Routine fish sampling with hoop nets was conducted monthly from April through December 1978 along natural and revetted riverbanks on the lower Mississippi River near Eudora, Arkansas, to monitor changes in fish populations affected by placement of new revetment for bank protection. Eighteen species of fish were collected with four species comprising over 75% of the total catch. During the months prior to revetment placement, freshwater drum, Aplodinotus grunniens, was the most abundant (32.7% of the catch) species collected. Following in abundance were the flathead catfish, Pylodictis olivaris, (9.8%), common carp, Cyprinus carpio, (7.8%), and blue catfish, Ictalurus furcatus, (3.3%). After revetment placement in August 1978, the freshwater drum was again the most abundant component, comprising 9.7% of the catch. Gizzard shad, Dorosoma cepedianum, flathead catfish, and blue catfish followed in abundance and comprised 8.9, 4.1, and 3.4% of the total catch, respectively. Catch per effort data indicated that fish were generally more abundant at natural bank stations than revetted bank stations but the difference was not significant. The study suggests that fish inhabiting natural riverbank habitat recover quite rapidly from bank perturbation caused by the placement of revetment

Farrell, M. P.

Knight, S. S.

Pennington, C. H.

English

UARK (University of Arkansas )

Journal of the Arkansas Academy of Science Volume 39 Article 24 1985 Response of Fishes to Revetment Placement C. H. Pennington U.S. Army Engineer Waterway Experiment Station S. S. Knight U.S. Army Engineer Waterway Experiment Station M. P. Farrell U.S. Army Engineer Waterway Experiment Station Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarworks.uark.edu/jaas  Part of the Environmental Monitoring Commons Recommended Citation Pennington, C. H.; Knight, S. S.; and Farrell, M. P. (1985) "Response of Fishes to Revetment Placement," Journal of the Arkansas Academy of Science: Vol. 39 , Article 24. Available at: https://scholarworks.uark.edu/jaas/vol39/iss1/24 This article is available for use under the Creative Commons license: Attribution-NoDerivatives 4.0 International (CC BY-ND 4.0). Users are able to read, download, copy, print, distribute, search, link to the full texts of these articles, or use them for any other lawful purpose, without asking prior permission from the publisher or the author. This Article is brought to you for free and open access by ScholarWorks@UARK. It has been accepted for inclusion in Journal of the Arkansas Academy of Science by an authorized editor of ScholarWorks@UARK. For more information, please contact scholar@uark.edu. Arkansas Academy of Science Proceedings, Vol. XXXIX,1985 95RESPONSE OF FISHES TOREVETMENT PLACEMENTC. H. PENNINGTON, S. S. KNIGHT,and M. P. FARRELLU.S. Army Engineer Waterway Experiment StationP.O. Box 631Vicksburg, MS 39180ABSTRACTRoutine fish sampling withhoop nets was conducted monthly from Aprilthrough December 1978 alongnatural and revetted riverbanks on the lower Mississippi River near Eudora, Arkansas, to monitor changesin fish populations affected by placement of new revetment for bank protection. Eighteen species of fishwere collected with four species comprising over 75% of the total catch. During the months prior to revet-ment placement, freshwater drum, Aplodinotus grunniens, was the most abundant (32.7% of the catch)species collected. Following in abundance were the flathead catfish, Pylodictis olivaris, (9.8%), com-mon carp, Cyprinus carpio, (7.8%), and blue catfish, Ictalurus furcatus, (3.3%). After revetment place-ment in August 1 978, the freshwater drum was again the most abundant component, comprising 9.7%of the catch. Gizzard shad, Dorosoma cepedianum, flathead catfish, and blue catfish followed in abun-dance and comprised 8.9, 4.1, and 3.4% of the total catch, respectively. Catch per effortdata indicatedthat fish were generally more abundant at natural bank stations than revetted bank stations but the dif-ference was not significant. The study suggests that fish inhabiting