United States
          Environmental Protection
          Agency
Criteria and Standards Division
Nonpoint Sources Branch
Washington DC 20460
EPA 440/5-88-002
February 1988
          The Lake and  Reservoir
          Restoration Guidance
          Manual
          First Edition




            •^*&*S*^,££r>~:i
               K^-^mjsmj?*^^ -
               •>|L      .r W* ^ • • - - ,,w

            ^^-^,!^-^l",^*-*"'-!^^^^»V%'' ••>'" Vk- rt!^^^*-- "''

                    J4^A%:^^^V
                              "' 4^%?-*
      ; ,,^ '-s^*1
.  *  ,.«s


                              „*•»"-= ~««"TT, ^«...m

                  -
           -*•	'•t!*'^ *
   "«» *» «*»,,- .,, •'««f|^>
-------
Lake and Reservoir Restoration
          Guidance Manual
                 Prepared by the

      North American Lake Management Society
           Lynn Moore and Kent Thornton, editors
                     for the

         Office of Research and Development
         Environmental Research Laboratory
                Corvallis, Oregon
                      and
                  Office of Water
            Criteria & Standards Division
             Nonpoint Sources Branch
         U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
                 Washington, D.C.
                   First Edition
                      1988    U,S. EmtFOT" • .    Section Agency
                             Region 5, Us,     i2J)
                             77 West Jackson t^ufevard, 12th Floor
                             Chicago, IL 60604-3590

-------
                         EPA-440/5-88-002
     This  Manual has  been reviewed by the U.S. Environmental
     Protection Agency and approved  for publication. Approval does
     not signify that the contents necessarily reflect the views and
     policies of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, nor does
     mention of trade names or commercial products constitute en-
     dorsement or recommendations for use.
The Manual was prepared by the North American Lake Management Society
   under EPA Cooperative Agreement No. CR813531-01-0 from the
         Environmental Research Laboratory, Corvallis, Oregon.

              Cover photograph: Emerald Lake, Colorado
            Design and production by Lura Taggart, NALMS

-------
Preface
The Lake and Reservoir Restoration Guidance Manual represents
a landmark in this nation's commitment to  water quality,  as  it
brings to  the lake user practical  knowledge for restoring and
protecting  lakes and  reservoirs.  More than an  explanation  of
restoration techniques, this  Manual is a guide to wise manage-
ment of lakes and reservoirs.
  Congress recognized the need  for compiling this information
and communicating it to the community level, as the logical out-
growth  of the  Clean  Lakes Program established by the Clean
Water Act  of 1972. For the past 17 years, the Clean Lakes
Program has given states matching grants to restore degraded
lakes. That process has generated a great  deal of information
about what techniques to use  in restoring these water bodies,
how and where they should be used, and how well they work.
This Manual is the first step in making that information available in
a comprehensive, organized  format.
  As the Manual was being written, Congress continued its effort
to improve this  knowledge base  by mandating in the Water
Quality Act of 1987, that this  Manual be updated every two years.
  The purpose of the Manual is to provide guidance to the lake
manager, lake homeowner,  lake association and other informed
laypersons  on lake and reservoir management,  restoration and
protection.  With this in mind, the reader is invited to send com-
ments and  suggestions to the Clean Lakes Program,  Nonpoint
Sources Branch (WH-585), U.S. Environmental Protection Agen-
cy, 401 M Street, S.W.,  Washington, DC 20460.
                                                           in

-------
 Contents
Preface
Content
Acknowledgements   ........................... Xi
 Contents  ................................... v
 Chapter 1: Overview of Manual
 Introduction	1.1
    Audience	   1_1
    Focus	    -j.2
 Lakes as Resources  	1 _2
    Natural Lake Conditions	1.2
    Desired Lake Uses	   •) .3
    What a Lake IS NOT	^3
 Defining Desired Uses  	1_4
    User Involvement	   -(.4
    Causes versus Symptoms - A Major Reason for This Manual  .... 1-4
 Manual Organization	    -|_5
 Definitions	          -j.g
 Chapter 2: Ecological Concepts
 Lake and Reservoir Ecosystems	2-1
 The Lake and Its Watershed  	2-3
    Water	           2-3
    Special background section: The Hydrologic Cycle	2-4
    Special background section: Hydraulic Residence Time  	2-5
    Dissolved Materials  	       2-5
    Particulates	           2-7
    Effects of Lake Depth  	2-7
    Man-Made Lakes	    2-8
Lake Processes	        2-8
    Lake Stratification and Mixing	2-8
    Mixing Processes   	                 2-8
   Water Movements   	2-10
Organic Matter Production and Consumption	2-11
   Photosynthesis and Respiration	2-11
   Special background section: The Unique Properties of Water  ...  2-12
   Phytoplankton Community Succession	2-15
   Sedimentation and Decomposition	2-16
   Food Web Structure, Energy Flow, and Nutrient Cycling   	2-17

-------
     Lake Aging and Cultural Eutrophication	2-19
        Special background section: Lake Basin Origin and Shape	2-20
     Ecology's Place in Protection and Restoration  	2-22
     Summary	2-23


     Chapter 3: Problem Identification
     Chapter Objectives	3-1
     Common Lake Problems	3-1
        Algae	3.4
        Weeds  	3.4
        Depth	3.4
        User Conflicts  	3.4
     Problem Statement	3.5
     Problem Identification   	3.5
        Problem Perception  	3.5
     Causes of Lake Problems   	3-6
        Selecting a Consultant	3.7
     Problem Diagnosis	3.7
        Investigate the Problem  	3.7
        Preliminary Analyses	3.9
        Data Collection and Analyses	3-11
     Water Budget	3-11
        Surface Water and Lake Level	3-11
        Groundwater Measurements   	3-12
     Water Quality Monitoring	3-14
        Sampling Sites	3-14
     Physical Parameters  	3-15
        Sedimentation Rate Estimates	3-15
        Temperature	3-15
        Transparency	3-16
     Chemical Parameters	3-17
        Dissolved Oxygen  	3-17
        Nutrients  	3-18
     Biological  Parameters   	3-19
        Algal Biomass  	3-19
     Macrophyte Biomass and Locations	3-19
     Use of Trophic State Indices	3-21
     Problem Definition  	3-23
        Putting the Pieces of the Puzzle Together   	3-23
        Mirror Lake	3-24
VI

-------
 Chapter 4: Predicting Lake Water Quality
 Uses of Models	4_1
 Eutrophication Model Framework	4.3
 Variability	4.5
 Loading Concept	4.5
 Water Budget	4.7
 Phosphorus Budget  	4.3
 Lake Response Models	4_12
 Tracking Restoration Efforts	4-16
    Lake Washington, Washington: "You Should Be So Lucky1  	4-18
    Onondaga Lake, New York: "Far Out. 93 Percent Is Not Enough"     4-18
    Long Lake, Washington: "What's This? Reservoir Restoration?"  . .  .  4-20
    Shagawa Lake, Minnesota: 'The Little Lake That Couldn't"   	4-20
    Kezar Lake, New Hampshire: "The Little Lake That Could (With a Little
    Help)", or "Shagawa Revisited ..."  	4_2o
    Lake Morey, Vermont: "Strange Mud ..."	4-21
    Wahnbach Reservoir, Germany: "When All Else Fails ..."	4-22
    Lake Lillinonah, Connecticut: "You Can't Fool Mother Nature..."   .  4-22


 Chapter  5: Managing the Watershed
 Introduction	   5_1
 The Lake-Watershed Relationship	5.1
 Point Sources	5_2
 Wastewater Treatment	5.3
    Choosing the Scale of the System   	5.3
       Municipal Systems	5.3
       Small-Scale Systems  	5.4
       On-lot Septic Systems	5.5
 Community Treatment Facilities	5.3
 Water Conservation to Reduce Lake Problems	5-11
 How to Assess Potential Sources  	5-12
Assessing Point Sources	5.13
 Nonpoint Sources   	5_13
Cultural Sources of Sediments, Organic Matter, and Nutrients	5-14
What are Best Management Practices?	5-15
Lake Restoration Begins in the Watershed  	5-17
Guidelines and Considerations	5.19
Examples of Point and Nonpoint Improvement Projects	5-20
    Lake Washington: Point Source Diversion  	5-20
    Annabessacook Lake, Cobbossee Lake, and Pleasant
    Pond: Point-Source Diversion/Nonpoint Source Waste
    Management/I n-Lake Treatments	5-20
    East and West Twin Lakes: Septic Tank Diversion	5-21
                                                                    vii

-------
     Chapter 6: Lake and Reservoir Restoration and
     Management Techniques
     Introduction	6-1
        The Principles of Restoration  	e-1
        Are Protection and Restoration Possible?  	6-2
     Lake and Reservoir Restoration and Management Techniques  	6-4
        Basic Assumptions   	6-4
     Problem I: Nuisance Algae   	6-5
        Biology of Algae   	6-5
     Algae/Techniques with Long-Term Effectiveness	6-5
        Phosphorus Precipitation and Inactivation  	6-5
        Sediment Removal   	6-7
        Dilution and Flushing   	6-10
     Algae/Additional Procedures for Control  	6-11
        Artificial Circulation   	6-11
        Hypolimnetic Aeration	6-12
        Hypolimnetic Withdrawal  	6-13
        Sediment Oxidation  	6-14
        Food Chain Manipulation  	6-14
        Algicides   	6-17
    Algae/Summary of Restoration and Management Techniques   	6-18
     Problem II: Excessive Shallowness   	6-18
     Problem III: Nuisance Weeds (Macrophytes)  	6-19
        Biology of Macrophytes	6-19
     Macrophytes/Long-Term Control Techniques   	6-20
        Sediment Removal and Sediment Tilling  	6-20
        Water Level Drawdown   	6-22
        Shading and Sediment Covers   	6-23
        Biological Controls   	6-24
    Macrophytes/Techniques with Shorter-Term Effectiveness	6-28
        Harvesting   	6-28
        Herbicides   	6-30
    Macrophytes/Summary of Restoration and Management Techniques .  .  6-34
    Problem IV: Eutrophic Drinking Water Reservoirs   	6-35
        Nature of the Problem	6-35
        Water Supply Reservoir Management	6-35
           Color	6-36
           Taste and Odor   	6-36
           Loss of Storage Capacity	6-36
           Trihalomethane Production	6-36
    Problem V: Fish Management	6-37
        Nature of the Problem	6-37
        Diagnosis and Management  	6-37
VIM

-------
Chapter 7: Hypothetical Case Study

Purpose Of Case Study  	7-1
Lynn Lake-a Case Study  	7-1
Problem Definition   	7-3
Lake Restoration Advisory Committee  	7-5
Consultant Selection	7-6
Detailed Work Plan	7-7
Phase I Grant Application  	7-8
Lake And Watershed Study  	7-8
    Study of Lake and Watershed Characteristics   	7-8
    Study of Previous Uses and Recreational Characteristics  	7-9
    Lake  Monitoring  	7-9
    Watershed Monitoring	7-11
    Data Analysis   	7-14
       Lake Analysis  	7-14
       Watershed Analysis	7-16
    Evaluation of Management Alternatives  	7-18
    Evaluation Criteria  	7-18
       Effectiveness   	7-19
       Longevity   	7-20
       Confidence   	7-20
       Applicability  	7-20
       Potential for Negative Impacts  	7-21
       Capital Costs   	7-21
    Watershed Management Alternatives	7-23
       Wastewater Treatment Plant Upgrade  	7-24
       Sedimentation Basins	7-24
       Agricultural Practices  	7-24
       Construction Controls   	7-26
    In-lake  Management Alternatives  	7-26
    Public Hearing  	7-29
    Selection of Management Plan  	7-29


 Chapter 8: Implementing the Management Plan
 Management Means Implementation  	8-1
    Who Does the Work?   	8-1
    Selecting Consultants or Contractors   	8-2
 Institutional Permits, Fees, And Requirements  	8-3
 Implementation Costs Money  	8-8
    Plans and Specifications	8-8
    Funding Sources	8-8
        Federal Agencies   	8-8
        State Agencies	8-9
        Local Sources	8-10
                                                                      IX

-------
Implementation Requires Contracts	8-10
Implementation Takes Time  	8-11
Public Education Is Critical For Sound Lake Management	8-11
Post Monitoring Is An Integral Part Of Implementation	8-12


Chapter 9: Lake Protection And Maintenance
Introduction   	g.1
Lake Organizations   	9-1
Regulations In Lake and Watershed Protection And Management	9-2
Controlled Development	g_2
Permits and Ordinances	9.5
Lake Monitoring   	9.7
Epilogue	1(M
References  	10-3
Index  	10_7


Appendices
Appendix A: Metric Units	A-1
Appendix B: Glossary  	B-1
Appendix C: Point Source Techniques  	C-1
Appendix D: Best Management Practices	D-1
Appendix E: State/Provincial Lake Management Information	E-1
Appendix F: Forms and Documents	F-1

-------
Acknowledgements
This Guidance Manual was prepared under the guidance of Kent W. Thornton,
Ph.D., Project Manager, NALMS. The authorship for each chapter includes:

      CHAPTER 1: OVERVIEW OF MANUAL
      Kent W. Thornton, Ph.D.
      FTAMssoc/ates
      CHAPTER 2: ECOLOGICAL CONCEPTS
      Bruce Kimmel, Ph.D.
      Oak Ridge National Laboratory


      CHAPTER 3: PROBLEM IDENTIFICATION
      Lowell Klessig, Ph.D.
      University of Wisconsin-Stevens Point
      Richard Wedepohl, Ph.D.
      Douglas Knauer, Ph.D.
      Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources


      CHAPTER 4: PREDICTING LAKE WATER QUALITY
      William W. Walker, Ph.D.
      Environmental Consultant


      CHAPTER 5: MANAGING THE WATERSHED
      KentW. Thornton, Ph.D.
      Forrest E. Payne, Ph.D.
      FTN Associates


      CHAPTER 6: LAKE AND RESERVOIR RESTORATION AND
      MANAGEMENT TECHNIQUES
      Dennis Cooke, Ph.D.
      Kent State University


      CHAPTER 7: HYPOTHETICAL CASE STUDY
      Frank X.  Browne, Ph.D.
      F.X. Browne Associates


      CHAPTER 8: IMPLEMENTING THE MANAGEMENT PLAN
      William Funk, Ph.D.
      Washington State University


      CHAPTER 9: LAKE PROTECTION AND MAINTENANCE
      Kent W. Thornton, Ph.D.
      F7AMssoc/ates
                                                             XI

-------
       The document was extensively reviewed  by Lynn Moore, Garth Redfield,
     Ph.D., Chair, NALMS Editorial Board, Wayne  Poppe, Ph.D., Spencer Peterson,
     Ph.D., Kent W. Thornton, Ph.D. and Dennis Cooke, Ph.D. The document was
     reviewed by both technical and lay persons and review comments were received
     from:

            Val Smith, Ph.D.                      William Jones
            University of North Carolina            Indiana University

            Chris Holdren, Ph.D.                  Lucy Scroggins
            University of Louisville                 City of Hot Springs

            Dennis Bokemeier                    Jonathan Simpson
            Lake Sommerset Property             Candlewood Lake
            Owners Association                    Association

            Donna Sefton                        Don Roberts
            Sfafe of Illinois                        U.S. EPA-Region V

            Jerri Hollingsworth                    William Morris
            U.S. EPA                             Albemarle County, Virginia

            Walter Shannon, Jr.
            Lakeville, Connecticut

       All of these individuals are gratefully acknowledged for their efforts and con-
    tributions to this Guidance Manual. The authors are particularly commended for
    their tireless effort in preparing this manual.
xii

-------
      CHAPTER 1
Overview of Manual

-------
CHAPTER  1
OVERVIEW OF MANUAL
Introduction
This Guidance Manual pursues a very broad subject — protecting and restoring
lakes and reservoirs. An enormous amount of information trails behind that
topic. The burden on those who wrote this Manual was not in finding good
material to put in, but in deciding where to stop. To make a book so full of infor-
mation that it deserves premier  shelf space for its reference value but remains
compact enough to lift easily required some guiding assumptions.
  First, this Manual supplies its own context. Therefore, any point the reader
finds in midbook is prefaced with adequate background information to under-
stand it and then followed with guidance on how to apply it. The  material
presented here was chosen because it fits a fourfold purpose:
  1. To help users identify, describe, and define their lake problems '
  2. To help them evaluate available lake and watershed management practices
for addressing problems or protecting current quality
  3. To describe the process  of developing a site-specific lake or reservoir
management plan
  4. To illustrate how to put a lake management plan into practice and evaluate
its effectiveness
Audience

This Manual is written for the informed citizen who is interested in lakes and
reservoirs - in protecting, restoring, and managing them. It is not written for the
scientist or engineer. Consequently, English units of measure are used here, ex-
cepting a few terms that are never reported in English  units. Appendix A
provides the reader with  information on the metric system. Many other, more
technical, documents discuss specific points of lake and reservoir management
in detail.  Additional references and sources of information are given wherever
appropriate.
                                                                 1-1

-------
    Focus

    The focal point of this book is water quality, particularly the effects of excessive
    inputs of silt, nutrients, and organic matter known as eutrophication. The reader
    will find information here on the effects of water quality on fish, for example, but
    will need another source for advice on fisheries management. State game and
    fish agencies, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, the U.S. Soil and Conservation
    Service, and other agencies publish numerous booklets, fact sheets, and techni-
    cal bulletins on fish management that more than suffice for this omission.
       Technical jargon  is kept to a  minimum to help the reader grasp important
    points without stumbling over the words. Even so, a handful of terms are so im-
    portant to lake management that working around them would be a disservice.
    These terms are defined in a side note the first time that they appear, clearly ex-
    plained in the text, and included in the glossary. The only word that needs some
    advance explanation is the relatively simple word, lake. It is used genetically in
    this Manual to include both  natural lakes and reservoirs. Distinctions between
    the two types of systems are discussed when these distinctions have important
    management implications.
    Lakes as  Resources
    Lakes are important resources on our landscapes. As sources of enjoyment,
    they support fishing, boating, and swimming. Fishing and swimming are among
    the fastest growing and most popular forms of outdoor recreation in the United
    States and  Canada.  Lakes' commercial value in food supply, tourism,  and
    transporation is worth many billions of dollars each year. Lakes also provide life-
    sustaining functions such as flood protection, generation of electricity, and sour-
    ces of drinking water.  Finally, as places of beauty, they offer solitude  and
    relaxation. This aesthetic quality is not a minor gift - over 60 percent of Wiscon-
    sin lake property owners who were asked what they valued in lakes rated aes-
    thetics as especially important.


    Natural Lake Conditions

    The natural condition of a lake -  before home construction, before deforesta-
    tion, before agriculture and other human activities — may not have been nearly
    as pristine as is commonly believed. The natural geologic process is for lakes of
    moderate depth to gradually fill and become wetlands. The position of a lake
    along this geologic continuum from deep to shallow influences the natural water
    quality that might be expected in a lake.
      Many lakes would be eutrophic despite human activities and development in
    the watershed.  In the Southern United States, for example, soil fertility, runoff
    patterns, and geology encourage a somewhat more eutrophic natural condition
    compared to Northern lakes. Northerners expecting to see deep blue waters
    may find the color of healthy Southern lakes dismaying. Even comparing nearby
    lakes may be misleading because the lakes may differ in critical ways - depth,
    water source,  erodibility of watershed soils,  comparative watershed size,  and
    local land use. Major differences can occur from one side of town to the other or
    across a State.  For example, changes in lake quality from northern to southern
    Wisconsin or from eastern to western Minnesota reflect regional differences in
    these factors.
1-2

-------
    Such differences need to be factored into lake management. Because the
 natural lake water quality obviously affects lake uses, an important goal of both
 this Manual and lake management is to identify and define the uses a lake could
 naturally support and to develop a compatible lake and watershed management
 plan to restore the lake to this natural condition or protect its current condition.
    This variability brings up a key point in lake management: Whatever the start-
 ing conditions and  whatever the limitation on what can ultimately be achieved,
 the goal is always the same - to minimize lake quality problems. '


 Desired  Lake  Uses

 Lake usage is a match between people's desires and the lake's capacity to satis-
 fy these desires. Lake problems are defined in terms of the limits on desired uses
 - as limitations on uses that can reasonably be prevented or corrected with
 proper management. This is a critical definition for developing lake management
 programs: A lake problem is a limitation on the desired uses by a particular set
 of users. Before undertaking a management program, these desired uses need
 to be clearly defined, limitations on the uses must be  identified, and the causes
 must be understood.


 What  a  Lake IS NOT

 A lake cannot be all things to all people. Desirable uses, even obtainable ones,
 can conflict. Lake organizations  invariably would like to see their lake do every-
 thing.  They  want  aesthetic  pleasure,  great fishing,  healthy  water,  sandy
 shorelines  and bottoms, and a nice wildlife population -  all without pests, in-
 sects, or weeds. Unfortunately, almost no lake can meet all of these demands.
   Depending  on physical characteristics of the lake basin and watershed and
 the quality of incoming water, lakes are suited to particular uses. Even when  a
 lake is capable of several uses,  however, management for a specific use may
 still  be  required.  Like cattlemen and sheepherders,  motor boaters and trout
 fishermen don't necessarily get along.
   Although it might  be technically possible to drastically alter a lake to meet the
 needs of a particular user group,  the cost will be high and the decision is usually
 unwise. It is important  to understand a lake's capacity and attainable  quality
 when developing a  management plan to obtain certain desired uses. Some
 lakes will never be  crystal clear. No matter  what restoration or management
 measures are taken,  if the drainage area is large relative to lake surface area and
 the soils are highly erodible and nutrient-rich, the lake  will promptly return to its
 former state. Even the most reliable restoration techniques are not universally
 appropriate. The same  procedure that improves lake quality in one  lake can
 diminish it in another. For example, a technique called artificial circulation can
 decrease algal problems in some lakes  but may increase algal production in
 others.
   This Manual concentrates on how to determine what uses the lake can sup-
 port with reasonable management efforts. It is critical, therefore, to determine,
what lake uses are desired and have these goals clearly in mind and in focus as
the problems are delineated.
                                                                         1-3

-------
    Defining  Desired Uses
    While user groups obviously are the prime candidates for identifying desirable
    goals, they often lack sufficient understanding to assess the practicality of their
    wishes. The material in this Manual will be helpful in examining the feasibility of
    proposed goals. In addition, the advice of experts is highly recommended. Many
    State and Federal sources are available, and they are listed in later chapters of
    this Manual.


    User  Involvement

    Lake and reservoir management is an active process. Informed citizens must be-
    come involved if desired and attainable lake uses are to  be achieved.  Getting
    people together and simply finding out what they want may require as much ef-
    fort as figuring out how to do it. Since a given lake may serve several different
    groups  of users, several different methods might be required to involve all of
    these major user groups.
      Lake homeowners and other local users can get involved with lake use
    decisions through membership in one of several types of lake organizations. The
    local  powers and financial ability of these groups vary considerably from com-
    munity to  community and State to State. (See Chapter 8 for additional discus-
    sion of  legal authority and issues). Also, the annual meeting of the local lake
    group is an obvious place to discuss and vote on priority uses for the lake. If the
    lake serves primarily local property owners and residents, such votes are likely
    to be respected by government agencies.
      Reaching a consensus on specific lake uses may be difficult, however, if more
    than one lake organization exists on the lake, especially if conflicting uses are al-
    ready well established.
      There are several procedures or approaches that can be used to reach a con-
    sensus  on desired  lake uses and identify various  lake  problems. These ap-
    proaches, described in Appendix 3-A, include the nominal group process and
    the Delphi process.  While  these techniques can be very effective when properly
    used, most lake managers or informed citizens will need professional assistance
    in using them. Lake associations typically include people of diverse occupations,
    however, so a  member of the association may have the experience needed to
    use these  methods.
      Based on the beginning definition -  a lake problem is a limitation on the
    desired  uses by a particular set of users  - defining the desired lake uses and
    the limitations  on these uses represents the cornerstone  of any lake manage-
    ment program.


    Causes Versus Symptoms  - A Major

    Reason for This Manual

    The greatest bias of lake users, in general, is confusing  the symptoms of
    problems with  their causes. Most lake communities need professional  help to
    identify  causes of lake  problems. To decide when professional advice is war-
    ranted and how much help is needed, local lake community leaders need to un-
    derstand lakes  in general and be aware of possible causes of the problems. The
    purpose of this Manual  is to help the user define problems, understand the un-
    derlying causal mechanisms, evaluate available techniques for  addressing
    problems,  develop an effective lake management plan, solve problems by im-
    plementing this plan, and evaluate the plan's effectiveness.
1-4

-------
  In most cases, managing or restoring a lake eventually requires help from a
professional lake manager, limnologist, or environmental engineer. This Manual
provides guidance for  selecting consultants and for  finding  appropriately
qualified experts.
Manual  Organization

The Manual is divided into three parts.


Part 1 -  Understanding and Defining the Problem

Chapter 2 provides information on how inseparably lakes and watersheds are
coupled and how lakes function as systems. It is important to have some under-
standing of how the various components of a lake and watershed work and fit
together. It doesn't take a mechanic to drive a car, but any driver needs to un-
derstand what makes the car go and what makes it stop in general principle. The
eutrophication process can be accelerated or slowed down by various manage-
ment techniques and their effects on the different lake components. This chapter
describes these processes.
   Chapter 3  describes the process used to identify the lake problem and dif-
ferentiate symptoms from causes. This is a critical part of lake management.


Part 2 —  Management Techniques

Chapter 4 discusses analytical tools available for evaluating the potential effec-
tiveness of lake and watershed management techniques in achieving a desired
lake use or certain level of lake quality.
   Chapter 5  discusses  the effects of watershed land use on lake quality and
various watershed management techniques available to control point and non-
point source pollutants entering the lake.
   Chapter 6  discusses  in-lake management techniques available to achieve a
desired lake use. It focuses not only on the techniques but also on their mode of
action and possible interactions with other techniques.


