J ;:... ry

N: .~ ..);ld We tla nds Research center

U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service

7·..···J Cajundome Boulevard

Lafayette. La. 70500

ljio~og~/';dl 0erV'C0C'· -' -: ''' Y" I

---- - ---- :-V'vS/OBf,·3:11 C.2

F!::.WU/\R':' I ;a2

HAB!ITAT SUITABILITY INDEX M:;CEL3~

CHANNEL CATFISH

SK

361

. l' 54

no . 82 -

10 .2

nand Wildlife Service

'. Department of the Interior
The Biological Services Program was established wi t hi n the U. S. Fis h

and Wil dlife Service to supply scientific information and me thodologies on

key environmental issues that impact fis h and wi l dli fe reso urces and their

supporting ecosystems. The mission of the program is as follows:

• To strengthen the Fish and Wi l dl i fe Serv i ce i n its role as

a primary source of information on national fish and wildlife resources, particularly i n respe ct to env ironmental

impact assessment . .

• To gather, analyze, and present info rmation that wi ll ai d

decisionmakers in the identi fication and resorution of

problems associated with major changes in land and water

use.

• To provide bet ter ecological i nformation and eval uat ion

for Department of the Interior development programs , such

as those rel at i ng to energy developme nt.

Informati on develo ped by the Biological Ser vices Program is i nt ended

for use i n the planni ng and decis ionma ki ng process to prevent or mi nimi ze

the impact of devel opment on fi sh and ~I i l li f e Rese arch activ ities and

technical assistance services ar e based on an anal ysis of t he is sues , a

determina tion of t he decisionma kers involved and the i r i nformati on needs,

and an evaluation of t he st ate of t he art to identi fy i nformation ~aps

and t o determine priorities. This is a st ra tegy t hat wi l l ensure t hat

the products produced and di sseminated are t ime ly and useful .

Proj ects "have been initi ated i n t he following areas: coal extract ion

and convers ion; power pl ants; geot hermal , mi neral and oil shal e developmen t; water res ource analysis , j ncludi ng stream alterations and west ern

water allocation ; coastal ecosystems and Oute r Con tinent al Shelf devel opment ; and systems i nventory , incl uding Na ti onal Wetl and Inventory ,

habitat classi f i cation and analysis, and informat ion transfe r .

The Bi ological Services Program consists of the Office of Bi ol ogi cal

Ser vi ces in Washington, D.C. , wh i ch is r espo nsibl e for overal l planning and

ma nagement; Nat ional Teams, whi ch provide the Program's cent ra l scie nti fi c

and technical expertise and arrange ~o contract i ng bi ol 09ica l services I

studies with states, universities, consulting firms , and othe rs; Regiona l

Sta f fs , who provide a link to problems at t he operati ng leve l; and staffs at

certain Fish and Wil dli fe Ser vice resear ch facili t i es , wh o conduct in-h ouse

research stud ies .
HABITAT SUITABILITY INDEX MODELS: CHANNEL CATFISH

by

Thomas E. McMahon

and

James W. Terrell

Habitat Evaluation Procedures Group

Western Energy and Land Use Team

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service

Drake Creekside Building One

2625 Redwing Road

Fort Collins, Colorado 80526

Western Energy and Land Use Team

Office of Biological Services

Fish and Wildlife Service

U.S. Department of the Interior

Washington, D.C. 20240

FWS/OBS-82/10.2

February 1982
This report should be cited as:

McMahon, T. E., and J. W. Terrell. 1982. Habitat suitability index models:

Channel catfish. U.S.D.l. Fish and Wildlife Service. FWS/OBS-82/l0.2.

29 pp.

i i
PREFACE·

The habitat use information and Habitat Suitability Index (HSI) models

presented in this document are an aid for impact assessment and habitat management activities. Literature concerning a species' habitat requirements and

preferences is reviewed and then synthesized into HSI models, which are scaled

to produce an index between 0 (unsuitable habitat) and 1 (optimal habitat).

Assumptions used to transform habitat use information into these mathematical

models are noted, and guidelines for model application are described. Any

models found in the literature which may also be used to calculate an HSI are

cited, and simplified HSI models, based on what the authors believe to be the

most important habitat characteristics for this species, are presented.

Use of the models presented in this publication for impact assessment

requires the setting of clear study objectives and may require modification of

the mode 1s to meet those obj ecti ves. Methods for reduci ng mode 1 complex i ty

and recommended measurement techniques for model variables are presented in

Appendix A.

The HSI models presented herein are complex hypotheses of species-habitat

relationships, not statements of proven cause and effect relationships.

Results of mode~erformance tests, when available, are referenced; however,

models that have demonstrated reliability in specific situations may prove

unreliable in others. For this reason, the FWS encourages model users to

convey comments and suggestions that may help us increase the utility and

effectiveness of this habitat-based approach to fish and wildlife planning.

Please send comments to:

Habitat Evaluation Procedures Group

Western Energy and Land Use Team

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service

2625 Redwing Road

Ft. Collins, CO 80526

iii

CONTENTS

PREFACE iii

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS vi

HABITAT USE INFORMATION 1

Genera 1 1

Age, Growth, and Food 1

Reproduct ion 1

Specific Habitat Requirements................................... 1

HABITAT SUITABILITY INDEX (HSI) MODELS................................ 4

Model Applicability... 4

Model Description - Riverine.................................... 5

Model Description - Lacustrine.................................. 8

Suitability Index (SI) Graphs for

Model Variables............................................... 9

Riverine Model.................................................. 15

Lacustrine Model............................................. 17

Interpret i ng Mode 1 Outputs 22

ADDITIONAL HABITAT MODELS 24

Mode 1 1 24

Model 2 25

Model 3 25

REFERENCES CITED 25

v
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

Dugan Sabins provided a major literature review in the early stages of

manuscript development. We would like to thank Charles Walburg and Corlin

Cook for their suggestions and comments on earlier manuscripts. An earlier

draft was published as an appendix in U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (1981)1.

Word processing was provided by Dora Ibarra and Carolyn Gulzow. The cover of

this document was illustrated by Jennifer Shoemaker.

1U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 1981. Standards for the development of

habitat suitability index models. U.S.D.I. Fish and Wildlife Service, Division

of Ecological Services, Washington, D.C. 103 ESM. n.p.

vi
CHANNEL CATFISH (Ictalurus punctatus)

HABITAT USE INFORMATION

General

The native range of channel catfish (Ictalurus Runctatus) extends from

the southern portions of the Canadian prairie provinces south to the Gulf

states, west to the Rocky Mountains, and east to the Appalachian Mountains

(Trautman 1957; Miller 1966; Scott and Crossman 1973). They have been widely

introduced outside this range and occur in essentially all of the Pacific and

Atlantic drainages in the 48 contiguous states (Moore 1968; Scott and Crossman

1973). The greatest abundance of channel catfish generally occurs in the open

(unleveed) floodplains of the Mississippi and Missouri River drainages (Walden

1964).

Age, Growth, and Food

Age at maturity in channel catfish is variable. Catfish from southern

areas with longer growing seasons mature earlier and at smaller sizes than

those from northern areas (Davis and Posey 1958; Scott and Crossman 1973).