natural riverbank habitat recover quiterapidly from bank perturbation caused by the placement of revetment.INTRODUCTIONThe Mississippi River and Tributaries Project founded under theauspices of the Mississippi River Commission provides for flood con-trol in the alluvial valley and for navigation improvement of the lowerMississippi River. The open channel method of navigation controlemployed on the lower Mississippi River consists ofdike constructionfor channel contraction and secondary channel closure and placementofrevetment to control bank erosion. Revetments have been constructedusing stone riprap, wire fencing, fabriform mat, rubber tires, and avariety of other materials. Presently, most revetments in the lowerMississippi River are constructed of articulated cement mattress, withthe upper bank covered by riprap (Keown et al., 1977).Despite the ubiquity of revetments along the banks of many majorU.S. rivers, the quality of this altered habit is not well known (Miller,1981). The work reported here compares the fish along natural and revet-ted banks prior to and after placement ofarticulated cement mattressfor bank stabilization.MATERIALSAND METHODSFrom Aprilthrough December 1978, routine sampling was conductedto monitor changes in fish populations associated withnatural and revet-ted riverbanks on the lower Mississippi River in the vicinity of Eudora,Arkansas. Three sections of the river bank were chosen for study (Figure1):a. An existing revetted bank composed of stone riprap and artic-ulated cement mattress that was placed in 1970 and extendsfrom river mile 449.2 to 499.7.b. A reach of natural bank extending from river mile 499.7 to500.4. This section ofbank was modified for bank stabilizationwith the placement of 1066 m of revetment from August 1978through December 1978.c. Anatural bank section that extends upstream of the new revet-ment to river mile 500.7.There were four sampling stations within each riverbank section. Sta-tions within each section were 100 m apart.Monthly sampling was initiated on 17 April 1978 at the 12 perma-nent stations along the riverbank. Each station was sampled with twohoop nets, one 0.6-m (2-ft) and 0.9-m (3-ft) in diameter. The 0.6-mnets were always set near the river bank in shallow water, approximately2m in depth, while0.9m nets wereplaced in deeper water approximately3.6 m in depth. Nets were set parallel to shore and to each other fortwo consecutive 24 hour periods. Fish from all samples were weighed,measured, and counted. At each net set made, water depth and sur-face measurements ofdissolved oxygen, temperature, and water velocitywere taken.Catch per unit of effort (C/f) was used as an index of fish abun-dance and comparisons were made among banks over time. AllmeanC/f values are the number of fish caught divided by the number ofunitsof effort (hoop net hours).»ure 1.Diagram ofMississippi River left bank near Eudora, Arkan-, illustrating station locations prior to and after revetment placement1978.95Journal of the Arkansas Academy of Science, Vol. 39 [1985], Art. 24Published by Arkansas Academy of Science, 1985Response of Fishes to Revetment PlacementTable 1. Summary of mean catch per effort (C/f), current velocity, Table 2. Frequency of occurrence (percent) of fish captured with hoopdissolved oxygen (D.O.), temperature, and depth by station group and nets at sampling stations 1-4, 5-8, and 12-15.type of gear used, April-December 1978, Eudora, Arkansas.Station Velocity D.O. Temperature Depth 1-4 5-8 12-15 Total*o*Group Gear C/f cm/sec mg/l C m Speciea _B_ _A_ _B_ _A_ _B_ _A_Scaphirhynchua platorvnchus 0.2 0.9 0.2 1.31-4 HN2 0.60 39 7.8 19.9 2.1 Lepiaosteua platoatomua 0.5 1.7 0.2 2.4HN3 0.74 55 7.7 20.6 4.4 Aneuilla rostrata 0.2 0.6 0.2 0.2 1.3Dorosoma cepedianum 1.4 3.7 0.6 3.5 1.7 10.95"8 HN2 °- 45 33 7 -8 19 '9 ZA Carassius auratus 0.3 0.3HN3 0.58 47 7.7 20.2 4.2 Cyprinus carpio 4.0 2.4 0.5 1.4 8.3Carpiodes carpio 1.7 0.5 0.2 0.6 0.5 3.512-15 HN2 0.28 18 7.7 19.7 2.0 .Carp_iodes. cypnnun 0.2 0.2 0.4"N3 0.41 23 7.6 20.1 3.4 Ictiobus bubalus 0.2 0.5 0.6 1.4 