APPENDIX F

 

A HEALTH ASSESSMENT OF THE FISH COMMUNITIES

IN THE

WICHITA RIVER BASIN IN TEXAS

 

May 1998

 

BASIN SUMMARY REPORT

FOR THE

RED RIVER BASIN

September 1999

 

 

 

1.0Abstract

 

This paper gives insight into the biological health of streams located in the Wichita River Basin.  Little information exists on the biological communities of this geographical region, which hinders long-term comparisons.  Hence, fish were collected during July of 1997 to enable the calculation of biological indices and provide a biological survey for future reference.  Rapid Bioassessment (RBA) methodologies were used for the quantification of biological integrity at 12 monitoring stations in this basin.  Results show poor overall biological health of most streams in this river basin.  Detected impairment is most likely due to physical habitat limitations and water quality problems (i.e. total dissolved solids).

 

2.0       Introduction

 

This paper presents the results of a bioassessment study of the Wichita River basin performed in July of 1997.  The study was performed under a monitoring plan developed under the Texas Clean Rivers Program (CRP) and was performed in coordination with the Texas Parks and Wildlife Region 2-F District, office in Wichita Falls.  Under this plan, biological monitoring plays a major role in supplementing chemical and physical data to provide a complete assessment of water quality in the Red River Basin.

 

The primary objective of this study was to assess the water quality of streams within the Wichita River Basin.  Fish were collected at 12 sampling stations in the Wichita River basin.  These biological samples were used to calculate a biological integrity score (or Index of Biotic Integrity (IBI)), using Rapid Bioassessment Protocols (RBP).  By performing habitat assessments at these stations, it is possible to determine biological impairment due to water quality, as opposed to natural habitat characteristics.

 

Table 1 provides a description of these stations while Figure 1 shows the location of the stations.  These stations are exposed to several different land uses having potential to impair water quality.  These include urban activities, such as wastewater effluent discharges and stormwater runoff carrying excess nutrients and pollutants.  Secondly, these stations encounter the potential degradation from farming activities, including sedimentation and excess runoff carrying various pollutants.

 

Table 1

Description of Monitoring Stations Sampled for Biological Communities

in the Wichita River Region of the Red River Basin

 

 

 

                                                                        U ) Urban                                 R ) Ranching

                                                                        F ) Farming                              D ) Outflows from Lake

 

Lastly, these stations are exposed to ranching activities, which result in sedimentation, introduction of fecal pathogens, and deterioration of the riparian zone/stream banks.  Table 1 displays which of these activities are predominant at each of the monitoring stations.

 

3.0Regional Description

 

The Wichita River is one of the largest tributaries of the Red River in Texas.  The basin extends from the confluence with the Red River in Clay County to its headwaters in Cottle, King, and Dickens counties.  Lake Kemp and Lake Diversion are two reservoirs located on the main stem of the Wichita River, and are located in Baylor and Archer Counties.  There are five subwatersheds (Hydrologic Unit Codes [HUCs]) in the basin totaling 4,951 square miles of contributing drainage area.  Average annual rainfall for this region is approximately 26 inches per year.

Figure 1, Table 1 provides a description of these stations while Figure 1 shows the location of the stations.

The stations sampled in this study are generally low-gradient and possess clay/mud substrates high in ferrous hydroxide.  Vegetation presence is limited, dominated by salt cedar, mesquite, some hardwoods, and grasses.  Overall physical habitat in this region is limited for biological communities to thrive.  Limiting habitat characteristics for aquatic life in this region include the lack of suitable substrate, high rates of sedimentation, and poor stream bank stability.  Water quality characteristics for this watershed, which may limit biological integrity, include high levels of dissolved solids, namely chlorides.  These total dissolved solids originate from both natural (salt springs in headwaters) and anthropogenic (oilfield operations) sources.  The combination of limiting habitat and elevated levels of dissolved solids renders the Wichita River basin a harsh environment for biological communities.

 

4.0       Methods and Materials

 

4.1Rapid Bioassessment Methodology ) Fish

 

Fish species were identified and assigned origin groups, tolerance values, and trophic levels (Plafkin et al, 1989; Hubbs, et al, 1991).  This information was used to score 11 RBP V (or IBI) metrics (Plafkin et al, 1989).  RBP V allows for some discretion in selecting individual metrics for analysis.  Metrics measure particular components of community structure, each having a different range of sensitivity to pollution stress.  The metrics used to calculate an IBI score for these stations was a modified version developed for fish in the Subhumid Agricultural Plains of Texas (Ecoregions 27, 29, and 32) (Linam, personal communication).

 

Data Analyses

 

The 11 metrics which were evaluated in this study include:

 

1.         Total number of species

2.         Number of cyprinid species

3.         Number of sunfish species

4.         Number of benthic invertivore species

5.         Percentage as tolerants

6.         Percentage as invertivores

7.         Percentage as piscivores

8.         Total number of individuals

9.         Percentage omnivores

10.Percentage of individuals as non-native species

11.Percentage diseased/anomalies

 

All metrics, except "total number of individuals" were evaluated according to the previously cited references.  A different method was used to determine the "total number of individuals" metric.  Smaller seine mesh sizes used at stations to calculate the metrics, resulted in greater numbers of fish collected (i.e. western mosquitofish). The total number of individuals from each of the 12 stations were ranked and the value at the 90^th percentile was deduced. This number was split into thirds, giving the three ranges for the metric scoring. This is consistent with the methodology used for the calculation of other metrics.

 

Metric scoring consists of each metric receiving a 1, 3, or 5, based on its numeric value.  The eleven metric scores for each sampling site were totaled to obtain an Index of Biotic Integrity score.  Each sampling site was classified as being in Limited (<35), Intermediate (35-40), High (41-48), or Exceptional (>48).