Southern catfish mature at age V or less (Scott and Crossman 1973; Pflieger

1975) while northern catfish mature at age VI or greater for males and at age

VIII or greater for females (Starostka and Nelson 1974).

Young-of-the-year (age 0) catfish feed predominantly on plankton and

aquatic insects (Bailey and Harrison 1948; Walburg 1975). Adults are opportunistic feeders with an extremely varied diet, including terrestrial and

aquatic insects, detrital and plant material, crayfish, and molluscs (Bailey

and Harrison 1948; Miller 1966; Starostka and Nelson 1974). Fish may form a

major part of the diet of catfish> 50 cm in length (Starostka and Nelson

1974). Channel catfish diets in rivers and reservoirs do not appear to be

significantly different (see Bailey and Harrison 1948; Starostka and Nelson

1974). Feeding is done by both vision and chemosenses (Davis 1959) and occurs

primarily at night (Pflieger 1975). Bottom feeding is more characteristic but

food is al so taken throughout the water col umn (Scott and Crossman 1973).

Additional information on the composition of adult and juvenile diets is

provided in Leidy and Jenkins (1977).

Reproduction

Channel catfish spawn in late spring and early summer (generally late May

through mid-July) when temperatures reach about 21° C (Clemens and Sneed 1957;

Marzolf 1957; Pflieger 1975). Spawning requirements appear to be a major

factor in determining habitat suitability for channel catfish (Clemens and

Sneed 1957). Spawning is greatly inhibited if suitable nesting cover is

unavailable (Marzolf 1957).

Specific Habitat Requirements

Channel catfish populations occur over a broad range of environmental

conditions (Sigler and Miller 1963; Scott and Crossman 1973). Optimum riverine
habitat is characterized by warm temperatures (Clemens and Sneed 1957; Andrews

et al. 1972; Biesinger et al. 1979) and a diversity of velocities, depths, and

structural features that provide cover and food (Bailey and Harrison 1948).

Optimum lacustrine habitat is characterized by large surface area, warm temperatures, high productivity, low to moderate turbidity, and abundant cover

(Davis 1959; Pflieger 1975).

Fry, juvenile, and adult channel catfish concentrate in the warmest

sections of rivers and reservoirs (Ziebell 1973; Stauffer et al. 1975; McCall

1977). They strongly seek cover, but quantitative data on cover requirements

of channel catfish in rivers and reservoirs are not available. Debris, logs,

cavities, boulders, and cutbanks in lakes and in low velocity « 15 cm/sec)

areas of deep pools and backwaters of rivers will provide cover for channel

catfish (Bailey and Harrison 1948). Cover consisting of boulders and debris

in deep water is important as overwintering habitat (Miller 1966; Jester 1971;

Cross and Collins 1975). Deep pools and littoral areas (s 5 m deep) with

.:?: 40% su i t ab l e cover are assumed to be optimum. Turbidities> 25 ppm but

< 100 ppm may somewhat moderate the need for fixed cover (Bryan et al. 1975).

Riffle and run areas with rubble substrate and pools « 15 cm/sec) and

areas with debris and aquatic vegetation are conditions associated with high

production of aquatic insects (Hynes 1970) consumed by channel catfish in

rivers (Bailey and Harrison 1948). Channel catfish are most abundant in river

sections with a diversity of velocities and structural features. Therefore, it

is assumed that a riverine habitat with 40-60% pools would be optimum for

providing riffle habitat for food production and feeding and pool habitat for

spawning and resting cover (Bailey and Harrison 1948). It also is assumed

that at least 20% of lake or reservoir surface area should consist of littoral

areas (:=; 5 m deep) to provide adequate area for spawning, fry and juvenile

rearing, and feeding habitat for channel catfish.

High standing crops of warmwater fishes are associated with total

dissolved solids (TDS) levels of 100 to 350 ppm for reservoirs in which the

concentrations of carbonate-bicarbonate exceed those of sulfate-chloride

(Jenkins 1976). It is assumed that high standing crops of channel catfish in

1akes or reservoi rs will, on the average, correspond to thi s TDS 1eve 1.

Turbidity in rivers and reservoirs and reservoir size are other factors

that may influence habitat suitability for channel catfish populations.

Channel catfish are abundant in rivers and reservoirs with varying levels of

turbidity and siltation (Cross and Collins 1975). However, low to moderate

turbidities « 100 ppm) are probably optimal for both survival and growth

(Finnell and Jenkins 1954; Buck 1956; Marzolf 1957). Larger reservoirs

(> 200 ha) are probably more suitabl e reservoir habitat for channel catfi sh

populations because survival and growth are better than in smaller reservoirs

(Finnell and Jenkins 1954; Marzolf 1957). Other factors that may affect

reservoir habitat suitability for channel catfish are mean depth, storage

ratio (SR), and length of agricultural growing season. Jenkins (1974) found

that high mean depths were negatively correlated with standing crop of channel

catfish. Mean depths are an inverse correlate of shoreline development (Ryder

et al. 1974), thus higher mean depths may mean less littoral area would be

available. Jenkins (1976) also reported that standing crops of catfishes

(Ictaluridae) peaked at an SR of 0.75. Standing crops of channel catfish were

2
postively correlated to growing season length (Jenkins 1970). However, harvest

of channe 1 catfi sh reported in reservoi rs was not corre 1ated with growi ng

season length (Jenkins and Morais 1971).

Dissolved oxygen (DO) levels of 5 mg/l are adequate for growth and

survival of channel catfish, but D.O. levels of ? 7 mg/l are optimum (Andrews

et al. 1973; Carlson et al. 1974). Dissolved oxygen levels < 3 mg/l retard

growth (Simco and Cross 1966), and feeding is reduced at D.O. levels < 5 mg/l

(Randolph and Clemens 1976).

Adult. Adults in rivers are found in large, deep pools with cover. They

move to-rTffles and runs at night to feed (McCammon 1956; Davis 1959; Pflieger

1971; 1975). Adults in reservoirs and lakes favor reefs and deep, protected

areas with rocky substrates or other cover. They often move to the shoreline

or tributaries at night to feed (Davis 1959; Jester 1971; Scott and Crossman

1973).

The optimal temperature range for growth of adult channel catfish is

26-29° C (Shrable et al. 1969; Chen 1976). Growth is poor at temperatures

< 21° C (McCammon and LaFaunce 1961; Macklin and Soule 1964; Andrews and

Stickney 1972) and ceases at < 18° C (Starostka and Nelson 1974). An upper

lethal temperature of 33.5° C has been reported for catfish acclimated at

25° C (Carlander 1969).

Adult channel catfish were most abundant in habitats with salinities

< 1.7 ppt in Louisiana, although they occurred in areas with salinities up to

11.4 ppt (Perry 1973). Salinities s 8 ppt are tolerated with little or no

effect, but growth slows above this level and does not occur at salinities

> 11 ppt (Perry and Avault 1968).

Embryo. Dark and secluded areas are required for nesting (Marzolf 1957).