2.7*Ictiobus cyprinellus 0.6 0.6HN2, Hoop net, 0.6 m diameter; HN3,Hoop net, 0.9 m diameter.! _ Ictalurua furcatus 1.1 1.3 1.1 1.6 1.1 0.5 6.7Ictalurue punctatus 0.9 0.6 0.3 1.8RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONm^l, 4.5 1.7 3.2 1.6 2.1 0.8 13.9Morone chrvsopa 0.3 0.2 0.5Estimates of water quality parameters from the Mayersville Revet- Uponi8 macrochirua 0.2 0.3 0.5ment indicate the similarity between the three river sections sampled.Water temperature and dissolved oxygen concentrations were fairlycon-sistent, withno significant differences between the river sections sampled stizoatedion canadense 0.2 0.6 0.8or the deep and shallow water sets. Monthly water temperatures from . , ,, .K,. , , , 1 .• • jj • Aplodinotua grunniena 17.7 4.9 7.5 3.4 7.5 1.4 42.4the area indicate that no unusual thermal conditions occurred duringthe study. Maximum temperatures occurred inAugust, and minimum total 34.1 14.5 17.3 13.4 14.7 5.4 99.4temperatures were in December. Monthly temperatures rarely varied 5more than One degree among Station groupings and between the Shallow B-before revetment and A-after revetment placement at stations 5-8.and deep sets at a station. Temperatures recorded from the shallow-water sets were generally slightly lower than temperatures at the deep-water sets. Also, temperatures from stations 12-15, located along theold revetment were slightly cooler than those recorded at the other sta-tions. Dissolved oxygen determinations indicated a normal tendencytoward winter maximum and summer minimum values. The shallow Eighteen species of fish were collected during the study, 16 fromsets at a station had only slightly higher concentrations of dissolved natural bank stations 1-4 and 14 each from natural or revetted bankoxygen than did the deeper sets. Analysis ofvariance did reveal a signifi- stations 5-8 and old revetted bank stations 12-15. Four species of fishcant difference between the current velocities at the deep-water and comprised over 75.5% of the total catch. Freshwater drum (Aplodinotusshallow-water sets forold revetment stations 12-15 and stations 1-4 and grunniens) was by far the most abundant species, representing 42.4%5-8 (Table 1). Monthly current measurements indicated that velocity of the total fish catch (Table 2). Flathead catfish (Pylodictis olivaris),at stations along the old revetment for both shallow and deep sets was gizzard shad (Dorosoma cepedianum), and carp (Cyprinus carpio)less than at other stations grouped by bank type (Table 1). The data followed in abundance comprising 13.9, 10.9, and 8.3% of the totalalso demonstrated that currents along the shallow inshore sets were less catch, respectively.than, but not significantly different from, the deep-water sets at each During the months prior to the revetment placement, freshwater drumsampling station. was the most abundant species (32.7% of the catch) collected. Follow-Hoop net catches varied considerably during the nine-month study ing in abundance were the flathead catfish (9.8%), carp (7.8%), andalong the Mayersville Revetment. Total catches ranged from zero in blue catfish (Ictalurus furcatus) (3.3%). After the revetment placementnumerous net sets to over 16 fish captured at station 2 on 11 July. in August, the freshwater drum was again the most abundant compo-Greatest catches occurred during June and July as river stage de- nent of the catch, comprising 9.7%. Gizzard shad (8.9%), flathead cat-creased and water temperatures increased. Catches at all stations were fish (4.1%), and blue catfish (3.4%) followed in abundance,consistently low from September-December. Some possible explana- c Mean C/fwas used to compare relative abundance of fishes capturedtions for such low hoop net catches are: (a) a steady low water river from the three types of riverbank. The data indicate that fishes werestage during September and October; (b)decreased activity offish caused generally more abundant at natural bank stations 1-4 than at other sta-by fallingwater temperatures; and (c) disturbance of the area when revet- tion groupings (Table 1). Analysis of variance among station group-ment was placed on 24 August along the riverbank at stations 5-8 or ings by month indicated that C/f was not significantly different (a—by upper bank grading that continued through December. 