l l {Ill (will!!! l”! ll 1!! ll ll Ill Lilli l L
LI BRA R Y

Michigan Stat:
University ‘

This is to certify that the

thesis entitled

Some Aspects of the Population Ecology of
the Smallmouth Bass in a Small Michigan Stream

presented by

Thomas C . Dewberry

has been accepted towards fulfillment
of the requirements for

_Mas_te_x_ degree in Eisherim Wildlife

5w. gm

Major professo

Date

 

0-7639

 

-A... 6—4...

YRWZS'aag

i :9 ill-.1350
“baa gas?

tom-19m Inc

 

 

 

 

SOME ASPECTS OF THE POPULATION ECOLOGY
OF THE SMALLMOUTH BASS IN'A SMALL

MICHIGAN STREAM

BY

Thomas C. Dewberry

A THESIS
submitted to
Michigan State University
in partial fulfillment of the requirements
for the degree of

MASTER OF SCIENCE

Department of Fisheries and Wildlife

1978

{/oaacs/

ABSTRACT
SOME ASPECTS OF THE POPULATION ECOLOGY

OF THE SMALLMOUTH BASS IN A SMALL
MICHIGAN STREAM

BY

Thomas C. Dewberry

The population of large smallmouth bass appeared to vary greatly
throughout the year in Spring Brook. The most plausible explanation
was that the fish were migratory.

Mark-and-recapture electrofishing inventories were conducted in
April, June, and September. A weir with two-way fish traps was main-
tained from April into September.

The data indicated the large smallmouth bass were not migratory.
They did move considerably during the year but movement was generally
limited to about 1 km. Analysis of their habitat requirements
provided an explanation for the movement.

An investigation of the geology and hydrology of the drainage basin

provided an explanation for the distribution of smallmouth bass in

Spring Brook.

The size of crayfish eaten by the rockbass and smallmouth bass,
combined with field observations, suggested that Age-I and II small-
mouth bass fed primarilly in riffles; while the rockbass predominantly

fed in the vegetational areas along the stream margin.

TO MARY

ii

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

I wish to express my personal graditude to Dr. Eugene Roelofs,
under whose guidance this study and degree were undertahen, and to
my graduate committee, Dr. Grahame Larson, Dr. Niles Kevern, and Dr.
Ray White whose suggestions and criticisms were invaluable in the

preparation of the manuscript.

I am also grateful to all my colleagues , too numerous to

name at this point, for their assistance throughout the study.
Special thanks are also extended to the Michigan Department

of Natural Resources, especially Mr. David Havens, for designing

and building the weir.

iii

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Page
LIST OF TABLES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . v
LIST OF FIGURES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ~,- . . . . . . . . . vi
INTRODUCTION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
STUDY AREA DESCRIPTION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5

SMALLMOUTH BASS POPULATION 19

O
O
O
O
O
O
C
O
O
O
0

Methods . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
Results and Discussion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
Reproduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18
Remaining Population Parameters . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22
Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24
PHYSIOGRAPHY . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25
Methods . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25
Results and Discussion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29
Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 45
SMALLMOUTH BASS - ROCKBASS INTERACTION . . . . . . . . . . . . . 46
Methods . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 48
Results and Discussion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50
Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 54
IMPLICATIONS FOR.MANAGEMENT . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 57
APPENDIX I . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 61

LIST OF REFERENCES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 65

iv

LIST OF TABLES

TABLE Page

1. Distribution of large smallmouth bass captured
in the study area 0 O O O O I O O I O O O I O O O O O O O O O 14

2. Friedman Test for equal catchability among seven
size groups of smallmouth bass. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15

3. Movement of smallmouth bass through the weir, 1977. . . . . . . 17

4. Back calculated lengths of smallmouth bass
collected during 1977, Lee Method. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23

5. Groundwater yield for selected subbasins in the
Spring Brook drainage basin. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 42

6. Monthly deviations in air temperature from average,
Lansing, MI, Spring 1977. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . d4

7. Monthly deviations in precipitation from average,
LanSing, MI 19770 0 o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o 44

8. Food items of smallmouth bass and rockbass (From
Carlander 1977). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 47

9. Size distribution of crayfish from two habitats
in the study area. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55

10.Groundwater yield for selected streams in lower
Mi Ch igan O 0 O O O O I O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O Q I O O 5 8

Appendix I. Flora and fauna of the Spring Brook
stUdy area 0 O O O I O O O I O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O I O 6 1

FIGURE

1. Michigan river basins and the location of Spring Brook.

2. The Spring Brook drainage basin. . . . . . . . . . . .

3. Location of marshes in the Spring Brook basin. . . . .

4. The study area of Spring Brook. . . . . . . . . . . .

5. Population estimate of adult smallmouth bass in the
study area. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

6. Distribution of pools in the study area of Spring Brook,

10.

11.

12.
13.
14.
15.
16.

1}.

LIST OF FIGURES

Spring 1977. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Distribution of pools at base-flow in the study area of
Spring Brook, Summer 1977. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Distribution of successful smallmouth bass nests in the
study area of Spring Brook, Spring 1977. . . . . . . .

Frequency of occurrence of smallmouth bass in various
habitats in Ill. (compiled from Forbes and Richard-
son's 1920 data). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Location of the study sites along Spring Brook for
determdning the profiles of temperature, discharge,

and conductivity. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Contour map of the bedrock surface in the Spring Brook
ba81n. OI I C O O O O O I I O O O O O O O O O O I O O

Contour map of the drift thickness, Spring Brook basin.
Stage I of the deglaciation of the Spring Brook basin.

Stage II of the deglaciation of the Spring Brook basin.

Stage III of the deglaciation of the Spring Brook basin.

Stage IN'of the deglaciation of the Spring Brook basin.

Stage V of the deglaciation of the Spring Brook basin.

vi

Page

13

19

20

21

27

' 3O

31

34
35
36

37

LIST OF FIGURES- Continued

FIGURE

18.
19.

20.

21.

Contour map of the water table in the Spring Brook basin.

Profiles of temperature, discharge, and conductivity '
along Spring Brook, Aug 2, 1977. . . . . . . . . . . .

Maximum size of crayfish eaten by rockbass and smallmouth

bass of a given length. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Size of crayfish eaten by smallmouth bass and rockbass

of a given length from Spring Brook, August 1977.

vii

Page

.38

.41

.51

.52

INTRODUCTION

In Michigan, warmrwater streams have received little attention
from biologists. This Situation seems perplexing since the top
predator in these systems is one of the most sought-after game
fish in North America, the smallmouth bass. One would expect
south-central Michigan streams to rank among the best smallmouth
bass streams in the country because southern Michigan is located
near the center of the smallmouth bass's range.

Fifty years ago, the Grand, Kalamazoo, and St. Joseph Rivers
and their tributaries were nationally renowned smallmouth bass
streams (Figure 1). Since that time the watersheds have been
highly developed. Industrial, urban, and agricultural develOpment
proceeded and the streams lost groundwater input when channelized,
which destroyed much smallmouth bass habitat; erosion increased
stream turbidity; and more effluent and fertilizers entered the
streams. Many of these warm-water streams shifted from an autotrophic
state, augmented by imported energy from the watershed to an import-
export regime where large influxes of organic matter outweighed
production in the stream itself (Vannote 1963). As a result, the
smallmouth bass populations in the southern Michigan area have been
greatly reduced.

Spring Brook, a minor third order (Horton 1945) tributary of

the Grand River, is unusual. It is among the least perturbed

.xooum mcmuom mo c.0283 o5 com magma: ~95.“ cowasowz A ouswam

z-w‘n \ I"v‘°-'
toe-n «Exam . .6:

:3: 2:5;

 

 

 

streams in south-central Michigan and is a good smallmouth bass
stream. There are no towns, villages, or factories located within
the drainage basin above the study area. Extensive marshes in

the upper two-thirds of the basin buffer the stream from
agricultural and urban activities. Only a small section of the
stream.has been channelized. The streams adjacent to Spring
Brook have been managed as marginal trout streams while Spring
Brook has not.