Males bui l d and guard nests in cavities, burrows, under rocks, and in other

protected sites (Davis 1959; Pflieger 1975). Nests in large impoundments

generally occur among rubble and boulders along protected shorelines at depths

of about 2-4 m (Jester 1971). Catfish in large rivers are likely to move into

shallow, flooded areas to spawn (Bryan et al. 1975). Lawler (1960) reported

that spawning in Utah Lake, Utah, was concentrated in sections of the lake

with abundant spawning sites of rocky outcrops, trees, and crevices. The maie

catfish fans embryos for water exchange and guards the nest from predators

(Miller 1966; Minckley 1973). Embryos can develop in the temperature range of

15.5 to 29.5° C, with the optimum about 27° C (Brown 1942; Clemens and Sneed

1957). They do not develop at temperatures < 15.5° C (Brown 1942). Embryos

hatch in 6-7 days at 27° C (Clemens and Sneed 1957).

Laboratory studies indicate that embryos three days old and older can

tolerate salinities up to 16 ppt until hatching, when tolerance drops to 8 ppt

(Allen and Avault 1970). However, 2 ppt salinity is the highest level in

which successful spawning in ponds has been observed (Perry 1973). Embryo

survival and production in reservoirs will probably be high in areas that are

not subject to disturbance by heavy wave action or rapid water drawdown.

Fry. The optimal temperature range for growth of channel catfish fry is

29-30° C (West 1966). Some growth does occur down to temperatures of 18° C

(Starostka and Nelson 1974), but growth generally is poor in cool waters with

average summer temperatures < 21° C (McCammon and LaFaunce 1961; Macklin and

3
Soule 1964; Andrews et al. 1972) and in areas with short agricultural growing

seasons (Starostka and Nel son 1974). Upper incipient lethal level s for fry

are about 35-38° C, depending on acclimation temperature (Moss and Scott 1961;

Allen and Strawn 1968). Optimum salinities for fry range from 0-5 ppt;

salinities 10 ppt are marginal as growth is greatly reduced (Allen and

Avaul t 1970).

Fry habitat suitability in reservoirs is related to flushing rate of

reservoirs in midsummer. Walburg (1971) found abundance and survival of fry

greatly decreased at flushing rates < 6 days in July and August.

Channel catfish fry have strong shelter-seeking tendencies (Brown et al.

1970), and cover availability will be important in determining habitat suitability. Newly hatched fry remain in the nest for 7-8 days (Marzolf 1957) and

then disperse to shallow water areas with cover (Cross and Collins 1975). Fry

are commonly found aggregated near cover in protected, slow-flowing (velocity

< 15 em/sec) areas of rocky riffles, debris-covered gravel, or sand bars in

clear streams (Davis 1959; Cross and Collins 1975), and in very shallow

« 0.5 m) mud or sand substrate edges of flowing channels along turbid rivers

and bayous (Bryan et al. 1975). Dense aquatic vegetation generally does not

provide optimum cover because predation on fry by centrarchids is high under

these conditions, especially in clear water (Marzolf 1957; Cross and Collins

1975). Fry overwinter under boulders in riffles (Miller 1966) or move to

cover in deeper water (Cross and Collins 1975).

Juvenile. Optimal habitat for juveniles is assumed to be similar to that

for fry. The temperature range most suitable for juvenile growth is reported

to be 28-30° C (Andrews et al. 1972; Andrews and Stickney 1972). Upper lethal

temperatures are assumed to be similar to those for fry.

HABITAT SUITABILITY INDEX (HSI) MODELS

Model Applicability

Geographic area. The model is applicable throughout the 48 conterminous

States. The standard of comparison for each individual variable suitability

index is the optimum value of the variable that occurs anywhere within the 48

conterminous States. Therefore, the model will never provide an HSI of 1.0

when applied to water bodies in the Northern States where temperature-related

variables do not reach the optimum values for channel catfish found in the

Southern States.

Season. The model provides a rating for a water body based on its ability

to support a self-sustaining population of channel catfish through all seasons

of the year.

Cover types. The model is applicable in riverine, lacustrine, palustrine,

and estuarine habitats, as described by Cowardin et al. (1979).

Minimum habitat area. Minimum habitat area is defined as the minimum

area of contiguous suitable habitat that is required for a species to succesfully live and reproduce. No attempt has been made to establish a minimum

4
habitat size for channel catfish, although this species is most abundant in

larger water bodies.

Verification level. The acceptable output of these models is an index

between 0 and 1 which the authors believe has a positive relationship to

carrying capacity. In order to verify that the model output was acceptable,

sample data sets were developed for calculating HSI's from the models.

The sample data sets and their relationship to model verification are

discussed in greater detail following the presentation of the models.

Model Description

It is assumed that channel catfish habitat quality is based primarily on

their food, cover, water quality, and reproduction requirements. Variables

that have been shown to have an impact on the growth, survival, distribution,

abundance, or other measure of well-being of channel catfish are placed in the

appropriate component and a component rating derived from the individual

variable suitability indices (Figs. 1 and 2). Variables that affect habitat

quality for channel catfish, but which do not easily fit into these four major

components, are combi ned under the "other component." headi ng. Levels of a

variable that are near lethal or result in no growth cannot be offset by other

variables.

Model Description - Riverine

Food component. Percent cover (V2 ) is assumed to be important for rating

the food component because if cover is available, fish would be more likely to

occupy an area and utilize the food resources. Substrate (V 4 ) is included

because stream productior, pocent i a l of aquatic insects (consumed directly by

both channel catfish and their prey species) is related to amount and type of

substrate.

Cover co~nent. Percent pools (VI) is included because channel catfish

utilize pools as cover. Percent cover (V 2 ) is an index of all types of

objects, including logs and debris, used for cover in rivers. Average current

velocity in cover areas (VIS) is important because the usable habitat near a

cover object decreases if cover objects are surrounded by high velocities.

Water quality component. The water quality component is limited to

temperature, oxygen, turbidity, and salinity measurements. These parameters

have been shown to effect growth or survival, or have been correlated with

changes in standing crop. Variables related to temperature, oxygen, and

salinity are assumed to be limiting when they approach lethal levels. Toxic

substances are not considered.

5
Habitat Variables Life Requisites

I

I

I

I

I

I

I

I

I

I

(V 6 season )

Temperature (adult) (V s )

Temperature (fry) (Vl 2 )

Temperature (juvenile) (Vl 4 )

Di ssol ved oxyge~rn~(~V~s2)-=========~§~~~ Water qual ity (CWQ) ---~HSI Turbidity (V7 ) -

Salinity (adult) (V9 )

Salinity (fry, juvenile) (Vl J )

Length of agricultural growing

~~ poo1s (V1 ) -====================-..- % cover (V2 ) - Cover (CC)

Average current velocity (Vl S ) -------

~~ pools (Vl )

% cover (V2 )

Dissolved oxy~g~e~n~(~V~s~)~===============~~Reproduction(CR)

Temperature (embryo) (VlO ) ----===

Salinity (embryo) (Vl l )

Figure 1. Tree diagram illustrating relationship of habitat variables

and life requisites in the riverine model for the channel catfish.

Dashed lines indicate optional variables in the model.