Part 3 —  Development and Implementation of  a
Lake Management Plan

Chapter 7 describes how the watershed and lake management techniques are
integrated to formulate  and develop an effective lake management plan. The
procedure is illustrated through the  use of a comprehensive example - a
hypothetical case study.
   Chapter 8  discusses putting the lake management plan into practice. This re-
quires attention to numerous  practical details such  as permits, bonding, in-
surance, and scheduling.
   Chapter 9  discusses how to protect the current lake quality or the lake quality
after restoration. Lake organizations and associations can be effective forces in
protecting lakes. Monitoring the lake status and changes occurring in the lake is
the keystone of lake management and protection.
   Appendices and a glossary supplement the material covered in Chapters 1
through 9. Appendix  A, on the metric system, will be especially useful to the
reader who is not comfortable with the metric units.
                                                                      1-5

-------
      As mentioned earlier,  lake management is an active process. Informed
    citizens are invaluable to this process. The purpose of this Manual is to help
    those who have an interest in lakes achieve the primary goal of lake manage-
    ment: to realize whatever desirable uses a particular lake has the capacity to
    support.
    Definitions
    Terms important to the understanding of lake management are defined in the
    margins beside their first appearance in the text.
1-6

-------
      CHAPTER 2
Ecological Concepts

-------
 CHAPTER  2
 ECOLOGICAL  CONCEPTS




 Lake  and  Reservoir

 Ecosystems

 Lake management must be based on an understanding that lakes are complex
 and dynamic ecosystems.
   The lake, viewed simply as a water system, is  influenced  by a  set of
 hydro-logic conditions, the watershed, the shape of the lake basin, the lake
 water, and bottom sediments. These physical and chemical components of the
 lake system, in turn, support a community of organisms that is unique to the lake
 environment. The lake biota enrich the complexity of the lake system; they not
 only have a myriad of links to one another but also affect the lake's physical and
 chemical features (Fig. 2-1). All of these components of the lake system-physi-
 cal, chemical, and biological-are in  constant change, and the chemical and
 biological components are particularly dynamic.
   Because lakes are highly interactive systems, it is impossible to alter one
 characteristic, such as the amount of weeds or the clarity of the water, without
 affecting some other aspect of the system, such as fish production. For ex-
 ample, a lake association might decide to remove all weeds by mechanical
 processes, accidentally destroying important habitat needed for fish survival. In
 addition, algae might proliferate, fed by some of the nutrients the weeds had pre-
 viously used. If the lake association then decided that a chemical treatment
 would solve the algae problem and help clear up the water, the next sequence in
 the chain of events might  be more penetration of sunlight through the water,
 which could encourage new weed growth, which could affect fish survival.
  Ecology is the scientific study of the interrelationships among organisms and
their environment. Managing a lake for maximum benefit requires an under-
standing of how lake ecosystems are structured and how they function. The ex-
ample just  given is hypothetical, but  variations on these unexpected results
happen over and over across the country when management programs are im-
plemented without adequate knowledge of lake ecology.
 Ecosystem: A system of in-
 terrelated organisms and
 their physical-chemical en-
 vironment. In this manual,
 the ecosystem is usually de-
 fined to include the lake and
 its watershed.
 Biota: All plant and animal
 species  occurring in  a
 specified area.
Ecology: Scientific study of
relationships between or-
ganisms, and their environ-
ment. Also, defined as the
study of the structure and
function of nature.
                                                               2-1

-------
              Marginal zone
Littoral zone
                                  Pelagic zone

                                Profundal zone
       Pelagic zone (open water)
 Benthic zone
   Figure 2-1.-The location and nature of typical lake communities, habitats, and organisms.
   In addition to the lake's watershed, all of these components are part of the lake ecosystem.
2-2

-------
   The hypothetical example also illustrates a confusion between causes and
 symptoms. Not only did the association fail to think about how lake organisms
 were related to one another, they also failed to ask why weeds and algae were
 growing profusely. Limnology is the scientific study of freshwater ecosystems:
 lakes, reservoirs, rivers, and streams. The goal of limnology is to improve the un-
 derstanding of physical, chemical, geological,  and biological factors that affect
 aquatic productivity and water quality. An adequate understanding of limnology
 is the backbone of sound lake management.
   This chapter is not intended to be a text on  either aquatic ecology or limnol-
 ogy. Rather, its goal is to provide to the reader the background information
 necessary to understand the causes of lake degradation problems and identify
 the lake management and restoration approaches that are most applicable to
 their particular situation.
The Lake and  Its  Watershed
Lakes are constantly receiving materials from their watersheds and from the at-
mosphere, and energy from the sun and wind. Because of this, lake quality is as
much influenced by what can (and will) go into the lake as it is by what is already
there. The lake is a receiver, and what comes into it depends largely on existing
conditions in the surrounding watershed. Important factors include watershed
topography, local geology, soil fertility and erodibility, vegetation in the water-
shed, and other surface water sources such as runoff and tributary streams. The
atmosphere may contribute materials to the lake as well, notably acidity from
rainfall and dust in some areas. See the special section on the hydrologic cycle,
which describes major natural phenomena controlling water supply.
   Three basic  items  enter the lake from its watershed: water,  dissolved
materials carried in water, and particulates such as soil.
Watershed: A  drainage
area or basin in which all
land and water areas drain
or flow toward a central col-
lector such as a stream,
river, or lake at a lower ele-
vation.
Water

The amount of water entering the lake from its watershed controls lake volume
and several other factors that influence the lake's overall health. A lake, like any
tank, takes a predictable amount of time to fill and to empty, given a certain rate
of flow. Unlike rivers, lakes essentially slow the flow of water; thus, any water
entering the lake will remain in it for a period called the hydraulic residence time
(see Special Section).  The lake water quality reflects the history of the lake
water, as well as the condition of new incoming water.
  Because of this residence time, management programs directed at improving
lake water quality by improving incoming water will face a lag period between
the time that incoming water quality gets better and the time that change be-
comes evident in the lake. The longer the residence time, the greater the lag.
  Additional delays between changes in the quality of incoming water and that
of in-lake water will also occur because water affects and is affected by the biota,
sediments, and existing water chemistry.
                                                                       2-3

-------
                        The Hydrologic Cycle

         Because the amounts of precipitation and surface water runoff directly in-
         fluence the nature of lake ecosystems, a good way to begin to learn about
         lakes is to understand the water or hydrologic cycle. The circulation of
         water from atmosphere to earth and back to the atmosphere is a process
         which is powered by the sun (Fig. 2-A). Worldwide, about three-fourths of
         the precipitation received on the land  is returned to  the atmosphere as
         water vapor via evaporation and transpiration from terrestrial and  emer-
         gent and floating aquatic plants. The rate of evaporation and transpiration
         varies with factors such as wind speed and amount of insolation. The
         remaining precipitation either is stored in ice caps, or drains directly off
         the land and into surface water systems such as streams, rivers, lakes, or
         oceans, from which it eventually evaporates, or it infiltrates the soil and
         underlying rock layers and enters the groundwater system. Groundwater
        flows may enter lakes and streams through underwater seeps or springs
        or surface channels, and then return to the atmosphere via evaporation.
                                                          INFILTRATION

                                                          GROUND WATER FLOW
                                                          WATER TABLE
            Figure 2-A.-Hydrologic cycle.

        Lakes and reservoirs have a water "balance," described as this simple
        equation: water input = water output +/- the amount of water stored in
        the  lake. Inputs are  direct precipitation,  groundwater, and surface
        streams, while outputs are surface discharge (outflow), evaporation, los-
        ses  to groundwater, and  water withdrawn  for domestic-agricultural-in-
        dustrial purposes. Sometimes inputs are greater than outputs, and lake
        levels  rise as water  is stored. At other times,  for example, a summer
        drought, lake levels fall as losses exceed gains.

        Some lakes, called seepage lakes, are formed at the intersection of the
        groundwater flow system with the land surface. Seepage lakes are main-
        tained primarily by groundwater  inflow, and their water levels fluctuate
        with seasonal variations in the local water table. Drainage lakes, on the
        other hand,  are fed primarily by inflowing rivers and streams, and  their
        water levels vary with  the surface water  runoff from their surrounding
        watersheds.  In both cases, the balance between hydrologic inputs and
        outputs influences the nutrient supply to  the  lake, the lake's water
        residence time,  and consequently the lake's  productivity and water
        quality.
2-4

-------
              Hydraulic Residence Time
  The average time required to completely renew a lake's water volume is
  called the hydraulic residence time. For instance, it might take 5 minutes
  to completely fill a bathtub with the tap fully open and the bottom drain
  closed. The  hydraulic residence time of the tub, then, is 5 minutes. With
  the tap and drain only half open, the hydraulic residence time would be 10
  minutes.
   tat
    Inflow =
     10 gal/mm
                                    Ib)

                                     Inflow =
                                      10 acre-ft/day
Outflow =
 1" acre-ft/day
                      Outflow =
                        10 gal/min
Hydraulic residence time = Volume 7 Flow Rate
               = 50 gal ; 10 gal/min = 5 min
                                      Water residence time = 500 acre-ft T 10 acre-ft/day
                                                   = 50 days
   Figure 2-B.-Hydraulic residence time is an important factor to consider in restoration
   programs. The simple formula given in the figure assumes that inflow is equal to
   outflow.

   If the lake basin volume is relatively small and the flow of water is relative-
   ly high, the hydraulic residence time can be so short, less than 10 days for
   example, that algal biomass is not accumulated in the lake. The algal cells
   produced in the water column are washed out faster than they can grow
   and accumulate.

   An intermediate water residence time permits both an abundant supply of
   plant nutrients and adequate time for algae to assimilate nutrients and to
   grow and accumulate.

   Longer water residence times from 100 days to several years provide
   plenty of time for algal biomass to accumulate, if there are  sufficient
   nutrients present. The  production of algae may ultimately be limited by
   the supply of nutrients.  If the nutrient supply is high, algal biomass will be
   very large. The combined effects of nutrient income or "nutrient loading"
   and hydraulic residence time on the production of algae is the basis for
   methods to predict changes in the condition of the lake following changes
   in one or both of these processes (such as the diversion of wastewater
   flows.) This will be discussed in Chapter 4.
Dissolved Materials
One of the most important materials dissolved in water is oxygen. Sources of
dissolved oxygen include inflowing water, transfer from the atmosphere (gas ex-
change), and production by aquatic plants. Oxygen production by plants is dis-
cussed later in this chapter. Oxygen is consumed or removed from the lake by
outflow, loss to the atmosphere,  nonbiological combination with  chemicals in
the water and mud (chemical oxygen demand, or COD), or plant, bacterial, and
animal respiration.  Biochemical oxygen demand (BOD) is a common measure
used to describe the  rate of oxygen consumption by organisms and materials
                                                                          Chemical oxygen demand
                                                                          (COD): Nonbiological up-
                                                                          take of molecular oxygen by
                                                                          organic and inorganic com-
                                                                          pounds in water.
                                                                         2-5

-------
     under dark conditions,  and  varies with the  amount of organic  matter and
     microbes in the water. Wastewater discharges can have very high BOD, for ex-
     ample.
        When the loss of oxygen from the water exceeds the input of oxygen from
     various sources, the oxygen content of the lake water is decreased. If the dis-
     solved oxygen becomes severely depleted, anoxic conditions can occur that
     lead to odors, fishkills, increased phosphorus and ammonia concentrations, and
     other undesirable effects.
        Inflowing stream water also carries the two principal plant nutrients, nitrogen
     and  phosphorus, in both dissolved organic and inorganic forms. Nitrogen and
     phosphorus are required for the biological production of phytoplankton  (free-
     floating microscopic algae) and macrophytes (larger, floating and rooted plants
     or "weeds"). (See the section in this chapter on Organic Matter Production and
     Consumption.) Surface  and  subsurface drainage from  fertile  (nutrient-rich)
     watersheds results in biologically productive lakes, and drainage from  infertile
     (nutrient-poor) watersheds results in biologically unproductive lakes.
        Soils, weathered minerals, and decomposing organic matter in the watershed
     are the main natural sources  of phosphorus and nitrogen. Man-made sources
     such as agriculture,  crop and forest  fertilizers, and  wastewater  discharges,
     however, commonly increase the rate of nutrient income or loading  from water-
     sheds and are the major  causes of biological overproduction in many lakes (see
     Table 2-1). Watershed disturbances such as logging and mining, which remove
     the land's natural  vegetation,  can greatly increase  the amount  of  silt and
     nutrients exported from the  land to the  lake. Chapter 5 discusses the effects of
     watershed disturbance in greater detail, along with management practices to
     control  sediment and nutrient loads from the watershed to the lake.  Finally,
     some pesticides,  herbicides, toxic pollutants, chemicals in wastewater dischar-
     ges,  and industrial waste materials also enter the lake with incoming  water.

     Table 2-1.—Representative values for nutrient export  rates and input rates for
                various land  uses. All values are medians and are only  approxima-
                tions owing to the highly variable nature of data on these rates.
     LAND USE	TOTAL PHOSPHORUS	TOTAL NITROGEN
     A. Export rates (kg/ha/yr)1'2
        Forest                                  0.2                     2.5
        Nonrow crops                            0.7                     6.0
        Pasture                                 0.8                    14.5
        Mixed agriculture                         1.1                      5.0
        Row crops                               2.2                     9.0
        Feedlot, manure storage                  255.0                  2920.0

     B. Total atmospheric input rates (kg/ha/yr)1'3
        Forest                                 0.26                    6.5
        Agricultural/rural                         0.28                    13.1
        Urban industrial                           1.01                    21.4

     C. Wastewater input rates (kg/capita/yr)4
        Septic tank input5	1.45	4.65
     ' Values in this table are all in kg/ha/yr,  which is the standard for such measurements To convert to pounds per acre per year,
      multiply by 0 892
     2 Source Reckhow et al 1980, Figure 3
     3 Source Reckhow et ai 1980, Table 13
     4 Source Reckhow et al 1980, Table 14
     5 This is prior to absorption to soil during infiltration, generally, soils will absorb 80 percent or more of this phosphorus
2-6

-------
Particulates

Organic matter, clays, and silt wash from the watershed and into the lake. Where
the land is disturbed, the loss of soil is apt to be very high. Even removing brush
and  replacing it with a  poor stand of lawn  increases the  rate of erosion.
Erodibility among soil types varies and is one of the factors that must be con-
sidered in watershed management programs. In addition to soil loss from the
land via rainfall and snowmelt, streams may scour soil from their banks as they
flow. Wind also carries some particulates  such as dust and pollen directly to
lakes. Inputs of suspended  particles result  in increased turbidity (a decrease of
water transparency and light availability, which affects plant growth).
   Lakes are extremely efficient sediment  traps. Filling in with silt is part of a
lake's natural aging pattern, but poor land management practices can speed up
the process significantly.  Suspended sediment particles that can be easily car-
ried by rivers and streams settle out once they reach the relatively quiescent lake
environment. As a consequence  of this  trapping ability, particle-associated
nutrients,  organic  matter, and toxic contaminants are often  retained in lake
basins.
   Many toxic contaminants become strongly associated with  (adsorbed  to)
suspended particles. The influx of herbicides, pesticides, and toxics adhered to
soil particles is becoming an increasingly common problem for lakes. Incoming
silt can bring other problems as well. Silt-laden water can reduce light penetra-
tion  and,  consequently, the light  available to algae. Many species of fish are
sight feeders; they cannot locate prey efficiently in muddy waters. Silt deposits
can prevent successful hatching of fish eggs that require clean surfaces. Finally,
excessive levels of silt can irritate fish.
   The section in this chapter on Sedimentation and Decomposition discusses
the effect of organic matter in the water on dissolved oxygen. Particles of or-
ganic matter can enter the lake from watershed runoff,  can be suspended in
tributary streams, or can originate within the lake itself from the aquatic plants
and animals. Chapter 3  discusses the use of radioisotopes to date sediment
deposition in  the  lake. Controlling soil  loss from the watershed  is treated in
Chapter 5 in the discussion of best management practices. The use of dredging
to deepen a lake and remove sediments is  discussed in Chapter 6.
 Effects of  Lake Depth

 Shallow lakes tend to be more biologically productive than deep lakes because
 of the large area of bottom sediments relative to the volume of water, more com-
 plete wind mixing of the lake water, and the large very shallow or littoral areas
 along the lake perimeter that can be colonized by rooted and floating macro-
 phytes. Indeed, shallow lakes may be dominated by plant production in littoral
 areas and have little open-water habitat. Large incomes of silt and incomplete
 decomposition of macrophytes can make lakes become shallow rapidly. Usual-
 ly, shallow lakes also have a shorter hydraulic residence time.
   Deep, steep-sided  lakes usually stratify thermally during the summer, which
 prevents complete mixing of the lake water. These lakes may have less area that
 is shallow enough  for rooted aquatic plants to receive  light  and grow.  Thus,
 deep lakes generally have a high proportion of open-water (pelagic) habitat, and
 their food webs tend to be based on the organic matter produced by algae, or
 planktonic plants. Many reservoirs have large areas of shallow water, but flood
 control operations  often bring  about water-level fluctuations that discourage
 well-developed stands of aquatic weeds along the shoreline.
Organic matter: Molecules
manufactured by plants and
animals  and   containing
linked carbon atoms and el-
ements such as hydrogen,
oxygen,   nitrogen,  sulfur,
and phosphorus.
 Sediment: Bottom material
 in a lake that has been de-
 posited after the formation
 of a lake basin. It originates
 from remains of aquatic or-
 ganisms, chemical precipi-
 tation  of dissolved miner-
 als, and erosion of sur-
 rounding lands (see ooze).
 Littoral zone: That portion
 of a water body extending
 from the shoreline lakeward
 to the greatest depth occu-
 pied by rooted plants.
Pelagic zone: This is the
open area of a lake, from
the edge of the littoral zone
to the center of the lake.
                                                                           2-7

-------
                       Man-Made  Lakes

                       In contrast to the glacial lakes that may be thousands of years old, most man-
                       made impoundments have been constructed within the  past 100 years. Ponds,
                       stock tanks, and  small  reservoirs have  been formed for agricultural  use,
                       municipal water supply,  soil and  water conservation,  and recreation. Large
                       reservoirs are usually constructed by Federal agencies by impounding major
                       rivers and are operated for multiple purposes that include water supply, flood
                       control, and hydroelectric power generation.
                         The purpose and location of an impoundment usually determines its basin
                       size, and the topography of the inundated valley dictates the basin shape. The
                       geology, soil type, and vegetation in the valley and the watershed directly affect
                       reservoir productivity and water quality. Because reservoirs are often flooded
                       river valleys, many of these man-made lakes are long and narrow rather than cir-
                       cular or ovoid like many natural lakes, and they tend to have irregular shorelines
                       (Fig. 2-2). Additionally, while natural lakes tend to have diffuse sources of inflow-
                       ing  water,  relatively low watershed areas compared  to lake surface area, and
                       long hydraulic residence times, reservoirs usually differ in all of these traits, and
                       these differences account for  the great differences  in water  quality that can
                       occur between lakes and reservoirs. Typically, a reservoir has one or two major
                       tributaries, a very large watershed compared to lake surface, and relatively short
                       hydraulic residence times. The contributions of dissolved and paniculate organic
                       and inorganic materials to the lake from the watershed are also likely to be very
                       high for reservoirs.
                        Lake  Processes
Epilimnion:   Uppermost,
warmest, well-mixed layer
of a lake during summer-
time thermal stratification.
The  ep/limnion  extends
from the surface to the ther-
mocline.
Hypolimnion:     Lower,
cooler layer of a lake during
summertime thermal stratifi-
cation.
Lake Stratification and  Mixing

In spring and early summer, the combination of solar heating and wind mixing of
near-surface water layers brings about the warming of the upper portion of the
lake water column and the stratification of many lakes and reservoirs into layers
of water with different temperatures and densities (Fig. 2-3). Rapidly flushed,
shallow lakes that are exposed to strong  winds, however, do not normally
develop persistent thermal stratification.
  During summertime thermal stratification,  a warmer, less dense layer of water
(the epilimnion) floats on a cooler, denser water layer (the hypolimnion). These
two layers are separated by a zone of rapidly changing temperature and density
called the metalimnion. The term metalimnion is often used loosely. The classical
definition is the stratum of water of rapid thermal change with depth, above and
below which are zones of uniformly warm (epilimnion) and cold (hypolimnion)
water layers. The thermodine is a horizontal plane of water across the lake
through the point of the greatest temperature change. The thermocline is within
the metalimnion.
                        Mixing Processes
                        The most important lake mixing mechanisms are wind, inflowing water, and out-
                        flowing water. Wind affects the surface waters of all lakes, but the effectiveness
                        of wind in mixing the entire water column is sharply curtailed in  some lakes
                        during the summer. During summertime thermal stratification, a lake usually can-
                    2-8

-------
                                                Lake bottom
           Natural Lake
              — Lower watershed area: lake surface area ratio
              — Longer hydraulic residence time
              — Frequently deeper
              — Frequently simpler in shape
                   VVatevshedbpunclary
           Reservoir
             — Higher watershed area: lake surface area ratio
             — Shorter hydraulic residence time
             — Frequently shallower
             — Frequently more convoluted in shape


    Figure 2-2.-Comparison of reservoirs to natural lakes.
not be completely mixed by wind. When its temperature-controlled zonation
breaks down in the fall, the waters cool, and mixing from the top to bottom oc-
curs.
   In stratified lakes, the thickness of the epilimnion can be considered to be the
depth to which water is consistently mixed  by wind. How deep (or thick) this
layer becomes during the summer depends upon how resistant the water is to
mixing. The greater the temperature difference between the epilimnion and the
hypolimnion, the more wind energy would be required to mix the water column
completely to the bottom of the lake (see Special Section: The Unique Proper-
ties of Water). The density gradient (change in density) of the metalimnion acts
as a physical barrier to complete mixing of the epilimnion and hypolimnion.
                                                                        2-9

-------
                                      EPILIMNION OR MIXED LAYER-WARM (LIGHT) WATER
                                                                               THERMOCLINE (PREVENTS MIXING)
                                                                DEGREES FARENHEIT
                          Figure 2-3.-A cross-sectional view of a thermally stratified lake. The curved line (the water
                          temperature profile) illustrates how rapidly the water temperature decreases in the metal-
                          imnion compared to nearly uniform temperatures in the epilimnion and hypolimnion. The
                          metalimnetic density gradient associated with this region of rapid temperature change pro-
                          vides a strong, effective barrier to water column mixing during the summer months.
Decomposition: The trans-
formation of organic mole-
cules (e.g., sugar) to inor-
ganic molecules (e.g., car-
bon dioxide and  water)
through biological and non-
biological processes.
   In the spring, just after thermal stratification is established, the hypolimnion
will be rich in dissolved oxygen from early spring water mixing and plant oxygen
production. However, because of the barrier properties of the thermocline, the
hypolimnion is isolated from gas exchanges with the atmosphere during the
summer and is often too dark for plant production of oxygen. In a productive
lake, the hypolimnion can then become oxygen depleted over the period of sum-
mer thermal stratification as its reserve of dissolved oxygen is consumed by the
decomposition (respiration) of organic matter by microbes. This event has very
important consequences for lake productivity and fish management and is one
of the major targets of lake restoration activities.
  As the epilimnion cools in the late summer and fall, the temperature difference
between layers decreases, and mixing becomes easier. With the cooling of the
surface, the mixing layer  gradually extends  downward  until  the  entire water
column  is again mixed and homogeneous (Fig.  2-4). This destratification
process is often referred to as fall overturn.
                         Water Movements

                         The wind-driven vertical mixing of the water column, just discussed, is only one
                         of several types of water movements in lakes.
                            The downstream flow of water usually controls the transport of dissolved and
                         suspended particles, particularly in river-like lakes and in many large, man-made
                         impoundments are dominated by major tributaries. Many natural lakes, however,
                         have numerous, diffuse inflows (including subsurface inflows) and a surface out-
                     2-10

-------
                      (A.) SUMMERTIME THERMAL STRATIFICATION
                          EPILIMNION

                        THERMOCLINE
                        METALIMNION

                        HYPOLIMNION
                  (B.) ANNUAL CYCLE OF THERMAL STRATIFICATION
       Y^S*f^**7
            SPRING
           OVERTURN
      \      EARLY       /
      \      FALL      /
  FALL
OVERTURN
  Figure 2-4.-Seasonal patterns in the thermal stratification of North Temperate zone lakes
  and reservoirs: (A) summertime stratification; (B) the annual cycle of lake thermal stratifica-
  tion.

 let. In such lakes, the downstream flow of water from the  watershed is not of
 major influence  on  lake water movements.  Commonly, large reservoirs have
 deep subsurface (often hypolimnetic) outlets from the dam that tend to promote
 the occurrence of subsurface density flows. A density flow occurs when inflow-
 ing water is cooler and thus denser than the epilimnetic water and, therefore,
 sinks or plunges to  a depth of equivalent water temperature or density before
 continuing its downlake flow (Fig. 2-5).
   Under stratified conditions, these density flows may pass through an entire
 reservoir along the bottom or at an intermediate depth without  contributing sig-
 nificant  amounts of nutrients or oxygen to the upper mixed layer. This is a com-
 mon  phenomenon in a series of  deep-discharge impoundments. Cold water
 released from an upstream reservoir may traverse the next reservoir in the series
 as a  discrete flow. This short-circuiting underflow may even be perceived as
 desirable for water quality, because it allows nutrient-laden water to flow through
 without  contributing to nuisance levels of algal production. Fishermen, however,
 may view the short circuit with  less enthusiasm because this reduction in algal
 production may be detrimental to overall lake production of fish.


