Waterfowl Use Characteristics of Flood-Prevention Lakes in North-Central Texas

Waterfowl use of 55 flood-prevention lakes in north-central Texas was determined from 16 biweekly aerial counts made during August 1976-April 1977. A total of 42,855 waterfowl of 18 species was observed. Ducks accounted for 84% (35,958) of this total, and puddle ducks represented 77% (27,717) of all ducks. Gadwalls (Anas strepera) and ring-necked ducks (Aythya collaris) were the 2 most abundant species of ducks. Values for 13 physical, limnological, and vegetative parameters were determined for each lake, and many of these were significantly correlated (P < 0.05) with each other, mainly due to soil types, topography, and land-use practices. The most important characteristics influencing waterfowl use were amounts of aquatic vegetation and lake surface area. J. WILDL. MANAGE. 45(1):16-26 A substantial amount of wetland habitat has been produced by the construction of 13,200 floodwater-retarding structures throughout the United States. Over 1,750 floodwater-retarding structures exist in Texas, and additional structures are planned. The sizes of these flood-prevention lakes, which are intermediate between the conventional farm pond and the large multipurpose reservoirs constructed by other government agencies, make them potentially valuable to waterfowl (Siegler 1945). Floodwater-retarding structures are built primarily for flood control. They function by impounding in the upper watersheds excess runoff that is then released slowly over a period of days. Construction of the structures is performed by the Soil Conservation Service (SCS), under authorization of the 1944 Flood Control Act, the 1954 Watershed Protection and Flood Prevention Act (Public Law 566), and the Flood and Agricultural Act of 1962 (Nord 1963, Lea and Mattson 1974). Construction is performed in conjunction with the local Soil and Water Conservation Districts, which are responsible for operation and maintenance. However, management and use of the lake remain the property of the owner. Several authors have stated that floodprevention lakes can attract migrating and wintering waterfowl, and may provide substantial recreational hunting potential (Grizzell 1960, Day 1964, Williams 1965, Dillon and Marriage 1973, Hatcher 1973). However, little is known about the species and numbers of waterfowl using them, chronology of use, or the ecological factors affecting their use. Therefore, statements concerning the value of flood-prevention lakes to waterfowl are only broad generalizations. In the only published study of its kind, Copelin (1961) found in western Oklahoma, with the exception of a national wildlife refuge, more ducks used flood-prevention lakes than all of the large impoundments in the area. Unfortunately, because these structures are built primarily for flood control, little attention has been given to determining the ecological factors and features of construction that would enhance the 1 Texas Agricultural Experiment Station Technical Article TA 16115. 2 Present address: Rob and Bessie Welder Wildlife Foundation, Sinton TX 78387. 16 J. Wildl. Manage. 45(1):1981 This content downloaded from 207.46. 13.113 on Wed, 05 Oct 2016 04:14:30 UTC All use subject to http://about.jstor. org/terms WATERFOWL USE OF FLOOD-PREVENTION LAKES * Hobaugh and Teer 17 wildlife potential of the lakes. Furthermore, because the lakes belong to the landowner, no conservation agency has formulated specific management recommendations. Our project was designed to provide basic information concerning the physical, limnological, and vegetative features of flood-prevention lakes that favor waterfowl. The specific objectives were to determine the waterfowl use of flood-prevention lakes in north-central Texas, and to relate variations in waterfowl use to differences in management practices and vegetative, limnological, and structural differences among lakes. This was a cooperative project between the Soil Conservation Service, the Texas Agricultural Experiment Station, and the Texas Agricultural Extension Service. Financial support was provided by the Caesar Kleberg Research Program in Wildlife Ecology. We thank all of the cooperating lake owners who allowed access to their property. Special appreciation is extended to L. C. Boswell, SCS, whose assistance was instrumental to the project success. Many other SCS personnel were helpful, and we thank them for their cooperation. We also thank B. W. Farquhar for his assistance with limnological data collection; 0. C. Jenkins for his help with the statistical analyses; W. H. Kiel, Jr., and R. J. Newton for their advice; and F. Sprague, SCS, and R. L. Noble for their advice and assistance throughout the project and for reviewing this manuscript.