6
Habitat Variables

% cover (V 2) -

~6 1ittora 1 are~a-(~V~3~)~===~===========::='~ Food (CF)

Total dissolved solids (VIS)

HSI

-------

Temperature (adult) (V s )

Temperature (fry) (V I2)

Temperature (juvenile) (V I 4)

Dissolved oxyge?rn~(~V~8~)-===========~::::~~7Water quality (CWO)

Turbidity (V,) - II

Salinity (adult) (V 9 ) /

/

Salinity (fry, juvenile) (VI 3) /

I

Length of agricultural growing season (Vs )

Storage ratio (VIS) Other (COT)

Flushing rate (VI')

% cover (V 2)

% littoral area (V 3)

Dissolved oxygen (V8)1~==========~~~Reproduction (CR) ,

Temperature (embryo) (V I O)

Salinity (embryo) (VII)

Figure 2. Tree diagram illustrating relationship of habitat variables

and life requisites in the lacustrine model for the channel catfish.

Dashed lines indicate optional variables in the model.

7
Reproduction component. Percent pools (V l ) is in the reproductive component becaus e channel catfish spawn in low velocity areas in rivers. Percent

cover (V 2 ) is in thi s component si nce channel catfi sh requi re cover for

spawning. If minimum dissolved oxygen (DO) levels within pools and backwaters

during midsummer (Va) are adequate, they should be adequate during spawning,

which occurs earlier in the year. DO levels measured during spawning and

embryo development could be substituted for Va. Two additional variables,

average water temperatures within pools and backwaters during spawning and

embryo development (Vl C ) and maximum salinity during spawning and embryo

develo~ment (Vl l ) are included because these water quality conditions affect

embryo survival and development.

Model Description - Lacustrine

Food component. Percent cover (V2 ) is included since it is assumed that

if cover is available, channel catfish would be more likely to utilize an area

for feeding. Percent littoral area (V3 ) is included because littoral areas

generally produce the greatest amount of food and feeding habitat for catfish.

Total dissolved solids (T05) (V l 6 ) is included because adult channel catfish

eat fish, and fish production in lakes and reservoirs is correlated with T05.

C0 ver comp0 nent. Per cent .c 0 ver (V 2 ) isinc1uded sin ce channe1 catf is',

strongly seek structural features of logs, debri s , brush, and other objects

for shelter. Percent littoral area (V3 ) is included because all life stage

predominantly utilize cover found in littoral areas of a lake.

Water quality component. Refer to riverine model description.

Reproduction component. Percent cover (V 2 ) is included since catfish

build nests in dark and secluded areas; spawning is not observed if suitable

cover is unavailable. Percent littoral area (V3 ) is included since catfish

spawning is concentrated along the shoreline. DO (Va), temperature (Vl C ) and

salinity (Vl l ) are included because these water quality parameters affect

embryo survival and development.

Other component. For reservoirs, storage ratio (Vl S ) and maximum flushing

rate when fry are present (Vl 7 ) are included in this component because storage

ratio may affect standing crop and the flushing of fry from a reservoir outlet

can reduce the abundance of fry.

8
Suitability Index (51) Graphs for Model Variables

This section contains suitability index graphs for the 18 variables

described above, and equations for combining selected variables into a species

HSI using the component approach. Variables pertain to a riverine (R) habitat,

lacustrine (L) habitat, or both (R, L).

Habitat Variable Suitability Graph

>,

+J 0.6

><

QJ

-0 0.8 c

.......

a.a +-.-.................,.--..--.."T"""'"................-r..................+

0.4

0.2

1. a +-'-................,J"..........,.....-'-'-~.................................+

,......

......

..Q

eu

+J

Vl

Percent pools during

average summer flow.

R

a 25 50 75 100

%

R,L Percent cover (logs,

boulders, cavities,

brush, debris, or

standing timber) during

summer within pools,

backwater areas, and

littoral areas.

><

QJ

-0

C

.......

,......

......

..Q

eu

+J

o 10 20 30 40 50

9
L (V 3 ) Percent littoral area 1.0

during summer. x

QJ

"0 0.8

c

I-<

>, 0.6

+>

..Cl 0.4 res

+>

::5

if> 0.2

0.0

0 25 50 75 100

%

R (V 4 ) Food production potential

in river by substrate type

present during average

summer flow.

lIfA) Rubble dominant in

riffle-runs with some

gravel and/or boulders

present; fines (silt 1.0

and sand) not common; x aquatic vegetation

abundan t (~ 3O~~ ) inc O.8 I-< pool areas.

B) Rubble, gravel, .?;' 0.6

boulders, and fines

occur in nearly equal ..Cl 0 4

amounts in ri ffl e-run.B .

areas; aquatic vegeta~;

t ion i sID- 3O~6 i n if> O.2

pool areas.

C) Some rubble and gravel 0.0

present, but fines or

boulders are dominant;

aquatic vegetation is

scarce « 10%) in pool

a rea s .

D) Fines or bedrock are

the dominant bottom

material. Little or

no aquatic vegetation

or rubble present.

10

A B C

Class

o
R,L (V s ) Average midsummer water 1.0

temperature within

pools, backwaters, or x

(l) 0.8 littoral areas (Adult). -0

c

.......

>,

+-' 0.6

-r-r-

..0

ro 0.4

+-'

:::::l

VI 0.2

0.0

10 20 30 40

O(

R,L (V 6 ) Length of agricultural 1.0

growing season (frost- x

free days). (l)

-0 0.8 c

.......

Note: This variable >, 0.6 TSOpt i ona1. +-'

..0

ro 0.4

+-'

:::::l

VI 0.2

0.0

0 125 250

Days

R,L (V 7 ) Maximum monthly average

turbidity during 1.0 summer.

x 0.8 (l)

-0

C

I--< 0.6

>,

+-'

-r-r- 0.4 ..0

ro

+-' 0.2 - :::::l

VI

0.0

100 200 300

ppm

11
x

Q)

"'0

C

.....

R,L Average mlnlmum dissolved

oxygen levels within

pools, backwaters, or

littoral areas during

midsummer.

1.0

0.8

0.6

0.4

0.2

0.0

o 2 4

mg/l

6 8

R,L (V9 ) Maximum salinity 1.0

during summer x

(Adult). Q)

"'0 0.8 c

.....

c-,

+-' 0.6 .....

.....

..0

rtl 0.4

+-'

.....

::s

(/) 0.2

0.0

0 5 10 15

ppt

R,L ( VI 0 ) Average water

temperatures within 1.0

pools, backwaters,

and littoral areas x during spawning and Q) 0.8

"'0 embryo development c

(Embryo) . c-, 0.6

+-'

.....

..0 0.4 rtl

+-'

.....

::s

(/) 0.2

0.0

10 20 30

O(

12
R,L (V 11 ) Maximum salinity 1.0

during spawning

and embr~o development ><

(lJ 0.8

(Embryo) . "U

t::

I-t

>, 0.6

+-'

r-

.,-

..Q 0.4 co

+-'

::::l

Vl 0.2

0.0

a 10 20

ppt

R,L (V 12) Average midsummer water 1.0

temperature within pool s , ><

bacKwaters, or littoral (lJ

-0 0.8

areas (Fry). I::

>,

+-' 0.6 r-

'r-

..Cl 0.4 co

+-'

'r-

::::l

<./l 0.2

0.0

10 20 30 40

°C

R,L (V 1 J ) Maximum salinity

during summer >< 1.0

(Fry, Juvenile). (lJ

-0

I::

....... 0.8 >,

+-'

-r--'

0.6 .o

ro

+-'

'r- 0.4 ::::l

<./l

0.2

0.0

S 6 7 8 9 10

ppt

13
R,L ( V14 ) Average midsummer water 1.0

temperature within ><

poo1s, backwaters, or Q.J

-0 0.8 littoral areas c

>-i

(Juvenile). c-,

+> 0.6 ..--

-r-t-

..0

res

+> 0.4 ......