 Organic Matter Production and

 Consumption


 Photosynthesis  and Respiration

 Planktonic algae (phytoplankton) and macrophytes use the energy from sun-
light, carbon dioxide, and water to produce sugar, water, and molecular oxygen.
The sun's energy is stored in the sugar as chemical bond energy. The green
                                            Density flows:   A flow of
                                            water of one density (deter-
                                            mined  by  temperature or
                                            salinity) over or under water
                                            of another density (e.g.,
                                            flow of cold river water un-
                                            der warm reservoir surface
                                            water).
                                            Macrophytes: Rooted and
                                            floating  aquatic  plants,
                                            commonly  referred to as
                                            waterweeds. These plants
                                            may flower and bear seed.
                                            Some forms, such as duck-
                                            weed and Coontail (Cerato-
                                            phytlum) are  free-floating
                                            forms without roots in the
                                            sediment.
                                                                       2-11

-------
   Tlie  layer  of  greatest
temperature   change,    the
metalimnion, presents a bar-
rier to mixing. The thermocline
is  not  a layer,  but  a  plane
through the point of maximum
temperature   change.   The
epilimnion  and  hyplimnion
are  relatively  uniform   in
temperature. As  the graph il-
lustrates,  ice  is  much less
dense  (lighter)  than  water.
Warm water is less dense than
cold water, but not as light as
ice.  Density  changes  most
rapidly at warm temperatures.
        The  Unique Properties of Water

 Water is a unique substance, and in order to understand how lakes be-
 have, it is useful to understand water's physical and chemical properties.
 The molecular structure of water and the way in which water molecules
 associate with each other dictate these properties:
    1. Water is an excellent solvent; many gases, minerals, and organic
 compounds dissolve readily in it.
    2. Water is a liquid at natural environmental temperatures and  pres-
 sures. Although this property seems rather common and obvious to  us, in
 fact, it is quite important. If water behaved at ordinary temperatures and
 pressures as  do chemically similar inorganic compounds,  it would  be
 present only as a vapor and lakes would not exist.
    3. The temperature-density relationship of water is also unique.  Most
 liquids  become  increasingly dense (more  mass,  or weight, per unit
 volume) as they cool. Water also becomes rapidly more dense as its
 temperature drops, but only to a certain point (Fig. 2-C). Water reaches its
 maximum density at 39.2 °F (3.94 °C), then it decreases slightly in density
 until it reaches 32 °F (0 °C), the freezing point. At this point, ice forms and
 density decreases sharply. Ice, therefore, is much lighter than liquid water
 and forms at the surface of lakes rather than at the lake bottom.
                          Temperature and the Density of Water
                0  5   10  15 20  25 30 °C
THERMOCLINE

at 4°C Water
less dense as it
r as it cools
)-25°C = 60-75°F
5-20 °C = 45-65 °F
l-15°C - 392-45°F
°°;I ° ; EPIUMNION 20-25 °*C > { I
°°-°°. METALIMNION 15-20°cY%"
•V-; HYPO°LIM° ION 4-1 "°C\%;
                                          1 ooooo

                                          0 99900

                                          0 99800

                                          0.99700

                                          0.99600

                                          0 99500

                                          092
                                                  TEMPERATURE °C

                                                0 +5 10 15 20  25 30

LIQUID TO ICE
-"
Figure 2-C.-The temperature-density relationship of water enables deep lakes to strat-
ify during summer. (See explanation in side column.)
    A second important consequence of the temperature-density relation-
 ship of water is the thermal stratification of lakes. Energy is required to mix
 fluids of differing densities, and the amount of energy necessary is related
 to the difference in density. In the  case of the water-column  mixing in
 lakes, this energy is provided primarily by wind. Therefore, the changes in
 water density that accompany rapidly decreasing water temperatures in
 the metalimnion during summer stratification are of great importance. This
 metalimnetic density gradient  provides a strong  and effective  barrier to
 water-column mixing.
    4. Water also has an unusually high specific heat. Specific heat is the
 amount  of energy required to change the temperature of 1 g of water by
 1°C. Water also has a high latent heat of fusion,  which is the energy re-
 quired to melt 1 g of ice at 0 °C. These properties make lakes slow to thaw
 and warm in the spring and slow to cool and freeze in the fall, thus provid-
 ing exceptionally  stable thermal environments for aquatic organisms.
 Additionally, because water gains and loses heat slowly, the presence of
 large lakes can exert a significant influence on local and regional climate.
 A good example is the Great Lakes, which have a dramatic effect on both
 the air temperature and on the precipitation in the States and Provinces
 surrounding them.
                          2-12

-------
 Figure 2-5.-Density flows in reservoirs. Often the inflowing tributary and reservoir waters
 differ in temperature and, therefore, in density. If the river inflow is warmer and less dense
 than the reservoir water, the "lighter" inflow will spread over the reservoir surface as an
 overflow. If river inflow is cooler and denser than the entire reservoir water mass, it will
 proceed along the reservoir bottom as an underflow. If river inflow is of an intermediate
 density, it will "plunge" from the surface and proceed downstream at the depth at which the
 river water and reservoir water densities are equal.
pigment, chlorophyll, is generally required for plants to do this. Sugar, along with
certain inorganic elements such as  phosphorus, nitrogen, and sulfur, is then
converted by plant cells into organic compounds such as proteins and fats. The
rate of photosynthetic production  of sugar is called primary productivity. The
amount of plant material produced and remaining in the system is called primary
production and is identical in process of origin to the standing crop or biomass
of plants in a farmer's field. While photosynthesis in the lake normally is the
dominant source of organic molecules for the food web, most lakes receive sig-
nificant additional inputs of energy in the forms of dissolved and paniculate or-
ganic matter from their watersheds.
Primary productivity: The
rate at which algae  and
macrophytes fix or convert
light, water,  and carbon
dioxide to  sugar in  plant
cells. Commonly measured
as milligrams of carbon per
square meter per hour.
                                                                               2-13

-------
Phytoplankton:    Micro-
scopic algae and microbes
that float freely in open wa-
ter of lakes and oceans.
   In the process of photosynthesis, molecular oxygen is produced as well, and
this is the primary source of oxygen in the atmosphere and dissolved in water.
Oxygen  is usually required to completely  break down organic molecules to
release the light energy they contain. Plants and animals release this energy to
do work through a process called respiration. Its end-products are energy, carb-
on dioxide, and water, produced  by the breakdown of organic molecules in the
presence of oxygen.
   Because of its requirement for light, the primary (photosynthetic)  production
of organic matter by aquatic plants is restricted to the portion of the lake water
column that is lighted (also called the photic zone). The thickness of the lighted
zone depends upon the transparency of the lake water. The photic zone is the
depth to which at least 1 percent  of the surface light intensity penetrates. Below
this, in the aphotic zone, the available light  is  too weak to support a significant
amount of photosynthetic production.
   Phytoplankton production  is controlled largely by water temperature, light
availability, nutrient availability, hydraulic residence time, and plant consumption
by animals.  Macrophyte  production is  thought to  be controlled more by
temperature, light, and bottom soil types; most rooted macrophytes obtain their
nutrients from the bottom sediments rather than the water and are restricted by
light penetration to the shallow littoral water.
   When light is adequate for photosynthesis, the availability of nutrients often
controls  phytoplankton productivity. In the  lake,  differences between plant re-
quirements for an element and its availability exert the most significant  limit on
lake productivity. Table 2-2 compares the relative supply of essential  nutrients to
their demand for plant growth. Phosphorus and nitrogen are the least available
elements, and therefore, they are  the most likely to limit lake  productivity.
                          Table 2-2.—The listed elements are required for plant growth. Plant demand is
                                      represented by the percentage of these essential elements in the liv-
                                      ing tissue of freshwater plants. Supply is represented by the propor-
                                      tions of these elements in world mean river water.  The  imbalance
                                      between demand and supply is an important factor in limiting plant
                                      growth (after Vallentyne, 1974).
ELEMENT
Oxygen
Hydrogen
Carbon
Silicon
NITROGEN
Calcium
Potassium
PHOSPHORUS
Magnesium
Sulfur
Chlorine
Sodium
Iron
SYMBOL
o
H
C
Si
N
Ca
K
P
Mg
S
Cl
Na
Fe
DEMAND BY
PLANTS (%)
80.5
9.7
6.5
1.3
.7
.4
.3
.08
.07
.06
.06
.04
.02
SUPPLY IN DEMAND: SUPPLY
WATER (%) RATIO1
89
11
.0012
.00065
.000023
.0015
.00023
.000001
.0004
.0004
.0008
.0006
.00007
1
1
5,000
2,000
30,000
< 1,000
1,300
80,000
< 1,000
< 1,000
<1,000
<1,000
< 1,000
                          1 Percent of element in plant tissue / percent in available water The higher the ratio, the more scarce the nutrient Phosphorus,
                           in particular, is likely to limit plant growth in a lake If more phosphorus is supplied, however, plant growth is likely to accelerate
                           unless and until limited by some other factor
                     2-14
                            Phosphorus in particular can severely limit the biological productivity of a lake
                         for many natural lakes. The by-products of modern society, however,  are rich
                         sources of this element.  Wastewaters, fertilizers, agricultural drainage, deter-
                         gents, and municipal sewage contain high concentrations of phosphorus, and if
                         allowed  to enter the  lake,  they can stimulate algal productivity.  Such high

-------
 productivity, however, may result in nuisance algal blooms, noxious tastes and
 odors, oxygen depletion in the water column, and undesirable fishkills during
 winter and summer.
    Since phosphorus is most often the nutrient that limits algal productivity, it is
 usually the element that is the focus of many lake management or restoration
 techniques. Phosphorus loading can be reduced, for example, by chemical floc-
 culation in advanced wastewater treatment plants or controlled in the watershed
 by using proper agricultural and land management practices, improving septic
 systems, and applying fertilizer carefully (see Chapter 5). In the past 20 years,
 there have been increasing efforts to minimize phosphorus inputs to lakes as a
 way to curb eutrophication. Methods for precipitating or inactivating phosphorus
 within the lake are discussed in Chapter 6 under Algae/Techniques With Long-
 Term Effectiveness. A method for determining the amount of phosphorus com-
 ing from the watershed is discussed in Chapter 3, and a formula for calculating
 the amount is given in Chapter 4.


 Phytoplankton Community Succession

 As the growing season proceeds, a succession of algal  communities typically
 occurs in a lake (Fig. 2-6). Phytoplankton biomass usually tends to be high in the
 spring and early summer by virtue  of increasing water temperature and light
 availability, relatively high nutrient availability, and low losses to zooplankton
 grazing  (consumption by microscopic animals). As grazing pressure increases
 and  nutrient  availability  declines from  early to midsummer, algal  biomass
 declines. It rises again in the late summer and fall when water column mixing in-
 creases the supply of nutrients and other conditions provide a favorable environ-
 ment  for the growth of algae. Sometimes, particularly in very productive lakes,
 blue-green algae form floating scums on the surface of the lake.  Algal produc-
 tion and  biomass are usually low in the winter because of low water tempera-
 tures and low light availability.
Figure 2-6.-A typical seasonal succession of lake phytoplankton communities.  Diatoms
dominate the phytoplankton in the spring and the autumn, green algae in mid summer, and
blue-green algae (cyanobacteria)  in late summer.
Biomass: The weight of bi-
ological matter.  Standing
crop  is  the  amount of
biomass (e.g., fish or algae)
in a body of water at a given
time.  Often measured in
terms of grams per square
meter of surface.

Zooplankton: Microscopic
animals which float freely in
lake water, graze on detritus
particles,  bacteria, and al-
gae, and maybe consumed
by fish.
                                                                         2-15

-------
   Sedimentation and Decomposition

   Sedimentation is the sinking of particles (silt, algae, animal feces, and dead or-
   ganisms) through the lake water column and their deposition on the lake bottom.
   Sedimentation is a very important process that affects phytoplankton biomass
   levels, phytoplankton community succession, and transfers of organic matter,
   nutrients, and particle-associated contaminants from the lake's upper layers to
   the bottom sediments. One reason for the dominance of blue-green algae in
   some lakes may be related to their ability to regulate their buoyancy and, there-
   fore, to counter sedimentation. Sedimentation of paniculate organic matter from
   the water column  to the lake bottom  provides  a  critical  linkage between
   planktonic primary  production and the growth of  bottom-dwelling organisms
   such as aquatic insect larvae, clams, and crayfish, which eat this organic matter
   and upon which larger predatory organisms fish and turtles may feed.
      Settling plankton, zooplankton feces, and other organic detritus particles are
   degraded  in the water column and in the bottom sediments through  oxygen-
   consuming decomposition processes. Organic matter decomposition, a collec-
   tive  term  for  the  net conversion of organic  material  back to inorganic
   compounds (see Fig. 2-7), occurs through the respiratory activities of all or-
   ganisms, including bacteria, fungi and other microbes.
          CO2 + H2O +  NUTRIENTS  + SUNLIGHT
         PHOTOSYNTHESIS

RESPIRATION &
DECOMPOSITION
                       (CH2O) + H2O + O2
    Figure 2-7.-The equilibrium relationship between photosynthesis and respiration-decom-
    position processes. The photosynthetic conversion of light energy, carbon dioxide (C02),
    water (H20), and nutrients into organic matter produces oxygen (02) and results in nonequi-
    librium concentrations of carbon, nitrogen, sulfur, and phosphorus in organic compounds
    of high potential energy. Respiration-decomposition processes tend to restore the equilib-
    rium by consuming oxygen and decomposing organic materials to inorganic compounds.
      In the hypolimnion of productive lakes, the sedimentation of organic matter
    from the surface waters is extensive. And because algae and other paniculate
    materials are abundant,  light penetration through the water column  to the
    hypolimnion is limited or absent and photosynthesis cannot occur. Under these
    conditions,  the oxygen consumed in the hypolimnion and bottom sediments
    during the decomposition (respiration) of this organic matter greatly exceeds the
    oxygen produced. Also, as described earlier, the hypolimnion is isolated from
2-16

-------
  the atmosphere by a temperature or water density barrier to mixing known as
  the metalimnion. The result, in productive thermally stratified lakes, is a depletion
  and sometimes almost complete absence of dissolved oxygen in the hypolim-
  nion. A similar result can occur, though more slowly, in shallow, productive lakes
  with a prolonged snow and ice cover.
    The chemical and physical changes associated with oxygen depletion are
  marked. They include increased nutrient release from the bottom sediments,
  destruction of oxygenated habitats for aquatic animals, and incomplete decom-
  position of sedimented organic matter. These symptoms are often characteristic
  of lake trophic status (see description of trophic status in the section on Lake
  Aging and Cultural Eutrophication in this chapter):
    Oligotropnic lakes: Insufficient organic matter is produced in the epilimnion
  to  affect  hypolimnetic  oxygen concentrations significantly;  the hypolimnion
  remains well oxygenated throughout the year.
    Eutrophic lakes: Organic matter decomposition can rapidly exhaust the dis-
  solved oxygen in unlighted zones, leading to anoxia in the hypolimnion. During
  midsummer, a temperature-oxygen squeeze can develop in stratified lakes, and
  cool water fish such as trout cannot withdraw to  the oxygen-depleted lower
 waters and must stay in less than ideal, warmer upper waters.
    In anoxic conditions, metals such as iron, manganese,  and sulfur, and the
  nutrients phosphorus and ammonium (a nitrogen compound) become increas-
 ingly soluble and are released from the sediments to accumulate in the hypolim-
 nion.  Summer partial mixing events, which can occur during the passage of
 summer cold fronts with wind and cold  rains, can transport some of these
 released  nutrients to the  lake surface where they  may stimulate more algae
 production. At fall turnover, these metals and nutrients reenter the photic zone
 and may also stimulate algal blooms. Nutrients that reenter the water column
 from sediments constitute an "internal nutrient load" to the lake. Lake managers
 must be aware of this internal  source of nutrients  in addition to the nutrients
 entering from the watershed.
 Food Web  Structure,  Energy Flow, and
 Nutrient Cycling

 In-lake  plant production  usually forms the organic matter base of  the lake's
 predator  prey  communities,  called food webs. Although  some waterbodies
 (especially rapidly flushed reservoirs) receive important supplements  of organic
 matter from river and stream  inflow, most lakes require a reliable level of algal
 and macrophyte production to maintain food webs.
   Some  of  the organic  matter  produced  photosynthetically  by  primary
 producers (macrophytes and algae) is consumed by herbivores (grazers) rang-
 ing from tiny zooplankton to snails to grazing minnows.  Herbivores, in turn
 provide a food source for the next level, the carnivores, such as predatory fish
 and turtles. These general levels, from primary producers, to herbivores, to the
 larger predators, constitute the food chain (Fig. 2-8). The food chain concept ex-
 plains the flow of energy (Fig. 2-9) among lake organisms. Each general level of
 consumers,  called a trophic  level, transfers  only a fraction of the  energy it
 receives up the chain to the next trophic level. In practice, this means that a few
sport fish depend upon  a much larger  supply of smaller herbivores, which
depend  upon a successively much larger base of plants and algae.
 Trophic state: The degree
 of eutrophication of a lake.
 Transparency, chlorophyll-a
 levels, phosphorus concen-
 trations, amount of macro-
 phytes, and quantity of dis-
 solved  oxygen in the hy-
 polimnion can be used to
 assess state.
Anoxia: A condition of no
oxygen in the water. Often
occurs near the bottom of
fertile stratified lakes in the
summer and under ice in
late winter.
 Nutrient Cycling: The flow
 of nutrients from one com-
 ponent of an ecosystem to
 another, as when macro-
 phytes die  and re/ease nu-
 trients that become  avail-
 able to algae (organic to in-
 organic phase and return).
Producers:  Green plants
that manufacture their own
food through photosynthe-
                                                                        2-17

-------
          PISCIVOROUS
               FISH
               r
               EAT
               1-2 FT
         PLANKTIVOROUS
              FISH
               y
               EAT
               6"-1 FT
          ZOOPLANKTON
               r
               EAT
                1/10 IN
             ALGAE
                                                    MICROSCOPIC
           NUTRIENTS
NUTRIENTS
          *v RECYCLE
       F^l '^••••••V: -.•-...:----.--.:• ****.-.." -
       1.:'%;j':'f':'~t^i'-:7 •'.'••.?• -1- ': '-•'
            BENTHIC
           ORGANISMS
   Figure 2-8.-The food chain.
2-18

-------
    Finally, all of these organisms produce  wastes and die, which provides
 nourishment to the bacteria and fungi in the form of dissolved and paniculate or-
 ganic matter. Decomposition of organic matter recycles nutrients for additional
 plant production (Fig. 2-9).
                                               Plant nutrient uptake, photosynthesis of
                                               organic matter and dissolved oxygen.
                                           **** — THERMOCLINE
                                               Consumption of dissolved oxygen in
                                               respiration-decomposition processes, nutrient
                                               regeneration by organic matter decomposition
                                               Accumulation of nutrients and organic
                                               sediments, release of dissolved nutrients from
                                               sediments to water
 Figure 2-9.-lnfluence of photosynthesis and respiration- decomposition processes and or-
 ganic matter sedimentation on the distribution of nutrients, organic matter, and dissolved
 oxygen in a stratified lake.
 Lake  Aging  and  Cultural

 Eutrophication

 Lakes and reservoirs are temporary features of the landscape. The Great Lakes,
 for example, have had their current shapes for only about 12,000 years. Over
 tens to  many thousands of years, lake basins change in  size  and depth as a
 result of climate, movements in the earth's crust, and the accumulation of sedi-
 ment. Lake eutrophication is a natural process resulting from  the gradual  ac-
 cumulation of nutrients, increased productivity, and a slow filling in of the basin
 with accumulated sediments, silt, and organic matter from the watershed. The
 original  shape of the basin and the relative stability of watershed soils strongly
 influence the lifespan of a lake.
   The classical lake succession sequence (Fig. 2-10) is usually depicted as a
 unidirectional progression through a series of phases or trophic states:
   Oligotrophy: Nutrient-poor, biologically unproductive
   Mesotrophy: Intermediate nutrient availability and biological productivity
   Eutrophy: Nutrient-rich, highly productive
   Hypereutrophy: Pea-soup conditions, the extreme end of the eutrophic stage
   These lake trophic states correspond to gradual increases in lake productivity
from oligotrophy to eutrophy (Fig. 2-10).
                                                                       2-19

-------
                  Lake  Basin Origin and Shape

        The origin of the lake basin often determines the size and shape of the
        lake, which in  turn  influences the lake's productivity,  water quality, the
        habitats it offers, and its lifespan.

        Glacial activity  has been the most common origin of lake basins in North
        America (Fig. 2-D).  Glacial lakes of Canada and the upper Midwestern
        United States were formed about 8,000 to 12,000 years ago. Some lake
        basins resulted from large-scale glacial scouring, the wearing away  of
        bedrock and deepening of valleys by expansion and recession of glaciers.
        Deep depressions left by receding glaciers filled with melt water to form
        lakes. The finger lakes of Upper New York State were formed this way.
MORAINE /   CLEAN ICE f     DR|FT
                     IN ICE
                                                          DURING GLACIATIOIM
                                                          About 3,000 years ago the last
                                                          glaciers began to retreat from
                                                          the North American continent
                                                          Many of the small lakes in the
                                                          upper midwest and north
                                                          central states as well as
                                                          Canada were formed by huge
                                                          ice blocks buried in the loose
                                                          rock and soil and deposited by
                                                          the glaciers. When the buried
                                                          ice blocks melted they left
                                                          holes in the glacial till which
                                                          filed with water from the
                                                          melting glaciers
                                              GLACIAL TILL
                            AFTER GLACIATION
                            Chains of lakes formed along
                            some streams that drained the
                            melting glaciers. Other lakes
                            were created between the
                            moraines and the retreating
                            ice mass from the melting
                            water

                            MORAINE
                            A Moraine is a ridge of low
                            rolling hills made up of
                            unsorted rocks and soil
                            deposited when the glacial ice
                            mass melted.
        Figure 2-D.-The effects of glaciation in shaping lake basins.

        Kettle, or "pothole," lakes, which formed in the depressions left by melting
        ice blocks, are very common throughout the upper Midwestern United
        States and large portions of Canada. These lakes and their watersheds
        are popular home and cottage sites and recreational areas. The size and
        shape of the kettle lake basins reflect the size of the original ice block and
        how deeply it was buried in the glacial debris.

        Natural lakes have also been formed by volcanism; Crater Lake, Oregon,
        is an example.  Large-scale movements of large segments of the earth's
        crust, called  tectonic activity, created Reelfoot Lake  in Tennessee and
        Lake Tahoe in California,  among others.

        Solution lakes are formed where groundwater has dissolved limestone;
        Florida has a number of these lakes. Lakes may also originate from shift-
        ing of river channels; oxbow lakes are stranded segments of meandering
        rivers. Finally, natural lakes can also be created by the persistence of the
        dam-building beaver.
2-20

-------
                                    MES07ROPHY
                                                                HYPEHEUTROPHY
  TIME

  MAN INDUCED
                   1000'S OF YEARS
                                           100'S OF YEARS
       OLIGOTROPHY
                                   EUTROPHY/HYPEREUTROPHY
                                                              M    E/H
                       10'S OF YEARS
Figure 2-10.-Above: The progression of natural lake aging or eutrophication through nutri-
ent-poor (oligotrophy) to nutrient-rich (eutrophy) states. Hypereutrophy represents extreme
productivity characterized by algal blooms or dense macrophyte populations (or both) plus
a high level of sedimentation. The diagram depicts the natural process of gradual nutrient
enrichment and basin filling over a long period of time (e.g., thousands of years).
Below: Man-induced or cultural eutrophication in which lake aging is greatly accelerated
(e.g., tens of years) by increased inputs of nutrients and sediments to a lake, as a result of
watershed disturbance by man.
   Evidence obtained from sediment cores (see Chapter 3), however, indicates
that changes in lake trophic status are not necessarily gradual or unidirectional.
If their watersheds  remain relatively undisturbed,  lakes can retain the  same
trophic status  for many thousands  of years. Oligotrophic  Lake Superior is a
good example of this. In contrast,  rapid changes in lake  nutrient status and
productivity are often a result of man-induced disturbances to the watershed
rather than gradual enrichment and filling  of the  lake  basin through natural
means.
   Man-induced cultural eutrophication occurs when nutrient, soil,  or organic
matter loads to the lake are dramatically increased. The lifespan of a lake can  be
shortened drastically by activities such as forest clearing, road building, cultiva-
tion, residential development, and wastewater treatment discharges  because
these activities increase soil and nutrient loads to the lake.  Chapter 5 explains
watershed influences from these activities in the sections on nonpoint and cul-
tural sources.
   Some lakes, however, are naturally eutrophic. It is important to recognize that
many  lakes and reservoirs  located  in naturally fertile watersheds have little
chance of being anything other than eutrophic. Unless some other factor such
as turbidity or hydraulic residence time intervenes, these lakes will naturally have
very high rates of primary production.
   Natural and man-made lakes undergo eutrophication by the same proces-
ses—nutrient enrichment and basin filling-but at very different rates (Fig.  2-10).
Reservoirs become eutrophic more rapidly than natural lakes, as  a rule, because
most reservoirs receive higher sediment and nutrient loads than do most natural
lakes. They may even be eutrophic  when initially filled.  Reservoirs, especially
those with hypolimnetic outlets, are considerably more efficient at trapping sedi-
ments than at  retaining nutrients, and therefore,  the filling of their basins with
river-borne silts and  clays is the dominant aging process for  reservoirs.
                                                                             2-21

-------
   Ecology's Place  in  Protection
   and  Restoration
  The goal of this chapter on ecological and limnological concepts is to provide
  the reader with a basic background for understanding the origins of lake
  eutrophication and water quality problems. This background is intended to help
  the reader evaluate the potential benefits and limitations on lake protection and
  restoration approaches and techniques described in the rest of this Manual.
     This Manual emphasizes two basic, complementary approaches to lake res-
  toration:
     1. Treating the causes of eutrophication. This approach involves limiting lake
  fertility by controlling nutrient availability.
     2. Treating the products of overfertilization and thus controlling plant produc-
  tion in the lake.
     Methods employed to control  nutrient availability include proper watershed
   management practices, advanced treatment of wastewater, and diversion of
  wastewater and stormwater (see  Chapter 5). Hypolimnetic withdrawal, dilution
   and flushing, phosphorus  precipitation  and inactivation, sediment oxidation,
   sediment removal, and hypolimnetic aeration  are  techniques to deal  with
   nutrients already in the lake system; they are discussed in Chapter 6.
      Methods used to control plant biomass include artificial circulation, water-
   level  drawdown, harvesting, chemical treatments (herbicides and  algicides),
   biological controls, and shading  and  sediment covers for macrophyte control.
   Chapter 6 provides details on these techniques also.
      Determining what needs to be treated and where problems may originate is
   discussed in Chapter 3 on Problem Identification. Chapter 5 gives further infor-
   mation on watershed influences and how to manage them.
      Most of what we know about lake and reservoir restoration has been learned
   in the last 15 years through experience gained from many studies conducted in
   the United States, Canada, Europe, and Scandinavia. Experience gained from
   previous lake restoration efforts clearly leads to three conclusions:
      1. There is no panacea for lake management or restoration problems; dif-
   ferent situations require different approaches and solutions.
      2. A complex set of physical, chemical, and biological factors influences lake
   and reservoir ecosystems and affects  their responsiveness to lake restoration ef-
   forts.
      3. Because of the tight coupling between lakes and their watersheds, good
   conservation practices in the watershed are essential for improving and protect-
   ing lake water quality. Efforts to  control both external loading of nutrients from
   the watershed  and internal nutrient loading and recycling are often required to
   produce a noticeable improvement in water quality.
2-22

-------
                          Summary

 The character of a lake or reservoir is determined by a complex set of
 physical, chemical, and biological factors that vary with lake origin and
 current conditions. Important factors include hydrology, climate, water-
 shed geology, watershed to lake ratio,  soil  fertility, hydraulic residence
 time,  lake  basin  shape, external and  internal  nutrient loading rates,
 presence or absence of thermal stratification, lake  habitats, and  lake
 biota. In some situations, a natural combination of these factors may dic-
 tate that a lake will be highly productive (eutrophic) and management or
 restoration efforts to transform such a system to an unproductive, clear-
 water (oligotrophic) state would be ill-advised. However, if a lake has be-
 come eutrophic or has developed other water quality problems as a result
 of, for example, increased nutrient loading to the lake from the watershed,
 then these effects can be reversed and the condition of the lake can be
 improved or restored  by an appropriate combination of management ef-
 forts in the watershed and in the lake itself. The best situation is one where
 steps are taken to protect the lake's watershed before problems develop.