The study area was selected because it is the section of
Spring Brook which contained the largest number of smallmouth bass
and has provided me with good smallmouth bass fishing for 15 years.
The stream reach can be sampled effectively with standard gear.
There were no pools too deep to sample by electrofishing nor was
the channel blocked by log jams. Adjacent stream reaches harbored
fewer but larger bass. In these sections, I have caught bass up
to 3.1 kg. In the study area,which receives little fishing, the
largest smallmouth bass was just under 1.9 kg.

For many years, I have observed that the number of large
smallmouth bass in some sections of Spring Brook seemed to vary
greatly throughout the year. A preliminary study of the smallmouth
bass was conducted during 1976. A large number of bass over 350
mm were observed in the spring. By midsummer, few large bass could
be found-in the study sections. The possible explanations for this
included: 1) fishing mortality, 2) natural mortality, 3)
emigration. Fishing mortality was unlikely; few fishermen were

observed in the study area. Natural mortalitwaas also unlikely;

smallmouth bass are long-lived. The most plausible explanation for
the phenomenon was emigration. A literature review revealed the extent
of migrations in smallmouth bass was unknown. webster (1954), Cleary
(1956), Trautman (1957), and Robbins (1975) reported the occurrence
of migrations in bass populations. Funk (1957) found that a group
of smallmouth bass were mobile, however, the fish were generally
immature.

The primary objective of this study was to gain an understanding
of the mechanism causing the fluctuation of large smallmouth bass
in the study area of Spring Brook. An investigation of the physical
aspects of the watershed was also conducted to gain an understanding

of the distribution of smallmouth bass in Spring Brook.

STUDY AREA DESCRIPTION

Spring Brook, a minor tributary of the Grand River, rises
in a sedge-grass marsh in north-western Jackson County and flows
north 29.4 km to its confluence with the Grand River at the town
of Eaton Rapids (Figures 1 and 2). The Spring Brook drainage basin
was defined as the segment of stream and associated catchment basin
upstream from Spicerville Road, the site of a U.S.G.S. partial
records station. The drainage area is 147.6 kmz. The upper half
of the basin consists of sand, gravel, and glacial till overlying
Saginaw Sandstone. The lower half of the basin is primarily
30-60 m of glacial till overlying bedrock. The dominant land use
in the basin is agriculture, although the upper two-thirds of the
basin has extensive marshes generally wider than 1 km (Figure 3).
The marshes are primarily managed as wildlife habitat and provide
an extensive "green belt" for the stream. Mean gradient of the
upper two-thirds of Spring Brook is 0.04%. The mean gradient of
the lower one-third of the stream,which includes the study area,
is 0.85% (4.5 ft/mi).

The study area encompassed 1.95 km of Spring Brook between
Bradford and Holmes Roads in Eaton County (Figures 2 and 4).
This reach has a moderately well-developed riffle-pool profile

and a substrate of predominantly rubble and boulders.

t, \ Eaton Rapids
\’ ‘s
I \
,J ‘ 3mm Rd
!
a 3
r ‘x-J \HOII" II
I ’ l.
I \‘
I ‘-\
I R
x
J g“
:’ ~
’\
x
‘3 \\~:’ \‘
.f \h
1 .
x \‘
t ‘ I)
x’ g
t
a a ,
’ \
‘ t ,
I, x“
' ~~u~ ‘
M”. I’ ) x‘
but , f
I
- E“‘”‘-- I " z
Spring- , 1
\ a
port , I
er (I
f I
\
‘ a
\
\ ,’
I l
r-———-4 (_‘ ,
0 2 “I \ l)
\\ ‘s‘
’ 3
If) ‘\
~a-u"
1’ :3
‘ s
\
\ ,’
\ , \
V \‘ I’
‘\ a cs /
\vl \v/\'~‘\ /
-\\._I’

Figure 2. The Spring Brook drainage basin.

(I
I
I” V
I
\
I v
r”
.“
‘\-..__ (I
V Marshes
t————c
. III

 

Figure 3. Location of marshes in the Spring Brook basin.

Bradford Road

 

N
Section A
Section B
Section C
O 200 m
't

Figure 4. The study area of Spring Brook.

The channel is about 7 m wide with pools about 1 m deep at a base
flow of 0.14 m3/sec. During the preliminary study, the research
area was divided into 3 sections of about equal length (Figure 4).
Sections A and C were high gradient sections, principally long
shallow riffles. The substrate was mainly rubble and boulders
which had armor-plated the stream bed. The pools were not well
developed. Section B consisted of several habitats. The upper

30 m was the largest and deepest pool in the study area, the
substrate being composed of sand and large boulders. A long shallow,
sandy riffle occupied the rest of the upper half of this section.
The lower half of section B had a low gradient, deep pools , and
slow flow. The substrate in the thalweg was sand in gravel. In
adjacent areas extensive silt deposits had formed. A small log
jam and overhanging shrubs provided an abundance of cover.

The tree canopy over the study area was 502 closed, 45%
partial, and 52 open. The preponderance of canOpy cover indicated
allochthonous detritus was probably important in the stream's
trophic system. Lists of the flora and fauna are given in
Appendix I , along with their microhabitat associations and

relative abundance throughout the year.

10

SMALLMOUTH BASS POPULATION

Methods
Estimates of the smallmouth bass population in the study area
were made by mark-and recapture electrofishing with calculations

by the Bailey Modification of the Petersen Method (Ricker 1958).

P: M gc+12
n+1

where P is the population estimate, M is the number of fish marked
on the first run, C is the number of marked and unmarked fish
captured on the second run. Confidence intervals were calculated
for the population estimates according to the procedure outlined
by Davis (1964). The 95% confidence intervals were obtained from
the tables given in Adams (1951). The bass were partitioned into
3 size groups by the methods outlined by MacFadden (1961) to
determine if gross changes in the size distribution took place
during the year.

The electrofishing inventories were made in April, June, and
September. Care was taken to minimize the movement between the
sections. The sections were delimited by shallow riffles. During
the April population estimate, block nets were placed in the riffles
to minimize movement. A 240-volt AC generator rectified to DC was

mounted in a small boat which was towed by a crew member. Three

11

positive electrodes were attached to 8 m cables. The ground was a
piece of copper screen attached to a Styrofoam float and towed be-
hind the boat.

The weir and a 2-way fish trap were maintained from April to
September 1977. The weir, located about 1 km below the study area,
blocked the movement of all bass greater than 155 mm. The trap con-
sisted of two live-boxes each with a funnel in one end, placed so
that the funnel of one faced upstream and that of the other down-
stream.

A creel survey was conducted from late May through September to
characterize the angler harvest. On weekdays, the study area was
walked morning and evening. On weekends during June and July, the
area was walked hourly throughout the daylight hours. The land-
owners along the stream also provided valuable assistance by notify-

ing me when they saw anglers in the area.

Results and Discussion

 

Initially, we experienced all the problems Vannote (1963) in-
dicated. Smallmouth bass could avoid recapture by direct-current
electrofishing gear. They apparently could escape the margin of
an approaching electrical field. If they were attracted, the bass
often approached at high speeds and frequently were carried com-
pletely through the field. During the first population estimate,
the most sucessful technique consisted of moving quickly between
pools, using the element of surprise. The last few meters before
a pool, we would move slowly with the electrodes out of the water.

If fish were seen ahead of us, an electrode was touched to the water

12

for about 1 second. The electrodes were simultaneously thrust into
the pool and moved very quickly. This appeared to disorient the bass.
Later in the season, a more sucessful technique was to place the
electrodes in a line across the stream. The crew would then move
slowly upstream manipulating the electrodes slowly.

The electrofishing inventories indicated the number of large
bass changed markedly in each section, while in the research area
as a whole, there was little change in the population numbers (Fig-
ure 5 and Table l). The assumption of equal catchability for each
size group was accepted (Table 2). The population estimates for
each section could not be determined independently because of the
high mobility between sections. For example, 55.5% of the recap-
tured fish had changed sections between the first and second runs
of the April population estimate. The number of large bass in
sections A and C declined from spring to summer. About half of
the large bass which disappeared from sections A and C were recap-
tured in June and September in section B. .

The section of stream between the study area and the weir was
electrofished during the June population estimated to determine the
number of marked fish that had moved downstream of the study area
but upstream of the weir. A total of nine marked bass were identi-
fied. Located in this section was a large log jam and a hole too
deep to adequately electrofish. Angling this section indicated a
large number of bass.