:::::l

(/) 0.2

0.0

10 20 30 40

O(

L (V 1 S ) Storage ratio. 1.0

><

Q.J

-0 0.8 c

>-i

c-,

+> 0.6

..--

..0

res 0.4 +>

:::::l

(/) 0.2

0.0

0 2 3

L (V 1 6 ) Monthly average TDS

(total dissolved 1.0

solids) during ><

Q.J

summer. -0

c

>-i 0.8

c-,

+> 0.6

..0

res

+> 0.4

:::::l

(/) 0.2

0.0

0 500 1000

ppm

14
L (V 1 7 ) Maximum reservoir 1.0

flushing rate while

fry present (Fry). x

OJ 0.8 -0

s::

.....

>, 0.6 -l..J

.D 0.4 co

-l..J

:::l 0.2 Ul

0.0

4 5 6

Days

R (V 18) Average current velocity 1.0

in cover areas during x average summer flow. OJ

-0

s:: 0.8

c-,

-l..J 0.6

.D

co 0.4 +>

:::l

Ul

0.2

0.0

10 20 30 40 50

em/sec

Riverine Model

These equations utilize the life requisite approach and consist of four

components: food, cover, water quality, and reproduction.

15
Water Quality (CWQ)'

+ V7 + 2(V a) + V9 + V1 3

7

3

If Vs, V1 2 , V1 4 Va, V9 , or V1 3 is S 0.4, then CWQ equals the lowest

of the following: Vs , V1 2 , V1 4 , Va, V9 , V1 3 , or the above equation.

Note: If temperature data are unavailable, 2(V6 ) (length of agricultural growing season) may be substituted for the term

2(Vs + V1 2 + V1 4 )

in the above equation

Reproduction (CR).

CR= (V V 2 V 2 V 2 V )1/8 1 X 2 X a X 10 X 11

If Va, V1 0 , or V1 1 is s 0.4, then CR equals the lowest of the

following: V6 , V1 0 , V1 1 , or the above equation.

HSI determination.

If CWQ or CR is s 0.4, then the HSI equals the lowest of the

following: CWQ' CR, or the above equation.

16
Sources of data and assumptions made in developing the suitability indices

are presented in Table 1.

Sample data sets using riverine HSI model are listed in Table 2.

Lacustrine Model

This model utilizes the life requisite approach and consists of five

components: food, cover, water quality, reproduction, and other.

Water Quality (CWQ)'

C

WQ = same as in Riverine HSI Model

Reproduction (CR).

If Va, V1 0 , or V1 1 is 0.4, then CR equals the lowest of the

following: Va, V1 0 , V1 1 , or the above equation.

17
Table 1. Data sources and assumptions for channel catfish suitability indices.

Variable and source

Bailey and Harrison 1948

Bailey and Harrison 1948

Marzolf 1957

Cross and Collins 1975

Bailey and Harrison 1948

Marzolf 1957

Cross and Collins 1975

Bailey and Harrison 1948

Clemens and Sneed 1957

West 1966

Shrable et al. 1969

Starostka and Nelson 1974

Biesinger et al. 1979

Jenkins 1970

Finnell and Jenkins 1954

Buck 1956

Marzolf 1957

Moss and Scott 1961

Andrews et al. 1973

Carl son et al. 1974

Randolph and Clemens 1976

Perry and Avault 1968

Perry 1973

Assumption

Optimum conditions for a diversity of

velocities, depths, and structural

features for channel catfish will be

found when there are approximately equal

amounts of pools and riffles.

The strong preference of all life stages

of channel catfish for cover indicates

that some cover must be present for

optimum conditions to occur.

Lakes with small littoral area will provide less area for cover and food production for channel catfish and are therefore less suitable.

The amount and type of substrate or the

amount of aquatic vegetation associated

with high production of aquatic insects

(used as food by channel catfish and

channel catfish prey species) is optimum.

Temperatures at the warmest time of year

must reach levels that permit growth in

order for habitat to be suitable. Optimum

temperatures are those when maximum growth

occurs.

Growing seasons that are correlated with

high standing crops are optimum.

High turbidity levels are associated with

reduced standing crops and therefore are

less suitable.

Lethal levels of dissolved oxygen are

unsuitable. DO levels that reduce feeding

are suboptimal.

Salinity levels where adults are most

abundant are optimum. Any salinity

level at which adults have been

reported has some suitabilty.

18
Table 1. (concluded)

Variable and source Assumption

Brown 1942

Clemens and Sneed 1957

Perry and Avault 1968

Perry 1973

McCammon and LaFaunce 1961

Moss and Scott 1961

Macklin and Soule 1964

West 1966

Allen and Strawn 1968

Andrews 1972

Starostka and Nelson 1974

Allen and Avault 1970

Andrews et al. 1972

Andrews and Stickney 1972

Jenkins 1976

Jenkins 1976

Wal,burg 1971

Miller 1966

Scott and Crossman 1973

Cross and Collins 1975

Optimum temperatures are those which

result in optimum growth. Temperatures

that result in death or no growth are

unsuitable.

Salinity levels at which spawning has

been observed are suitable.

Optimum temperatures for fry are those

when growth is best. Temperatures that

result in no growth or death are unsuitable.

Salinities that do not reduce growth

of fry and juveniles are optimum.

Salinities that greatly reduce growth

are unsuitable.

Temperatures at which growth of juveniles

is best are optimum. Temperatures that

result in no growth or death are unsuitable.

Storage ratios correlated with maximum

standing crops are optimum; those correlated with lower standing crops are

suboptimum.

Total dissolved solids (IDS) levels correlated with high standing crops of warmwater fish are optimum; those correlated

with lower standing crops are suboptimum.

The data used to develop this graph are

primarily from southeastern reservoirs.

Flushing rates correlated with reduced

levels of fry abundance are suboptimal.

High velocities near cover objects will

decrease the amount of usable habitat

around the objects and are thus

considered suboptimum.

