I I I I I I I I I I I I I o.HHIH.oH

I I I I I I I I I H H N H o.OHIH.e

I I I I I I I I m H N m m o.mIH.m

I I H I N H I H m e m 0 0H o.NIH.~

I I I H I m N H 0H 0 o m NH o.~.IH.o

H . H N N m m N a a NH 4H HN 3 o.oIH.m

I I N N m m a HH 8 NN S .3 ma o.mIH.e

I .. N e e NH aH eN mm i mHH HeH Nam 041.3

I I m a HH m mH 0N mm mm NNN 34 com o.mIH.N

I H I I H z m 0H a an 2H m3 3.: o.NIH.H

I I I I H H I a a a mN AWNH H8 o.HIo.o
monogam nopmo mmwfiwwoahmw

NH HH 0H m N a e m H m N H o .33 non fines

 

moedo

.593 .He noneez

emaHINmaH £696 Seemi Jena 28m see 3530 an 3H,; neHNea .He eeHeBHnnnHa senate .HHHH oHneN

 

 

.55» .5280: on» on 0005.8 0.3: mowevnoopon a .3288 one: .10 :23 amoH 303.50th oz

 

 

H
I I I I I I I I I I I I I 04.7.13”
I I I I I I I I I I I I I 0.0.nI1m
I I I I I I I I I I I . I I o..ml.1m
I I I I I I I I I .10 .10 .10 «.0 0.0I1~.
I I I I I I I I I 10 10 1o «.0 0.7.10
I I I I I .10 .10 .10 10 «.0 «.0 no 10 0.0I1m
I I I I I .10 .10 «.0 «.0 4.0 0.0 0...” m4 0.mI1:
I I I .10 1o «.0 m.o 4.0 4.0 «.H a; 0.« m.0 0.:I1m
I I .10 I «.0 10 m.0 3.0 4.0 m.H 0.m 0.0 «a: o.ml.1«
I I I I I I .10 «.0 «.0 1H m.« 0.0 «.m« 0.«I.1H
I I I I I I I 10 10 .10 3.0 o.« 12” 0.70.0

hocoovoum ommpnoouom MWMMMMWonMMMmuW

NH HH NH a N a N m a m N H o 2:3 non Ewan

seen» we .HBeez

e38

 

 

H.0mmHI«mmH £080 Snows noonnHm 33m one 3:33 .3 main. .Honcd Mo hoses—08m ownugmoaom .E 03.3.

 

II o o o a e e e e I c
e e o w o e u o 0 II v
e a e e o w e e v I o
e v o e w c o e . II c
e e a o a o v s a I w
I. II I I... e e. e o e .. .
II I. I. e U I e o e
II II .I. .D II I. II a II o
I I. I [II II l 'i .I ‘ 'U 1
II I. I. I. l. .I. .l o .I .

 

class (one trout, two trout, three trout, et cetera), it was found
that each of the plotted curves had a characteristic ascending
left limb, a dome—shaped upper'portion, and a long, descending
right limb (Fig. 9). This was the type of curve described by
Ridcer (l9u8) as commonly characteristic of catch distributions
of fisheries. In plotting the curves, however, Ricker plotted
age classes of fish against catch frequencies, rather'than hour
categories against catch frequencies as plotted by the author
from Augusta Creek data and shown in Fig. 9. The percentage of
zero catches (unsuccessful visits) in each of the various hour or
catch categories was also plotted; again, the characteristic catch
curve was formed (Fig. 10).

It is evident from the above distribution curves that the per-
centage of zero catches may be a function of the number of hours
Spent angling, with the most patient anglers presumably obtaining
the highest rewards in tenns of numbers of trout creeled. Neverthe-
less, there may also be other variables which might effect the
total catch structure. SuCh variables as weather, numbers of an-
glers fishing a given volume of water at a given time, the oporb
tunity'flor anglers to encounter'fish, the number of fish.present
and the probability of a fish accepting the proffered bait could
act individually or collectively in complicating the analysis of
catch data. More detailed studies of these and other’variables ,
including individual differences among anglers are needed before
a complete understanding of the total catch structure can be ob-

tained.

1000

FREQUENCY

C L.T C H

8
c:

8

1

Fig. 9. Catch frequency curves of catch
classes plotted against hour cate-
gories.