0.05) except during June and August. In June, C/f on natural bankTotal catches were generally greatest along the natural bank at sta- stations 1-4 was significantly greater than C/f at stations 5-8 and 12-15.tions 1-4 and 5-8 (prior to 24 August) and lowest at stations 12-15 In October, C/f along old revetted bank stations 12-15 was zero anddownstream along the old revetment. Total catch along new revetment significantly different from C/f at stations 1-4 and 5-8.stations 5-8 after 24 August was approximately the same as at natural C/f was generally greater in 0.9-m nets fished in deeper water thanbank stations and slightly better than catches on the old revetment. Eddy in the 0.6-m nets set in shallow water. However, analysis of variancecurrents along revetted bank stations 12-15 were consistently present, ofC/fbetween the two gears indicated no significant difference inmeancertainly causing some nets to fish improperly. C/f.96 Arkansas Academy of Science Proceedings, Vol. XXXIX,1985 96Journal of the Arkansas Academy of Science, Vol. 39 [1985], Art. 24https://scholarworks.uark.edu/jaas/vol39/iss1/24Arkansas Academy of Science Proceedings, Vol. XXXIX,1985 97C. H. Pennington, S. S. Knight, and M. P. FarrellCONCLUSIONSDuring this study, no major differences in water quality or C/f weredocumented along the three types of riverbanks (old revetment, newrevetment, and natural bank). However, abundance estimates alongrevetted bank stations 12-15 were generally lower than along the otherbank types. Pennington, Baker and Potter (1983), in a study ofnaturaland revetted banks near Greenville, Mississippi, reported similar C/ffor both riverbank types. This was consistent withC/fvalues reportedby Burress, Krieger and Pennington (1982) and Kallemeyn and Novot-ny(1977), however, all authors reported C/F values to be higher alongrevetted banks. The low catches along revetted bank stations 12-15 couldreflect a difference in fish abundance that may be governed by localvariations in bank materials and water currents.Iotal catch and C/ffor the months revetting materials were depositedcates a higher abundance of fish at stations 5-8 than at the old un-urbed revetment at stations 12-15. This indicates that fish suscepti-ble to capture with hoop nets apparently respond and recover quiterapidly from bank perturbation caused by the placement of therevetment.ACKNOWLEDGMENTSThis work is part of the Environmental and WaterQuality Operational Studies, Project VA, sponsored bythe Office, Chief of Engineers.LITERATURE CITEDBURRESS, R. M.,D. A.KRIEGER, and C. H. PENNINGTON. 1982.Aquatic biota of bank stabilization structures on the Missouri River,North Dakota. Technical Report E-82-6. U.S. Army EngineerWaterways Experiment Station, Vicksburg, Mississippi. 51 pp.KALLEMEYN,L. W., and J. F. NOVOTNY. 1977. Fish and fish foodorganisms in various habitats of the Missouri River in SouthDakota, Nebraska, and Iowa. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Na-tional Stream Alteration Team, FWS/OBS-77.25, Columbia,Missouri. 63 pp.KEOWN, M. P., N. R. OSWALT, E. B. PERRY, and E. A.DARDEAU, JR. 1977. Literature survey and preliminary evalua-tion of streambank protection methods. Technical Report H-77-9.U.S. ArmyEngineer Waterways Experiment Station, Vicksburg,Mississippi. 94 pp.MILLER,A.C. 1981. Aquatic habitat studies on the Lower MississippiRiver, river mile 480 to 530: Report 1. Introduction. MiscellaneousPaper E-80-1. U.S. Army Engineer Waterways Experiment Sta-tion, Vicksburg, Mississippi. 34 pp.PENNINGTON, C. H., J. A. BAKER, and M.E. POTTER. 1983.Fish populations along natural and revetted banks on the LowerMississippi River. North Amer. J. Fish. Mgmt. 3(2):204-211.97Journal of the Arkansas Academy of Science, Vol. 39 [1985], Art. 24Published by Arkansas Academy of Scie ce, 1985