 In the chapters to follow, a variety of lake and watershed management
 techniques are discussed and compared. While reading through this in-
 formation it  is important to remember that the  potential effectiveness of
 any lake restoration method or combination of  methods will depend en-
 tirely on the ecological soundness of its application. Recent experience in
 lake restoration has clearly shown that there  is  no panacea for lake res-
 toration  or  for lake management  problems.  That  is  (despite  the
 salesman's claims), introducing grass carp, harvesting weeds, or install-
 ing an artificial aeration/destratification system is not necessarily the solu-
 tion for a particular  lake. In fact, all three  of these  commonly used
 methods address symptoms rather than causes.

 Finally, lakes and their watersheds are tightly coupled. Therefore, to be ef-
fective, lake and reservoir restoration and management efforts  must con-
sider both watershed processes and lake dynamics.
                                                                     2-23

-------
        CHAPTER 3
Problem Identification

-------
 CHAPTER 3
 PROBLEM  IDENTIFICATION
 Chapter Objectives

 In the first chapter of this Manual, a lake problem was defined as a limitation on a
 desired use of the lake. Based on this definition, problems can often be identified
 by simply listing lake users' complaints. When boat owners can't put their boats
 in the water or get away from the dock because of weeds, for example, they
 have clearly identified a problem. While this identification of a problem is usually
 the first action in the process of reaching a solution, a number of other steps
 must occur between pointing to an apparent problem and implementing a plan
 that truly solves it. These steps are illustrated in Figure 3-1.
  The purpose of this chapter is to help lake users, managers, and associations
   • Identify problems
   • Put problems in perspective for a particular lake
   • Understand how the causes, not the symptoms of problems are
    determined through diagnostic analysis of the lake
   • Define the causes of the lake problems
  Finally, this chapter directs the reader to appropriate parts of this Manual to
 evaluate the alternatives for solving these problems.
Common Lake  Problems
Most types of lake problems commonly occur in a number of lakes in a region.
Rarely is a problem unique to a particular lake. Some of these widely occurring
lake problems, impaired uses, and possible causes are listed in  Table 3-1.
Among these common lake problems, overabundant algae, excessive macro-
phytes, lack of depth and user conflicts frequently arouse public complaints and
provide good examples of the relationship between lake users and lake condi-
tions.
                                                          3-1

-------
                           Problem Identification
                            Common lake problems
                              (See Chapter 2 for reasons)
                        Algal scums        - Poor fishing
                        Weeds             - Odor
                        Color and muddy waters
                        Overcrowding/user conflicts
                              Problem statement
                                  (symptoms)
                            Lake users
                            Lake association
                            Community
                             Problem identification
                           Possible
                           causes
  Perception
Private
Sector

Universities
Consultants
Contractors
Organization
                              Problem diagnosis
                        Available data
                        Data collection
                        Modeling techniques
                        Indices
  (See Chapter
                              Problem definition
                              Possible solutions
                         Watershed
                        Management
                         (See Chapter 5)
                              V	
  In-lake
Restoration
(See Chapter 6)
                             Lake management plan
                               (See Chapters 7, 8, 9)
                   Public
                   Sector

                   Local
                   Federal
                   State
     Figure 3-1.-General approaches can be described for defining lake problems in terms of
     users' needs and investigating causes to reach a solution that fits both the lake's capabili-
3-2  ties and the needs of users.

-------
                                Table 3-1.—Examples of common lake problems, impaired uses, and possible causes of the problem.
Impared Uses
Aesthetics
Fishing

ALGAE SCUM WEEDS
'High Nutrients 'Shallowness
'High Nutrients
'Sediment
*
COMMON PROBLEMS/SYMPTOMS
FISH KILLS DEPTH
*
'Toxins _
'No Oxygen ]^

USER CONFLICTS
'Motor Boat Noise
'Debris
'Motor Boating
'Swimming

TASTE & ODOR
"High Nutrients
'HighOrganics
'Algae
l^l^
                                                                       'HighOrganics
                                                                       'Sediment
Swimming


Motorboating


Sailing



Water Supply
                              _
                                                                                                                   'Motor Boating
                                                                                                                   'Swimming
                                                                                                                   'Scuba Diving

                                                                                                                   'Motor Boating
                                                                                                                   'Swimming
                                                                                                                   'Scuba Diving

                                                                                                                   'Swimming
                                                                                                                     (contamination)
                                                                                                                   'Motor Oils, Gas
                                                                                                                   'Debris
    <^i^ = problem shown above definitely impairs use shown at left
      n* = problem shown above may impair use shown at left
    " = common causes of problem shown above; definite impairment of use
U
w

-------
Algae: Small aquatic plants
which occur as single cells,
colonies, or filaments.
                         Algae
Algae are a vital part of all lakes (see Chapter 2); they are one of the sources of
food and energy for fish and other lake organisms. Too many algae and the
wrong kinds of algae, however, can interfere with some lake uses. For instance,
they can clog the filters of drinking water treatment plants. Also, organic matter
produced by algae can react with chlorine. Trihalomethanes- possible products
of this chemical reaction-are believed to cause cancer. Algae can also inhibit
the growth of other plants by shading them, contribute to oxygen depletion and
fishkills, and cause taste and odor problems in water and fish. Some species of
algae can release toxins.
   The most common use of lakes is aesthetic enjoyment; excess algae are
most likely to interfere with the simple pleasure of viewing a lake from a resort, a
cottage, a home, a park,  or a highway. Unsightly scums are especially likely to
be caused either by tangled masses of filamentous algae or by "blooms" of cer-
tain planktonic algae that float on the lake surface.
   The regular occurrence of algal blooms indicates that nutrient levels in the
lake are too high.
                        Weeds

                        Weeds also limit many lake uses. Like algae, weeds (or aquatic macrophytes)
                        are a vital part of the lake (see Chapter 2). They provide cover for fish and food
                        for wildlife. But too many weeds can limit swimming, fishing, skiing, sailing, boat-
                        ing, and aesthetic appreciation. Indeed, getting rid of noxious weeds is one of
                        the most common drives among lake associations. Fifty percent of Wisconsin
                        lake districts report harvesting weeds, and 25 percent use herbicides (Klessig et
                        al. 1984).
                         Depth
                        Depth problems result from the loss of volume in a lake or reservoir because of
                        increased sediment load. Increased sediment generally leads to problems with
                        turbid or murky water. The reduction in depth can disrupt swimming, boating,
                        and sailing activities and encourage extensive weed growth. Increased sediment
                        loads originate externally as soil erosion in the  watershed  or internally from
                        decaying algae and weeds in the lake itself. The loss of lake volume, or infilling, is
                        a problem in a majority of lakes and reservoirs. Dredging has been one of the
                        major  lake  restoration approaches used  in  lake management.  Dredging,
                        however, doesn't stop the soil erosion in the watershed.


                        User Conflicts

                        Not all lake problems occur because of physical, chemical, and biological condi-
                        tions in the lake. User conflicts arise from limitations on the time and space avail-
                        able for desirable activities.  Some lake  uses  clearly  conflict  with  others.
                        Motorboating can disrupt fishing, swimming, and scuba diving in a lake. Just the
                        sound of boat  motors can disturb the aesthetic pleasures derived from a lake
                        setting. Mudflats created by lake drawdown for power generation or water supp-
                        ly conflict with  the desire to have a constant water level for aesthetics, docking
                        boats, and wading. Conflicts among desired lake uses can cause greater lake
                        problems than  those arising from algal scums or an overabundance of weeds.
                    3-4

-------
Problem  Statement
A local homeowner or lake user will probably be aware of lake problems before
a professional lake manager suggests that something is wrong. User percep-
tions are often the first qualitative indicators that the lake has or does not have a
problem. If a boater cannot move across the shallow areas of a lake because of
dense macrophytes or if a swimmer cannot enjoy a dip without entanglement
with macrophytes, a problem exists. If a homeowner relaxing in the confines of
the yard is offended by the smell of decaying macrophytes and algae, a problem
exists. For these lake users, the most productive response to such problems can
be to form an organized group to deal with the problems and to determine the
interest in seeking a solution to the problems. Local initiative is an important part
of lake restoration; it helps local users understand how the lake works (and their
role in the problems) and enables them to cooperate in the solution.  Determin-
ing why problems exist and how serious they are relative to the natural carrying
capacity of the lake, however, typically requires professional assistance.
   Lake organizations invariably would like to see their lake do everything. They
want aesthetic pleasure, great fishing, healthy water, sandy shorelines and bot-
toms, and a nice wildlife population all without pests, insects, or weeds. Unfor-
tunately, almost no lake can meet all of these demands. Systematically clarifying
the attainable uses in  a lake management effort must be the first step of any
plan.
   Local users, homeowners, or  lake associations have two responsibilities in
lake restoration that require considerable attention. The first one is to come to
some agreement  on what the problems are, clearly stating these problems and
determining how to organize to see that the problems are resolved. Appen-
dix 3-A describes two democratic procedures, the nominal group process and
the Delphi process, that may prove useful for the first responsibility. The second
responsibility is to assure that analysis of the causes of problems and a viable
response to these factors is carried out by competent professionals.
   Based on both what the users want and what the lake itself is capable of sup-
porting, problem identification focuses first on establishing a set of realistic uses
desired in the lake.
 Problem  Identification


 Problem  Perception
 Depending on physical characteristics of the lake basin, the watershed and the
 quality of incoming water, lakes are suited to particular purposes. Table 3-2 sum-
 marizes general lake types that are suited to specific uses.
   Although it may be technically possible to drastically alter a lake to meet the
 needs of a certain user group, the cost will be high and the decision is usually
 unwise. It is important to understand the lake uses that can realistically be at-
 tained when choosing a desired  use. Some lakes can never be crystal clear, no
 matter what measures are taken. If the watershed area is large relative to lake
 surface area and watershed soils are highly erodible and nutrient-rich, the lake
 will always have excessive algae and weed growth regardless of any lake treat-
 ments.
                                                                       3-5

-------
Oligotrophic: "Poorly nour-
ished," from the Greek. De-
scribes a lake of low plant
productivity and high trans-
parency.
                                  Table 3-2.—Priorities for lake use based on lake characteristics
                                         SIZE OF LAKE
                                                               DEPTH
                                                                                  CLARITY
                           USES
              SMALL    LARGE   SHALLOW    DEEP    TURBID  CLEAR
            (LESSTHAN (OVER500 (LESSTHAN5' (OVER20')  (SECCHI   (OVERS')
            10 ACRES)   ACRES  AVG. DEPTH)           UNDER 2')
                           Water
                           Supply

                           Fishing/
                           Wildlife

                           Swimming/
                           Skiing

                           Boating/
                           Sailing

                           Aesthetics
                          - = not suitable
                          - - suitable
                          + - = suitability depends on modifying factors
   Regional differences in lakes across the country represent an important factor
in understanding the limitations of lake management. These differences are dis-
tinct enough to be identified as regions, called ecoregions  (Omernik, 1987).
Regional  differences  in  geology,  soils, land  use, and vegetation in  these
ecoregions result  in very different lake quality. Lakes in northern Minnesota, for
example, have lower nutrient and algal concentrations and greater transparency
than lakes in southern Minnesota in areas with more naturally fertile soils. Man-
made reservoirs generally are more turbid than natural lakes. Lake users from
different regions of the country, therefore, may perceive a problem in local lakes
that is due to natural causes. One of the important parts of problem definition is
to delineate natural from man-made causes of a problem.
   Sometimes, users perceive a lake problem for which a source or cause might
not exist. Perceived problems are no less important than real problems with un-
derlying causes and need to be addressed.  For example, people who  won't
swim in a lake  because a sewage treatment  plant discharged into one of the
lake's tributaries 15 years ago are still reacting  to historic conditions. People per-
ceive a  continuing problem, even though the  problem was solved  more than a
decade  ago. Although it is important to distinguish between real and perceived
problems, it is equally important to identify and solve the causes of both types of
problems.


Causes  of Lake Problems

The fact that most problems commonly occur  in a number of lakes in the region
means that the  general causes of these problems and a variety of approaches
for solving them also are known. While the solution for each common problem
must be lake-specific because each lake has unique characteristics, general ap-
proaches can be described for defining lake problems and causes (see Fig. 3-1).
   Identifying the potential causes of lake problems requires an understanding
and appreciation of the interactions not only among components within the lake
such as algae, macrophytes, fish, and other organisms but also the interactions
between the lake and its watershed (see Chapters 2 and 5). In some situations, a
natural combination of these factors may dictate that a lake will  be highly biologi-
cally productive and that management and restoration efforts to transform such
a system to an oligotrophic state would be ill-advised.
                     3-6

-------
  If, however, a lake has become eutrophic  or has developed other water
quality problems as a result of manageable problems such as an increased
nutrient load from man-made causes, then these effects can be reversed, and
the  condition of the lake can be improved or restored by an appropriate com-
bination of management efforts in both the watershed and the lake itself.
  Delineating natural causes versus man-made causes of problems can be en-
hanced by looking at other lakes in the same region. If there are lakes in the area
that have similar water quality  but relatively undisturbed watersheds,  then the
problems occurring in the lake might be due to natural  causes. If these other
lakes  in the region with relatively undisturbed watersheds, however, have the
quality of water that is desired, then man-made causes are probably contributing
to lake problems, and these causes need to be identified.  Using other lakes in
the  region with relatively undisturbed watersheds for reference is a good way to
initially assess the potential impacts of man-made or cultural sources to the lake
problems.
  There  are  numerous  tools  available for  identifying the  causes of lake
problems. Qualitative approaches, such  as comparing the target lake to sur-
rounding lakes, document subjective observations which can reveal important
patterns. The quantitative approaches, such as the models discussed in Chapter
4 and trophic state indices, rely on objective data. In practice,  both qualitative
and quantitative approaches are usually considered. Using these methods to
identify underlying causes of problems usually requires professional assistance.
An  important step in problem definition, therefore,  is selecting  a competent
professional or firm to interpret the results of various diagnostic approaches.
Selecting a Consultant
There are a number of criteria to consider in selecting a consultant.  Trjese
criteria include experience in conducting lake studies, identifying the underlying
causes, and formulating effective lake management plans; expertise in engineer-
ing, limnology, biology, or other disciplines associated with lake management;
past performance in conducting similar studies or dealing with similar problems;
and the capabilities of the firm in addressing the problems in the lake. A series of
questions related to these criteria are listed in Table 3-3 and can be used to help
select a consultant or contractor. These questions need to be tailored to the par-
ticular  set of lake problems and should not be considered all-inclusive. The
questions, however,  should  assist the lake manager and  lake associations in
thinking about the appropriate questions to ask in seeking professional assis-
tance.
Limnology: Scientific study
of fresh water, especially
the history, geology, biot-
ogy, physics, and chemistry
of lakes. Also termed fresh-
water ecology.
 Problem  Diagnosis

 Investigate the Problem
 After the lake association or lake manager has selected professional assistance
 and the water quality problems have been identified, the next step is to diagnose
 and quantify the problems and determine their causes. This diagnosis should be
 guided by the professional consultant. However, it is important for the lake
 manager and/or lake association to understand the general process or steps in
 problem diagnosis.  Effective lake  management and  lake protection occurs
                                                                        3-7

-------
      	Table 3-3.—Criteria for selecting consultants and contractors	

      A. Experience
        1.  How many lake restoration projects have they performed and for whom (reference
           and dates)?
        2.  Have they successfully submitted Phase I and Phase II applications and obtained
           EPA and/or State funding?
        3.  Have they performed Phase I Diagnostic/Feasibility Studies?
        4.  Have they managed Phase II Implementation  Projects?
        5.  Have they worked on integrated watershed lake management projects?
        6.  Have they ever developed ordinances, zoning recommendations, or other institu-
           tional approaches for protecting lakes?
        7.  Do they have experience with both structural and nonstructural management
           techniques and procedures?
        8.  Have they prepared environmental assessments or impact statements?

      B. Expertise
        1.  Do they have interdisciplinary capabilities (i.e., engineers, limnologists, chemists,
           biologists)?
        2.  Are they familiar with the EPA and State regulations for Clean Lakes studies'?
        3.  What is the educational background of the project team?

      C. Past Performance
        1.  Have they worked as a prime contractor before or primarily as a subcontractor?
        2.  Have they ever had cost overruns? If so, how  much and why?
        3.  Have previous projects been completed on time?

      D. Company Capabilities
        1.  Do they do everything in-house or do they use subcontractors?
        2.  Do they perform the  chemical analyses themselves or in a contract laboratory?
        3.  Do they have the capability to collect and evaluate water quality and biological data?
        4.  Do they have a quality assurance/quality control (QA/QC) program?
        5.  Do they have experience in the following areas?
          a. Analyzing physical, chemical, and biological factors
          b.  Performing nonpoint source studies, including setting up automated monitoring
            stations and stream gaging stations
          c. Analyzing the trophic condition  of the lake
          d. Analyzing wet and dry weather data to calculate a reliable annual nutrient and
            sediment loading  budget
          e. Evaluating best management practices and  in-lake restoration techniques
          f. Analyzing institutional approaches for implementation of proposed management
            and in-lake restoration activities
          g. Assisting in public participation activities
          h. Understanding and working with the EPA Clean Lakes Program
    through an understanding  and  identification of  the underlying  causes  of
    problems.
       Problem diagnosis is a process that provides greater quantitative resolution
    on the sources or causes of the lake problems with each step. Once the causes
    of the lake problems are  clearly defined,  then several alternative watershed
    management practices (Chapter 5) and lake restoration techniques (Chapter 6)
    can be evaluated to reduce or solve these problems.
       At this stage,  the lake problems have been identified by the lake users, and
    potential causes generally are known. Algal scums, for example, result from
    excess nutrients, typically phosphorus, in the lake. Weeds grow in areas that are
    shallow  and  may  be filling  in with  nutrient-rich sediments. Taste and odor
    problems can result from algal scums or the decay of organic matter in the lake.
    Problem diagnosis identifies which of the potential causes are contributing to the
    problems and determines their relative importance.
       Diagnosis is generally a two-step process:  collating and evaluating existing
    data; and collecting and analyzing additional data. The first step, using existing
    data, might be sufficient in some instances to provide sufficient problem resolu-
3-8

-------
tion for alternative control strategies to be evaluated. Generally, additional data
are required, but this first step, at a minimum, identifies major data gaps and
provides for the design and implementation of a more cost-effective and efficient
data collection program.
Preliminary Analyses
Preliminary analyses include obtaining any existing information available on
both the watershed and the lake and making a few basic back-of-the-envelope
or desk-top calculations. Typically, a considerable amount of information will be
available on  the watershed  and lake.  Watershed districts, sanitary districts,
county extension offices, county soil and water conservation districts, and city,
county and regional  planning agencies usually have maps, land use data, or
aerial photographs on the watershed and lake. Water quality data might be avail-
able on the inflowing streams or the lake itself. Fishing maps might be available
for the lake that show the surface area, depth contours, location of inflowing
streams, coves and embayments and other features of the lake that can be im-
portant in diagnosis.  Recent aerial photographs taken during mid- to late sum-
mer can show the extent of weed beds in the lake.
   Watershed land use and  topographic maps can be used to determine the
location and acreage of various types of crops in the watershed, the soil types in
the watershed including their potential for erosion, the location of feedlots and
barnyards, residential or housing developments,  forested and open land, and
any conservancy districts. The location of wastewater treatment, industrial dis-
charges, and storm sewers can be obtained from the sanitary district, city health
department, or State natural resource or pollution control agency. In addition,
discharge data, organic matter (for example, BOD), and nutrient concentrations
in the wastewater discharge  usually can be obtained from the wastewater treat-
ment plants  Discharge Monitoring Records (DMR's)  required by the U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency.
   Estimates of annual  runoff of water from the watershed or the  amount of
stream inflow to the lake might be available from the city or county planning
agencies, U.S. Geological Survey, or Soil Conservation Service. The location of
groundwater wells in the watershed also might be available from these agencies,
the health department or pollution control agencies. Groundwater wells can indi-
cate the direction of flow and loading to seepage lakes (Fig. 3-2).
   Existing monitoring data  for temperature, dissolved  oxygen, nutrients, and
algae (chlorophyll) in the inflowing stream or lake are invaluable in this phase of
problem diagnosis. Unfortunately,  in many instances monitoring data are not
available for even Secchi depth determinations, which are quick and easy to do.
 If monitoring data are available, the progressive deterioration of  lake water
quality or onset of a lake problem might be traced  back to some change in
watershed land use or lake usage that has occurred.
    Existing data should be evaluated for clues on why problems are occurring in
the lake. This diagnosis is enhanced by performing some basic back-of-the-en-
velope analyses. The analyses involve the construction of a simple lake budget
that accounts for the input and output of organic matter,  sediment, and nutrients
to and from  the lake. The budget  is used similar to a household budget. In  a
 household budget, it is important to balance income versus savings and expen-
 ses. The lake budget, for example, attempts to account for the sources and total
 load of phosphorus entering the lake (income), the amount retained in the lake
that  might stimulate algae or macrophyte growth (savings), and the amount
 leaving the lake (expenses). The total phosphorus load, as described in greater
 detail in Chapter 4, is an important diagnostic tool in determining the potential
 cause of several lake problems.
Ground water: Waterfound
beneath the  soil  surface
and saturating the stratum
at which it is located; often
connected to lakes.

Secchi depth: A measure
of transparency of water ob-
tained by lowering a black
and white, or all white, disk
(Secchi disk, 20 cm in diam-
eter) into water until it is no
longer visible. Measured in
units of meters or feet.
                                                                            3-9

-------
           Water
           Table
 Septic
System
                                  Ground-Water Observation
                                             Wells
38-mm PVC pipe or 	 | | 5~
32-mm galvanized pipe \T~T I

Disturbed aquifer -^_^
x1


Well screen — 	
Well point -~_____^^


S


=
u
0 1 to 1 3 m
^
&
24
\




to 31 7 m

046 to
091 m
     Figure 3-2.-Groundwater observation wells.
       The potential sources of nutrients,  sediments,  and organic matter from
    agricultural land uses, wastewater treatment plants, urban areas, and forests can
    be identified. These types of land uses and levels of wastewater treatment have
    been investigated and some general nutrient and sediment export coefficients
    associated with various land  uses have been published. These land use coeffi-
    cients can be used with the annual runoff coefficients and wastewater discharge
    estimates to estimate the total load of material to the lake. The relative contribu-
    tion of the various land use activities or wastewater treatment plants to the total
    lake load also can be  determined. A rough estimate of the amount of material
    retained in the lake versus flowing out of the lake can be estimated based on the
    hydraulic residence time (see Chapters 2 and 4). Quantities of materials such as
    phosphorus or BOD associated with various levels  of severity of problems in
    other similar lakes can be compared with the quantity estimated for the lake
    under study.
       The preliminary lake budget  can  indicate those land use activities, including
    wastewater treatment,  that appear to be contributing the greatest proportions of
    organic matter, sediment and nutrients to the lake and, therefore, warrant con-
    sideration for watershed management practices (see Chapter 5). The budget
    also might indicate that  loading from the watershed doesn't appear sufficient
    to produce the magnitude or severity of the problems experienced in the lake.
3-10

-------
Perhaps other factors such as internal processing of material in the lake or an
unmeasured and unestimated component of the budget such as septic tank
drainage or groundwater  is  contributing material  to the lake problems. The
budget approach provides limited information on internal lake processes al-
though it does provide insight into which processes might be important based
on external  loads. High sediment loads indicate potential problems with lake fill-
ing while high nutrient loads indicate algae or weed production is a potential
problem.
   To refine the diagnosis  and better define the cause of the problem now re-
quires the collection and analysis of additional data. This data collection effort,
however, should be guided by the results of the preliminary analysis. If agricul-
tural runoff appears to be a major contributor to the nutrient and sediment load,
for example, then data collection efforts should focus on better estimates of
loading from the various agricultural locations in the watershed to determine
which locations  are  contributing the greatest portion  of  the  load  to the
lake. Wastewater discharges to  a lake are usually an  important source  of
nutrients and organic matter. The relative contribution of wastewater treatment
plant effluent, storm water sewers or septic tank seepage to the lake can be
determined by collecting samples to characterize these inputs.