Zero catches

 

‘/ \ l trout

2 trout
/\‘\
l — \ '
I 3 trout
I

 

 

 

I, \\
I! ’P‘-\ \
I \ \
iv ’ ‘\~
\ \\ ./A\ h trout
' \‘. J/ \
I/ \ \ \
5 trout \\ \\
‘ \
\
0.0-1.0 r 2413.0 ' uni-5.0 j 6.1-7.0 8.1-9.0
1.1-2.0 3.1-h.0 5.1-6.0 7.1-8.0 9.1-10.0

H O'U R. C A'P E G O R.Y

CATCHES

ZERO

0F

PERCENTAGE

33.0

20.0

10 .0
8.0

6.0

h.0

2.0

1.0
0.8

0.6

0J4

0.2

0.1

 

Fig. 10. Percentage zero catches by catch categories

 

L i_ L 4* 1 l l 1

0001100 I 20].!300 I 11.011500 1 6011700 I 801.900

1.1- 2.0 3.1-11.0 5.1-6.0 7 .1-8 .0

CATCH CATEGORY
(hoursfished)

 

 

 

“MUM“; ,
l... I.

52

Fishing Success and lntensity

Data collected from the controlled creel counts over the
five-year period revealed that the stream section was fished on
616 days of a total of 689 days comprising the five angling sea-
sons. Four thousand, four hundred twelve anglers spent more
than 20,700 hours fishing, and caught 6,930 trout, of which 6,062
were planted rainbow trout, h79 were planted brown trout, 3821 were
brown trout assumed to be native or carried over from previous
plantings, and one was a brook trout. Rainbow trout made up the
greater portion of the total catch in every year (Fig. 11).

Nearly ninety percent of all trout taken were caught by an-
glers using bait, seven percent by those using dry or wet artifi-
cial flies, and six percent by those using artificial plugs or
Spinners (table VIII).

0f the total of 10,570 trout stocked in the stream section
during the five-year period, 6,255 were taken in the year they
were planted, and 267 in subsequent years for an over-all return
to the creel of 61.7 percent. Catches for the year of planting
averaged 58.5 percent, ranging from 149.1 percent in 1953 to 66.2
percent in 1955 (table XV).

Since the stream section within the Kellogg Forest has no
weirs or restraining structures to prevent emigration of trout,
it can be assumed that some of the planted individuals did not
remain in the planting locality. Indeed, numerous reports of
catches of marked trout both upstream and downstream from the

Kellogg Forest preparty would seem to imply that an appreciable

 

Fig. 110

1—

I5001

|400~*

1200‘

I

400-

.2()C)«-

 

 

”.97"

 

 

Percentage distribution
of trout catches fran

Augusta Creek, Michigan, I
1952-1956. ‘

 

88.344:

 

 

 

 

53

L I BROWN TROUT

 

 

 

3.9 x.

 

19W

 

fij RAINBOW TROUT

 

 

 

 

317%

 

 

92-4”:

 

 

 

F9312

IQMZB

° 105.4.
YEAR

F955

r9563

5h

finch 0:15.30..." cup 5.. Sumo 0H3 wnflopno $3.3. «.0305 won 00 mmcganm 0mg no.“ 25.38 demon.

 

 

H
.momggu
N.HN mam NNmo SN mmN.N 05.2 none. 3.89
R «.3 as I «S ooo.H. pan... 88.5 33
N.

H man as I as RN; .. .. omeH
m.NN N.NN Nem.H mm mNN.H ooo.N e . mmmH
N.oN o.Nm NaN.H Nm NNN.H oNN.N e e smeH
o.mm H.m: emo.H Ne HNe coo.N e . mmaH
:.NN m.NN mNN.H 4N moN.H ooo.N neon» neneHeN NmmH

new»
#930 each
EBB E38 H38 EHM node new.» and eoeeeHm NfipeeHo
.033 £30qu 05090.... H309 H803» gonna—N new?» .8952 9.09552 330% Ho .30»

 

 

omeH I NmeH I 5353 £698 enema I .NeHeeeHn page .Hnnfieeo no Hoes 8. .838

SH 0.369

 

 

I
I

 

55

percentage of planted trout not only left the planting locality,
but found their way into anglers' creels as well. It is evident,
therefore, that returns of stocked trout indicated by creel count
records taken within the prcperty boundaries should actually be
considered as minimal. It might well be that from ten to thirty
‘percent of the planted trout are not recorded merely because they'
were caught outside the study area where the mandatory creel cen-
sus is in effect. Assuming only ten percent of the planted trout
are taken by anglers outside the boundaries of the experimental
area, the overall return over the fives-year period may easily have
been in excess of seventy percent, an extremely satisfactory return
from stocked trout in Michigan.