Response of Fishes to Revetment Placement

ScholarWorks@UARK

Journal of the Arkansas Academy of ScienceVolume 39 Article 241985Response of Fishes to Revetment PlacementC. H. PenningtonU.S. Army Engineer Waterway Experiment StationS. S. KnightU.S. Army Engineer Waterway Experiment StationM. P. FarrellU.S. Army Engineer Waterway Experiment StationFollow this and additional works at: http://scholarworks.uark.edu/jaasPart of the Environmental Monitoring CommonsThis article is available for use under the Creative Commons license: Attribution-NoDerivatives 4.0 International (CC BY-ND 4.0). Users are able toread, download, copy, print, distribute, search, link to the full texts of these articles, or use them for any other lawful purpose, without asking priorpermission from the publisher or the author.This Article is brought to you for free and open access by ScholarWorks@UARK. It has been accepted for inclusion in Journal of the Arkansas Academyof Science by an authorized editor of ScholarWorks@UARK. For more information, please contact scholar@uark.edu, ccmiddle@uark.edu.Recommended CitationPennington, C. H.; Knight, S. S.; and Farrell, M. P. (1985) "Response of Fishes to Revetment Placement," Journal of the ArkansasAcademy of Science: Vol. 39 , Article 24.Available at: http://scholarworks.uark.edu/jaas/vol39/iss1/24Arkansas Academy of Science Proceedings, Vol. XXXIX,1985 95RESPONSE OF FISHES TOREVETMENT PLACEMENTC. H. PENNINGTON, S. S. KNIGHT,and M. P. FARRELLU.S. Army Engineer Waterway Experiment StationP.O. Box 631Vicksburg, MS 39180ABSTRACTRoutine fish sampling withhoop nets was conducted monthly from Aprilthrough December 1978 alongnatural and revetted riverbanks on the lower Mississippi River near Eudora, Arkansas, to monitor changesin fish populations affected by placement of new revetment for bank protection. Eighteen species of fishwere collected with four species comprising over 75% of the total catch. During the months prior to revet-ment placement, freshwater drum, Aplodinotus grunniens, was the most abundant (32.7% of the catch)species collected. Following in abundance were the flathead catfish, Pylodictis olivaris, (9.8%), com-mon carp, Cyprinus carpio, (7.8%), and blue catfish, Ictalurus furcatus, (3.3%). After revetment place-ment in August 1 978, the freshwater drum was again the most abundant component, comprising 9.7%of the catch. Gizzard shad, Dorosoma cepedianum, flathead catfish, and blue catfish followed in abun-dance and comprised 8.9, 4.1, and 3.4% of the total catch, respectively. Catch per effortdata indicatedthat fish were generally more abundant at natural bank stations than revetted bank stations but the dif-ference was not significant. The study suggests that fish inhabiting natural riverbank habitat recover quiterapidly from bank perturbation caused by the placement of revetment.INTRODUCTIONThe Mississippi River and Tributaries Project founded under theauspices of the Mississippi River Commission provides for flood con-trol in the alluvial valley and for navigation improvement of the lowerMississippi River. The open channel method of navigation controlemployed on the lower Mississippi River consists ofdike constructionfor channel contraction and secondary channel closure and placementofrevetment to control bank erosion. Revetments have been constructedusing stone riprap, wire fencing, fabriform mat, rubber tires, and avariety of other materials. Presently, most revetments in the lowerMississippi River are constructed of articulated cement mattress, withthe upper bank covered by riprap (Keown et al., 1977).Despite the ubiquity of revetments along the banks of many majorU.S. rivers, the quality of this altered habit is not well known (Miller,1981). The work reported here compares the fish along natural and revet-ted