Data Collection and Analysis

With the preliminary analysis as  a guide, a data  collection program can be
designed for problem definition. A typical data set for problem diagnosis will in-
clude measurements on
   1. Water budget: surface and groundwater inputs and changes in lake level
   2. Physical parameters: sedimentation rate, temperature, and transparency
   3. Chemical parameters: dissolved oxygen and plant nutrients
   4. Biological parameters: algae, macrophytes, fish survey
   5. Other parameters as required, such as alkalinity, pH, and conductivity
   6. Use of trophic state indices
Water  Budget


Surface Water and Lake Level
Determining water flow into and out of the lake, as well as recording changes in
lake level, are essential for determining the annual nutrient, organic matter, and
sediment loads to the lake and establishing the carrying capacity of the lake, the
amount a lake or reservoir can assimilate each year without exhibiting problems.
   The first step is to establish a lake-level  gaging station. This usually consists
of placing a staff gage  in the  lake and  making regular readings.  Readings
are most accurate when the water is calm. An alternative method is placing a
stilling well that dampers  out the effect of waves and continually records water
level (Fig. 3-3).
   Stream gaging stations are required on major tributaries as close to where
they enter the lake as possible and at the outlet of the lake. Gaging all of the
tributaries to a lake, however, is not usually required. The water yields from
monitored subbasins within the watershed can  be substituted for similar un-
monitored basins. If obvious sources of pollution are recognized near a tributary
                                                                      3-11

-------
        Typical  1960 cost $5000 per installation.
                                         From U.S. Geological Survey

    Figure 3-3.-Conventional stilling well installation for water stage recorder.


    stream, then it is prudent to place another gaging station in the vicinity of the pol-
    lution site.
    Groundwater Measurements

    The importance of groundwater nutrient contributions to a lake depends on the
    size of the surface watershed contributing to the lake. For example, if the surface
    watershed of a 1,000-acre lake is 50,000 acres, the water and nutrient incomes
    for that lake are probably dominated by surface inputs, and the groundwater
    contribution might  be of little consequence.  However, if the watershed area
    around  a 100-acre lake is only 300 acres, then the groundwater contribution
    might become more important.
      When managing groundwater-dominated seepage lakes such as those found
    in Florida, Minnesota, Michigan, the New England States, New York, and Wis-
    consin,  the groundwater component of a nutrient budget becomes essential.
      Defining the groundwater contribution to a lake is not as precise as for surface
    waters.  The same general principal, however,  holds true: Water flows downhill.
    The actual definition of the groundwater component is determined by measuring
    the elevation of the groundwater table relative to the elevation of the lake sur-
    face. Where the groundwater table is higher than the lake, the water is moving
    toward  the lake. If  the groundwater table is lower than the lake, then the lake
    water is moving out of the lake into the groundwater.
      To define the groundwater basin about a lake, wells must be placed about the
    surrounding land, and the water level in each well must be measured in relation
    to the lake level  (Figure 3-4).
3-12

-------
                                               3a,b
                                             '3c
o2b
                                   Alga  Lake
Figure 3-4.-Groundwater observation well locations on Greater Bass Lake are indi-
cated by a number followed by a letter, a, b or c. In this case, the groundwater table was
always lower than the lake level and any influence of the groundwater system, including
on-site waste disposal systems, upon the lake chemistry would be considered insignifi-
                                                                                 3-13

-------
      The knowledge of the groundwater flow direction can assist  in making
    decisions about sewering a lake. For example, if the groundwater flow is away
    from the lake on the east shore and toward the lake on the west shore, then
    serious considerations should be given as to sewering the east shore for the pur-
    pose of reducing nutrients entering the lake via onsite waste disposal systems.
    Water Quality  Monitoring


    Sampling  Sites

    Sampling locations and depths influence the conclusions drawn from the data
    collected in the lake so it is important that these stations accurately represent
    conditions in the lake.
      The sampling locations and depths for  physical,  chemical, and biological
    analyses are associated directly with the properties of the lake. In lakes that are
    almost round, a single station located over the deepest point may be adequate.
    In lakes with branched, finger-like shorelines, multiple embayments or long nar-
    row lakes and reservoirs where significant gradients in water quality might exist,
    more stations will be needed (Fig. 3-5).
             Long, large lakes
                                                              Inlet
    Outlet
             Lakes with distinct lobes or isolated bays


                                             Inlet
    Outlet
   Figure 3-5.-Typical sampling locations for lakes with simple and complex shapes.

3-14

-------
  In shallow lakes that mix continuously throughout the summer, fewer stations
will be needed, and samples taken at the surface, middepth and bottom would
be adequate. An integrated sample from the surface to just above the sediment
might be better.
  In deep, stratified lakes, samples  should be collected at least near the sur-
face, in the metalimnion (see Chapter 2), near the middle of the hypolimnion
(see Chapter 2) and near the bottom. One location should be at the deepest part
of the lake with  other stations located in the shallower areas  and  prominent
bays. For reservoirs,  stations should be located at the river inflow,  below the
plunge point,  perhaps near mid-reservoir, and at the deepest  point near the
dam.
Physical  Parameters


Sedimentation Rate Estimates
There are  two generally accepted methods for the determination of recent
sedimentation rates in lakes and reservoirs. One method involves the determina-
tion of the radioisotopes Cesium-137 or Lead-210 in the sediments. Although
this method provides accurate estimates of sedimentation  rates, it is relatively
expensive.
  The second method, which is far less sensitive but also much less expensive,
is to compare the current  bottom contours (the depth to the bottom) with a
similar map made several years before. The water level for these two  surveys
must be the same or the depth to the bottom  must be corrected if not at the
same water level. For lakes and reservoirs receiving large sediment loads, this
method is satisfactory.
  The usefulness of these methods depends on the objective of the study. One
use of sediment  dating is  in proposed dredging projects. Before any major
dredging is undertaken, the rate of sedimentation should be determined. It is of
little value to dredge a reservoir that is filling in at a rate of 2 inches or more a
year if watershed  controls for erosion are nof implemented. In general, lakes fill
in at a slower rate than reservoirs with rates for lakes ranging from 0.10-0.50 inch
per year.
Temperature
Temperature patterns or thermal stratification (see Chapter 2) influence the fun-
damental processes occurring in a lake such as dissolved oxygen depletion,
nutrient release, and algal growth. Temperature measurements are useful, for
example, in deciding whether a shallow lake mixes periodically throughout the
summer.  If a shallow lake is suspected of thermally stratifying for brief periods
and then mixing, frequent (i.e., weekly) measurements should be taken during
the summer. Deeper lakes that remain stratified throughout the summer months
may not require a high frequency of sampling for temperature to understand the
general temperature patterns occurring in the lake.
   An example of thermal stratification and mixing periods is shown in Figure 3-6
for Pickerel Lake over a 2-year period. This figure represents the type of informa-
tion a professional consultant will collect and analyze as part of a lake restora-
tion program. The algal problems associated with this shallow lake (40 acres,
17-foot maximum depth) are directly related to the timing of the summer mixing
                                                                     3-15

-------
                                                          Mix
         2
         4
    4±   6
    £   8
     g-  10
    Q  12
        14
        16
             1971
            N    D
                       1972
J|F|M|A|M|J|J|A|S  I  0  i N I  D
                                   1973
            J|F|M|A|M|J|J|A|S|0|N
         2
         4
    *i   6

    K   8
    g-  10
    Q  12
        14
        16
    Figure 3-6.-Thermal stratification and mixing in Pickerel Lake. Lines represent the depth to
    which the temperature (indicated in the circle) prevails. Temperatures are in °F.

    period. When the lake mixed in mid-September, clumps of blue-green algae that
    were on the lake bottom were suspended  into the entire lake. Cold weather
    prevented any prolonged algal bloom. However, the following year Pickerel  Lake
    mixed  in early  August,  again distributing  blue-green algae  off the bottom
    throughout the entire lake. During August and September, a massive blue green
    algal bloom  occurred as the warm weather created  favorable environmental
    conditions for algal growth.
    Transparency
    Secchi depth is probably the most frequently used parameter in limnology. The
    Secchi disk is a 20 cm plastic or metal disk that is either entirely painted white or
    divided into alternating painted black and white quadrants. The disk is lowered
    into the water, and the observer measures the depth at which it can no longer be
    seen. This depth  is recorded and is referred to as the Secchi transparency, or
    Secchi depth, of the lake (see Fig. 3-7).
      The assumption is that the greater the Secchi depth, the better the water
    quality of the  lake. The transparency  is based  on the transmission of light
    through water and is related, in part, to the natural light attenuation of the water
    being measured,  the amount of inorganic suspended solids, and the amount of
    organic suspended solids (algae cells). The relationship between  the  Secchi
    transparency and the amount of algal biomass as expressed in chlorophyll-a has
    been developed  for a  large number of lakes. Each ecoregion of the country
    should develop this relationship independent of the others because  turbid
    waters might be  normal in some regions but unusual in others.  For  Northern
3-16

-------
   Secchi depth is midway-
r
                                      Disk raised slowly to point
                                      where it reappears
                                     .Disk lowered slowly until it
                                      disappears from view
Figure 3-7.-The Secchi disk is a simple and extremely useful tool for tracking long-term
trends in lake water quality.

lakes, a Secchi depth of greater than 30 feet is considered oligotrophic while the
eutrophic lakes may only have a reading of 3 to 4 feet or less during summer
algal blooms.
Chemical  Parameters


Dissolved  Oxygen

These determinations are extremely useful because dissolved oxygen can act as
an integrator of the health of the lake.
   In shallow lakes that mix periodically during the summer, dissolved oxygen
measurements should be made at the same time temperature determinations
are being made. Periods of no mixing when dissolved oxygen in the bottom
goes to zero followed by periods of mixing can result in the release of phos-
phorus from the bottom during anoxia and eventual redistribution throughout
the lake. This can promote the development of algal blooms.
   The deeper lakes that remain stratified during the summer months may not
require a high frequency of sampling for dissolved oxygen and temperature in
order to  understand their water quality patterns. There  is, however, a critical
period during the spring just as a eutrophic lake is beginning to stratify. At this
point, weekly measurement of dissolved oxygen at 1- or 2-ft  intervals is sug-
gested until the dissolved oxygen concentration  approaches zero in the
                                                                  3-17

-------
    hypolimnion. The rate of dissolved oxygen depletion can then be calculated.
    This rate can be useful in designing aeration systems if this is a chosen manage-
    ment option. The rate of dissolved oxygen depletion is also another indicator of
    the severity of the lake trophic condition. Generally, the more rapid the depletion
    rate, the more eutrophic the lake.
       Low dissolved oxygen may be the cause of both summer and winter fishkills.
    During summer months, the dissolved oxygen in shallow eutrophic lakes may be
    depleted following a rapid algal die-off. Severe dissolved oxygen depletions can
    occur from natural causes,  but they can also result from unwise management;
    for instance, treating an algal bloom in the entire lake with herbicides can drasti-
    cally reduce the dissolved oxygen and cause a fishkill. Also, for lakes that freeze
    at the surface during the winter months, dissolved oxygen can  be reduced by
    the end of winter to conditions that cause a fishkill.
    Nutrients

    The nutrients to be sampled in a lake study are generally those that are critical to
    plant growth, principally phosphorus and nitrogen. Phosphorus is often the key
    nutrient in determining the quantity of algae in the lake. Chapter 2 explained the
    role of  plant nutrients  and their relative  availability in lake systems. Certain
    species of algae can fix atmospheric nitrogen and add to a lake's nitrogen pool if
    nitrogen is in short supply.  For eutrophication studies, total phosphorus is the
    single  most important nutrient to  determine  in the incoming and  outgoing
    streams. Many lake management decisions will be made based on the total
    phosphorus income to a  lake. The modeling efforts (see  Chapter 4) to predict
    water quality changes as a result of an implementation project are based on the
    total phosphorus loadings. Other chemical analyses that are important are total
    soluble phosphorus, soluble reactive phosphorus, total Kjeldahl nitrogen, nitrate
    nitrogen, ammonium nitrogen, and total  and dissolved  solids.  Occasionally,
    measurements of chloride or potassium are useful indicators of agricultural or
    urban source problems.
        The total nitrogen to total phosphorus ratio (N:P) in the lake water can help
    determine what algae might  prevail in the  lake (e.g.,  N:P 10).  For example,
    nitrogen-fixing blue-green algae might be favored during periods of low nitrogen
    content in the lake. Since phosphorus is not a volatile chemical, its sources are
    rather limited.  Because of this, controlling phosphorus is usually the only practi-
    cal solution to the problems of algal growth in a lake.
       Of specific interest is  the  nutrient load during normal streamflow and the
    nutrient income during storm events. A single, large storm event may produce a
    nutrient income equal to several months of income during normal flow. To obtain
    nutrient samples during storm events, automatic sampling devices that are ac-
    tivated  by rising water levels can be installed  in the streams. The automatic
    samplers are made for convenience, since the physical presence of a person to
    obtain samples throughout a storm event is often not probable, especially when
    the storm starts at 3 a.m. on Sunday morning.
       The final component of the stream work is the coupling of the nutrient con-
    centrations in the stream water to the streamflow to develop an annual nutrient
    income to the lake. Once the annual nutrient and water income for the monitored
    subbasins within the watershed have been calculated, they can be extrapolated
    to the unmonitored subbasins. In the final  analysis, the incomes from all of the
    subbasins are added together to produce the total surface watershed income to
    the lake.
3-18

-------
 Biological  Parameters
 Biological indicators of eutrophication can be a variety of different organisms,
 but  the  most  frequently monitored indicators  are algae and macrophytes
 (weeds). An overabundance of either usually brings numerous complaints from
 lake users.
 Algal Biomass
 Biomass determinations are  probably the  most  useful measurement  of the
 amount of algae, followed by actual identification  of species. The biomass
 measurement most frequently used is chlorophyll-a. In most studies,  an in-
 tegrated water sample is collected from the upper portion of the lake (the photic,
 or lighted, zone) either by taking water samples from several depths and mixing
 them together,  or by using a tube that extends through the photic zone. Peak
 chlorophyll-a concentrations  in an  oligotrophic lake may range from 1.5 to
 10.5 jig/L, while peak concentrations in a eutrophic lake may range from 10 to
 275 p,g/L The average summer chlorophyll concentrations are good indicators
 of the severity of the algal problems in a lake.
   Algal identification also can be  useful in conjunction  with the biomass
 measurements. A determination of the major types of algae that compose the
 biomass may help to understand the lake problems. Blue-green algae are the
 most frequent cause of aesthetic problems; they can float  at the surface and
 leave a paint-like film on the shores and cause taste and odor problems.
   The chlorophyll-a concentrations and the relation to the major algal types
 during the growing season are illustrated for eutrophic North Twin Lake in Figure
 3-8.  The period of greatest  algal problems can be noted  by the higher
 chlorophyll-a concentrations from the end of July through September. The exact
 kinds of algae  that  contribute to the higher biomass is displayed in the kite
 diagrams of algal succession. Anabaena, a blue-green alga that often  forms
 noxious scum at the surface of the lake,  is present during the August bloom.
 Lyngbya, another troublesome blue-green alga, was dominant during Septem-
 ber. The chlorophyll-a concentrations detailed the severity of the algal problem
 and the algal identification allowed for the recognition of the algal species that
 dominated during the problem period.
Chlorophyll-a: A type of
chlorophyll present in all
types of algae, sometimes
in direct proportion to the
biomass of algae.
 Macrophyte  Biomass  and

 Locations
Aquatic macrophyte communities range from completely submerged stands of
large algae (for example, Chara, Cladophora) to stands of rooted plants with
floating leaves (waterlily). Macrophyte densities vary seasonally, between lakes
in an area, and among regions. In a northern Wisconsin lake, the average weight
of  macrophytes might be several hundred pounds per acre while in Florida
several tons per acre are common. Densities also vary within a lake. Eutrophic
lakes can have very high quantities of plants as can lakes located in regions with
long growing seasons, warm waters, or other favorable conditions.
   Macrophytes are usually surveyed once or twice during the growing season.
Several tasks are normally accomplished during a macrophyte survey. The first
is mapping the location and extent of the major community types: emergents,
                                                                   3-19

-------
Hydrographic map: A map
showing the location of ar-
eas or objects within a lake.
                                            Q.
                                            O
                                           o
40
30
20
10



1
ah ll










|
                                                    M
                                           A    S    0
                                  4000
                                  cells/ml
                                 2000
                                 cells/ml
                                 200        r
                                 colonies/ml [_
                                                                           (BG) =
                                                                           BLUE-GREEN ALGAE
                                                           Anabaena
                                                              (BG)
                                                                                    Oscillatoria
                                                                                       (BG)
                                                                                     Lyngbya
                                                                                       (BG)
                                                           Fragilaria
                                                          (DIATOM)
                                                           Melosira
                                                          (DIATOM)
                                                          Microcystis
                                                             (BG)
                                                   M
                                          A     S  '  0
 Figure 3-8.-The chlorophyll-a concentrations and the major algal types during the growing
 season for the eutrophic North Twin Lake. The period of greatest algal problems can be
 noted by the higher chlorophyll-a concentrations, end of July through September. The exact
 kinds of algae that contribute to the higher biomass is displayed in the kite diagrams of algal
 succession.

floating leaves, and submergent plants (see Biology of Macrophytes in Chapter
6). The abundance could be described as follows: A = abundant, B  = common,
S  = sparse. This information should be  sketched on a  hydrographic map to
show distribution of the major communities. Figure 3-9 is an example from Pike
Lake that shows the distribution patterns of the  major macrophyte communities
during August.  Then,  plant density, species identification frequency, and depth
of growth should be determined.
                     3-20

-------
    Pike Lake

   August 14, 1980
                                       Ceratophyllum

                                       Utnculana — Potamogeton

                                       Potamogeton — Mynophyllum — Utnculana

                                       Ceratophyllum — Mynophyllum

                                       Ceratophyllum — Potamogeton — Mynophyllum

                                       Ceratophyllum — Potamogeton — Vallisnena
Figure 3-9.-Pike Lake distribution patterns of the major macrophyte communities during
August. Depth contours are given in meters.


   The assembled information on macrophytes is useful in deciding where to
concentrate macrophyte control efforts, such as harvesting or dredging, and for
predicting the depth to which plants might grow if the water clarity were im-
proved (see Chapter 6).
 Use  of Trophic State  Indices
 A variety of indices are available to rate measured in-lake variables on a scale so
 that the severity of lake problems can be compared to other lakes in the area.
 This provides a quantitative means of assessing lake  changes after protection
 and restoration practices have been  implemented (Carlson, 1977; Kratzer and
 Brezonik, 1981; Walker, 1984). These lake indices, often referred to as "trophic
 state indices," attempt to simplify complicated environmental measurements. As
 Reckhow (1979) has pointed out, an index is a summary statistic that is used be-
 cause its convenience outweighs the disadvantage of information lost in sum-
 marization.
   The basis for the trophic state index concept is that, in many lakes, the de-
 gree of eutrophication is believed to be related largely to increased nutrient con-
 centrations in the lake. Often phosphorus is the nutrient of concern. An increase
 in lake  phosphorus  concentration is expected to cause an  increase in the
 amount of lake algae (see Chapter 2 to review this concept) as measured by
 chlorophyll-a. Simultaneously  there would be  an associated decrease in water
 transparency as measured by a Secchi disk.
   The Carlson (1977) Trophic State  Index (TSI), is the most widely used (see
 Chapter 4). It was developed to compare determinations of chlorophyll-a, Sec-
 chi transparency, and total phosphorus concentration.  Higher index numbers in-
 dicate a degree of eutrophy while low numbers indicate a degree of oligotrophy
 (low nutrient and algal concentrations and  high transparency). The index was
 scaled so that a TSI  = 0 represents a Secchi disk transparency of 64 meters.
 Each halving of transparency represents an increase of 10 TSI units. A TSI of 50,
 thus, represents a transparency of 2  meters, the approximate demarcation be-
                                                                        3-21

-------
     tween oligotrophic and eutrophic lakes. Suppose that a lake had a transparency
     index of 60 prior to implementation of lake  restoration.  If two years later, the
     index is 40, this would be a quantitative estimate of the degree of improvement.
     A TSI of 40 might be common to undeveloped lakes in the area; this might indi-
     cate that the lake has improved about as far as it can. Significant upward move-
     ment of the index in later years would indicate a return of the lake to its previous
     condition. The index, therefore, is a useful tool for assessing the lake's current
     condition and for monitoring change over time.
       The Carlson TSI works well in north temperate lakes that are phosphorus
     limited but poorly in lakes that are turbid from erosion or in lakes with extensive
     weed problems. Figure 3-10 is an example of TSI plots for a north temperate lake
     of relatively poor water quality; Figure 3-11 illustrates a more complex situation
     when it is necessary to determine why parameters do not agree as expected. By
     scanning the TSI plots, the lake manager can begin to understand the patterns in
     a particular  lake and appreciate the seasonal variations that occur without
     having to  analyze phytoplankton and  phosphorus  concentrations and  place
     trophic interpretations on them.
         100
          90
     (75   70
     I   60
     _c
     8   50
     £  40
      Q.
      O
     £  30

         20

         10

          0
Secchi depth
Chlorophyll-a
Total phosphorus
                                                      Mesotrophic
                                               a
                                               o
                                               •»-»
                                               LU
                                               O

                                               a.
                                               o
                                               ^
                                               4-<
                                               O
                                               05
                M
               A

             1979
0
                                                                   N
     Figure 3-10.-A TSI plot for a north temperate lake that is considered of poor water quality.
3-22
       The TSI values calculated for chlorophyll-a, for example, may not be similar to
    simultaneous calculations of TSI from Secchi disk or total phosphorus measure-
    ments. Understanding this particular situation requires the consultant to examine
    the data base  in greater detail. In this case, an explanation might  be the
    presence of suspended materials that reduce  light attenuation and therefore
    algal productivity. An abundant population of large zooplankton might be active-
    ly feeding upon the algae and reducing their biomass. In such cases, the TSI

-------
x
CD
T3
C
to
ffi
O

Q.
O
80


70


60


50


40


30


20


10
                 ..-^.
            D TSI (Total - P)
            O TSI (Secchi Disk)
            A TSI (Chlorophyll-a)
           I
I
                           I
                                             .O

                                             Q.
                                             O
                                             +-*
                                             O
                                             D)
                 M
             J      A
            Months
                                               0
 Figure 3-11.-A TSI plot that adds more complexity to the interpretation. The TSI(chl-a) plot
 does not agree with either the TSI(SD) or the TSI(TP) plots. Understanding this particular
 situation requires the lake manager to examine the data base in much greater detail.

plots would be valuable because they allow the professional to assess the situa-
tion, and the possible need for additional information, in  order  to make
decisions.
   Other indices have been developed that are more appropriate for the various
major lake ecoregions in the country. Walker (1984) has developed such an
index for reservoirs, and Brezonik (1984)  has developed an index that more
specifically fits the needs of Florida lakes and includes situations where nitrogen
rather than phosphorus may be limiting algal growth. Porcella et al. (1979) have
included a term in their Lake Evaluation Index that represents the amount of lake
surface covered by macrophytes.
 Problem  Definition

 Putting the Pieces  of the Puzzle
 Together
 Identifying lake problems is not that difficult; identifying the source of a particular
 problem takes a little more effort. The in-lake and watershed measurements
 necessary to identify the severity of a problem and track down the sources that
 cause various problems have been discussed. The final step is to use the infor-
                                                                    3-23

-------
     mation to make lake management decisions. The best way to illustrate the im-
     portance of measuring the severity of the lake problem and identifying the sour-
     ces is to present an example.
     Mirror Lake