19
Table 2. Sample data sets using riverine HS1 model.

Data set 1 Data set 2 Data set 3

Variable Data SI Data SI Data SI

% pools Vi 60 1.0 90 0.6 15 0.5

01

10 cover V2 50 1.0 10 0.4 5 0.2

Substrate for V4 s i It- 0.7 s i It- 0.5 sand 0.2

food production gravel sand

Temperature-Adult

(0 C) Vs 28 1.0 32 0.4 22 0.5

Growing season V6 180 0.8

Turbidity (ppm) V7 50 1.0 210 0.5 160 0.8

Dissolved oxygen

(mg/l) Va 4.5 0.6 4.0 0.5 4.0 0.5

Salinity-adult

(ppt) Vs < 1 1.0 < 1 1.0 < 1 1.0

Temperature-Embryos (OC) Vi O 25 0.8 21.5 0.5 28.5 0.5

Salinity-Embryo

( ppt) Vii < 1 1.0 < 1 1.0 < 1 1.0

Temperature-Fry

(0 C) V1 2 26.5 0.8 32 0.7 23 0.5

Salinity-Fry/

Juvenile (ppt) V1 3 < 1 1.0 < 1 1.0 < 1 1.0

TemperatureJuvenile (0 C) V1 4 29 1.0 32 0.7 22 0.5

Velocity V18 15 1.0 5 1.0 30 0.3

20
Table 2. (concluded)

Data set 1 Data set 2 Data set 3

Variable Data 51 Data 51 Data 51

Component 51

CF = 0.85 0.45 0.20

Cr = 1. 00 0.62 0.31 '-'

CWO = 0.87 0.40* 0.69

CR = 0.86 0.58 0.47

H51 = 0.88 0.40* 0.43

*Note: CWO S 0.4; therefore, H51 = CWO in Data 5et 2.

21
HSI determination.

HSI

If CWO or CR is 0.4, then the HSI equals the lowest of the

following: CWO' CR, or the above equation.

Sample data sets using lacustrine HSI model are listed in Table 3.

Interpreting Model Outputs

The proper interpretation of the HSI produced by the models is one of

comparison. If two water bodies have large differences in HSI's, then the one

with the higher HSI should be able to support more catfish than the water body

with the lower HSI, given that the model assumptions have not been violated.

The actual differences in HSI that indicate a true difference in carrying

capacity are unknown and likely to be high. We have aggregated a large number

of variables into a single index with little or no quantitative information on

how the variables interact to effect carrying capacity. The probability that

we have made an error in our assumptions on variable interactions is high.

However, we believe the model is a reasonable hypothesis of how the selected

variables interact to determine carrying capacity.

Before using the model, any available statistical models, such as those

described under model 3 in the next section, should be examined to determine

if they better meet the goals of model application. Statistical models are

likely to be more accurate in predicting the value of a dependent variable,

such as standing crop, from habitat related variables than the HSI models

described above. A statistical model is especially useful when the habitat

variables in the data set used to derive the model have values similar to the

proposed model application site. The HSI models described above may be most

useful when habitat conditions are dissimilar to the statistical model data

set or it is important to evaluate changes in variables not included in the

statistical model.

The sample data sets consist of different variable values (and their

corresponding SI score), which although not actual field measurements, are

thought to represent realistic conditions that could occur in various channel

catfish riverine or lacustrine habitats. We believe the HSI's calculated from

the data reflect what carrying capacity trends would be in riverine or lacustrine habitats with the characteristics listed in the respective data sets.

22
Table 3. Sample data sets using lacustrine HS1 model.

Data set 1 Data set 2 Data set 3

Variable Data SI Data SI Data 51

01

/0 cover V2 50 1.0 10 0.4 5 0.2

% littoral area V3 40 1.0 20 0.7 70 0.6

Temperature-Adult

(0 C) Vs 26 1.0 20 0.3 33 0.2

Growing season V6 180 0.8

Turbidity V7 175 0.7 210 0.5 250 0.3

Dissolved oxygen Va 4.5 0.6 4.5 0.6 2.5 0.2

Sa1in ity-Adu It

(ppt) V9 < 1 1.0 < 1 1.0 < 1 1.0

Temperature-Embryo

(0 C) V10 25 0.8 21.5 0.5 28 0.5

Salinity-Embryo

(ppt) V11 < 1 1.0 < 1 1.0 < 1 1.0

Temperature-Fry

(0 C) V12 26.5 0.8 32 0.7 23 0.5

Sa1i nity-Fry/

Juvenile (ppt) V13 < 1 1.0 < 1 1.0 < 1 1.0

TemperatureJuvenile (0 C) V14 29 1.0 32 0.7 22 0.5

Storage ratio V15 1.5 0.9 .3 0.7 0.8 1.0

TDS (ppm) V1 6 200 1.0 300 1.0 600 0.6

Flushing rate

while fry

pre sen t (d ays ) V17 15 1.0 4 0.4 11 1.0

23
Table 3. (concluded)

1. 00 0.70 0.47

1. 00 0.52 0.33

0.82 0.30* 0.20*

0.83 0.56 0.20

0.95 0.55 1. 00

0.89 0.30* 0.20*

Variable

Component SI

CF =

Cc =

C

WQ =

CR =

COT =

HSI =

Data set 1

Data SI

Data set 2

Data SI

Data set 3

Data SI

*Note: C

WQ 0.4; therefore, HSI = CWQ in Data Sets 2 and 3.

ADDITIONAL HABITAT MODELS

Mode 1 1

Optimal riverine habitat for channel catfish is characterized by the

following conditions, assuming water quality is adequate: warm, stable water

temperatures (summer temperatures of 25-31° C); an approximate 40-60% area of

deep pools; and abundant cover in the form of logs, boulders, cavities, and

debris (> 40% of pool area).

HSI = number of above criteria present

3

24
Model 2

Optimal lacustrine habitat for channel catfish is characterized by the

following conditions, assuming water quality is adequate: warm, stable water

temperatures (summer temperatures of 25-30° C); large surface area (> 500 ha);

moderate to high fertility (TDS 100-350 ppm); clear to moderate turbidities

« 100 JTU); and abundant cover (> 40% in areas < 5 mdeep).

HSI = number of above criteria present

5

Model 3

Use the reservoir standing crop regression equations for catfishes presented by Aggus and Morais (1979) to predict standing crop, then divide the

predicted standing crop by the highest standing crop value used to develop the

regression equation, in order to obtain an HSI.

REFERENCES CITED

Aggus, L. R., and 0.1. Morais. 1979. Habitat suitability index equations

for reservoi r s based on standi ng crop of fi sh. Nat 1. Reservoi r Res.

Program. Rept. to U.S. Fish Wildl. Serv., Hab. Eval. Proj., Ft. Collins,

CO. 120 pp.

Allen, K. 0., and J. W. Avault. 1970. The effect of salinity on growth of

channel catfish. Proc. Southeastern Assoc. Game and Fish Commissioners

23:319-331.

Allen, K. 0., and K. Strawn. 1968. Heat tolerance of channel catfish,

Ictalurus punctatus. Proc. Southeastern Assoc. Game and Fish

Commissioners 21:399-411.

Andrews, J. W., and R. R. Stickney. 1972. Interactions of feeding rates and

environmental temperature on growth, food conversion and body composition

of channel catfish. Trans. Am. Fish. Soc. 101(1):94-99.

Andrews, J. W., L. H. Knight, and T. Murai. 1972. Temperature requirements

for high density rearing of channel catfish from fingerlings to market

size. Prog. Fish-Cult. 34:240-242.

Andrews, J. W., T. Murai, and G. Gibbons. 1973.

oxygen on the growth of channel catfish.

102(4):835-838.

25

The influence of dissolved

Tran s . Am. Fish. Soc.
Bailey, R. M., and H. M. Harrison, Jr. 1948. Food habits of the southern

channel catfish (lcta~rus lacustri2 punctatus) in the Des Moines River,

Iowa. Trans. Am. Fish. Soc. 75:110-138.