banks prior to and after placement ofarticulated cement mattressfor bank stabilization.MATERIALSAND METHODSFrom Aprilthrough December 1978, routine sampling was conductedto monitor changes in fish populations associated withnatural and revet-ted riverbanks on the lower Mississippi River in the vicinity of Eudora,Arkansas. Three sections of the river bank were chosen for study (Figure1):a. An existing revetted bank composed of stone riprap and artic-ulated cement mattress that was placed in 1970 and extendsfrom river mile 449.2 to 499.7.b. A reach of natural bank extending from river mile 499.7 to500.4. This section ofbank was modified for bank stabilizationwith the placement of 1066 m of revetment from August 1978through December 1978.c. Anatural bank section that extends upstream of the new revet-ment to river mile 500.7.There were four sampling stations within each riverbank section. Sta-tions within each section were 100 m apart.Monthly sampling was initiated on 17 April 1978 at the 12 perma-nent stations along the riverbank. Each station was sampled with twohoop nets, one 0.6-m (2-ft) and 0.9-m (3-ft) in diameter. The 0.6-mnets were always set near the river bank in shallow water, approximately2m in depth, while0.9m nets wereplaced in deeper water approximately3.6 m in depth. Nets were set parallel to shore and to each other fortwo consecutive 24 hour periods. Fish from all samples were weighed,measured, and counted. At each net set made, water depth and sur-face measurements ofdissolved oxygen, temperature, and water velocitywere taken.Catch per unit of effort (C/f) was used as an index of fish abun-dance and comparisons were made among banks over time. AllmeanC/f values are the number of fish caught divided by the number ofunitsof effort (hoop net hours).»ure 1.Diagram ofMississippi River left bank near Eudora, Arkan-, illustrating station locations prior to and after revetment placement1978.95Journal of the Arkansas Academy of Science, Vol. 39 [1985], Art. 24Published by Arkansas Academy of Science, 1985Response of Fishes to Revetment PlacementTable 1. Summary of mean catch per effort (C/f), current velocity, Table 2. Frequency of occurrence (percent) of fish captured with hoopdissolved oxygen (D.O.), temperature, and depth by station group and nets at sampling stations 1-4, 5-8, and 12-15.type of gear used, April-December 1978, Eudora, Arkansas.Station Velocity D.O. Temperature Depth 1-4 5-8 12-15 Total*o*Group Gear C/f cm/sec mg/l C m Speciea _B_ _A_ _B_ _A_ _B_ _A_Scaphirhynchua platorvnchus 0.2 0.9 0.2 1.31-4 HN2 0.60 39 7.8 19.9 2.1 Lepiaosteua platoatomua 0.5 1.7 0.2 2.4HN3 0.74 55 7.7 20.6 4.4 Aneuilla rostrata 0.2 0.6 0.2 0.2 1.3Dorosoma cepedianum 1.4 3.7 0.6 3.5 1.7 10.95"8 HN2 °- 45 33 7 -8 19 '9 ZA Carassius auratus 0.3 0.3HN3 0.58 47 7.7 20.2 4.2 Cyprinus carpio 4.0 2.4 0.5 1.4 8.3Carpiodes carpio 1.7 0.5 0.2 0.6 0.5 3.512-15 HN2 0.28 18 7.7 19.7 2.0 .Carp_iodes. cypnnun 0.2 0.2 0.4"N3 0.41 23 7.6 20.1 3.4 Ictiobus bubalus 0.2 0.5 0.6 1.4 2.7* Ictiobus cyprinellus 0.6 0.6HN2, Hoop net, 0.6 m diameter; HN3,Hoop net, 0.9 m diameter.! _ Ictalurua furcatus 1.1 1.3 1.1 1.6 1.1 0.5 6.7Ictalurue punctatus 0.9 0.6 0.3 1.8RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONm^l, 4.5 1.7 3.2 1.6 2.1 0.8 13.9Morone chrvsopa 0.3 0.2 0.5Estimates of water quality parameters from the Mayersville Revet- Uponi8 macrochirua 0.2 0.3 0.5ment indicate the similarity between the three river sections sampled.Water temperature and dissolved oxygen concentrations were fairlycon-sistent, withno significant differences between the river sections sampled stizoatedion canadense 0.2 0.6 0.8or the deep and shallow water sets. Monthly water temperatures from . , ,, .K,. , , , 1 .