The average catch per angler dropped from 2.14 trout in 1952
to 1.3 trout in 1956 (Fig. 12). This decrease may be related to
the increase in angling intensity on the stream, since zero catch.-
es have also increased. As stated previoudly, the increase in
angling pressure has been accanpanied by a corresponding increase
in the numbers of zero catches. With the exception of 1956, zero
catches have risen steadily each year as the numbers of anglers
have increased. In 1991, only 5&2 fishermen obtained the special
permits to fish the stream, and in 1956, 1,102 individuals were
issued permits. This is an actual increase of 103 percent over
the five—year period. Of 8,231 visits to the stream during the
same period, nearly 5,000 visits resulted in zero catches. Thus
approximately sixty percent of the angler visits were unsuccessful.

The percentage distribution of zero catches by months is given in

56

Fig. 12. Average annual catch per angler, 1952-1956

205 "

ANGLER

200 "

PER

CATCH

105 -'

 

AVERAGE

 

 

HUNDREDS OF LNGLERS

CATCHES

ZERO

0F

NUMBER

Fig. 13.

lhOO

l

1200 '

1000

600

200‘

 

0

 

of anglers, Augusta Creek, 1952-1956

 

------ Mglers

Zero cat ches

 

Relationship between zero catches and numbers

Liam)

-1000

.800

 

 

1952

I I F
1953 ‘ 195k 1955 1956
1'3 A R

OF ANGLERS

NUMBER

57

58

figure 11;. Again, it is emphasized that figures for the years
1952 and 1953 are based on a restricted, stratified sample of
twenty-two days from the fishing season.

The average catch per angler visit for the five-year period
was 0.8 trout. The yearly figure has not exceeded 1.0 since 1952
(table IV). The average catch per angling hour has remained rela-
tively stable, with the most impressive catches appearing in the
1953 and 1955 angling seasons. Figure 15 shows the average catch
per hour of angling by months. It can be readily seen that catches
were highest in the month of June, when angling pressure was heavi-
est. The relationship between numbers of anglers, yearly catches and
angling hours is indicated by figure 16.

It was evidart from the study that the most sustained yields
of planted trout are apparent when stocking is accomplished on a
nearly continuous basis during the fishing season. There appears
to be a short time lag of one or two days before the catch reaches
a definite peak after each planting. The relationship can be clearly
seen from the daily catdi graphs for each of the five years during
which the study was conducted. In nearly every instance, the total
catch shows a very noticeable rise shortly after the planting dates.
Graphic representations of daily catches and planting dates are
given in figures 17 through a.

CATCHES

ZERO

PERCENTAGE

59

Fig. 114. Percentage of zero catches by months,
Augusta Creek data, 1952-1956

1952 —- -—

1951; -----—---
1955

1956 -——---—--

 

100-

 

 

 

0 I i ‘

T l ' ’ I I
April May June July August September

MONTH

Fig. 15. Average catch per angler hour by months,
1952-1956

0.8 .-

0.7 ..

 

AVERAGE CATCH PER ANGLER 1101 R

002 ii-

O.1 ..

 

0.0

cli—
III-
p

3..

APR. MAY JUN. JUL. AUG. 3

MONTH

 

Fig. 16.

70-

15

munaans or mama HGJRS
:8 8
1

.5

 

Graph indicating relation between numbers of
anglers, angler hours and trout caught for

years 1952-1956

HGJRS

TRWT

ANGLERS

I I I I
51 8 3’. 8

I
E
wnnms or memes on I-IINDREDS or TROUT

 

 

1952

I T

I l
19 53 19 Sh 19 SS 1956
YEAR

 

32%
£32 .eeeeo e .
pmswzd Eon.“ mo nommom mfiawnm
H138 add mm?
.aenfi .: e
. am

 

_I 1H1l|li Linn... .

 

‘. 1 A
I I

HOlVO A'IIVCI W101

 

 

62

.meEoHE .xogo mfidwdd 80.5. wagon. H H

63

”a.” h .4—._:.Li,. M_——_ __ . ‘.__ . .

 

3
HOLVO KING ‘lVJ.O.L

.nommom mfiamnm :mmH
Sessions £88 Seemed 28.. mosses anus .fioflmsa :3 .mg

611

3893...... 3.8.9....

 

 

 

as

I=¢c<

 

 

 

HOlVO KING "“7101 '

as $3 .8 .wE
.commom wwwamumnmdwsd
monopmo .SH
295
Swami
4‘ Axmgo
.sswflog

A" W“

 

 

 

 

65.