Biesinger, K. E., R. B. Brown, C. R. Bernick, G. A. Flittner, and K. E. F.

Hokanson. 1979. A national compendium of freshwater fish and water

temperature data. Vol. I. U.S. Environ. Protection Agency Rep., Environ.

Res. Lab., Duluth, Minn. 207 pp.

Brown, B. E., 1. Inman, and A. Jearld, Jr. 1970. Schooling and shelter

seeking tendencies in fingerling catfish behavior. Trans. Am. Fish. Soc.

99(3):540-545.

Brown, L. 1942. Propagation of the spotted channel catfish (Ictalurus.

lacustris QlJnctatus). Trans. Kansas Acad. Sci. 45:311-314.

Bryan, C. F., F. M. Truesdale, and D. S. Sabins.

of the Atchafalaya Basin, annual report.

Unit, Baton Rouge. 203 pp.

1975. A limnological survey

Louisiana Coop. Fish. Res.

Buck, H. D. 1956. Effects of turbidity on fish and fishing. Trans. N. Am.

Wildl. Conf. 21:249-261.

Carlander, K. C. 1969. Channel catfish. Pages 538-554 in Handbook of freshwater fishes of the United States and Canada, -exclusive of the

Perciformes. Iowa State Univ. Press, Ames. 752 pp.

Carlson, A. R., R. E. Siefert, and L. J. Herman. 1974. Effects of lowered

dissolved oxygen concentrations on channel catfish (Ictalurus punctatus)

embryos and larvae. Trans. Am. Fish. Soc. 103(3):623-626.

Chen, T. H. 1976. Cage culture of channel catfish in a heated effluent from

a power plant, Thomas Hill reservoir. Ph.D. Dissertation, Univ. Missouri,

Columbia. 98 pp.

Clemens, H. P., and K. E. Sneed. 1957. Spawning behavior of channel catfish,

ktaluru~ Lunctatus. U.S. Fish Wildl. Servo Spec. Sci. Rep.-Fish. 219.

11 pp.

Cowardin, L. M., V. Carter, F. C. Golet, and E. T. LaRoe. 1979. Classification of wetlands and deepwater habitats of the United States. U.S.D.I.

Fish and Wildlife Service. FWS/OBS-79/31. 103 pp.

Cross, F. B., and J. T. Collins. 1975. Fishes in Kansas. Univ. Kansas Mus.

Nat. Hist. Publ. Educ. Ser. 3. 180 pp.

Davis, J. 1959. Management of channel catfish in Kansas. Univ. Kansas Mus.

Nat. Hist. Misc. Publ. 21. 56 pp.

Davis, J. T., and L. E. Posey, Jr. 1958. Length at maturity of channel

catfish (Ictalurus lacustris) in Louisiana. Proc. Southeastern Assoc.

Game and Flsh.-COmmissioners 21:72-74.

26
Finnell, J. C., and R. M. Jenkins.

Oklahoma waters: 1954 revision.

37 pp. (Cited in Miller 1966.)

1954. Growth of channel catfish in

Oklahoma Fish. Res. Lab., Rept. 41.

Hynes, H. B. N. 1970. The ecology of running waters. Univ. Toronto Press,

Canada. 555 pp.

Jenkins, R. M. 1970. The influence of engineering design and operation and

other environmental factors on reservoir fishery resources. Water

Resources Bull. 6(1):110-119.

Jenkins, R. M. 1974. Reservoir management prognosis: migraines or miracles.

Proc. Southeastern Assoc. Game and Fish Commissioners 27:374-385.

Jenkins, R. M. 1976. Prediction of fish production in Oklahoma reservoirs on

the basis of environmental variables. Ann. Oklahoma Acad. Sci. 5:11-20.

Jenkins, R. M.,

harvest in

Ha 11, ed.

Publ. 8.

and D. 1. Morais. 1971. Reservoir sport fishing effort and

relation to environmental variables. Pages 371-384 in G. E.

Reservoir fisheries and limnology. Am. Fish. Soc.-Spec.

Jester, D. B. 1971. Effects of commercial fishing, species introductions,

and drawdown control on fish populations in Elephant Butte Reservoir, New

Mex i co. Pages 265-285 in G. E. Ha 11, ed. Reservoi r fi sheri es and

limnology. Am. Fish. Soc~pec. Publ. 8.

Lawler, R. E. 1960. Investigations of the channel catfish of Utah Lake. Utah

State Dept. Fish Game. Inform. Bull. 60-8. 69 pp.

Leidy, G. R., and R. M. Jenkins. 1977. The development of fishery compartments and popul at i on rate coeffi ci ents for use in reservoi r ecosystem

modeling. Contract Report Y-77-1, prepared for Office, Chief of

Engineers, U.S. Army, Washington, D.C. 72 pp.

Macklin, R., and S. Soule. 1964. Feasibility of establishing a warmwater

fish hatchery. Calif. Fish Game, Inland Fish. Admin. Rept. 64-14.

13 pp. (Cited in Miller 1966.)

Marzolf, R. C. 1957. The reproduction of channel catfish in Missouri ponds.

J. Wildl. Manage. 21(1):22-28.

McCall, T. C. 1977. Movement of channel catfish, Ictalurus punctatus, in

Cholla Lake, Arizona, as determined by ultrasonic tracking. Western

Assoc. Game Fish. Comm. 57:359-366.

McCammon, G. W. 1956. A tagging experiment with channel catfish (Ictalurus

punctatus) in the lower Colorado River. Calif. Fish Game 42(4):323-335.

McCammon, G. W., and D. A. LaFaunce. 1961. Mortality rates and movement in

the channel catfish population of the Sacramento Valley. Calif. Fish

Game 47(1):5-26.

27
Miller, E. E. 1966. Channel catfish. Pages 440-463 in A. Calhoun, ed.

In 1and fi sheri es management. Ca1if. Fi sh Game Re s .-Agency, Sacramento.

546 pp.

Minckley, W. L. 1973. Fishes of Arizona. Arizona Fish Game Publ., Phoenix.

293 pp.

Moore, G. A. 1968. Vertebrates of the United States. McGraw-Hill, New York.

Moss, D. D., and D. C. Scott. 1961. Dissolved oxygen requirements of three

species of fish. Trans. Am. Fish. Soc. 90(4):377-393.

Perry, W. G. 1973. Notes on the spawning of blue and channel catfish in

brackish water ponds. Prog. Fish-Cult. 35(3):164-166.

Perry, W. G., and J. W. Avault. 1968. Preliminary experiments on the culture

of blue, channel, and white catfish in brackish water ponds. Proc.

Southeastern Assoc. Game and Fish Commissioners 22:396-406.

Pflieger, W. L. 1971. A distributional study of Missouri fishes. Univ.

Kansas Mus. Nat. Hist. Publ. 20(3):225-570.

Pflieger, W. L. 1975. Fishes of Missouri. Missouri Dept. Conserv. Publ.,

Columbia. 343 pp.

Randolph, K. N., and H. P. Clemens. 1976. Some factors influencing the

feeding behavior of channel catfish in culture ponds. Trans. Am. Fish.

Soc. 105(6):718-724.