 

Sampling Methodology

 

Fish were sampled at each site, using a backpack electro-shocking unit for the Little Wichita River at Highway 79 station and by seining techniques at the other stations.  Ten seine hauls were made at each station.  Additional seine hauls were performed if a new species was collected in the final seine haul until a seine haul with no new species occurred.  Sampling gear consisted of a Model 12-B Backpack Electro-fisher, a 10 foot seine with ¼ inch mesh, and a 25 foot bag seine with ¼ inch mesh.  The Little Wichita River station was electro-shocked for 15 minutes. No seining was performed at this site due to the over-abundant woody debris in the shallow channel.

 

All habitats, such as snags, rootwads, riffles, and undercut banks were sampled if present, in order to maximize the capture of different fish species.  A representative of each species was preserved in 10% formalin solution and returned to the lab for identification.  All other fish collected were released.  All fish were identified to species and the number of each species was recorded.

 

5.0       Results and Discussion

 

Scores calculated for the stations sampled in the Wichita River Basin give evidence that overall biological integrity ranges from Limited to High.  The majority of sites scored in the Limited category.  The predominance of low scores could be attributed to poor habitat conditions and poor water quality (i.e. high dissolved solids).  The results for each station, as well as the habitat score, is presented below in Table 2.

 

Table 2

RBA and Habitat Scores for Stations Sampled in the Wichita River Basin

 

 

 

Exhibit A contains a species list, as well as information for each station.  Exhibit B shows the scoring of each metric for each particular station.

 

Stations showing "limited" biological integrity are all located on the main stem of the Wichita River, including the South and North Fork branches.  These stations are characterized with poor substrate, lack suitable habitat, and possess elevated levels of dissolved solids, making it difficult to sustain healthy fish communities.  The Wichita River at US 283 and Buffalo Creek at FM 1814 both showed "High" biological integrity. The Wichita River at the US 283 station, scored the highest of all stations, and is greatly influenced by anthropogenic activities.  This station is located approximately 300 yards downstream of the Lake Kemp dam and possesses suitable substrate and habitat, as well as variable flows.  These advantageous characteristics, as well as the introduction of species from Lake Kemp, explain the healthy fish community at this station.  Buffalo Creek at FM 1814 scored "High" due to exceptional substrate, variable flows, and presence of fish cover.  It is interesting to note that the flow at this station is dominated by wastewater effluent discharged from the City of Iowa Park.  This discharge sustains adequate flows for the survival of fishes on a year round basis.

 

Beaver Creek at FM 2326, Wichita River at FM 810, and Little Wichita River at Highway 79 scored "Intermediate".  Each of these stations had habitat (or chemical) characteristics, which accounted for the collection of relatively healthy fish communities.  Beaver Creek at FM 2326 and the Little Wichita River at Highway 79 differed from most stations, in that abundant woody habitat was present at both.  The Little Wichita River at Highway 79 was sampled using a backpack electro-fisher, due to the presence of lower conductivity, which could explain differences in the collection from other stations.

 

The Wichita River at FM 810 is located in a stretch of the Wichita River in which all other stations showed limited biological integrity.  However, this station scored in the "Intermediate" category.  This difference could be attributed to the presence of a large riffle containing large boulders.  The presence of this riffle, which is very uncharacteristic of the Wichita River, provides a more diverse habitat for various species of fish. Obviously, habitat can play a predominant role in the presence or absence of a healthy fish community.  This can be seen below on Figure 2, which displays Habitat Score versus the RBA Score for each station.  As habitat quality increases, generally the biological integrity increases, as well.  Two stations, Wichita River at FM 810 (10145) and Beaver Creek at FM 2326 (15120) scored relatively high for their respective habitat scoring.  These stations were previously identified as possessing special habitat characteristics, explaining the more diverse collection.

 

Scoring several of the metrics pointed out similarities between most or all of the stations in the Wichita River Basin.  Species richness ranged from three to 12, with most stations on the main stem of the Wichita River scoring less than the tributaries.  The number of cyprinid species ranged from one to five, while most centered around two to three of these species.  A low amount of sunfish species (zero to three per station) was collected during this study, resulting in low metric scores for most stations.

 

The reason for the lack of sunfish species is most likely due to the combination of high concentrations of dissolved solids and the common lack of adequate habitat found throughout the basin.  Low metric scores were also obtained for the metric, number of benthic invertivore species.  Zero or one of these species were collected at stations, giving evidence of a low abundance of these species.  "Pollution tolerance" calculations show a large percentage of individuals falling into the "tolerant" category, a characteristic of this region.

 

The analysis of functional feeding groups shows a low percentage of piscivores, a high percentage of insectivores, while the percentage of omnivores varies greatly.  The total number of individuals ranged from 12 to 171, indicating that the abundance of fish in the basin is relatively low in comparison to other rivers and streams within the state.  Lastly, non-native species were collected at only one station and no anomalies were found on the fish.

 

The following Figure 2 displays Habitat Score versus Rapid Bioassessment Score for each station included in the Wichita River Basin study.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

 

Hubbs, Clark, Robert J. Edwards and Gary P. Garrett. 1991.  An Annotated Checklist of the

Freshwater Fishes of Texas with Keys to Identification of Species.  The Texas Journal of Science. 43(4):  Special Supplement.

 

Linam, Gordon.  1998.  Personal communication.  Texas Parks and Wildlife Department.

 

Plafkin, J.L., M.T. Barbour, K.D. Porter, S.K. Gross and R.M. Hughes.  1989.

Rapid Bioassessment Protocols for Use in Streams and Rivers:  Benthic Macroinvertebrates and Fish.  EPA/444/4-89-001.