     Mirror Lake is a small urban lake located within the city limits of Waupaca, Wis-
     consin. The lake has a surface area of 12.5 acres and a maximum depth of 43
     feet. The lake had experienced repeated blue-green algal blooms and winter
     fishkills. The city had an interest in restoring the lake.
       A diagnostic study was designed to determine the annual incomes of water
     and total phosphorus and to examine the water quality condition of the lake. Mir-
     ror Lake is a seepage lake without permanent inflowing streams from the water-
     shed. If this had been a drainage lake, then considerable attention would have
     been paid to land uses, and to streamflows, in order to identify those areas of the
     watershed most responsible for the silt and nutrient loads causing the problem.
       Water and  nutrient incomes were studied during  1972  and  1973. Table 3-4
     lists the results. Storm sewers from the City contributed more than 50 percent of
     the phosphorus income to Mirror Lake and were the obvious targets for lake
     protection efforts. The study demonstrated that the  greatest periods of phos-
     phorus income were spring showers and during intense late summer rainfalls.
      Table 3-4.—Annual phosphorus budget for Mirror Lake, 1972 and 1973
      SOURCES                        ^>                   ~
                                     1972
                                      %
      Storm Sewers
      Diffuse
      Ground Water
      Atmospheric
                                                           50
                                                           16
                                                           21
                                                           14
                                                          101
 57
 21
 18
  4
100
Internal nutrient cycling:
Transformation of nutrients
such as nitrogen or phos-
phorus from biological to in-
organic forms through  de-
composition,    occurring
within the lake itself.
3-24
       Total phosphorus concentration in the lake averaged 90 ^g phosphorus/liter,
     a very high value. The Carlson Trophic State (TSI) index number for this total
     phosphorus concentrations was 69, a value expected for an extremely eutrophic
     lake. Measurements of phosphorus throughout the water column revealed ex-
     tremely high phosphorus concentrations in the hypolimnion, particularly near
     the sediments. Experiments were then conducted to determine whether this
     phosphorus came from the sediments. The results revealed a very high release
     rate or internal phosphorus loading from the sediments.
       The algae in the  lake during the summer were unlike those found in many
     other eutrophic lakes. The spring and fall months were characterized by massive
     blooms of a blue-green  algae called Oscillatoria agardhii, but the summer
     season saw this species confined to the metalimnion (see Chapter 2), while the
     upper waters were dominated by green algae.
       It became obvious that the year-to-year increase in the quantity of algae of
     Mirror Lake was a response to stormwater inputs. A sediment core was taken,
     dated with the Lead-210 techniques, and analyzed for the presence of particular
     types of chlorophyll  pigments common in Oscillatoria. The first bloom of algae,
     as recorded by pigments  in the sediments, occurred in the early 1940's, just a
     few years after storm drainage was diverted to the lake.
      The diagnostic  study demonstrated very low dissolved oxygen in Mirror Lake
     during the winter  (Fig. 3-9). This problem was the cause of winter fishkills. An
    analysis of the data revealed that this problem was due to  poor lake mixing
    during fall months (see Chapter 2, for a discussion of expected thermal histories

-------
 of lakes) before ice developed. This meant that the lake had very low dissolved
 oxygen in it when the ice formed on the lake surface and eliminated oxygen ex-
 change with the atmosphere.
    The data from the diagnostic study were used to determine appropriate lake
 protection and restoration strategies. In 1976, storm sewer diversion reduced
 the phosphorus income to the lake by 50-60 percent. This step was taken after
 an historical analysis of lake sediments showed a relationship between the onset
 of algal blooms and the beginning of stormwater discharge to the lake. There
 was every expectation among  lake users  that the lake would immediately im-
 prove. As shown in  Figure 3-11, total phosphorus concentration in the lake in
 1977 and part of  1978 was very similar to the prediversion average of 90 n,g
 phosphorus per liter. This result demonstrated that storm sewer diversion was a
 necessary step to lake protection, but an insufficient one for lake restoration.
 The high internal phosphorus release was recycling phosphorus stored in the
 sediments from the 35 years of storm drainage. These phosphorus-rich waters
 were probably transported from the bottom to the upper waters during summer
 storm mixing. This mixing helped to maintain high phosphorus levels  in the
 water column. This problem was identified because monitoring had continued
 after storm sewer diversions. This post-diversion monitoring was an  integral part
 of diagnosis and implementation (see Chapter 8).
   Aluminum sulfate was applied to Mirror Lake sediments in May, 1978 to "inac-
 tivate" this phosphorus release (see Chapter 6 for a more detailed discussion of
 this procedure). As shown in Figure 3-12, total phosphorus fell to about 20  ^g
 phosphorus per liter, and has remained at that low level for several years. This
 action  produced  a  total phosphorus TSI of about 47, a value found in lakes
 that are considered to be borderline eutrophic. A lake with this total phosphorus
 concentration would be expected to have fewer problems with algae and sharp-
 ly improved transparency. This is what happened. Osc/llatoria agardhii was not
 present by 1980.
   The problem with low dissolved oxygen under the ice was solved  by using an
 artificial circulation device (see Chapter 6) in the fall to thoroughly mix the lake.
 Figure 3-13 shows the success of the treatment. The threat of a winter fishkill
 was ended.
   This case history represents a real and highly successful use of the diagnosis-
 feasibility-implementation approach to lake protection and restoration. The city,
 and its consultants, looked for the causes of the problem. The continued  wast-
 ing of  money on temporarily effective treatments was replaced with  expendi-
 tures directed toward the long term solution of the problem. Had the obvious
 just been done (stormwater diversion  only), the lake would have taken years to
 flush out nutrients before it came to  a new average total phosphorus concentra-
 tion. Instead, the  consultants identified a second source of phosphorus and
 treated that as well. The lesson here  is that lake  management proceeds from
 step-by-step approaches that are based upon a knowledge of both the water-
 shed and the lake, and are directed  at the causes of the lake's problems. Effec-
tive lake management plans (see Chapters 7, 8, and 9) result from the integration
of watershed management practices (see Chapter 5) and in-lake restoration pro-
cedures (see Chapter 6).
                                                                         3-25

-------
  O.Mr-
                                                           Mirror Lake
                                                           Phosphorus
                                                Dissolved Reactive Phosphorus
 0.02
                                                        I    I    I    I    I    I    I    I    1   U«sJ
                                              I
 I    I    I    I    I    I    I
     10 12   2   4   6   8   10  12   2   4   6   3
                     1977                    1978
10  12   2   4   6   8   10  12  2   4   6   8
               1979                    1980
10  12  2  4
         1981
6   8   10
Figure 3-12.-Phosphorus concentrations in Mirror Lake water decreased dramatically following alum treatment.
                                                                                (O
                                                                                CM
                                                                                A

-------
                                   Mirror Lake
                            Dissolved oxygen  (mg/L)
              ice
                                    AMJ     JASON
                                    aeration
                                                                          aeration
            D    J     FMAMJ

                                           1978

                                    aeration
JASON
                                                                           aeration
            DJ     FMAMJ    JASON
Figure 3-13.-Oxygen concentrations in Mirror Lake before and atter aeration show that both
the duration and severity of anoxia decreased. Oxygen concentrations are indicated by the
numbers on the lines (isopleths). 0 indicates no oxygen.
                                                                                 3-27

-------
  APPENDIX 3-A
  Democratic  Procedures to

  Obtain  Consensus on  Priority

  Uses  for a Lake


  Nominal Group  Process

  The nominal group process is an alternative to the standard group meeting pro-
  cedure. In a typical group meeting, a decision is made through the following se-
  quence: a motion, discussion,  and a vote. This standard procedure is frustrating
  to most people because they feel intimidated about speaking up in a group set-
  ting or because discussion is monopolized by a few dominant personalities.
    The  nominal group process is especially effective at soliciting concerns or
  setting  priorities. It can also be used to solicit ideas for activities or projects.
  Thus, the nominal group process could be used to prioritize uses, enumerate
  and prioritize perceived problems, or prioritize projects for a lake organization.
    The  process has many variations. In its simplest form, each participant is first
  asked to write down a list of  issues. The moderator than asks each person to
  volunteer one issue from that  person's list. The moderator proceeds around the
  group  until all issues are transferred from individual written lists to sheets of
  paper hung in view of the group. During this time, there is no discussion or
  debate on the appropriateness of anyone's suggestion. Each participant decides
  whether his or her  issues are already listed on the  sheet. The moderator
  proceeds around the group until no one has any more issues to contribute.
     After all issues are listed, the group debates whether certain issues should be
  combined. The discussion on combining issues usually leads into a general dis-
  cussion of the issues. The discussion is led by the person who suggested the
   issue and is designed  to help others understand the issue more fully. The
   moderator must be forceful in keeping the discussion focused on understanding
   each issue and eliminating duplication if the "authors" of those issues agree. The
   discussion is not allowed to become a debate on the merits of the issue.
     Following  the discussion,  the  moderator allows each person  to select a
   limited number of issues to "save" by placing a mark or sticker next to those is-
   sues. (The physical act of getting up and placing marks provides a nice, refresh-
   ing break in the process.) The 3-10 issues with the largest number of votes are
   placed by the moderator into  a priority pool. Participants then rank those issues.
     The nominal group method is designed to allow equal participation by all
   members of the group. Dominant personalities are neutralized by the procedure.
   If a group exceeds 15 people, it is advisable to split the group into  smaller sub-
   groups and proceed until each subgroup has identified  its priority  pool. The
   priority pools are then combined and the entire group ranks the issues in the
   combined pool.
      In larger lakeshore communities, direct participation by all property owners
   and local lake users may not  be feasible. Under such circumstances a task force
   or advisory committee might serve to represent the community and report to a
   city council or county board. The nominal group process may still be a useful
   procedure for the task force or advisory committee itself to use.
3-28

-------
  In addition to identifying issues, the participants leave the process with a
much higher sense of ownership than they do after participating in a standard
meeting. After the nominal group experience, they identify with the priorities be-
cause they actively help to select them.
Delphi  Process
The Delphi technique is premised on incomplete knowledge an inherent bias by
any one expert (or citizen). Therefore a panel of experts is expected to produce
a more complete range of issues or solutions and a more balanced prioritization
than a single expert.
  This procedure is useful in setting research priorities, summarizing current
knowledge, and making  policy recommendations for public bodies. For in-
stance, it could be used to design a management plan for a new reservoir.
  The first stage of the process is a solicitation of the full range of issues, ideas,
and concerns associated with the topic. The experts at a meeting or through
correspondence simply provide a  "laundry list" of all items that might be ap-
propriate.
  In the second stage, the list developed in Phase I is provided to the same ex-
perts for a ranking  on some specified  criterion of importance.  The  results of
Phase II are communicated to the organization that initiated the effort. Additional
phases can be used to obtain greater specificity regarding the highest ranked
items.
  While this procedure is too complicated and expensive for most  lakeshore
communities,  it is often a good idea for lake organizations to get  a second
opinion on major recommendations they receive from a consultant or agency
employee.
Literature  Cited
Delbecq, Andre I., Andrew H. VanDeVer, and David H. Gustafson. 1975. Group
   Techniques for Program Planning: A Guide to Nominal Group and Delphi
   Processes. Scott, Foreman, and Co. Glenville, IL.
                                                                      3-29

-------
        CHAPTER 4
Predicting Lake Water
	          Quality

-------
CHAPTER  4




PREDICTING  LAKE  WATER

QUALITY	




Uses of Models
Mathematical models can  be useful both in diagnosing lake problems and in
evaluating alternative solutions. They represent the cause-effect relationships
that control lake water quality in quantitative terms. Model formulas are derived
from scientific theories and from observations of the processes and responses
in real lakes. There are two basic ways in which models can be employed in lake
studies:
  1. DIAGNOSTIC MODE: What is going on in the lake? Models provide a
frame of reference for interpreting lake and watershed monitoring data. They tell
the user what to expect to find in a lake with a given set of morphometric,
hydrologic, and watershed characteristics. These  expectations are not always
met, however. Differences  between measured and  predicted conditions contain
information on the unique features of the lake under study. They help clarify im-
portant cause and effect relationships.
  2. PREDICTIVE MODE: What will happen to the lake if we do this, that, or
the other thing? Models can be used to predict how lake water quality condi-
tions will change in response to changes in nutrient inputs or other controlling
factors. For practical reasons, it is usually infeasible to predict lake responses
based  on full-scale experimentation with the lake and its watershed. Instead,
mathematical models permit experiments to be performed on paper or on com-
puter.
  Examples of questions that might be addressed via lake modeling include

   • What did the lake look like before anyone arrived?

   • What level of nutrient loading can the lake tolerate before it develops
    algae problems?
Morphometry: Relating to
a lake's physical structure
(e.g.  depth,  shoreline
length).
                                                               4-1

-------
      • How will future watershed development plans affect the lake's water
        quality?
      • What are the most important sources of the lake's problems?
      • What reduction in nutrient loading is needed to eliminate nuisance algal
        blooms in the lake?
      • Once watershed or point-source controls are in place, how long will it
        take for lake water quality to improve?
      • Given monitoring data collected in the lake and its watershed during a
        given year, what is the expected range of water quality conditions over
        several years?
      • Given a water quality management goal (such as a target level of lake
        phosphorus, chlorophyll-a, or transparency) and an array of feasible
        control techniques, what is the probability that restoration efforts will be
        successful?
      • Are proposed lake management goals realistic?

      Models are not the only means of addressing these questions, and they do
   have limitations.  For example,  modeling is feasible only for  evaluating those
   types of problems that are understood well enough to be expressed in concise,
   quantitative terms. In some situations, modeling may be infeasible or unneces-
   sary. Why make a lake study more complicated than it has to be?
      Models are not monoliths. They are rather frail tools used by lake manage-
   ment consultants in developing their professional opinions and recommenda-
   tions. The consultant should decide which models (if any) are appropriate, what
   supporting data should be collected, how the models should  be implemented,
   and  how the model's results should be interpreted. Consider the following
   analogy:
           HOME ADDITION             LAKE STUDY
           Carpenter                     Consultant
           Tools                         Modeling Techniques
           Raw Materials                 Monitoring Data
      Different carpenters may prefer certain brands of tools to others. The selec-
    tion of appropriate tools to accomplish a given job is important, but not the only
    factor determining the success or failure of a  project. In  home building, the
    quality of the addition depends less upon which tools are used than upon how
    they are used. The owner hires the carpenter, not his or her tools. The same is
    true for hiring a lake management consultant. Obviously, the quantity and quality
    of raw materials are every bit as important as the tools used on the job. The raw
    materials required for applying a model to a lake are monitoring data and other
    baseline information developed under diagnostic studies (Chapter 3).
      For ease in explaining modeling concepts, English units are used in the ex-
    amples in this chapter. Lake modeling is far less awkward, however, when metric
    units are used.
4-2

-------
Eutrophication  Model

Framework
Phosphorus loading models are frequently used  to evaluate eutrophication
problems related to algae. These models link phosphorus loading to the average
total phosphorus concentration in the lake water and to other indicators of water
quality that are related to algal growth, such as chlorophyll and transparency
(Fig. 4-1). Lake responses to  phosphorus loading  depend upon physical and
hydrologic characteristics.  Therefore, these  models consider lake volume,
average depth, flushing rate, and other characteristics in predicting lake respon-
ses to a given phosphorus load.
   While the terms and equations involved may seem mystical, the underlying
concepts are simple:
   1. Lake algal growth is limited by the supply of phosphorus.
   2. Increasing or decreasing  the mass of phosphorus discharged into the lake
over an annual or seasonal time scale will increase or decrease the average con-
centrations of phosphorus and algae in the lake.
   3. A lake's capacity to handle phosphorus loadings without experiencing
nuisance algal blooms increases with volume, depth, and flushing rate.
   In other words, the lake's condition depends upon how much phosphorus it
receives from both internal and external sources. A large, deep lake with a high
flow will be able to handle a much greater phosphorus load without noticeable
deterioration,  compared with  a small, shallow, or stagnant lake. Models sum-
marize these relationships in mathematical terms, based upon observed water
quality responses of large numbers of lakes and reservoirs.
   Algal growth in these models is usually expressed in terms of mean, growing-
season chlorophyll in the epilimnion concentrations. As discussed in Chapter 3,
phosphorus, chlorophyll-a, and transparency help to define trophic state, a
vague concept used to characterize lake condition. Other variables related to
algal productivity, such as hypolimnetic  oxygen-depletion rate, seasonal maxi-
mum chlorophylls,  bloom frequency, or organic carbon, may also be con-
sidered in phosphorus loading models.
   These methods cannot yet  be used to predict aquatic weed densities, which
generally depend more upon lake depth, the quantity and quality of lake bottom
sediment, and light penetration than upon the loading of nutrients entering the
lake from its watershed.
   Eutrophication models rely heavily on the lake phosphorus budget, which is
simply an itemized accounting of the inputs and outputs of phosphorus to and
from the lake water column over a year or growing season. Although budgets
can be constructed for other pollutants that cause lake problems (nitrogen, silt,
organic matter, bacteria, or toxics, for example) phosphorus budgets are used
most frequently. A phosphorus budget provides a  means to evaluate and rank
phosphorus sources that may contribute to an algal problem. The basic concept
and mathematics are relatively simple,  although  the estimation  of individual
budget items often requires considerable time, monitoring data, and expertise.
   Basic  concepts involved in constructing phosphorus budgets and applying
eutrophication models are described and illustrated  in later sections  of this
chapter.  In some situations, particularly in reservoirs, algal growth may be con-
trolled by factors other than phosphorus, such as nitrogen, light, or flushing rate
(Walker,  1985). Models appropriate for these situations are more complex than
those discussed below, although the general concepts and approaches are
similar.
                                                                       4-3

-------
                                                  Eutrophication Model Concepts
Loading:
Modifying factors
Phosphorus loading
Morphometry
Hydrology
Other factors





Increase
concentration
(Limiting nutrient)

Promote algal growth
and increase
concentration
(Algal pigment)

Decrease water
	 *• Transparency
(Secchi depth)
   Factors modifying
   lake response
   to loading
                           Patterns of
                           response
                           High
                          • response
                           factors
Low
response
factors
                  Lake phosphorus


                   High vflfn :|:|
         Low    ^

  Phosphorus loading

 Small, stagnant
 Shallow
 Dissolved P load
 Sediment recycle

 Large, rapidly-flushed
• Deep
 Particulate P load
 Stable thermocline
                                                                                Chlorophyll-a_
                                                    Lake Phosphorus

                                                  Clear, stagnant
                                                  Shallow
                                                  Dissolved P load
 Turbid, rapidly-flushed
• Deep
 Particulate P load
 Nitrogen limited
 Zooplankton grazing
                                                                                           Transparency
                                                                                                                    Low	
                                                                                                                      Chlorophyll-a_
 Turbid, colored
- High silt
 Rapidly-flushed
 Shallow
Figure 4-1.-Eutrophication modeling concepts.

-------
 Variability
 Eutrophication models are geared to predicting average water quality conditions
 over a growing season or year. Unfortunately, this often gives the mistaken im-
 pression that water quality is fixed and  does not vary in different  areas or
 through time within a given lake. This is not the case. Averaging is typically done
 over three dimensions:
    1. Over Depth. Generally within the surface, mixed layer. Vertical variations
 within the mixed layer are usually small.
    2. Over  Sampling Stations. Sampling  station locations might be located in
 different places of the lake. In a small, round lake, the variations among sampling
 stations will tend  to be insignificant, and one station is usually adequate. In a
 large lake with several embayments, in a long, narrow reservoir, or in a complex
 reservoir with several tributary arms, however, water quality may vary significant-
 ly from station to station (from oligotrophic to hypereutrophic). In such situa-
 tions,  the  "average water quality" may  be meaningless,  and  it  may be
 appropriate to divide the lake or reservoir into segments for modeling purposes
 (outflow from one segment serves as inflow to the next).
    3. Over Season. Phosphorus,  transparency, and especially chlorophyll-a
 concentrations usually vary significantly at a given station from one sampling
 date to the next during the growing season. It is not unusual, for example, for the
 maximum chlorophyll-a concentration to exceed two to three times the seasonal
 average. Because the input data themselves represent values within a range of
 actual  conditions, model outputs  also should  be  considered to represent
 answers within a  range.  Thus, model  calculations  are generally reported as
 having a certain "percent confidence" to indicate the likelihood that the answer is
 correct within a given range.
    In addition, since chlorophyll-a,  phosphorus, and transparency vary during
 the season to begin with, a slight improvement or deterioration in these water
 quality characteristics is difficult to perceive. A model prediction that conditions
 would improve slightly, therefore, is not likely to represent a noticeable change
 in the lake.  When  the change  becomes comparable to normal variations,  it is
 easier to observe an improvement or deterioration.
   Because of the above sources of variability, it is  more realistic to consider
 measured or modeled water quality as a "smear" than as a "point." If a consultant
 says that a lake has a mean chlorophyll-a concentration of 10 ppb, for example,
 the actual mean may be 5 or 20 ppb, depending on monitoring frequency  and
 lake variability. Perhaps more important, even if the seasonal mean is 10 ppb, 90
 percent of the samples will be in the 2-to-24 ppb range for a lake with typical
 seasonal variability.
   In a given watershed and lake, year-to-year variations in average water quality
 may be significant because of fluctuations in climatologic factors, particularly
 streamflows and factors controlling thermal stratification.  Monitoring programs
 extending for a period of at least 3 years are often recommended to characterize
 this year-to-year variability and provide an adequate basis for lake diagnosis and
 modeling.
   Another source  of variability is model error. Statistical analyses of data from
 large numbers of lakes and reservoirs indicate that phosphorus loading models
 generally predict average lake responses to within a range of one to two times
 the average. Differences between observed and predicted water quality, in part,
 reflect variability in the data (loading estimates and observed lake responses)
and  inherent model limitations.  Differences between  observed  (directly
 measured) and  predicted (modeled) values may contain useful information for
diagnostic purposes, however.  Model projections of future conditions resulting
                                                                          4-5

-------
     from a change in phosphorus loading are more reliable when they are expressed
     in relative terms (percent change from existing conditions). A good  lake and
     watershed monitoring program can reduce the risk of significant model errors,
     which may lead to false conclusions and poor management decisions.
     Loading  Concept
     Loadings most accurately express the relative impacts of various watershed
     sources on lake water quality. For example, a stream with high phosphorus con-
     centration will not necessarily be an important source to the lake, because the
     stream may have a very low flow and, therefore, contribute a relatively low an-
     nual loading.
       Because lakes store nutrients in their water columns and bottom sediments,
     water quality responses are related to the total nutrient loading that occurs over
     a year or growing season. For this reason, water and phosphorus budgets are
     generally calculated on an annual  or seasonal basis. Water and phosphorus
     residence times in the  water column determine whether seasonal or annual
     budgets are appropriate for evaluation of a given lake.
       Phosphorus loading concepts can be illustrated with the following analogy:
            GROCERY BILL              PHOSPHORUS LOADING
            Item                         Source
            Quantity                     Flow
            Unit Cost                     Concentration
            Cost of Item                  Loading From Source
            Total Cost of All Items        Total Loading From All Sources
       The cost of a given item is determined by the quantity purchased and the unit
    cost. The total cost of all items purchased determines the impact on finances
    (lake water quality). Funds (lake capacity to handle phosphorus loading without
    water quality impairment) are limited. Therefore, intelligent shopping (managing
    the watershed  and other phosphorus sources) is required to protect finances
    (lake water quality).
       Loadings change in response to season, storm events, upstream point sour-
    ces, and land use changes. For example, converting an acre of forest into urban
    land use typically increases the loading of phosphorus by a factor of 5-20. This
    results from increases in both water flow (runoff from impervious surfaces) and
    nutrient concentration (phosphorus  deposition and  washoff from  impervious
    surfaces). The evaluation of loadings provides a basis for projecting lake respon-
    ses to changes in land use or other factors.
       The grocery bill analogy breaks down in at least one important respect:  Shop-
    pers can read the unit costs off the  shelves. To estimate phosphorus loading
    from a given source, both flow and concentration must be quantified over annual
    and seasonal periods. This is difficult  because both flow and concentration vary
    (much more than  supermarket prices) in response to season, storm events, and
    other random factors. Flow should be monitored continuously in major streams.
    Concentration is usually sampled  periodically (weekly, monthly) and preferably
    supplemented with samples taken during storms. This is why good lake and
    watershed studies cost so much. Particularly in small, flashy streams, a very high
    percentage of the annual loading may occur during  short, intense storms. If
4-6

-------
 these events are not sampled, it will be relatively difficult to develop reliable load-
 ing estimates.
    Because of these factors, loading estimates for each source should be con-
 sidered with a degree of skepticism. These are not fixed quantities but ranges.
 Depending upon monitoring intensity and calculation methods, an annual load-
 ing estimate for a given stream could be off by a factor of two or more. Where
 appropriate,  monitoring intensity can be increased to provide better data for
 quantifying loadings, particularly in streams that are thought to be major con-
 tributors.
 Water  Budget
 The first step in lake modeling is to establish a water balance. Flows carry pol-
 lutants into and out of lakes, and analyses of lake eutrophication and most other
 water quality  problems cannot be  conducted without a  quantitative under-
 standing of lake hydrology. The basic water balance equation considers the fol-
 lowing flow terms, typically in units of acre-feet per year:

     INFLOW + PRECIPITATION  = OUTFLOW + EVAPORATION  +
               CHANGE IN STORAGE

   Water budget concepts are illustrated in Figure 4-2.


                        LAKE WATER BUDGET
                       PRECIPITATION    EVAPORATION
   TRIBUTARY INFLOWS 	.        I             t        -^. WITHDRAWALS

                     X|	'	1/
       DIRECT RUNOFF 	   ^    CHANGE IN STORAGE   Y ^_^ SURFACE OUTFLOW
       POINT-SOURCE
        DISCHARGES

 GROUNDWATER INFLOWS	"       \_	^^       ^\_*.  GROUNDWATER OUTFLOWS

 Figure 4-2.-Water budget schematic.