The 800-m section above the research area to Holmes Road was
electrofished during the September estimate to determine the number

of marked fish which had moved above the study area. A total of

.nmmH .mmum %o=um osu :fi moms suooaHHmam ufinpm mo oumefiumo cowumasnom .m seamen

 

l3

 

 

 

HQDEUUQNW mash. HfiHnw<
_ _ _
nem>umuca oucoeamcou Nome
J1

J- “m
m.
11. a
1
0
n om~ .3
S
m
8
TL
TL
L. w
n
3
Us
.. mNN an
e
s
S

Lfi i can

1 mum

 

14

Table 1. Distribution of large smallmouth bass captured in the
study area.

 

 

Population Inventory Size
Greater than 400 mm 350-400 mm
Section Section
A B C A B C
April 2 1 4 8 1 1
June 0 2 1 3 6 0

September 0 3 O 1 5 O

15

Table 2. Friedman Test for equal catchability among seven size groups
of smallmouth bass.

 

 

Size Group Efficiency of Capture
April June September

greater than
400 mm 0.5 0.0 . 0.5
360-399 mm 0.33 0.2 1.0
320-359 mm 0.2 0.5 0.375
280-319 mm 0.273 1.0 0.714
240-279 mm 0.2 0.2 0.5
200-239 mm 0.125 0.4 0.556
160-199 mm 0.0 0.636 0.2 ,

2
X - 5.285

2 .

Therefore, do not reject the hypothesis of equal catchability among
the size groups.

16

five marked fish were captured. All were captured in the same pool
about 150 m above the study area.

Few smallmouth bass were captured in the fish traps (Table 3).
The bass captured in the fish traps did indicate a general pattern
of movement. Before spawning, the bass moved equally in both direc-
tions. In general, the fish moving upstream were slightly larger
than those moving downstream. After spawning, all bass caught were
moving downstream. Five marked fish from the study area were trap-
ped during the year. Four of the five fish were from section C, the
farthest upstream section. One bass, marked at the uppermost sta-
tion, was trapped the following day. The fish had travelled 2.95 km
in 10 hours. It was difficult to evaluate the data collected at the
weir. As the stream approached base-flow, smallmouth bass became
adept at getting out of the traps. Apparently, they were able to
located the entrance to the funnel. Probably a larger number of
bass would have moved downstream had the weir not been present.

Larimore (1952) and many others have reported that smallmouth
bass are pool fish, though to date no study has adequately defined
the necessary requirements of pools for adult fish. Gerking (1949)
noted the total volume of pools within the 2-foot contour correlated
(+0.866) with absolute weight of fish from a stream section. Also,
the Instream Flow Group (1977) published electivity curves for
adult smallmouth bass which indicated 2 to 4 ft. was the threshold
depth for pools.

If discharge decreased enough, pool depth and volume would
dimdnish until the bass vacated the pool. During the preliminary

spring study, there were pools greater than 1 m deep in section A

17

Table 3. Movement of smallmouth bass through the weir, 1977.

 

 

week Movement
Upstream Downstream
April 19-23 1 0
April 24-30 0 1
Mhy 1-7 0 0
May 8-14 0 1
May 15-21 3 3
May 22-28 * 1 1
May 29-June 4 0 0
June 5-11 0 6
June 12-18 0 2
June 19-25 0 0
June 26-July 2 0 2
July 3-9 0 2
July 10-16 0 1
July 17-23 0 3
July 24-30 0 0
July 31-August 6 O 0
August 7-13 0 1
August 14-20 0 1
August 21-27 0 0
August 28- September 3 0 1
September 4-10 0 0
September 11-13 0 0

* Period of most intensive bass spawning.

18

which contained bass over 350 mm. Snorkeling and fishing observa-
tions indicated that the large bass left these pools as the depth
approached 1 m. One of the objectives of this study was to define
the minimum depths and volumes of pools for adult bass. Stream
discharge in May did not maintain the normal high level. As a re-
sult, no large fish were ever noted in 4 of the 7 pools in section
A during 1977. This suggested the population of large smallmouth
bass in sections A and C was lower during the study year than most
years. Figures 6 and 7 indicate the distribution of pools in Spring

Brook during the spring and summer.

Reproduction

Smallmouth bass are spring spawners and spawning activity is
closely related to water temperature (Hubbs and Bailey 1938). The
first nesting male in Spring Brook was observed 11 May 1977. The
water temperature coincided with that reported by Hubbs and Bailey
(1938). Twenty-five successful nests were found in the study area
between 19-25 May 1977 (Figure 8). No estimate of unsuccessful
nests was possible as many successful nests were not found until
the fry were observed. Nests in Spring Brook were found in rubble
areas adjacent to pools. The nest locations were in pockets of
minimum current.

I The number of successful nests in each section was 13.3 and 9
respectively. This distribution of nests within the study area was
very clumped. With the exception of one nest, all were located
along the periphery of a pool (Figure 8). Cleary (1956) and Sur-

ber (1943) also noted this phenomenon and hypothesized it was to

19

/,

an Pools-greater than 1 m
/7 deep

 

200 m

0

Figure 6. Distribution of pools in the study area of Spring Brook,
Spring 1977.

20

.- Pools- greater than 1 m
deep.

 

o 200 m (V

Figure 7. Distribution of pools at base-flow in the study area of
Spring Brook, Summer 1977.

21

A
1.
c X Successful nests

. Pools

 

 

 

0 200 m

Figure 8. Distribution of successful smallmouth bass nests in the
study area of Spring Brook, Spring 1977.

22

take advantage of the minimum current velocities in the pools. They
noted the lack of pools meant no spawning. The pools also provide
cover for the nesting bass. An analysis of the habitat in each sec-
tion provided an explanation for the distribution.

Sections A and C are characterized by long riffles and general-
ly poorly deve10ped pools. In section A, 13 nests were located and
9 of these were associated with 1 pool within 20 m of section C. The
remainder of section B is either long shallow riffles or long deep
pools with very little rubble. The substrate is not stable during

this time in these pools.

Remaining Population Parameters
The major limitation was that the fish could not be aged accur-
ately by the scale method. This problem had previously been obser-
ved by Brown (1960) and Keating (1970). Table 4 contains data and
back-calculated lengths using the Lee Method for the bass which
could be aged accurately. From these data, it is apparent that
natural mortality was not the major mechanism regulating the number
of large base in the study area. Smallmouth bass reached 350 mm
by the 7th year and the year classes VIII-XIII were well represented.
The creel survey revealed fishing mortality in the study area
was minimal. Six fishermen were found in the research area and in-
terviewed during the season. A total of 5 smallmouth bass were
kept. Four of the anglers did not keep any fish. In all cases,
the fishermen were contacted during their first trip to the study
area. The total fishing time was 32 man-days for the season, in-

dicating that there was little fishing done in Spring Brook.

23

mm- Hm m.o cm as mm am am us an mm mm muamamuucn

mowmuo><

use mms mos ham ham can ism mom sew mmu men was we emuemaaz
Nos aam awn can omm mam son Nam mmN amm mes mas me Nae H seal
one one awe ems awe mos can amm AeN mks all me ems _ meal

man can hem can «mm mmm elm emu saw mma as man N eea_

hos lam com awn Rom sea emu Hal can we «we a seal

can amm mom omN new mo~ cal «Na in sen N moms

mam Nmm own new amm ems mma as man a some

dam aim mam ANN mks ANI «A mmm a one“

new new sow was owl ma mom ma Hams

mam emu ass mNH as new no use“

cam «as mus as new em mesa

“so mms we mmu an anal

ems a» mom a mass

 

Box fix on x on E; HH> S > 5 HE E H Sunshade SE 358

AEEV :ofiumshom wa::n< um onumcog Aaavzumaoq .uz womb

.oosuoz own .mmmH wcwuco oouooHHoo ammo sunosflamsm mo unuwcoa ooumanoamo xoom .q manna

 

24

Summary

The electrofishing inventories indicated the number of bass
changed little during the season for the research area as a whole.
Few bass moved downstream to the fish traps, so the hypothesis that
the smallmouth bass in the study area were migratory was rejected.