• • jj • Aplodinotua grunniena 17.7 4.9 7.5 3.4 7.5 1.4 42.4the area indicate that no unusual thermal conditions occurred duringthe study. Maximum temperatures occurred inAugust, and minimum total 34.1 14.5 17.3 13.4 14.7 5.4 99.4temperatures were in December. Monthly temperatures rarely varied 5more than One degree among Station groupings and between the Shallow B-before revetment and A-after revetment placement at stations 5-8.and deep sets at a station. Temperatures recorded from the shallow-water sets were generally slightly lower than temperatures at the deep-water sets. Also, temperatures from stations 12-15, located along theold revetment were slightly cooler than those recorded at the other sta-tions. Dissolved oxygen determinations indicated a normal tendencytoward winter maximum and summer minimum values. The shallow Eighteen species of fish were collected during the study, 16 fromsets at a station had only slightly higher concentrations of dissolved natural bank stations 1-4 and 14 each from natural or revetted bankoxygen than did the deeper sets. Analysis ofvariance did reveal a signifi- stations 5-8 and old revetted bank stations 12-15. Four species of fishcant difference between the current velocities at the deep-water and comprised over 75.5% of the total catch. Freshwater drum (Aplodinotusshallow-water sets forold revetment stations 12-15 and stations 1-4 and grunniens) was by far the most abundant species, representing 42.4%5-8 (Table 1). Monthly current measurements indicated that velocity of the total fish catch (Table 2). Flathead catfish (Pylodictis olivaris),at stations along the old revetment for both shallow and deep sets was gizzard shad (Dorosoma cepedianum), and carp (Cyprinus carpio)less than at other stations grouped by bank type (Table 1). The data followed in abundance comprising 13.9, 10.9, and 8.3% of the totalalso demonstrated that currents along the shallow inshore sets were less catch, respectively.than, but not significantly different from, the deep-water sets at each During the months prior to the revetment placement, freshwater drumsampling station. was the most abundant species (32.7% of the catch) collected. Follow-Hoop net catches varied considerably during the nine-month study ing in abundance were the flathead catfish (9.8%), carp (7.8%), andalong the Mayersville Revetment. Total catches ranged from zero in blue catfish (Ictalurus furcatus) (3.3%). After the revetment placementnumerous net sets to over 16 fish captured at station 2 on 11 July. in August, the freshwater drum was again the most abundant compo-Greatest catches occurred during June and July as river stage de- nent of the catch, comprising 9.7%. Gizzard shad (8.9%), flathead cat-creased and water temperatures increased. Catches at all stations were fish (4.1%), and blue catfish (3.4%) followed in abundance,consistently low from September-December. Some possible explana- c Mean C/fwas used to compare relative abundance of fishes capturedtions for such low hoop net catches are: (a) a steady low water river from the three types of riverbank. The data indicate that fishes werestage during September and October; (b)decreased activity offish caused generally more abundant at natural bank stations 1-4 than at other sta-by fallingwater temperatures; and (c) disturbance of the area when revet- tion groupings (Table 1). Analysis of variance among station group-ment was placed on 24 August along the riverbank at stations 5-8 or ings by month indicated that C/f was not significantly different (a —by upper bank grading that continued through December. 