   The data for the terms INFLOW and OUTFLOW should  be evaluated over an-
 nual or seasonal periods. Inflows may include tributary streams, point-source
 discharges, runoff from shoreline areas, and groundwater springs. Outflows may
 include the lake outlet;  groundwater discharges; and withdrawals for water
 supply, irrigation, or other purposes. Major inflow and outflow streams should be
 gaged directly. Indirect estimation procedures (for example, runoff coefficients)
 can be used to quantify smaller streams. Precipitation and evaporation can be
 derived from regional climatologic data. The CHANGE IN STORAGE accounts
 for changes in surface elevation over the study period, which  is sometimes sig-
 nificant in reservoirs. This term is positive if lake volume increases over the study
 period, negative otherwise.
   Once the flow terms have been estimated and  tabulated, the water balance
 should be checked by comparing the total  inflows (left side  of equation) with
total outflows (right side). Major discrepancies may indicate an omission or es-
timation error in an important inflow or outflow term (such as unknown or poorly
defined streamflow or groundwater flow). Establishing water balances is relative-
ly difficult in seepage lakes because of the problems and expense of monitoring
groundwater flows. In any event, significant errors in the water balance may indi-
cate a need for further study of lake hydrology.
                                                                         4-7

-------
       To provide a complete accounting of the watershed, drainage areas should
     also balance (that is, the sum of the tributary drainage areas plus the lake sur-
     face area should equal the drainage area at the lake outlet).
     Phosphorus  Budget
     The lake phosphorus budget (Fig.4-3) provides the cornerstone for evaluating
     many eutrophication problems. The following terms are evaluated and typically
     expressed in units of pounds per year:
        INFLOW LOADING = OUTFLOW LOADING + NET SEDIMENTATION
                   + CHANGE IN STORAGE
       This equation summarizes fundamental cause and effect relationships linking
     watersheds, lake processes, and water quality responses.
                           LAKE PHOSPHORUS BUDGET

                            PRECIPITATION
                             & DUSTFALL   MIGRANT WATERFOWL

          TRIBUTARY INFLOWS —,        ,            I        _*. WITHDRAWALS


             DIRECT RUNOFF	^\    CHANGE IN STORAGE    Y  ^_+. SURFACE OUTFLOW
              POINT-SOURCE
               DISCHARGES

        GROUNDWATER INFLOWS	-         ^   .   ^        	
      & SHORELINE SEPTIC TANKS             ^~—*	         ^~*" GROUNDWATER OUTFLOWS


                                 NET SEDIMENTATION



      Figure 4-3.-Phosphorus budget schematic.
       The INFLOW LOADING term is the sum of all external sources of phosphorus
    to the lake, which may include tributary inflows,  point sources discharging
    directly to the lake, precipitation and dustfall, leachate from shoreline septic
    tanks, other groundwater inputs,  runoff from shoreline areas, and contributions
    from migrant waterfowl. Estimation of individual loading terms is the most impor-
    tant and generally most expensive step in the modeling process. Investments in
    intensive monitoring programs to define and quantify major loading sources
    usually pay off in terms of the quality and reliability of project results. Monitoring
    of the lake itself is usually conducted during the same period so that loadings
    can be related to lake responses.
       Stream loadings, usually the largest sources, are estimated from streamflow
    and phosphorus concentrations monitored over at least an annual period. Major
    tributaries should be sampled just above the lake over a range of seasons and
    flow regimes (including storm events) to provide adequate data for calculating
    loadings. In large watersheds,  it may be  appropriate to  sample at several
    upstream locations so that contributions from individual point and nonpoint
    sources can  be quantified.  Special studies  may be required  to  estimate
    groundwater input terms (for example, groundwater sampling and flow model-
    ing, shoreline septic tank inventories). Loadings in  runoff from shoreline areas
    and from relatively small, unsampled tributaries can be estimated indirectly, as
    discussed below. Loadings in  precipitation and dustfall, usually relatively small,
    can be estimated from literature values or regional sampling data.
4-8

-------
  In many cases, indirect estimates of loading from a given stream or area can
be derived from information on watershed characteristics. This method is based
upon the concept that two watersheds in the same region and with similar land
use patterns and geology will tend to contribute the same loading of phos-
phorus per unit area. This permits extrapolation of data  from one or more
monitored watersheds to others. "Export Coefficients" (Ibs phosphorus/acre-
yr) have been compiled for various land uses and regions (Chapter 2, see Table
2-1). The applicability of this method depends largely upon the quantity and
quality of regional export coefficient data for the land uses and watersheds
under study.  This approach is  much less costly than direct  monitoring, but
generally less reliable. It is frequently used in preliminary studies (to get a rough
handle on the lake nutrient budget before designing and conducting intensive
monitoring programs) and for estimating loadings from small watersheds whose
contributions to the lake's total phosphorus budget are relatively insignificant.
  The OUTFLOW LOADING term accounts for phosphorus leaving the lake in
surface outlet(s); withdrawals for water supply, irrigation, or other purposes; and
groundwater seepage. These are usually estimated by direct measurements of
flow and concentration, as described above for stream loadings.  If the lake out-
flow is dominated by groundwater seepage,  it will be very difficult to determine
the outflow loading term directly.
  The NET SEDIMENTATION term accounts for the accumulation or retention
of phosphorus in lake bottom sediments. It reflects the net result of all physical,
chemical, and biological processes causing vertical transfer of phosphorus be-
tween the water column and lake bottom, as described in Chapter 2. For a given
loading,  lake water  quality will generally improve  as the magnitude of the
sedimentation term increases because higher sedimentation leaves less phos-
phorus behind in the water column to stimulate algal growth. Because there are
several complex processes involved and these vary spatially and seasonally
within a given lake, it is  generally infeasible to measure net sedimentation direct-
ly. Accordingly, this term is usually calculated by difference from the other terms
or estimated using empirical models of the type discussed in the next section.
   The CHANGE IN STORAGE  term accounts for changes in the total mass of
phosphorus stored in the lake water column between the beginning and end of
the study period. Such changes would reflect changes in lake volume, average
phosphorus concentration, or both. This term is positive if the phosphorus mass
increases over the study period,  negative otherwise.
   As formulated above, the water and phosphorus budgets provide important
descriptive information on factors influencing lake eutrophication. A useful for-
mat for presenting results of budget calculations is illustrated in Table 4-1, based
on  data from Lake Morey, Vermont. The table provides a complete accounting
of drainage areas, flows, and loadings. The relative importance of various sour-
ces can be readily derived from the percentage calculations and accompanying
pie charts. The mean concentrations (ppb), runoff (ft/yr), and export (Ibs/acre-yr)
provide means for comparing the unit contributions from various watersheds of
different sizes. Often these values are sensitive to land uses, point sources, or
geologic factors. For example,  the relatively high export value for Pine Brook
(.47 versus a  range  of .04-.21 Ibs/acre-year for the other watersheds) reflects
erodible soils. High  export values for Aloha Camp and Bonnie Oaks Brooks
reflect inputs from camp sewage treatment systems.
   Comparing the magnitudes of the individual loading terms provides a basis
for ranking sources and identifying possible candidates for watershed manage-
ment or point source control techniques. For example, the Lake Morey phos-
phorus budget (Table  4-1) clearly indicates that sewering of shoreline areas
would not be an effective means of reducing lake eutrophication because septic
tanks currently account for less than 1 percent of the total loading.
                                                                           4-9

-------
£ 	
0
3 £?
o "CD ^
= 0-3
CD CD
"c ^ 3
QJ (Q CD
-_ *"+
3 21 co
•""^ d CD
CD" Q. Q.
05 CD' 5'
s.p-1
"§. - 5>
° 3 5-
-o| §

q 5- CD
5 9: 3
CO Q
5' S. <""

=? 31 i
™ Sl

2J. o •<
5 0 0
8 3 *
o -^
— O) '^
§ CD 3
^ Q.
3 3' CD
0) ro (Q
O. 3 ~
r* W <
C t
CO CD Q'
5 -• ~"
S s 5-
3 — • CD"
5'
-------
restoration technique such as sediment phosphorus inactivation (see Chapter 6)
may be appropriate for lake restoration.
                                                                          4-11

-------
                        Lake  Response  Models
                        Having characterized water and phosphorus budgets under existing conditions,
                        response models can be used to evaluate existing lake conditions and to predict
                        changes in phosphorus, chlorophyll-a, and transparency likely to result from
                        changes in phosphorus loading. Several empirical models have been developed
                        for this purpose. These models are based on statistical analysis of monitoring
                        data from collections of lakes and reservoirs.
                          Models vary with respect to applicability, limitations, and data requirements.
                        The consultant's choice of  appropriate models for a given lake or reservoir
                        should be based on regional experience and professional judgment. The con-
                        sultant should also consider how closely the impoundment characteristics (mor-
                        phometry,  hydrology,  lake versus reservoir) reflect the characteristics  of the
                        lakes that were used to develop a model. It may be inappropriate, for example,
                        to apply a model developed  in a study of Canadian natural lakes to an Alabama
                        reservoir with a very different set of conditions.
                          Eutrophication models are driven by three fundamental variables that are cal-
                        culated from impoundment morphometry, water  budgets, and  phosphorus
                        budgets:
(1)  Pi = AVERAGE INFLOW PHOSPHORUS CONCENTRATION (PPB)


               Total Phosphorus Loading (Ibs/yr)
      —     ______________________   ______
                                    ----- ------ -
                    Mean Outflow (acre-ft/yr)
                                                                          OCQ
                                                                          OLIO
                           This is the flow-weighted-average concentration of all sources contribut-
                           ing phosphorus to the impoundment. If there were no interactions with
                           bottom sediments, the average inflow, lake, and outflow phosphorus con-
                           centrations would be approximately equal. This basic measure of inflow
                           quality is the most important determinant of eutrophication response and
                           is the most frequent focus of long-term management efforts. It is sensitive
                           to watershed point and nonpoint sources.
Residence  time:  Com-
monly called the hydraulic
residence time-the amount
of time required to com-
pletely replace  the lake's
current volume ofwaterwith
an equal volume of "new"
water.
                                (2)   T = MEAN HYDRAULIC RESIDENCE TIME (YEARS)

                                                Lake Volume (acre-ft)
                     Mean Outflow (acre-ft/yr)

This variable approximates the average length of time water spends in a
lake or impoundment before being discharged through the outlet. In other
terms, it equals the time required for the lake to refill if it were completely
drained. As  residence time  increases, interactions between the water
column and  bottom sediment have greater influences on water quality.
For a given inflow concentration, phosphorus sedimentation usually in-
creases and lake phosphorus concentration decreases with increasing
residence time. At very short residence times (less than 1 -2 weeks), algae
may have inadequate time to respond to the inflowing nutrient supply.
                    4-12

-------
                        (3) Z = MEAN DEPTH (FEET)

                                   Lake Volume (acre-ft)

                                   Surface Area (acres)

    Other factors being equal, lakes and impoundments with shallower mean
    depths are generally more susceptible to eutrophication problems.  Shal-
    lower lakes have higher depth-averaged  light intensities  to support
    photosynthesis and  greater sediment/water  contact, which can en-
    courage nutrient recycling. Since they both increase with lake volume,
    mean depth and hydraulic residence time are typically correlated.

    Models differ with respect to  how these variables are  combined in equations
 to predict lake or reservoir responses for nutrient loading.
    One set of equations based on data from northern, natural lakes is presented
 in Table 4-2 to illustrate modeling concepts. These are not necessarily the "best"
 models to use  in a given application, the choice of which should be left to the
 lake consultant.


   Table 4-2.—Typical  phosphorus loading model equations for Northern lakes.

     pi               P                Chl.-a

   INFLOW  	^PHOSPHORUS	-» CHLOROPHYLL-a 	    SECCHITRANSPARENCY
            <1>                (2)               (3)

 (1) A model for predicting lake phosphorus concentration was developed by Larsen and
    Mercier (1976) and Vollenweider (1976):

                                P(ppb)  =   P,
                                         1 + T5

    This equation predicts that average lake phosphorus concentration, P, will increase
    in proportion to the inflow concentration and will decrease with increasing hydraulic
    residence time. At low residence times, phosphorus sedimentation is negligible  and
    the response is controlled primarily by inflow concentration.

 (2) The simplest of the chlorophyll-a response models was developed by Carlson (1977).

                           Chi -a (ppb)  = 068 P146

   This equation  is similar to others developed from  northern  lake data  by Dillon  and
   Rigler (1974) and  by Jones and Bachman (1978)

 (3) A similar  relationship was also developed by Carlson (1977) to predict Secchi disk
   transparency:

                        Secchi (meters)  = 7.7Chl-a~68

   This equation  is appropriate for lakes and reservoirs in which transparency is con-
   trolled primarily by algae.  It will overestimate transparency in impoundments with rela-
   tively high concentrations of inorganic suspended solids, silt, or color.
   Two of the equations are based on the Trophic State Index (TSI) developed
by Carlson (1977). This system, used by many States for classification purposes,
is  essentially a  rescaling  of phosphorus,  chlorophyll-a,  and  transparency
                                                                             4-13

-------
    measurements in units that are consistent with northern lake behavior (Fig.4-4).
    The index provides a common frame of reference for comparing these measure-
    ments. The scale is defined so that a decrease of index units corresponds to a
    doubling of transparency.
             PHYSICAL

             APPEARANCE

            >10% RISK
"DEFINITE ALGAE"

"HIGH ALGAE"

"SEVERE SCUMS-
             RECREATION

             POTENTIAL

            >10% RISK
"MINOR AESTHETIC PROB"-

"SWIMMING IMPAIRED"

"NO SWIMMING"
                         OLIGOTROPHIC     MESOTROPHIC   EUTROPHIC    HYPEREUTROPHIC

                    20    25   30   35   40   45   50   55   60   65   70   75   80
         TROPHIC STATE
               INDEX
         TRANSPARENCY
             (METERS)
         CHLOROPHYLL-A
                (PPB)
               TOTAL
       PHOSPHORUS (PPB)
                     15    1087654   3     215    1
                                                               05     0.3
                       0.5     1      2   3 4 5  7  10   15 20  30 40  60 80 100  150
                           5   7   10    15  20  25 30  40 50 60  80 100   150
      Figure 4-4. - Carlson's Trophic State Index related to perceived nuisance conditions
      (Heiskary and Walker, 1987). Length of arrows indicate range over which a greater than 10
      percent probability exists that users will perceive a problem.
       Carlson's index can be used to predict values of one variable from measure-
    ments of another. For example, a lake with a measured mean transparency of
    6.6 feet (2 meters) would have a TSI of 50. Based on the scales in Figure 4-4, a
    mean chlorophyll-a of 7 ppb and a mean total phosphorus concentration of 23
    ppb would also be expected for this lake. These predictions are approximate,
    however (good roughly to within a factor of two, assuming that the lake under
    study is typical of other northern lakes).
       Various factors influence relationships among phosphorus, chlorophyll-a, and
    transparency (Fig.4-1). Carlson's equations reflect relatively high  chlorophyll-a
    and transparency responses found in  northern, natural lakes. Turbid,  rapidly
    flushed impoundments tend to have lower responses and less  sensitivity to
    phosphorus loading.
       Heiskary and Walker (1987) describe a methodology for relating lake "trophic
    state," as measured by phosphorus, chlorophyll-a, or transparency, to user-per-
    ceived impairment  in aesthetic qualities and recreation potential. The arrows in
    Figure 4-4 indicate  measurement ranges in which the risk of perceived nuisance
    conditions (for example, "Swimming Impaired" or "High Algae") exceeds  10 per-
    cent, based on surveys of Minnesota Lakes. These ratings may vary regionally.
       Figure 4-5 provides additional perspectives on the  relationship between im-
    poundment phosphorus   concentrations  and  eutrophication  responses,  as
    measured  by mean  chlorophyll-a  and  transparency.  The  figure is  based on
    cross-tabulations of median total phosphorus,  mean  chlorophyll-a, and mean
4-14

-------
                     EPA National Eutrophication Survey
                       894 U.S.  Lakes and Reservoirs
  Probability    Chlorophyll-A
     1.0
        Transparency
           10  25  40  60 120>120      10   25   40  60  120>120

                 Total phosphorus interval maximum (PPB)
                   Trophic State

                   Oligotrophic
           tvivi'3   Mesotrophic
           \ZZZZ1   Eutrophic
           ••   Hypereutrophic
CHL-A
 (PPB)

    <4
  4-10
 10-25
  >25
Transparency
   (Meters)

      >4
     2-4
     1-2
 Figure 4-5.-Responses of mean chlorophyll-a and transparency to phosphorus.
transparency values from 894 U.S.  lakes and reservoirs (U.S. Environ.  Prot.
Agency, 1978).  Phosphorus values are classified into six intervals (0-10, 10-25,
25-40, 40-60, 60-120, 120 ppb), and the probabilities of encountering  mean
chlorophyll-a and transparency  levels in  Oligotrophic, mesotrophic, eutrophic,
and hypereutrophic ranges have been calculated for each phosphorus interval.
For example, if phosphorus is in the 25-40 ppb range, the probability of en-
countering a mean chlorophyll-a in the eutrophic  range (10 ppb) is about .4, or
40 percent, and the probability of encountering a mean transparency less than
6.6 feet (2 meters) is about .75, or 75 percent. Variations in the response factors
such as depth, flushing rate, or turbidity (see Fig. 4-1) contribute to the distribu-
tion of chlorophyll-a and transparency that can be expected for a given phos-
phorus load.
                                   Flushing rate: The rate at
                                   which water enters  and
                                   leaves a lake relative to lake
                                   volume, usually expressed
                                   as time needed to replace
                                   the lake volume with inflow-
                                   ing water.
                                                                        4-15

-------
    Tracking  Restoration  Efforts
    Figure 4-6 illustrates a type of "phosphorus loading diagram" often used to
    depict modeling results (Vollenweider,1976). This diagram is developed by solv-
    ing the equation for phosphorus concentrations from the Secchi depth of inflow-
    ing waters and the hydraulic residence time (Equation 1 in Table 4-2.) The dotted
    lines (representing phosphorus concentrations of 10, 25, and 60 ppb) are not
    sharp boundaries of  lake condition, but roughly delineate trophic  state
    categories based  on  average  phosphorus concentrations.  Corresponding
    chlorophyll-a and transparency probabilities can be derived from Figure 4-5. The
    object of the game is to move the lake away from the "HYPEREUTROPHIC"
    (northeast) corner and  toward the  "OLIGOTROPHIC" (southeast)  corner  in
    Figure 4-6,  usually by reducing  watershed  point or nonpoint sources and
    decreasing the average inflow phosphorus concentration (y-axis).


sr
Q.
O

O
o
in
ISPHORU!
u
0.
_j
i—
O
J—

o
U.
Z

IUUU





S
o
UL
DING / OUT
i
O
a
_j
<
|
10





1 1

ONONDAGA
j*"
• ^^
LILLINONAH ^. "1
****\ —• -" WASHINGTON
P = 60 _--T-T"" t IJ ^"
	 LONG T • I ^
KEZAR SHAGAWA .,. •*] **\
„, • — "~ WAHNBACH *
P-25 — — "" "" ' 1 MOREY **
---"""" f { H „>-""
•-•
P = 10 	 — """"""
~" ^\
N.
x 	 PREDICTED LAKE PHOSPHORUS (PPB)

I |
HYPER-EUTROPHIC
^ '
**
^
^^
^^ .
EUTROPHIC^ *• '

'MESOTROPHIC^ '
**
+

OLIGOTROPHIC




I
           .01
                         .1              1              10
                           HYDRAULIC RESIDENCE TIME (YEARS)

                                 LAKE VOLUME / OUTFLOW
                                                                     100
    Figure 4-6.-Restoration efforts tracked on Vollenweider's (1976) phosphorus loading dia-
    gram.

      The paths of eight documented restoration efforts are also plotted in  Figure
    4-6, based upon data summarized in Table 4-3. These case studies provide a
    context for illustrating important modeling concepts. Figure 4-7 plots measured
    mean  phosphorus,  chlorophyll-a, and  transparency for each  lake and  time
    period. These are compared with predicted values derived from the models in
    Table 4-2. The predictions are driven by the inflow concentrations and hydraulic
    residence times  listed  in Table 4-3.  These  comparisons illustrate  model
    capabilities to predict lake conditions before and after each restoration activity.
      Figure 4-8 summarizes measured phosphorus budget information  (inflow, in-
    flow-lake, and lake  concentrations) for each case and time period. The dif-
    ference between the inflow and lake concentrations approximately reflects the
    net  influence of bottom  sediments as a phosphorus sink (positive)  or source
    (negative) during each time period.
        Each of the following sections discusses a particular case study.
4-16

-------
Table 4-3.—
                                           in Chapter 4. These data were used to plot the progress of restoration efforts on the Vo.lenweider curve shown

LOCATION
IMPOUNDMENT TYPE
Lake Washington
Washington1
Natural Lake
Onondaga Lake
New York2
Natural Lake
Long Lake
Washington3
Reservoir
Shagawa Lake
Minnesota4
Natural Lake
Kezar Lake
New Hampshire5
Natural Lake
Lake Morey
Vermont6
Natural Lake
Wahnbach Reservoir
West Germany7
Reservoir
LakeLillmonah
Connecticut8
Reservoir
Sources ' Edmonson and Lehman (1981)
? Devan and EMler (1983) Walk.
1 Soltero and Nichols (1984)
4 Larsen and Malueg (1980)
DURATION ANDTYPE OF
RESTORATION ACTIVITY
1963-68 Point Source Diversion
1971 Detergent Ban & Sewer Repairs
1979-81 Point Source Treatment
1978 Point Source Treatment
1973 Point Source Treatment
1970 Point Source Treatment
1981 Point Source Diversion
1984 Hypolimnetic Alum Treatment
1986 Hypolimnetic Alum Treatment
1977 River Inflow Treatment
1 977 Point Source Treatment
5 Connor and Smith (1983 1986)

" Jones and Lee (1981)



OBSERVED WATER QUALITY RESPONSES HYDRAULIC MEAN
YEARS
1957
1963
1978
1970
1974
1985
1972-77
1978-82
1971-72
1974-78
1970
1981
1985
1981
1986
1 969-70
1978-79
1976
1977
Connor and Martin
am (1985) Smeltze

INFLOW P
(PPB)
94
155
48
3667
509
224
85
22
79
20
95
24
24
35
35
73
21
119
136
(1986)
r (1987)

LAKEP
(PPB)
26
62
19
2310
382
143
71
18
55
35
70
30
16
30
12
25
8
65
68


CHL-A
(PPB)
13
35
3
45
43
15
8
28
26
32
18
5
10
3
18
5
35
33


SECCHI RES. TIME DEPTH
(METERS) (YEARS) (FEET)
22 284 1080
1 0
64
21 0 28 39 4
1 2
0.9
019 47 9
19 070 187
24
10 0 13 92
1 4
30
44 1 93 27 6
60
30 1 70 59 0
60
1.1 008 390
1.6 014



SURFACE
AREA
21634
2889
5136
2272
180
543
558
1899



-------
  a.
  O
  DC
  O
120

too

 80

 60

 40

 20
[|   I
                                                .  I.  II
          WASHINGTON  ONONDAGAJ5  LONG  SHAGAWA   KEZAB   MOREY WAHNBACH LILLINONAH


                   104  467 490                    	^^_
      Jl

           H  Ik,  •,, K. I
           WASHINGTON  ONONDAGA/5  LONG SHAGAWA   KEZAR   MOREY WAHNBACH LILLINONAH
                            n
           WASHINGTON ONONDAGA/5  LONG SHAGAWA  KEZAR   MOREY WAHNBACH LILLINONAH


           I} OBSERVED RESPONSE   |  | PREDICTED RESPONSE
   Figure 4-7.- Observed and predicted responses to restoration efforts.
   Lake Washington, Washington: "You

   Should  Be So Lucky!"
   Between 1957 and 1963, eutrophication progressed with increasing sewage
   loadings from Metropolitan Seattle. Between 1963 and 1968, sewage discharges
   were diverted out of the lake basin, reducing the total phosphorus loading to the
   lake by 69 percent, relative to 1963. Observed and predicted conditions in 1978
   reflect dramatic improvements in water quality that followed within a year or two
   after the sewage  diversion. Observed phosphorus concentrations agree well
   with model predictions for each time period. Decreases in chlorophyll and in-
   creases in transparency were somewhat more dramatic than predicted by the
   models. Lake Washington is perhaps the most successful and fully documented
   lake restoration project to date.


   Onondaga Lake, New York: "Far Out. 93

   Percent Is Not Enough."

   Onondaga received primary treated sewage from Syracuse for many years. Bet-
   ween  1970 and 1985, phosphorus loadings were reduced by over 93 percent as
   a result of a phosphorus detergent ban, combined sewer repairs, and tertiary
   treatment for phosphorus removal.  Lake  phosphorus levels responded in
   proportion to loading reductions and in agreement with model predictions (Fig.
   4-7).  No significant improvements in chlorophyll-a or transparency were
   achieved, however.
4-18

-------
   The lack of algal response reflects the fact that pre- and postrestoration phos-
phorus levels were extremely high (exceeding 100 ppb; note the scale factor of 5
for this lake in Figs.4-7 and 4-8). Phosphorus usually does not limit algal growth
in this concentration range, particularly in deeper lakes. The chlorophyll model
(Equation 2 in Table 4-2) does not apply and substantially overpredicts algal
concentrations. Despite the substantial loading reductions as of 1985, Onon-
daga remained well within the hypereutrophic region of Figure 4-6 and on the flat
portion of the chlorophyll response curve shown in Figure 4-1.
 8
Washington Onondaga/5 Long  Shagawa   Kezar    Morey Wahnbach Lillmonah
w i^u
"- 100
O
-c 80
Q.
w 60
.c 40
°- 20
2 0
P on


—

—
—

".
c
7*



:|:




PI





X
271 Inflow — Lake




i 1
^

!;




LJ
             Washington Onondaga/5 Long  Shagawa   Kezar    iVorey Wahnbach Lillmonah
IZU
100
80
60
40
20
n
—
—
= Jl


n



4

•
52

n


•


nl


•


Hn FU Rm
L

1
a

*
ke


             Washington  Onondaga/5 Long  Shagawa   Kezar    Morey Wahnbach Lillmonah

Figure 4-8.-Observed responses of phosphorus budget components to restoration efforts.