The number of large bass in sections A and C varied significant-
ly throughout the year. In spring, these sections had adequate pools
and provided good spawing habitat. During the summer, at base-flow,
there were few pools in these two sections and few bass. As the
'stream stage declined, the bass moved into section B, upstream to
deeper pools, and downstream to deeper pools. Few bass travelled
downstream farther than 1 km. The presence of a large number of
bass in Ages VIII-XII and few fishermen indicated mortality is quite
low and not the primary mechanism regulating the number of large

bass in the study area.

25

PHYSIOGRAPHY

The occurrence of a large resident population of smallmouth bass
in a third order stream is not common in the Great Lakes Region.
Forbes and Richardson (1920) noted smallmouth bass were most common
in small rivers (Figure 9). Hubbs and Bailey (1938) remarked that
smallmouth base were rare in streams less than 10.6 m wide.

A third order stream which contains a large population of small-
mouth.bass is in a quasi-equilibrium situation: the stream must have
enough groundwater flow to maintain adequate pools during base flow;
but not so much groundwater that summer temperatures would be too
cold for bass reproduction and growth. The temperature of the ground-
water in this area is 9.5 C (Knutilla 1968). This section of the
study is an investigation of the geomorphic-hydrologic aspects of

the watershed.

Methods

'Maps of the bedrock surface, drift thickness, and water table
were constructed from well log data and contoured by computer. The
deglaciation history of Spring Brook drainage basin was reconstructed
from analysis of topographic maps, soils maps, and field observations
in conjuction with the above maps.

On 2 and 3 August 1977, when Spring Brook was at base-flow,
discharge,water temperature, and conductivity were measured at 10

sites upstream from the study area (Figure 10). Discharge was

26

60"
50-
8
a, 40
U -
C.‘
G)
H
L:
:J
U
0
O
l-H
o _
g 30
U
t:
(D
D
O“
O)
H
In
20_
10'
l l I l

 

 

Creeks Small Large Lakes
Rivers Rivers

(1-3 Order) (4-5 Order) (6+ Order)

Figure 9. Frequency of occurrence of smallmouth bass in various

habitats in Ill.(compiled from Forbes and Richardson 1920).

27

5’
‘11 1
l/ '
. \
t 10 I
f'\.J 1
I I
l \ ~ "' "‘ \
f 9 ‘)
3 F
{I \x r"\
~" 8 - \v/ \\
I \\
1’ i
r ’ ~,
’4 7 2
1 ' ‘ x
‘. 6 :
’ (“J
l./
r - ‘\
‘4 J’ “5 ‘\
""-~ I ‘ ‘
\hw~~ ”
~' .V') ' 5 t1
\ a
‘ ,1
“I
I
: “ "
\ )
) I
,_____.. ’ i
‘\ 3 )
o 2 km 5) “x!
2
.. ’1’ \v
‘1’“. S)
l 1 '
\ \
‘““\‘ }
\\”~\‘-’"~Q ,/
‘QJ

Figure 10. Location of the study sites along Spring Brook for

determining the profiles of temperature, discharge,
and conductivity.

28

measured with a Pygmy Gurley meter. The temperature data were col-
lected with a hand-held thermometer. Water samples were taken and
the conductivity was measured in the laboratory. The temperature
data and the water samples were collected within a 2-hour period
during the evening. The temperature data represented the maximum
temperature expected during the year at each site, as the air temp-
erature was 30+ C and the stream.was at base flow.

The discharge data were used to compute the groundwater yield,
i.e. discharge/drainage area, is a standard method to quantifying
the rate of groundwater recharge of a stream. The drainage above
a site was determined by planimetering the surface drainage area
(on a U.S.G.S. topographic map) above the given site.

Temperature and discharge data were collected throughout the
year in the study area; however, no records were available to deter-
mine the average temperature and discharge regimes. Since air temp-
erature is one of the major factors affecting stream temperature,
some data from Lansing, Michigan, 15 miles to the north were inclu-
ded. The nearest continuous recording U.S.G.S. station is on the
Grand River in Baton Rapids. The Spring Brook stream flow charac-
teristics should show trends similar to the Grand River's. The
catchment basin of the Grand River above Eaton Rapids lies directly
east of the Spring Brook basin (Figure l), and the normal storm
tracks in the region are generally west to east. The water temp-
erature in the study area was monitored from March to September with

a Taylor recording themograph.

29

Results and Discussion

 

The Spring Brook drainage area is located along the southern
edge of the Michigan basin and is underlain by both drift and sand-
stone of Mississippian age. Drilling logs from oil and water wells
within the drainage basin indicate the surface contact point be-
tween the Marshall Sandstone and the Saginaw Sandstone closely
coincides with the southern boundry of the drainage basin. The bed-
rock surface map indicates that the general slope of the bedrock is
to the north (Figure 11). In addition, the map shows a stream val-
ley in the bedrock. This valley coincides well with the present
location of the Spring Brook channel and appears to influence the
location of Spring Brook and the direction of stream flow.

The drainage basin was deglaciated about 12,000 years ago. Dur-
ing deglaciation a mantle of drift ranging from 3-70 m in thickness
was deposited over the bedrock. Thickness is shown in Figure 12.

It appears the shallowest drift occurs in the southwestern corner
of the basin; the thickest drift is located in the northern half of
the basin. In general, the drift in the upper part of the basin is
composed of sand and gravel while the remainder of the drainage
area is composed mainly of till.

The deglaciation history of the Spring Brook area is very com-
plex. Hypothetically, the earliest stage of deglaciation is rep-
resented in Figure 13. The deglaciated area was basically a bed-
rock high on the west side and an end moraine (till) on the east
side with a valley train in the center. The composition of the
drift along the valley train is primarily sand and gravel indicating

extensive glacial-fluvial influence. Kames and kame terraces are

30

  

Contour interval- 25 ft

Figure 11. Contour map of the bedrock surface in the Spring Brook
basin. ‘

31

 

\ v'x‘fa

     

u-———|
0 1 km

Contour interval-50 ft

Surface watershed

Figure 12. Contour map of drift thickness, Spring Brook basin.

32

   
 

’f‘s“
< ~.
I I
c’ (
x j N
"‘--’ I
z k
I ‘Iw-n‘
I \
) (’
f \
k ‘ ’~\
a, \‘/ \
I ‘\
u’ |
r’ \1
‘ l
I" <
{ \
. l
' I
J r‘"
1" “‘\
' ~4-
..,,_‘_J/ z x,
« 2
\ a
aJ' I
l I
I L
I I!
'——" ‘ ICE FRONT I
0 1 km
‘\
I
‘5
Present watershed-._~.’,"' ‘J
\ (J
‘ s
\v\
\ l
\ a. 0‘ I,
"v’ ‘”"\..‘~‘Jf

Figure 13. Stage I of the deglaciation of the Spring Brook Basin.

33

the major landforms along the valley walls and are indicative of
glacial stagnation. The drainage outlet was 293 m above present
sea level and flowed south (Figure 13). As deglaciation proceeded,
a new outlet was established at B (Figure 14), at an elevation of
291 m. The remnants of this channel show extensive development
which indicates it was utilized for a greater period of time or had
greater discharge than the first channel. The basic drift types
and landforms are unchanged from the first stage.

After the glacier had receeded northerly past point C (Figure
15), the level of impounded water dropped to approximately 285 m as
a new outlet was again uncovered. The next stage of deglaciation
involved complete drainage of the impounded water and reversal of
drainage. The ice and the surrounding uplands had been higher than
the southern and the western outlets. As the ice melted, meltwater
no longer could be impounded at the high level. As the ice margin
retreated northward, a well developed outlet was formed along the
northern rim of the basin, causing the meltwater to flow northward
into the deveIOping Grand River (Figure 16). Up until this time,
Spring Brook had been part of the glacial Kalamazoo River system.

The ice then apparently retreated to the northwest (Figure 17).
A lower outflow channel was then developed; this channel is the
present Spring Brook channel. As downcutting progressed, the lake
was drained and cobble and boulders were left accumulated in the
channel. At some stages, the channel bed undoubtedly became armor-
plated thus preventing further downcutting until a flood removed
the armor-plate.