0.05) except during June and August. In June, C/f on natural bankTotal catches were generally greatest along the natural bank at sta- stations 1-4 was significantly greater than C/f at stations 5-8 and 12-15.tions 1-4 and 5-8 (prior to 24 August) and lowest at stations 12-15 In October, C/f along old revetted bank stations 12-15 was zero anddownstream along the old revetment. Total catch along new revetment significantly different from C/f at stations 1-4 and 5-8.stations 5-8 after 24 August was approximately the same as at natural C/f was generally greater in 0.9-m nets fished in deeper water thanbank stations and slightly better than catches on the old revetment. Eddy in the 0.6-m nets set in shallow water. However, analysis of variancecurrents along revetted bank stations 12-15 were consistently present, ofC/fbetween the two gears indicated no significant difference inmeancertainly causing some nets to fish improperly. C/f.96 Arkansas Academy of Science Proceedings, Vol. XXXIX,1985 96Journal of the Arkansas Academy of Science, Vol. 39 [1985], Art. 24http://scholarworks.uark.edu/jaas/vol39/iss1/24Arkansas Academy of Science Proceedings, Vol. XXXIX,1985 97C. H. Pennington, S. S. Knight, and M. P. FarrellCONCLUSIONSDuring this study, no major differences in water quality or C/f weredocumented along the three types of riverbanks (old revetment, newrevetment, and natural bank). However, abundance estimates alongrevetted bank stations 12-15 were generally lower than along the otherbank types. Pennington, Baker and Potter (1983), in a study ofnaturaland revetted banks near Greenville, Mississippi, reported similar C/ffor both riverbank types. This was consistent withC/fvalues reportedby Burress, Krieger and Pennington (1982) and Kallemeyn and Novot-ny(1977), however, all authors reported C/F values to be higher alongrevetted banks. The low catches along revetted bank stations 12-15 couldreflect a difference in fish abundance that may be governed by localvariations in bank materials and water currents.Iotal catch and C/ffor the months revetting materials were depositedcates a higher abundance of fish at stations 5-8 than at the old un-urbed revetment at stations 12-15. This indicates that fish suscepti-ble to capture with hoop nets apparently respond and recover quiterapidly from bank perturbation caused by the placement of therevetment.ACKNOWLEDGMENTSThis work is part of the Environmental and WaterQuality Operational Studies, Project VA, sponsored bythe Office, Chief of Engineers.LITERATURE CITEDBURRESS, R. M.,D. A.KRIEGER, and C. H. PENNINGTON. 1982.Aquatic biota of bank stabilization structures on the Missouri River,North Dakota. Technical Report E-82-6. U.S. Army EngineerWaterways Experiment Station, Vicksburg, Mississippi. 51 pp.KALLEMEYN,L. W., and J. F. NOVOTNY. 1977. Fish and fish foodorganisms in various habitats of the Missouri River in SouthDakota, Nebraska, and Iowa. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Na-tional Stream Alteration Team, FWS/OBS-77.25, Columbia,Missouri. 63 pp.KEOWN, M. P., N. R. OSWALT, E. B. PERRY, and E. A.DARDEAU, JR. 1977. Literature survey and preliminary evalua-tion of streambank protection methods. Technical Report H-77-9.U.S. ArmyEngineer Waterways Experiment Station, Vicksburg,Mississippi. 94 pp.MILLER,A.C. 1981. Aquatic habitat studies on the Lower MississippiRiver, river mile 480 to 530: Report 1. Introduction. MiscellaneousPaper E-80-1. U.S. Army Engineer Waterways Experiment Sta-tion, Vicksburg, Mississippi. 34 pp.PENNINGTON, C. H., J. A. BAKER, and M.E. POTTER. 1983.Fish populations along natural and revetted banks on the LowerMississippi River. North Amer. J. Fish. Mgmt. 3(2):204-211.97Journal of the Arkansas Academy of Science, Vol. 39 [1985], Art. 24Published by Arkansas Academy of Scie ce, 1985

https://scholarworks.uark.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=2455&context=jaas

Response of Fishes to Revetment Placement

Abstract

Similar works

Full text

Available Versions

UARK (University of Arkansas )

ScholarWorks@UARK