 

 

 

PPO‘”

1

I
C
Q

HOLV

é
0 Fl lVCl 'lVJ.O.L

 

 

 

 

.nommom maimed momma .._N .mfim
aged .mhmamcd
spam monopmo
. mono spammed
assumes: a

—T

__A.
T

, ”-mr'

Hofire x11

“l ALMA.. .
we

DATE

a
if
‘

 

 

 

E
W ‘l‘JiOJ.

67

SIMMARY

Analysis of data collected by the use of a mandatory creel
count on a LII-mile section of Augusta Creek in southwestern
Michigan over a five-year period revealed the following mfoma—
tion:

Fishermen spent more than 20,700 hours in the pursuit of
their sport, and caught 6,930 trout, of which 6,062 were plant—
ed rainbow trout, 1479 were planted brown trait, 38h were brown
trout assumed to be native to the stream or renaining from pre-
vious plantings, and one was a brook trout.

Approximately ninety percent of all the trout creeled were
caught by fishermen using bait, seven percent by those using
dry or wet artificial flies, and six percent by anglers using
artificial plugs or spinners.

0f the 10,570 trout stocked in the stream section over the
five-year period, 6, 255 weretaken in the year in which they were
stocked, and 267 in following years for an over-all average re-
turn of 61.8 percent overt-the period. This figure should be con-
sidered a minimum return, since some trout were reported caught
outside the experimental area and were not recorded in the creel
count.

The average catch per angler declined from 2.1; trout in
1952 to 1.3‘trout in 1956. This decrease is attributed to the

increase in angling pressure on the stream during the same period.

68

Approximstely sixty percent of all fishermen visits to the
experimental stream section resulted in no trout to the creel.

It seems evident that the percentage of zero catches is a function
of the number of hours fished, with the more "patient" anglers
reporting the largest numbers of trout.

Only nine percent of the anglers fishing Augusta Creek test
stream accmnted for more than fifty percent of the total catch
over the five-year period. This implies that angler srccess may
be due to an inherited or acquired ability to catch fish. Statisti-
cal analysis of Augusta Creek creel census data gave evidence to
support this implication. It was found that the frequency distri-
bution of catches of various sizes may be represented by a curve
Isimilar to that of the Pareto distribution of special abilities
as applied to home runs in baseball or incomes in a stable society.
Thus it seems that successful anglers possess Special abilities
enabling them to catch fish, while unsuccessful anglers do not.

Present creel returns indicate that the current stocking
policy at Augusta Creek is sufficiently adequate, even though
a considerable number of fishermen reported no trout caught.

If catches outside the experimental area are considered, the
returns for the stream are exceptionally high for the state of

Michigan.

69

SHIECI‘ED REFERENCES

Boussu, M.F.
l95h. Relationship between trout population and cover on
a small stream. Jour. Wildlife Mgt., 18 (2): 229-
239.

Brown, CoDeJe
191th. Michigan streams - their lengths, distribution and
drainage areas. Mich. Dept. Cons. Misc. Publication
No. 1, Inst. Fish. Res.

Chamberlain, Thomas K.
l9h2, Research in stream management in the Pisgah National
forest. Trans. Am. Fish. Soc., 72: 150-177.

 

9
19h}. Overstocking trout streams. Trans. 8th. N. Am. Wild-
life Conf., pp. 350-3su.

C00per, E.L.
1951. Rate of exploitation of wild eastern brobk trout and
brown trout pcpulations in the Pigeon River, Otsego
County, Michigan. Trans. Am. Fish. Soc., 81: 22hp23h.

DaViS, H.S. .
1938. Objectives in trout stream management. Trans. Am.
Fish. Soc., 68: 76-83.

Davis, Harold T.
19U1. The analysis of economic time series. Cowles Comm.
for Res. in Econ., Mono. No. 6, Principia Press, Inc.,
Bloomington, Ind., pp. 39h~hhl.

Eicher, George J. Jr.
l9h6. Current trends in state fishery programs. Trans. Am.
Fish. Soc., 76: 13-22.

Ha zzard, Albert S.
1937. Results of stream and lake improvement in Michigan.
Trans. 2nd. N. Am. Wildlife Conf., pp. 620-62h.

_______: .
l9h1. The effects of snow and ice on fish life. Cent. Snow

(30an PI‘OCe, 1: 90—9LL.

7O

Hewitt, Edward R.
1938. What happens to our trout. N.Y. State Sportsnan, Feb.,
1938, pp. h,5,8 and 12.