The predominant sediment type in the formerly impounded area

34

 

 

Fi ure 14.
3 Stage II of the deglaciation of the Spring Brook basin

35

l
f l
i }
r‘\-3 :
\
t I“
/“ ICE FRONT
‘ ‘\ ’Q
‘~ ‘\V’ ‘\
I \‘
’ l
I) c ‘3
) I
I (
I \
U I
fa) (b...)
( "p “\
‘-- r’ I 1
s: \
\a’ s ‘ ‘- I
" “1 ‘1
‘ a
l I
a) f
n’ s’
f---i I S
\ I
0 1 km 1 ‘ I
l_\ l
\
\
3» “i
I \
Present watershed.______.( ' (S
1
\ \
\\~/~‘\—’V"\ ll
v-s \J

Figure 15. Stage III of the deglaciation of the Spring Brook basin.

36

 

\
t
‘a” x‘
’
( I
’
Present watershed-———___.: 2
\vs“ I,
- I
\\’I \v’\p~n‘.“v’

Figure 16. Stage IV of the deglaciation of the Spring Brook basin.

37

I
, s
3 “
I ‘1
I’ '
. \
y I
rx_4 :
/ \‘--
( \
\ ‘1
II” {-
t“ \\\ I” \
l . \V’ \‘
, \
I \
J 1
r , ‘~
I I
1’ g ‘
(
1‘ ‘ \
‘ l
’ I
r’ ’5’
r - “
\‘-‘- J! .1 ‘\
4,”: I‘ 1
b~~~‘ I)
v Q- ‘ Q
i “
‘ J
I I,
I" r
' I
I ’s
\ I
) I
' i
-\
\\ j
I “K
I
I’ l
.- \
/"' a "
s "
|\ {J
Q
" \\ i
\ ~ I
\ J, ‘ " ‘I 'b '5 I
‘~ J,

Figure 17. Stage V of the deglaciation of the Spring Brook Basin.

38

 

 
  

Contour interval- 10 ft

3"
Present watershed/W

Figure 18. Contour map of the water table in the Spring Brook basin.

39

is clay, indicative of standing water. The soil types in the shal-
low areas of the old glacial lake are predominantly Carlisle Muck
(0.4 m deep).

The Spring Brook drainage basin receives an average of 81.3 cm
of precipitation annually and has mean annual rundff of 25.4 cm
(Bent 1970). Knutilla (1968) reported the groundwater yield for
Spring Brook was lower than adjacent streams.

There are two components of runoff (groundwater and surface)
and the portion of each component has a profound influence on the
flow—duration curve. In general, the more groundwater discharge
into the stream, the more stable the flow and the greater the base-
flow discharge (Henderson and Doonan 1972).

The amount of groundwater entering a stream is the result of
physiographic parameters, probably the most important being the per-
meability of the soils and drift. water falling on sandy, well-
drained soils has a greater tendency to percolate down to the water
table than water falling on clay soils. Permeable soils and drift
provide much greater groundwater recharge capability than less per-
meable soils and drift. More permeable drift also allows greater
horizontal movement through the drift the greater the groundwater
discharge into the stream. The permeability of soils is largely
determined by the parent material, in this region, usually glacial
drift. Drift composed of sand and gravel is much more permeable
than drift composed primarily of clay. Glacial features primarily
constructed by glacial-fluvial processes are characteristically
composed of sorted sand and gravel; they are highly permeable.

Examples of these features include outwash plains, and kame

40

terraces. Glacial features composed of till generally are not as
permeable. The least permeable landforms are the glacial lake bot-
toms .

The watertable map suggests the typical situation, i.e. most
of the groundwater in the basin is moving toward the stream channel
(Figure 18). Horizontal movement of groundwater out-of the drainage
basin is probably not the reason for Spring Brook's lower than
expected base flow.

The discharge profile indicated groundwater recharge into the
stream channel was not constant (Figure 19). Analysis of the yields
indicated the overall groundwater input declined from station 4 to
11 (Table 5). The groundwater yields of the 3 sections of Spring
Brook were significantly different. The results were those predicted
from the analysis of the drift types. The upper third of the basin
is constructed of highly permeable glacial-fluvial drift. The ground-
water input to the stream is high in the section. The middle section
of the stream is a glacial lake bed. The clay sediments significantly
reduce the groundwater input to the stream. In the lower section,
which includes the study area, the stream transects a till plain.

The groundwater yield is intermediate between the other two sections.

Temperature measurement has been used by hydrologists to determine
the relative amounts of groundwater inputs to stream reachs. During
summer base flow, the greater the groundwater input the cooler
the stream temperature. The temperature and groundwater recharge to
the stream 'were negatively correlated in Spring Brook (Figure 19).

Conductivity measurement is also a standard technique for

41

(3) aznnszadmsl

.23 .N ms< .xoowm magnum wcofim Dfl>wuo=wsoo van .owumsomfiv Juan—«Hoes» mo mouwoum .3 shaman

oopsom Eouu mpouoao,:M

 

   

 

«N on 3 NM m e
— — - - - u
Hx x “S HHH> HH> H> > >H HHH HH H
.uz cowumum
:1; o3 1 so.
0.
o m.
m >uw>fiuo=vsoo m.
31:03 W. . 1M5. 2
a . 1
3 . an
I. . 3
m . )
.4 . s m
rA - ‘ c l:
.. a u
Ziocm W in -2.0
.
. .
I .
.
a
2 : 8m 3328an L - 8 .
\\
\
\
\
I \\
owumnomwa l// \\
/ \\
fl //\\ 1
mm . ovm 0N.

 

42

Table 5. Groundwater yield for selected subbasins in the Spring Brook
drainage basin.

 

 

Subbasins Groundwater Yield (M3/km2)
Station 4 (Section 1 .0028
Station 7 .0014
Station 11 .0013
Section 2 (Stations 4-7) .0002

Section 3 (Stations 7-11) .0012

43

quantifying groundwater input to a stream reach. The discharge and
conductivity profiles were not correlated well in Spring Brook
(Figure 19). The conductivity increased significantly in the mid-
dle section of the basin. This is the section which received little
groundwater input.

Hack (1957) determined that channel slope was not directly
related to the size of substrate material over an entire region,
but there was a good correlation for a given stream. In the study
area of Spring Brook, as the resistance of the channel bed increased
when rubble and boulders accumulated in the channel, one of the pree
dicted changes in the hydraulic characteristics would be an increase
in channel sIOpe (Leopold et al. 1964). The preferred habitat of
smallmouth bass is streams dominated by rubble-boulder substrate
(Hubbs and Lagler 1958). Therefore, it is not surprising that the
distribution of smallmouth bass in Spring Brook is correlated with
the highest stream gradient. This phenomenon was earlier reported by
Trautman (1942) and Huet (1959).

The temperature and discharge regimes were unusual during the
study year (Tables 6 and 7). The temperature regime was probably
substantially higher during the early spring in the study area. The
smallmouth bass spawned about two weeks earlier than normal. The
U.S.G.S. data from the Grand River indicated the winter discharge
was higher than normal but throughout the rest of the year the dis-

charge regime was about average.

«44

Table 6. Mbnthly deviations in air temperature from average, Lansing,
MI, Spring 1977.

 

 

Month Deviation from normal . Remarks
( F/day)

March +7.3 'F/day warmest 33
years

April +4.3 °F/day warmest 22
years

May +5.5 'F/day warmest 55
years

Table 7. Mbnthly deviation in precipitation from average, Lansing,

 

 

MI, 1977.
Month Deviation from normal
("lmonth)
March 0.29 inches more than average for the month.
April 0.37 inches less than average for the month.
May* 2.70 inches less than average for the month.
June 0.03 inches more than average for the month.

* (Until May 30, total for month was 0.1 inches- Total for the month
was 0.62 iches- lowest in history).

45

Summary

The occurrence of a large number of smallmouth bass in a third
order stream is not common in the Great Lakes Region. The investigation
of the geology and hydrology of the Spring Brook basin provided
an explanation for the distribution of smallmouth bass in Spring
Brook. The upper third of the basin provides the groundwater necessary
to maintain adequate base-flow during the summer. The middle section
of the basin has very little groundwater input and the stream
temperature rises rapidly as it passes through the marsh. This
provides the necessary temperature and discharge regimes in the study
area for smallmouth bass. As the stream downcut through the till
which impounded the glacial lake, boulders and rubble accumulated
in the channel, providing the preferred habitat of the smallmouth

bass.