Ryder, R. A. 1965. A method for estimating the potential fish production of

north-temperate lakes. Trans. Am. Fish. Soc. 94(3):214-218.

Ryder, R. A., S. R. Kerr, K. H. Loftus, and H. A. Regier. 1974. The morphoedaphic index, a fish yield estimator - review and evaluation. J. Fish.

Res. Board Can. 31(5):663-688.

Scott, W. B., and E. J. Crossman. 1973. Freshwater fishes of Canada. Fish.

Res. Board Can. Bull. 184. 966 pp.

Shrable, J. B., O. W. Tiemeier, and C. W. Deyoe. 1969. Effects of temperature

on rate of digestion by channel catfish. Prog. Fish-Cult. 31(3):131-138.

Sigler, W. F., and R. R. Miller. 1963. Fishes of Utah. Utah Fish Game, Salt

Lake City. 203 pp.

Simco, D. A., and F. B. Cross. 1966. Factors affecting growth and production

of channel catfish, Ictalurus punctatus. Univ. Kansas Mus. Nat. Hist.

Publ.17(4):191-256.

Starostka, V. J., and W. R. Nelson.

Fish Wildl. Servo Tech. Pap. 81.

1974. Channel catfish in Lake Oahe. U.S.

13 pp.

28
Stauffer, J. R., Jr., K. L. Dickson, J. Cairns, Jr., W. F. Calhoun, M. T.

Masnik, and R. H. Myers. 1975. Summer distribution of fish species in

the vicinity of a thermal discharge, New River, Virginia. Arch.

Hydrobiol. 76(3) :287-301.

Trautman, M. B. 1957. Fishes of Ohio. Ohio State Univ. Press. 683 pp.

Walburg, C. H.

survival,

Hall, ed.

Publ. 8.

1971. Loss of young fish in reservoir discharge and year-class

Lewis and Clark Lake, Missouri River. Pages 441-448 in G. E.

Reservoir fisheries and limnology. Am. Fish. Soc.-Spec.

Walburg, C. H. 1975. Food of young-of-year channel catfish in Lewis and

Clark Lake, a Missouri River reservoir. Am. Midl. Nat. 93(1):218-221.

Walden, H. T. 1964. Familiar freshwater fishes of America. Harper and Row,

New York. 324 pp.

West, B. W. 1966. Growth, food conversion, food consumption and survival at

various temperatures of the channel catfish, Ictalurus punctatus

(Rafinesque). M.S. Thesis. Univ. Arkansas, Fayetteville. (Cited in

Shrable et al. 1969.)

Ziebell, C. 1973. Ultrasonic transmitters for tracking channel catfish.

Prog. Fish-Cult. 35(1):28-32.

29
50212 "01

REPORT DOCUMENTATION 11,- REPORT NO.

PAGE \- FWS/OBS-82/10.2

4. ntle and Subtitle

Habitat Suitability Index Models: Channel catfish

7. Author(s)

Thomas E. McMahon, and James W. Terrell

9. Performing Organization Name and Address Ha bita t Eva 1uat ion Procedures Grou p

Western Energy and Land Use Team

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service

Drake Creekside Building One

2625 Redwing Road

Fort Collins, Colorado 80526

12. Sponsoring Organization Name and Address Western Energy and Land Use Team

Office of Biological Services

Fish and Wildlife Service

U.S. Department of Interior

Wrtsh;ngton, D.C. 20240

15. Supplementary Notes

-llL Abstract (Limit: 200 words)

3. Recipient's Accession No.

February 1982

6.

8. Performing Organization Rept. No.

10. Project/Task/Worll Unit No.

11. Contract(C) or Grant(G) No.

(C)

(G)

13. Type of Report &. Period Covered

Literature concerning the habitat requirements of the channel catfish (Ictalurus punctatus)

is reviewed, and the data is then synthesized into Habitat Suitability Index models.

This is one in a series of publications developed to provide information on the habitat

requirements of selected fish and wildlife species. Numerous literature sources have

been consulted in an effort to consolidate scientific data on species-habitat relationships. These data have subsequently been synthesized into explicit Habitat Suitability

Index (HSI) models. The models are based on suitability indices indicating habitat

preferences. Indices have been formulated for variables found to affect the life cycle

and survival of each species. Habitat Suitability Index (HSI) models are designed to

provide information for use in impact assessment and habitat management activities. The

HSI technique is a corollary to the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service's Habitat Evaluation

Procedures.

I

17. Document Analysis a. Descriptors

Habi tabi 1i ty

Fishes

b. Identifiers/Open-Ended Terms

Habitat

Habitat Suitability Index

Channel catfish

Ictalurus punctatus c. COSATI Field/Group

18. Availability Statement

Unlimited

! 19. Security Class (This Report)

i Unclassified

20. Security Class (This Page)

. Unclassified

! 21. No. of Pages

! 29 I

i 22. Price

i

(S.. ANSI-Z39.18) See Instructions on Reverse

'J U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE: 1982-578-124/186 REGION No.8

OPTIONAL FORM 212 (4-77~

(Formerly NTIS-3S)

Department of Commerce
•

••• ..__ .... J~.

' . '· 0 ,,-

Hawaiian Islands (>

-(:( Headq uarters . Division of Biological

Services, Wasnington, DC

x Eastern Energy anO Land Use Team

Leetown , WV

* Nationa l Coastal Ecosystems Team

Slidell, LA

• Western Energy and Land Use Team

Ft. Coll ins . CO

• Locat ions of Regional Off ices

REGION 1

Regional Director

U,S. Fish and Wildlife Service

Lloyd Five Hundred Building, Suite 1692

500 N.E. Multnomah Street

Portland , Oregon 97232

REGION 4

Regional Director

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service

Richard B. Russell Building

75 Spring Street , S.W.

Atlanta, Georgia 30303

I

J- - - - ---6 1

r-- - L, J

I : --

I I

1- - -'

I I

l,_ I 2 ,, -~-

-_.J

REGION 2

Regional Director

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service

P.O. Box 1306

Albuquerque, New Mexico 87 103

REGION 5

Regional Director

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service

One Gateway Cente r

Newton Corner, Massachusetts 02158

REGION 7

Regional Director

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service

lOll E. Tudor Road

Anchorage, Alaska 99503

- ..~,.

REGION 3

Regional Director

U.S. Fish and WildlifeService

Federal Building, Fort Snelling

Twin Cities, Minnesota 551 JI

REGION 6

Regional Director

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service

P.O. Box 25486

Denver Federal Center

Denver, Colorado 8022 5
u.s. FISH ..WILDLIFE f>ERVICE

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR hi?]

u.s.FISH ANDWILDLIFESERVICE "'-r rw T " "

As the Nation's pri ncipal conservation agency, the Department of the Interior has responsibility for most of our ,nationally owned public lands and natural resources . This includes

fostering the wisest use of our land and water resources, protecting our fish and wildlife,

preserving th & environmental and cultural values of our national parks and historical places,

and providing for the enjoyment of life through outdoor recreation. The Department assesses our energy and mineral resources and works to assure that t heir development is in

the best interests of all our people. The Department also has a major respons ibility for

American Indian reservation communities and for people who live in island territories under

U.S. adm inist ration.