Holloway, Ancil D., and Thomas K. Chamberlain.
1914.2. Trout management and stocking results in the national
forests of the southern Appalachians. Trans. 7th. N. Am.
Wildlife Conf., pp. 2145-2149.

Hubbs, Carl 1», John R. Greeley and Clarence M. Tarzwell.
1932. Methods for the improvement of Michigan trout streams.
Bill. Midi. Cons. Depte, InSte for FiShe R030 1, SLIP.)
15 FigS.

Lagler, Karl F.
1952. Freshwater fishery biology. Wm. C. Brown Co., Diblque,
Iowa, pp. 1142-11.].50

1935. The 1935 trout harvest from Furnace Brook, Vermont's
"test stream". Trans. Am. Fish. Soc., 65: 2211-233-

MaCiOlek, Jo, and FOR. Naedhame
1952. Ecological effects of winter conditions on trout and
trout foods in Convict Creek, California, 1951. Trans.
Am. Fish. Soc., 81: 202-217.

Morofsky, W.F., P.I.Tack and W.A. Lemmien.
191.9. Recovery of a southern Michi an trout stream. Mich. Ag.
Exp. Sta. Qlart.Bull ., 32: $1) 59-63.

Mottley, Charles M.
191:9. The statistical analysis of creel-census data. Trans.
‘01. Fish. 300., 763 290-”).

Needham, Paul R.
19147. alrvival rate of trout in a stream. Trans. Am. Fish.
Soc., 778 26—31.

Nielson, Reed 8., Norman Reimers and Harry D. Kennedy.
1957. A sir-year study of slrvival and vitality of hatchery.
reared rainbow trout of catchable size in Convict Creek,
California. Cal. Fish. and Game., LG: (1) 5-112.

Ricker, William E.
1918. Methods of estimating vital statistics of fish papulations.
Ind. UDiVQ mblo sale 391‘. N00 15, 1.101.

be

71

Schuck, Howard A.
191.2. The effect of papulation density of legal-sized trout
upon the yield per standard fishing effort in a con-
trolled section of stream. Trans. Am. Fish. Soc., 71:
236-2118.

Shetter, David S.

1939. Success of plantings of fingerling trout in Michigan
waters as demonstrated by marking experiments and
creel censuses. Trans. 11th. N. Am. Wildlife Conf.,
pp. 322-32’4.

 

’
191.7. Further results from spring and fall plantings of
legal-sized, hatchery-reared trout in streams and
lakes or Midligan. Trans. Am. Fish. 8°C., 7": 35-58.

19 . Resilts from plantings of marked fingerling brook
trout ( Salvelinus r. fontinalis Mitchell) in Hunt
Credr, Montmorency County, Michigan. Trans. Am. Fish.
Soc., 798 77-93.

Shetter, D.S. and A.S. Hazzard.
1910.. Results from plantings of marked trout of legal size
in streams and lakes of Michigan. Trans. Am. Fish.
500., 703 14.1.1.6-1‘68.

Shetter, David 3., 0.11. Clark and as. Hazzard.
191I6. The effect of deflectors in a section of a Michigan
trout stream. Trans. Am. Fish. Soc., 76: 216-278.

Shideler, James E.
1952. An analysis of brown trout ( Salmo tmtta) angling
on Augusta Creek in southwest Michigan. Unpub. M.S.
Thesis, Dept. of Fish. and Wildlife, Mich. State Univ.

Snith, Lloyd L. Jr.
191.1. The results of planting brook trout of legal size in
the Salmon Trout River, northern Michigan. Trans.
Am. Fish. Soc., 70: 219-259.

Tarzwell, Clarence M.
1931. Trout stream improvement in Michigan. Trans. Am. Fish.
&c.’ 61: 148—57.

____a
1935. Progress in lake and stream improvement. Trans. Am.
Game Conf., pp. 119-1314.

I.

72

Tarzwell, Clarence M.
1936. Lake and stream improvement in Michigan. Proc. N. Am.
Wildlife Conf., pp. h29-h3h.

________.3
1937. Experimental evidence on the value of trout stream
igprovement in Michigan. Trans. Am. Fish. Soc.,
8 177-1870

_,
1938. Factors influencing fish food and fish production
in southwestern streams. Trans. Am. Fish. Soc.,
678 2146-2550

Vestal, EILden H.
1951;. Creel returns frcm Rush Creek test stream, Mono County,
California, 1910-1951. Cal. Fish and Game, Lo: (2)
89-1014.