46

SMALLMOUTH BASS-ROCKBASS INTERACTION

The study of a single species is of little value by itself if
competitors exist in the system. Usually the population of a given
species is a result of the interaction with its competitors. A
crucial element of the concept of niche is that they are evolved in
the presence of competitors.

Forbes and Richardson (1920) reported the rockbass had an
extremely high associative coefficient (6.24) with the smallmouth
bass. The interaction of these two species should be of interest
to fisheries biologists and ecologists. The geographic distribution
of the two species is similar. The original range was northern
Minnesota to Quebec, south to eastern Oklahoma and Alabama (Hubbs
and Lagler 1958). Their preferred habitat is the same. They are
usually found in the same stream sections. They eat the same types
and sizes of prey (Table 8).

During their first year, rockbass and smallmouth bass both feed
on copepods, cladocerans, and dipterans. As they attain a larger
size, insects begin to gain importance. My field notes indicated
the smallmouth bass spawned earlier in the year than the rockbass.
This provides a mechanism to avoid competition. Hubbs and Bailey
(1938) reported the smallmouth bass spawned earlier than other
centrarchids in the same area.

After the two species attain 70 mm T L, crayfish is their

47

Table 8. Food items of smallmouth bass and rockbass (From
Carlander, 1977).

 

 

Size Food Items
Smallmouth bass Rockbass
8 mm Diptera
Copepods
Cladocerans
12 mm Diptera
Copepods
Cladocerans
Fish fry
20 mm Copepods
40 mm Insects
Small fish
45-70 mm Insects
Crustaceans'
70 + mm Crayfish* Crayfish*
Fish Fish

*Where abundant, crayfish made up most of the diet.

48

preferred food. Keast and Webb (1966) noted the mouth morphology
of the rockbass reflected their major food niche. Their terminal,
scoop-like mouth with moderate aperature and strong jaws were ideal-
ly suited for predation on crayfish. The mouth morphology of the
smallmouth bass is almost identical.

No study could be located documenting the size distribution
of both species and relating the size of crayfish eaten. Mbuth size
of both fishes is similar, and the maximum size of crayfish eaten by
fish of equal lengths should be similar. This section investigates
the interaction of the smallmouth bass and the rockbass for their

preferred food item, crayfish.

Methods

Fish

Fish were brought into the laboratory to determine the maximum
size of crayfish that a fish of a given size of each species could
eat. Each fish was isolated in a 63-liter aquarium. Three fish of
each species were used. Each fish was fed young-of-the-year cray-
fish during the acclimation period. For a test, the fish were star-
ved 24 hrs. and then presented a crayfish of a given size. The fish
were given 24 hours to eat the crayfish.

On three mornings in August, smallmouth bass and rockbass were
collected with backpack electrofishing equipment. Mornings were
selected because in a previous study on the food habits of rockbass,
a higher percentage of crayfish was noted in the morning than the
afternoon. Smallmouth bass less than 300 mm TL and all rockbass

were kept. The fish were immediately placed in 20% formalin and

49

brought to the laboratory, where body lengths (TL) of fish were
measured and the stomach contents recorded. 0f 17 smallmouth bass
and 24 rockbass examined, crayfish were by far the most frequently
found prey item. 0f 9 smallmouth bass with food in their stomachs,
all but one contained only crayfish. The exception was a young-of-
the-year bass which contained only Gammarus sp. 0f 13 rockbass
which contained food, all but 4 contained crayfish. The exceptions
included: Hexagenia Sp nymphs, snails, clams, and a terrestrial
beetle. Those crayfish were measured for which the cephalothorax
was still intact. When the cephalothorax was not intact, crayfish
length was estimated by comparing identifiable parts with crayfish
of known size. The stage of digestion was observed.

Crayfish

The number and size distribution of crayfish in various habi-
tats of the study reach were determined by the transect method. A
quadrat was placed and every cobble was lifted and checked for
crayfish. If a crayfish was seen, I attempted catching it in a
small net. A crayfish was followed even outside the quadrat until
caught or lost. If lost, its size was estimated. Movement in and
out of the quadrat was assumed to be 0. The stream margin contained
extensive growth of Lizard Tail (Saururus cernuus). This habitat
was also sampled by the quadrat method using a quadrat size of 1 m
by 0.5 m.

The pools represented a sampling problem. The substrate is pri-
marily boulders. In addition, many authors noted Orconectes propin-
‘ggug, the most abundant crayfish in the study area, is nocturnal and

makes migrations into the riffles at night. In the study area,

50

snorkeling revealed all the large crayfish were in the pools and
they were active during the day as well as during the night.

These crayfish were sampled at night utilizing the Petersen
mark and recapture method as outlined by Vannote (1963). The cray-
fish collected were marked by clipping the pleopods with a pair of
nail clippers. The crayfish collected were released within the
riffle area and care was taken to place them next to a rock. The

same area was sampled the following evening.

Results and Discussion

 

Fish

The laboratory study suggested the maximum size of crayfish
eaten was the same for a fish of a given size of either species
. (Figure 20). This was the result Keast and Webb (1966) had pre-
dicted. Size of food and size of mouth were directly related, and
they were related to length.

The field data indicated smallmouth bass and rockbass eat the
same size crayfish (Figure 21). The data suggested the size dis-
tribution of crayfish ingested by the smallmouth bass was correlated
closely with the length of the fish. For the rockbass, this was not
the case.

Keast and Webb (1966) hypothesized morphology was correlated
with food niche. They noted no two species in their study were
identical in all their characteristics. Using Keast and Webb's (19-
66) criteria, body form.was the only characteristic which the small-
mouth bass and the rockbass did not have in common. The rockbass

has a sub-gibbose body form, while the smallmouth bass has a

51

 

 

35-

30-—
x
o
L:
o
.2
U
o
"<3 20
S _
Q.
m
U
o
.c
U
“a
_= 15-—
u
60
c
o
L1

0 Smallmouth bass
10.—
A Rockbass
5 ..
.1 + . + 3 L
50 100 150 200 250 300

Total length of the fish (mm)

Figure 20. Maximum size of crayfish eaten by rockbass and smallmouth
bass of a given length.

52

35!-

30!

N N
O U!

Length of Cephalothorax (mm)
H
u:

 

 

 

 

 

 

10 _ 'Smallmouth bass
. . x Rockbass
S II—
I 1 l. _i I 1‘—
50 100 150 200 250 300

Total Length of Fish (mm)

Figure 21. Size of crayfish eaten by smallmouth bass and rockbass
of a given length from Spring Brook, August 1977.

53

compressed fusiform shape. Following the theoretical lines of Alex-
ander (1967) and Hynes (1970), the smallmouth bass's form is more
streamlined and adapted for greater efficiency in the current than
the rockbass's form.

The foraging behavior of the two species is related to body
form, Gerking (1953) and Klauda (1968) reported the smallmouth bass
was a pursuit predator with a much larger home range than the rock-
bass. During this study, Age-I and II smallmouth bass were often
Observed slowly patrolling the riffles and areas adjacent to the
riffles. On several occasions while snorkeling, a unique feeding
behavior was observed. An Age I or II smallmouth bass would station
itself about 0.5 m behind a feeding hog sucker. As the hog sucker
fed, it moved gravel and rubble, disturbing the young-of-the-year
crayfish and stonefly nymphs. These drifing invertebrates were easy
prey for the smallmouth bass. In general, adult bass up to about
2 kg patrol the pools and adjacent areas leisurely throughout the
day. They must see many crayfish and appear to select crayfish
according to size. This foraging strategy would minimize intraspe-
cific competition among various size groups. Smallmouth bass over
2 kg were always located in the deepest pools. They did not appear
to patrol their pools continually during the day as the smaller size
groups. Active fish over 2 kg were usually observed at dawn pur-
suing minnows in or adjacent to pools.

The rockbass, on the other hand, is seldom found in the riffles.
From electrofishing data, snorkeling, and walking the stream, the
rockbass was usually in the quieter areas of the stream especially

in areas with abundant cover. Keast and Webb (1966) described the

54

foraging behavior of the rockbass as "hang and rush". Few feeding
rockbass were observed in the field. However, one could Speculate
they patrol a small home range and probably select any prey item
observed. This strategy would minimize energy expenditure in seach
of prey.

Crayfish

Crayfish were not randomly distributed, The young-of-the-year
were most abundant in the shallow rubble riffles and in the vegeta-
tional areas along the stream margin (Table 9). They did not appear
to be nocturnal or migratory. The yearling crayfish were distribu-
ted among the large cobbles in the riffles, in the pools, and in the
vegetational areas along the stream margin. They appeared to be
active throughout the day and they migrate into the riffles at night.
The large crayfish were found in the pools among the boulders. They
were active during the day as well as at night. They also migrated
into the riffles at night.

A major sampling problem was noted during the mark and recap-
ture part of the study. The first night 80% of the crayfish were
males. The second night only 55% of the population were males.

This suggests the crayfish move extensively in the stream. Also,

few crayfish were recaptured.

Summary

From the data concerning foraging behavior, crayfish distribu-
tion, and fish distribution, the following hypothesis was formulated:
smallmouth bass and rockbass partition the habitat such that direct

competition is minimal, thereby allowing these two similar species

55

Table 9. Size distribution of crayfish from two habitats in the study

 

 

area.
Size Distribution Frequency of Occurrence

(Length of Cephalothorax) Vegetational Habitat Riffle Habitat

(mm) 1(28.5 crayfish/mz- based (34 crayfish/m2

on four quadrats) based on three

quadrats)

6 .03 .06
7 .04 .02
8 .02 .06
9 .11 .18
10 .22 .30
11 .17 .19
12 .11 .09
13 .08 .00
14 f .04 .05
15 .01 .02
18 .01 .00
19 .03 .oo
20 .02 .00
22 .Ol .01
23 .02 .01
24 .01 .00
25 .02 .01
26 .03 .00
27 .03 .00
3O .01 .00

l. 1.0

56

to coexist. Competition for crayfish appeared between rockbass
100-200 mm TL and smallmouth bass 140-220 mm TL (Figure 21).

The size of the crayfish selected by both species were the young-
of-the-year. These crayfish were abundant in two areas of the
stream: 1) in the riffles, 2) in the vegetational areas along the
stream margin. If the smallmouth fed primarily in the riffles and
the rockbass in the vegetation along the stream, the habitat would
be effectively partitioned. To test this hypothesis, I pose the
following field experiment. With the aid of several people, collect
and paint a code on the cephalothorax of the crayfish identifying
the habitat collected in. Three classes would be easiest; riffles,
pools, and margin of the stream. Wait 24 or 48 hours. Then collect
rockbass and smallmouth bass with electrofishing gear and quantify
the crayfish ingested by the fish. Also, collect crayfish soon
after collecting the fish to ascertain the movement of crayfish
among the three habitats.

Ecological investigations of this type provide a framework with
which to organize some of the observations of naturalists. Hallam
(1959) observed rockbass were more numerous than smallmouth bass
in streams with a lower percentage of fast current. Reynolds (1965)
noted the years with the best smallmouth bass growth were those with
the lowest water levels. Brown (1960) noted growth of the small-
mouth bass was slowest during years of high water and growth of

rockbass was greatest during the years of high water.

S7

IMPLICATIONS FOR MANAGEMENT

An assessment of the distribution and abundance of smallmouth
bass within Michigan is basic for any management program. This in-
dicates intensive sampling of each steam is necessary because of the
difficulty in capturing smallmouth bass.

The results of this study indicated the following system should
work well in establishing sampling sites. Using the Forbes and
Richardson's (1920) data and reanalyzing it utilizing the Horton
stream ordering system, the distribution of smallmouth bass in Ill-
inois was quite predictable (Figure 9). Smallmouth bass were most
common in Fourth and Fifth order streams. Third order streams ap-
pear to be transitional. A third order stream which contains small-
mouth bass is in a quasi-equilibrium between two paradoxical con-
ditions: 1) It must have enough groundwater recharge to the stream
to maintain adequate pools, 2) but yet not too high groundwater re-
charge which would maintain water temperatures too cold for bass
reproduction and growth. Conceivably, by reviewing U.S.G.S. records,
many 3rd order streams could be eliminated from the sampling pro-
gram (Table 10). Once the stream segments have been identified,
potential sites for assessment have to be chosen. Spring Brook
illustrates how the site with the largest population of bass can be
determined simply by the interpretation of a topographic map. Small—

mouth bass are most common in stream sections with rockrrubble

Table 10. Groundwater yield for selected streams in lower Michigan.
(U.S.G.S. data- base-flow discharge = 7-day loweflow with 2

year recurrence).

 

Stream

Order

Yield (m3/km2)

Dom. Sport Fish

 

Spring Brook
Augusta Creek
Quaker Brook

Thornapple River
(Hastings)

Grand River
(Eaton Rapids)

Looking Glass River

.001
.0046
.0023

.0019

.0014

.0010

smallmouth bass
brown trout
brown trout

(marginal)
smallmouth bass

smallmouth bass

smallmouth bass
(in high grad-
ient sections).

59

substrates. The stream sections that downcut through drift accumu-
lated the boulders and rubble. These are also the stream sections
with the highest gradient.

This study illustrated that the physical aspects of the study
area are determined by the physical setting of the watershed. There-
fore, the watershed approach is the logical management perspective.
In Spring Brook, 601 of the baseflow discharge in the research area
is in the stream channel only 4 km from the source. Maintenance of
this marsh is of paramount importance for sustaining summer baseflow.
Spring Brook, as with many other streams in southern Michigan, is
considered a county drain. The stream would have been channelized
from near the source to the mouth during the 1960's had the land-
owners along the stream not fought adamantly to stop it. Recently,
several marshes in the upper watershed have been drained and this
activity will undoubtedly continue. Changes in the Inland Lakes
and Stream Act should be a high priority in any management plan in
lower Michigan.

Instream management for smallmouth bass appears relatively easy
and inexpensive. Indications from this study and from the litera-
ture review reveal the prime objective should be the creation of
pools with minimum current velocities along the periphery of the
pools if spawing sites are limited. These pools should also have
a rock-rubble substrate. The major factor causing the poorly de-
veloped pools in the study area was the armor-plated stream bed.
This armor-plate of rubble and boulders provides excellent material

for the construction of stream improvement devices. During the fall,

60

1977, I began constuction of two devices. The basic methods out-
lined by White and Brynildson (1967) were followed. Modifications
were based on observations and experience gained from the construc-
tion of two devices during 1965-67. No evaluation was possible at
this time. Instream modification should be undertaken with great
caution and should remain experimental until several questions have
been answered. If the hypothesis in section IV is correct, most of
the stream improvement devices currently in use favor the rockbass
rather than the smallmouth bass.

In Michigan, the limited season is a management tool used for
the management of smallmouth bass. The closed season is from January
1 to late May. During this study, the season opened the day the last
successful nest was recorded in the study area. This is probably
the worst possible situation in terms of effects on reproduction.
The opening couple of weeks of the season attract by far the highest
number of angler efforts. Male bass guard the nest and the fry for
about 1 week and they are extremely vulnerable to angling. During
the preliminary study, one male was hooked and landed on four
successive casts and that fish was caught 13 times during the period
of nesting and guarding the fry. The year, 1977, was also a very
unusual year. It was the hottest and driest year in about 35 years.
The bass usually nest in early to mid June. This indicates that
during an average year the season opens just prior to the small-

mouth bass's Spawning period.

APPENDIX I

61

APPENDIX I
Flora and Fauna of the Spring Brook Study Area.

PLANTS:
Submerged:
Potamogeton pectinatus Linnaeus ; common in riffles with
open canopy
Potamogeton.americanus Chamisso and Schlechtendal; common in
riffles with open canopy
Vallisneria americana Michaux; abundant; associated with silt

substrate and open canopy

Emergent:

Cephalanthus occidentalis Linnaeus: abundant along stream margin
Phalaris arundinacea Linnaeus ; common along stream margin
.§§gittaria cuneata Sheldon ; common along stream margin
Saururus cernuus Linnaeus; abundant along stream margin

Iris versicolor Linnaeus ; common along stream margin
Nasturtium aquaticum Linnaeus ; abundant in limited areas

along the stream. Associated with springs.
Decodon verticillatus Linnaeus; abundant along stream margin
Polygonum hydropiperoides Michaux; common along a limited
section of the stream.
Phragmites maximus (Forster); rare along the stream margin

Sparganium eurycarpum Engelmann; common along the stream margin

62

APPENDIX I

Flora and Fauna of the Spring Brook Study Area.

Sparganium chlorocarpum Rydberg; common along the stream.margin

Typha angustifolia Linnaeus; rare along the stream margin

Invertebrates:

(Abundance index based on maximum number found throughout the year)
Abundant- can collect 25 or more in 10 minutes with screen

Common- can collect 10-25 in 10 minutes with a screen

Rare- can collect less than 10 in 10 minutes with a screen.

Insects

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Plecoptera
Acroneuria Common in rubble sections
Paragnetina Common in rubble sections
Perlesta (probably placida) Common in rubble sections
Taeniopteryx Abundant- extremely abundant batches
in March and April
Ephemeroptera - '
Isonychia Very abundant all year; associated with
Potamogeton and gravel riffles
Stenonema (pulchellum gr) Abundant in rubble areas
Hexagenia atrocaudata Abundant in the stable silt beds
Baetis Abundant in most habitats
Ephemerella Rare in the gravel riffles
Tricoptera
Pycnopsyche Abundant in most habitats
Megaloptera
Chauliodes Common in rubble areas
Corydalis cornuta Common in rubble areas
Odonata
Calopteryx Common in depositional areas
Argia Common in vegetation
Bozeria Common in vegetation
Hemiptera

Gerris Common

63

APPENDIX I

Flora and Fauna of the Spring Brook Study Area.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Crustaceans
Orconectes propinquus Very abundant
Cambarus Rare
Gammarus Very abundant, especially in watercress.
Fishes:
Ichthyomyzon fossor Reighard and Cummins Abundant
Ichthyogyzon castaneus Girard Common
Catostomus commersonnii commersonnii (Lacepede) Abundant
Moxostoma sp Rare
Hypentelium nigricans (Lesueur) 1 Very Abundant
Cyprinus carpio Linnaeus Rare
Semotilus atromacglggus (Mitchill) Common
Hybopsis micropoggg (Cope) Abundant
Notropis cornutus (Mitchill) Abundant
Pimephales notatus (Rafinesque) Abundant
Campostoma anomalum (Rafinesque) Rare
Ictalurus melas (Rafinesque) Common
Ictalurus natalis (LeSueur) Common
Esox americanus vermiculatus LeSueur Common
Esox lucius Linnaeus Common
Percina maculata (Girard) Common
Etheostoma nigrum Rafinesque Common

 

 

64

APPENDIX I

Flora and Fauna of the Spring Brook Study Area

 

 

 

 

 

 

Fishes:
Etheostoma caeruleum Storer Abundant
Micropterus dolomieui Lacepede Abundant
Micropterus salmoides (Lacepede) Rare
Lepomdslgulosus (Cuvier) Rare
Lepomis gibbosus (Linnaeus) Rare
Lepomis macrochirus Rafinesque Rare
Ambloplites rupestris (Rafinesque) Abundant

 

Pomoxis nigromaculatus (LeSueur) Rare

 

LIST OF REFERENCES

65

LIST OF REFERENCES

Adams, L. 1951. Confidence limits for the Petersen or Lincoln index
used in animal population studies. J. Wildl. Man. 15(1):13-19.

Alexander, R. McN. 1967. Functional design in fishes. Hutchinson,
London. 160 pp.

Bent,P.C. 1970. A prOposed streamflow data program for Michigan.
Open-file Report. U.S.G.S.

Brown, E.H. Jr.1960. Little Miami River headwater-stream invest-
igations. Ohio Dept. Nat. Res. Div. Wildl. D—J F-l-R. 143pp.

Cleary, R.E. 1956. Observations on factors affecting small-
mouth bass production in Iowa. J. Wildl. Man. 20(4): 353-59.

Davis, W.S. 1964. Graphic representation.of confidence intervals
for Petersen population estimates Trans. Am. Fish. Soc.
93(3):227-32.

Forbes, S.A. and R.E. Richardson. 1920. The fishes of Illinois.
Ill. Print Co. 357pp.

Funk, J.L. 1957. Movement of stream fishes in Missouri. Trans. Am.
Fish Soc. 85: 39-57.

Gerking, S.D. 1949. Characteristics of stream fish populations.
Investigations of Indiana Lakes and Streams 3(7):283-309.

 

1953. Evidence for the concept of home range and territory
in stream fishes. Ecol. 34: 347-365.

Hallam, J.C. 1959. Habitat and associated fauna of four species of
fish in Ontario streams. J. Fish. Res. Ed. Can. l6(2):147-173.

Hack,J.T. 1957. Studies of longitudinal stream profiles in Virginia
and Maryland. U.S. Geol. Survey Prof. Paper 294-8, 97 pp.

Hendrickson,G.E. and C.J. Doonan. 1972. Hydrology and recreation on
the cold-water rivers of Michigan's southern peninsula.
U.S.G.S. Water Info. Series Report 3,83pp.

66

Horton, R.E. 1945. Erosional developments of streams and their drainage
basins; hydrophysical approach to quantitative morphology.
Geol. Soc. Am. Bull. 56: 275-230

Hubbs, C.L. and RJM. Bailey. 1938. The smallmouth bass. Cranbrook
Inst. Sci. Bull. #10, 89pp.

Hubbs, C.L. and K.F. Lagler. 1958. Fishes of the great lakes region.
U. of Michigan Press, 213pp.

Huet, M. 1959. Profiles and biology of western european streams as
related to fish management. Trans. Am. Fish. Soc. 88(3):155-63.

Hynes, H.B.N. 1970. Ecology of running water. Univ. of Toronto Press.
555pp.

Instream Flow Group. July 1977. Newsletter. E.P.A. and U.S. Fish and
Wildl. Serv.

Keast, A. and D. Webb. 1966. Mouth and body form relative to feeding
ecology in the fish fauna of a small lake, Lake Opinicon,
Ontario. Fish. Res. Bd. Can. 23:1845-74.

Keating, J.P. 1070. Growth rates and food habits of smallmouth bass
in the Snake,Clearwater, and Salmon Rivers, Idaho. 1965-67.
M.S. thesis. Univ. of Idaho, 40pp.

Klauda, R.J. 1968. The utilization of artificial shelter by yearling
smallmouth bass (Micropterus dolomieui) in a stream aquarium
as related to water hardness, temperature, and substrata, M.S.
thesis. Penn State Univ. 57pp.

 

Knutilla, R.L. 1968. Storage relationships for Grand River. U.S.G.S.
(Regional Draft). *

Larimore, R.W. 1952. Home pools and homing behavior of smallmouth bass
in Jordan Creek. Ill.Nat. Hist. Surv. Biol. Notes No.28. 12pp.

McFadden, J.T. 1961. A population study of the brook trout (Salvelinus
fontinalis). Wildl. Mono No.7.

 

 

Reynolds, J.B. 1965. Life history of smallmouth bass (Micropterus dolo-
mieui), in the Des Mbines River, Boone County, Iowa. Iowa State
J. Sci. 39(4):4l7-36.

 

Ricker, W.E. 1958. Handbook of computations for biological statistics
of fish pepulations. Fish. Res. Bd. Can. Bull. 119. 300pp.

Robbins, W.H. 1975. Population dynamics of potamodromous smallmouth
bass (Micropterus dolomieui) and responses to environmental stimuli.
Ph.D. thesis. Univ. of Guelph.

67

Stein, R.A. 1977. Selective predation, optimal foraging, and the.’1
predator-prey interaction between fish and crayfish. Ecol.
58:1237-53.

Surber, E.W. 1943. Observations on the natural and artificial propaga-
tion of the smallmouth bass (Micropterus dolomieui). Trans. Am.
Fish. Soc. 72:233-45.

Trautman, M.B. 1942. Fish distribution and abundance correlated with
stream gradients as a consideration in stocking programs. 7th
NOA. Wildl. CODf. pp0211-224o

Trautman, M.B. 1957 Fishes of Ohio. Ohio State Univ. Press. 683pp.
Vannote, R.L. 1963. Community productivity and energy flow in an

enriched warm-water stream. Unpub. Ph.D. thesis, Mich. State
Univ. 156pp.

 

"I7‘111111111111111S