   Onondaga illustrates the fact that some lakes subject to point-source phos-
phorus discharges may be susceptible to nuisance algal growths, even with ter-
tiary treatment to  remove phosphorus. Although chlorophyll and transparency
did not respond, the disappearance of severe blue-green algal blooms following
the loading reductions was a significant water quality improvement.
   Why didn't Onondaga Lake respond like Lake Washington? It started off in
much worse shape (Fig. 4-6).  Onondaga has much shorter hydraulic residence
time (.28 versus 2.8 years) and, therefore, less opportunity for phosphorus
sedimentation. The  loading plot (Fig. 4-6) essentially captures the  relative
responses of these two lakes to restoration efforts.
                                                                            4-19

-------
    Long Lake, Washington: "What's This?

    Reservoir Restoration?"

    Beginning in 1978, tertiary treatment of sewage from Spokane reduced  the
    average seasonal phosphorus loading  to this 22-mile-long reservoir on  the
    Spokane River by 74 percent. This impoundment has a relatively short hydraulic
    residence time (.19 years, or 70 days). Accordingly, the inflow and reservoir
    phosphorus concentrations are similar, and the sedimentation term is relatively
    small (Fig. 4-8). Reservoir phosphorus levels responded roughly in proportion to
    the loading. Mean chlorophyll-a concentrations were reduced by 45 percent and
    were apparently less sensitive to the  phosphorus loading reductions than
    predicted by Equation 2 in Table 4-2. Northern lake models (such as Equation 2)
    tend to overestimate chlorophyll-a sensitivity to phosphorus in some reservoirs
    because of effects of algal growth limitation by flushing and light  (Walker,
    1982,1985).
    Shagawa Lake, Minnesota: "The Little

    Lake That Couldn't."

    During 1973, external phosphorus loadings to this northern Minnesota lake were
    reduced by 75 percent via point source treatment. Although average lake phos-
    phorus levels during ice-free seasons were reduced by 35 percent,  mean
    chlorophyll-a and transparency did not respond according to model predictions
    (Fig. 4-7). The lack of response has been attributed to phosphorus releases from
    bottom sediments. These releases reflect historical loadings and the high sus-
    ceptibility of this relatively shallow lake to hypolimnetic oxygen depletion and
    wind mixing. The fact that lake phosphorus exceeded the inflow concentration
    during the postrestoration period (Fig. 4-8) is indicative of sediment phosphorus
    release.
      Despite the  fact  that  the phosphorus loading diagram (Fig. 4-6)  places
    Shagawa Lake  at the oligo-mesotrophic boundary following load reductions,
    mean chlorophyll-a concentrations remained in the hypereutrophic range during
    the first few years following loading reductions. Over time, the rate of phos-
    phorus release from  bottom sediments may eventually decrease  and permit the
    lake to respond to the change in loading. This case points out the fact that load-
    ing models  of the type demonstrated here do not account for  unusually high
    sediment phosphorus release rates, which may defer lake responses to changes
    in external loading.
    Kezar Lake, New  Hampshire: "The Little
    Lake That Could (With a Little Help)," Or
    "Shagawa Revisited  ..."
    This shallow, rapidly flushed lake was subject to a municipal sewage discharge
    and in hypereutrophic condition for many years. Following installation of phos-
    phorus removal facilities in 1970 and, eventually, complete elimination of the dis-
    charge in early 1981, the external loading was reduced by about 75 percent. Like
    Shagawa, the lake phosphorus concentration exceeded average inflow con-
    centration during the initial period following loading reduction (Fig. 4-8). Kezar
4-20

-------
Lake (maximum depth = 27 feet) was thermally stratified in 1981. Significant ac-
cumulations of phosphorus released from thick, phosphorus-rich bottom sedi-
ments accompanied depletion of oxygen from the hypolimnion. Surface algal
blooms  (chlorophyll-a = 60 ppb) were experienced during August 1981 and
were apparently triggered by escape of hypolimnetic phosphorus into the mixed
layer.
   Because of sediment phosphorus releases, responses of lake phosphorus,
chlorophyll-a, and  transparency  to the 1981  sewage diversion were less
dramatic than predicted by the models (Fig. 4-7). In 1984, a hypolimnetic alum
treatment was conducted to address  the sediment nutrient release problem.
Monitoring  data  from  1985 indicate  that  phosphorus,  chlorophyll-a, and
transparency levels responded in agreement with model predictions following
the alum treatment. This case illustrates use of both watershed (point source
control) and in-lake restoration (alum treatment) techniques to deal with a lake
problem. Decreases in transparency following 1985 indicate that the book is not
yet closed on Kezar Lake, however.
 Lake  Morey, Vermont:  "Strange  Mud..."

 Morey is a resort lake sheltered in the mountains of eastern Vermont. Aside from
 the shoreline, the watershed is largely undeveloped. From the late 1970's to
 1985, severe algal blooms and user complaints were experienced at increasing
 frequency.  Summer mean chlorophylls concentrations ranged from 8 to  30
 ppb, transparencies ranged from 2 to 5 meters, and spring  phosphorus con-
 centrations ranged from 17 to 48 ppb. These variations in water quality could not
 be explained by changes in land use, other watershed factors, or climate. Peak
 algal concentrations were usually found in the metalimnion and were  supplied
 by phosphorus released from bottom sediments during  periods of summer and
 winter anoxia.  The hypolimnion was relatively thin  (mean depth = 7 feet) and
 covered approximately 59 percent of the lake surface area. Bottom waters lost
 their dissolved oxygen early in June and remained  anaerobic through  fall over-
 turn.
   A 2-year intensive study indicated that large quantities of  phosphorus were
 stored in the lake water column and sediments. At  peak stratification in August
 1981, for example, the total mass of phosphorus in the water column was about
 five times  the annual phosphorus loading from the watershed.  Phosphorus
 balance calculations (see Table 4-1) indicated that the  lake inflow and outflow
 concentrations were approximately equal,  despite  the relatively long hydraulic
 residence time of 1.93  years. Equation 1 (Table 4-2) predicts that a lake with this
 residence time should trap 58 percent of the  influent phosphorus.  Study results
 indicated that Lake Morey was particularly susceptible to phosphorus recycling
 from bottom sediments because of its shape (broad, thin hypolimnion suscep-
 tible to rapid oxygen depletion) and iron-poor sediments (Stauffer,1981).
   Model predictions for the Lake Morey prerestoration period were substantial-
 ly below observed  values of phosphorus and chlorophyll-a  (Fig. 4-7). This
 reflects the fact that phosphorus retention  capacity was unusually  low. Ob-
 served transparency was higher than  predicted, however, because of the ten-
 dency for algae to concentrate in the metalimnion, below the mixed layer where
 transparencies were measured.
   Because the phosphorus budget indicated that the Morey's problems were
 primarily related to internal recycling and not  to watershed loadings, a hypolim-
 netic alum treatment was conducted during  early  summer of 1986. The treat-
 ment reduced  average phosphorus and chlorophyll-a concentrations during the
 period following treatment  down to levels  that were  consistent with  model
                                                                        4-21

-------
     predictions. Despite no significant changes in external loadings, the alum treat-
     ment apparently restored Lake Morey to a mesotrophic status, consistent with
     its position on the phosphorus loading diagram (Fig. 4-6).
       The longevity  of the  treatment  remains  to be  evaluated through future
     monitoring. This is an example of how phosphorus budgets can be used to diag-
     nose lake problems, regardless of whether or not the solutions involve reduc-
     tions in external  loading. Sewering of shoreline areas (a  restoration activity
     previously proposed and on the drawing boards for Lake Morey) would have
     had little impact.
    Wahnbach Reservoir,  Germany:  "When

    All  Else  Fails ..."

    Wahnbach Reservoir, a water supply for Bonn, Germany, was subject to high
    phosphorus loadings from agricultural runoff and municipal point sources during
    the period prior to 1977. The resulting severe blooms of blue-green algae that
    developed in the reservoir caused major problems for the water supply. For
    various reasons, the loadings from the watershed were largely uncontrollable. In
    response to this  problem, a detention basin and  treatment  plant were con-
    structed at the major inflow to the reservoir in 1977. The treatment plant was
    designed to remove more than 95 percent of the phosphorus inflow via sedimen-
    tation, precipitation, flocculation with iron chloride, and direct filtration. Opera-
    tion of this plant reduced the average inflow phosphorus concentration to the
    entire reservoir by about 71 percent.
       As illustrated in Figures 4-6 and 4-7, the inflow treatment restored Wahnbach
    Reservoir from eutrophic to oligotrophic status during 1978-1979. Observed and
    predicted lake phosphorus concentration dropped below 10 ppb. Chlorophyll-a
    concentrations are consistently overestimated by the model, although the rela-
    tive reduction in chlorophyll-a is correctly predicted.  This relatively extreme and
    costly restoration measure was justified in relation to the severe impacts of
    eutrophication on drinking water quality and water treatment economics.
    Lake Lillinonah, Connecticut: "You Can't

    Fool Mother Nature ..."

    Data from this 10-mile impoundment on the Housatonic River in Connecticut il-
    lustrate the sensitivity of some reservoirs to hydrologic fluctuations. During 1977,
    phosphorus removal was initiated at a municipal point source above the reser-
    voir. This program reduced phosphorus loading from the point source by 51 per-
    cent and reduced total loading to the reservoir by 8 percent during 1977.
      Compared to the case studies discussed above, this loading reduction was
    relatively small, and  a major  change in reservoir water quality would not be
    anticipated. In fact, observed and predicted phosphorus and chlorophyll-a con-
    centrations were slightly higher during 1977 (Fig. 4-7). The concentrations in-
    creased primarily because the flow through the reservoir decreased by about 43
    percent during 1977. As indicated by Equation 1 (see Table 4-2), the average in-
    flow concentration is the most important variable determining phosphorus
    predictions, particularly in reservoirs with low hydraulic residence times. Inflow
    concentration is determined from the ratio of loading to outflow. The inflow con-
    centration increased by 14 percent in 1977 because the small decrease in load-
    ing was more than offset by the decrease in flow.
4-22

-------
   For both time periods, the models overestimate reservoir phosphorus and
chlorophyll-a  concentrations and underestimate  transparency. Apparently,
phosphorus sedimentation  in  the  Lillinonah was somewhat  greater  than
predicted by Equation 1. This is not unusual for long and narrow reservoirs with
high inflow phosphorus concentrations (Walker, 1982,1985). The loading plot
(Fig. 4-6) correctly predicts a hypereutrophic status for the Lillinonah during
both monitoring years.
   Monitoring over a longer time period that includes years with flows similar to
those experienced during 1976 would be required to track the response of the
reservoir to the phosphorus loading reduction. Because the loading reduction is
relatively small, impacts may be difficult to detect in the context of year-to-year
variations. More substantial reductions in upstream  point or nonpoint loadings,
or both, would be required to restore the reservoir to a eutrophic or mesotrophic
level.
                                                                          4-23

-------
          CHAPTER 5
Managing the Watershed

-------
CHAPTER  5
MANAGING THE WATERSHED
Introduction
Lake condition can be greatly influenced by watershed drainage. Since this is
so, it should be possible to begin lake restoration outside the lake, on the land.
An entire body of land practices is aimed at exactly that result; these techniques
are called best management practices. The last half of this chapter deals explicit-
ly  with commonly accepted best management practices. These  practices
originated in the field of agriculture, mainly to prevent soil loss.
  Another central concept that this chapter reemphasizes is that lake water
quality is critically linked to the quality of incoming water. This chapter begins
with a discussion of water entering the lake both from specific discharge outlets
(point sources) and from generalized (nonpoint) sources.
  The importance of the lake and watershed relationship cannot be overem-
phasized. While this Manual often uses the term lake system, it may be useful to
keep in mind that the lake is a system within a larger system, the watershed. The
emphasis in this chapter is on management practices that are appropriate for
lake homeowners, lake associations or districts, and small lake communities.
The Lake-Watershed

Relationship
Muddy waters, decreased depth, rapid filling from silt, aquatic weeds, algal
blooms, and poor fishing are typical problems of many lakes. Very often, to find
the cause it is necessary to look away from the lake to the surrounding land.
  As Chapters 2 and 3 pointed out, the watershed contributes both the water re-
quired to maintain a lake or stream and the majority of the pollutant loads that
enter the lake. Effective lake management programs, thus, must include water-
                                                            5-1

-------
5-2
     shed management practices. Trying to solve lake problems without correcting
     the source or cause of the problem is not only shortsighted, it rarely works.
        Pollutant loads to the lake can be contributed from the watershed as either
     point sources or nonpoint sources. Point sources arise from a definite or distinct
     source such as  a wastewater  (sewage) treatment plant, industrial facility or
     similar source that discharges through a pipe, conduit, or similar outlet. They are
     relatively easy to identify by tracing the discharge  back to a specific source.
     Point sources were traditionally considered to be the primary sources of pollu-
     tion to waterbodies. This is no longer true for most lakes. Harder-to-identify and
     harder-to-control nonpoint sources are more likely to  be the principal con-
     tributors of nutrient and sediment loads.
        Point sources are usually controlled through wastewater treatment facilities
     and State and Federally regulated permits such as the National Pollutant Dis-
     charge Elimination System (NPDES).
        Nonpoint sources, by contrast, do not originate from a pipe or single source.
     Silt, nutrients, organic matter, and other pollutant loads are distributed over a
     relatively broad watershed area. When  water runs over land surfaces and picks
     up these materials, they have the potential to enter the lake. They may be carried
     directly to the lake with runoff or travel via a tributary stream or groundwater sys-
     tem before entering  the lake. Water running off a lawn or driveway during a
     heavy rain is a common sight - this is nonpoint source runoff. Although non-
     point source loadings can occur anywhere  in the watershed, some land uses
     such as agriculture,  construction, and city  streets contribute higher nonpoint
     pollutant loads than other land uses such as forests and other highly vegetated
     areas.
       It is not always easy to distinguish a point source from a nonpoint source. For
     example, parking lot runoff is considered a nonpoint source, but the runoff typi-
     cally enters the lake or stream through a drain pipe or culvert. In this chapter,
     point sources will be defined as homes,  factories, other industrial concerns, was-
     tewater treatment plants,  and  similar  structures that  discharge wastewater
     through a pipe. For regulatory purposes, wastes from homes on septic systems
     are considered nonpoint sources. In this chapter we discuss home wastewaters
     with point sources since the discharge is discrete and easily identifiable. Non-
     point sources will include  all  other types of pollutant loadings  to the lake  or
     stream including  lawns,  driveways,  subdivision  roads,  construction  sites,
     agricultural areas, forests, and other widespread sources.
     Point  Sources
    Wastewaters from industrial,  municipal, and household sources can be highly
    enriched in organic matter, bacteria, and nutrients. Wastewater pollutants can be
    extremely harmful to lake water quality, even when toxics or pathogens are not
    involved. For example, when  incoming water is high in organic matter, the bac-
    teria that decompose organic matter can consume the lake's dissolved oxygen
    supply more quickly than it can be replenished. The danger of this is especially
    strong in thermally stratified  lakes, where hypolimnetic oxygen may be totally
    depleted. These oxygen depletions can lead to fishkills, odors, and noxious con-
    ditions.
      As organic matter decomposes, it can also contribute additional nutrients to
    the water. The purpose of wastewater treatment is to remove the majority of the
    oxygen-demanding matter, bacteria, and nutrients.
      Most wastewater treatment plants have low discharge rates. Over 75 percent
    of all publicly owned treatment plants discharge less than 1  million gallons per
    day (mgd). Sewage treatment ponds or lagoons - the most common type of

-------
wastewater treatment facilities - typically have discharge rates less than 1 mgd.
These low discharge rates, however, do not mean the nutrient or organic loads
from these systems have an insignificant effect on lakes and streams.
  At just 10-50 ppb total phosphorus concentration in the water, some lakes
may develop algal blooms, murkiness, and other problems. The average total
phosphorus concentration of wastewater treatment plant discharges is about
100 to 500 times greater than this. In many streams, wastewater discharges may
dominate streamflow during the dry summer period when total flow is lower than
usual. Also, at the higher summertime water temperatures, water cannot hold as
much dissolved oxygen as it does during the cooler periods of the year.
  The combination of high, oxygen-demanding organic loads and lower than
normal dissolved oxygen levels is stressful enough in itself. The problem is com-
pounded when these  high-organic, low-oxygen conditions coincide with the
peak growing season for algae and macrophytes. The incoming nutrients will act
as a fertilizer, encouraging  excessive algal and macrophyte growth, which will
place additional stress on the dissolved oxygen supply as these plants decom-
pose.
   Natural areas such as wetlands around a lake have occasionally been used
for advanced wastewater treatment because they can function as a  biological fil-
ter to remove silt, organic matter, and nutrients from an inflowing stream to the
lake and improve lake quality. Wetlands, however, can also contribute organic
matter and nutrients to lakes under some conditions. Nutrients released from
wetlands can fertilize algal growth and contribute to lake problems. Whether a
wetland serves as a source or filter for nutrients and organic matter is an area
that needs better understanding and study.
   The Federal Clean Water Act established the  National Pollutant Discharge
Elimination System to regulate the discharge of  nutrients and  organic matter
from  wastewater treatment  facilities and  provides financial  incentives  and
authorizes punitive actions to encourage the improvement of  these facilities.
These facilities are regulated by the State water pollution control agency or by
EPA.  Information on permitted facilities discharging into a lake  or into streams
entering a lake can be obtained by contacting the State water pollution control
agency. If a problem appears to exist with a local treatment plant discharge, this
agency or the State health department should be notified.
 Wastewater Treatment


 Choosing the  Scale  of the System
 If point sources are the most important contributor of organic matter, bacteria,
 and nutrients, good wastewater treatment will be critical to protecting the lake.
 The better the system is at  removing organic matter, bacteria, and nutrients, the
 fewer algal blooms, aquatic weeds, and odors will occur in the lake. Regardless
 of the treatment system, however, all treatment systems require proper design,
 operation, and maintenance. These requirements vary among treatment sys-
 tems, but no system  can be installed and then ignored. Systems must be main-
 tained.

 Municipal Systems
 Typical waste treatment systems for larger cities and municipalities include a
 conventional sewer system leading to  a treatment facility such as an activated
                                                                      5-3

-------
    sludge  treatment system. Primary wastewater  treatment uses  screens and
    sedimentation (settling)  to remove the larger floating  and settleable  organic
    solids. Organic matter dissolved in the wastewater can still exert considerable
    oxygen demand, however, so secondary treatment  is used  to reduce this
    oxygen demand before  the wastewater is discharged into the  lake or  stream.
    Secondary treatment uses biological and chemical processes to remove 80-95
    percent of the organic matter in the wastewater. Primary and secondary treat-
    ment, however,  do not  significantly reduce dissolved nutrient (nitrogen and
    phosphorus) concentrations.
       Total  phosphorus concentrations  in  untreated  domestic wastewater are
    reduced about 4 percent by primary treatment and about  12 percent using
    secondary treatment. Total nitrogen has a higher removal rate, about 40  percent
    of the total nitrogen removal with primary treatment  and about 58  percent
    removal with secondary treatment. This means, however, that about half the total
    nitrogen and almost all the total phosphorus stays in the wastewater after secon-
    dary treatment.
       Another level of treatment tertiary or advanced treatment is  required to sig-
    nificantly reduce nutrient concentrations in the wastewater. Several tertiary treat-
    ment procedures are available and more are  being studied, but this  level of
    treatment is relatively expensive so it has not been applied to the same extent as
    secondary treatment.
       The best procedure for handling wastewater discharges to a  lake is to divert
    discharges away from the lake, out of the watershed.  Lake Washington, dis-
    cussed at the end of this chapter,  is a classic example of how lake quality can
    improve following point-source diversion. Another approach that has been used
    when diversion is not possible is dilution or flushing. This requires a relatively
    large source or supply of high-quality (low in nutrients and organic matter) water
    to dilute the wastewater discharge and increase the flushing through the lake
    (Welch and  Tomasek, 1980).  These  procedures have been  used primarily
    with municipal wastewater treatment plants.
       Normally, conventional treatment systems are not the best alternative for
    small communities and individual homeowners. Conventional treatment plants
    include systems such as activated sludge, bio-filters, contact stabilization, se-
    quencing batch  reactors and land treatment,  and large-scale  lagoons.  More
    detailed information and  fact sheets can be found in the EPA Innovative and Al-
    ternative Technology Assessment Manual  (EPA No.  430/9-78-009, published in
    February 1980).
       Conventional treatment plants  generally are  complicated mechanical  sys-
    tems. They typically use  large amounts of energy and are costly for small com-
    munities to build. In addition, they  require skilled  operators to run and maintain
    them. Wastewater is collected in most conventional systems by gravity, but the
    cost per household of gravity sewers is high in small communities and increases
    greatly in rural areas or wherever the ground is hilly, rocky, or wet.


    Small-Scale Systems

    Several small-scale treatment  plants and designs are available for a small city,
    town, or village. Even smaller-scale treatment systems exist that are suitable for
    the lake homeowner or lake association. The choices can range from individual
    on-lot systems to larger onsite treatment and  collection systems servicing
    several homes or small communities (Table 5-1).  Characteristics of these treat-
    ment systems, including  their status, application, reliability, limitations, cleaning,
    and treatment side effects are described in more detail in Appendix C.
5-4

-------
   	Table 5-1.—Examples of small-scale treatment plants and designs

   EXAMPLE                        REMARKS~
     Septic Tank
   2. Septic Tank Mound System
   3. Septic Tank - Sand Filter
  4. Faculative Lagoon
  5. Oxidation Ditch
  6. Trickling Filter
  7. Overland Flow Treatment
  A septic tank followed by a soil absorption bed is
  the traditional onsite system for the treatment and
  disposal of domestic wastewater from individual
  households or establishments. The system consists
  of a buried tank where wastewater is collected and
  scum, grease, and settleable solids are removed by
  gravity and a subsurface drainage system where
  wastewater percolates into the soil.

  Can be used as an alternative to the conventional
  septic tank-soil absorption  system in areas where
  problem soil conditions preclude the use of subsur-
  face trenches or seepage beds.

  Surface discharge of septic  tank effluent. Can be
  used  as an alternative to the conventional soil
  absorption system in areas where subsurface
  disposal contain an intermediate layer of sand as
  filtering material and underdrains for carrying off the
  filtered sewage.

  An  intermediate depth (3 to  8 feet) pond in which
  the wastewater is stratified into three zones. These
  zones consist of an anerobic bottom layer, and
  aerobic surface layer, and an intermediate zone.

 An activated sludge biological treatment process.
 Typical oxidation ditch treatment systems consist of
 a single or closed  loop channel 4 to 6 feet deep,
 with 45° sloping sidewalls. Some form of preliminary
 treatment such as  screening, comminution, or grit
 removal normally precedes the process. After
 pretreatment, the wastewater is aerated in the ditch
 using mechanical aerators that are mounted across
 the channel.

 The process consists of a fixed bed of rock media
 over which wastewater is applied for aerobic biolog-
 ical treatment.  Slimes form on the rocks and treat
 the wastewater. The bed is dosed by a distributor
 system, and the treated wastewater is collected by
 an underdrain system.

 Wastewater is applied by gravity  flow to vegetated
 soils that are slow to moderate in permeability and
 is treated as it travels through the soil  matrix by
 filtration, adsorption, ion exchange, precipitation,
 microbial action and also by plant uptake. An
 underdrainage system serves to recover the
 effluent, to control groundwater, or to minimize
trespass of wastewater onto adjoining property by
horizontal subsurface  flow.
On-Lot Septic Systems
On-lot systems refer to individual home sewage-disposal  systems. The most
common on-lot system is the septic tank and drain field (Fig. 5-1). The septic
tank provides primary treatment by trapping solids, oil, and grease that could
clog the drain field.   The tank stores sludge (solids that settle to the bottom)
and scum, grease, and floating solids until they can be removed during regular
                                                                                 5-5

-------
                  Inspection
Building paper
  /W-i^C^A-V^wJVjV-V*
                                          ;i	/• i-ij i iiCp-rA v&
                                          ^ i j i i j i jlra^yr^v r>^

                                                    •Disposal field section
          Septic tank cross section.
     Figure 5-1.-Septic tank and drain field.
    septic tank cleaning (every 2-4 years, depending on use). Solids and liquids in
    the tank are partially decomposed by bacteria. The wastewater that remains
    after solids are thus removed flows out of the septic tank and into the drain field
    tiles where it seeps into the soil. The soil filters this partially treated sewage, and
    bacteria associated with the wastewater allow decomposition to continue.
      As the wastewater flows through the drain field, phosphorus can be reduced
    by adsorption to soil particles, but nitrogen is primarily reduced by biological
    processes. Bacterial decomposition in  the  drain field reduces the oxygen
    demand of this wastewater before it enters the lake or groundwater.
      Some bacteria also convert nitrogen as ammonia to nitrate in the drain field.
    While this  reduces oxygen demand in the water, nitrate tends to move with the
    water, eventually entering the lake in  the groundwater.  Ammonia and nitrate are
    fertilizers, and encourage algal growth.
      Septic systems can be effective in removing organic matter, bacteria, and
    nutrients if properly  designed and maintained. They only work, however, if the
    proper site conditions exist. Many lakeside lots are inappropriate for septic sys-
    tems, and  lake problems have conclusively been associated with septic system
    failure. Conditions that prevent or interfere with proper septic system function in-
    clude unsuitable soils, high water tables, steep slopes, and underdesign or im-
    proper use. Many of these conditions occur around lakes and can  make lakeside
    lots unsuitable for septic systems.
      Soil plays a key role in the septic  system. Tightly bound and poorly drained
    soil types  (clays) are not effective filters. At the other  extreme, gravel is also a
    poor filter  because the wastewater drains through it so rapidly that little treat-
    ment takes place.
      Treatment is also prevented when the soil is too wet. Septic systems depend
    upon good contact  between the wastewater and  relatively dry soil particles so
    that the soil can adsorb nutrients as the wastewater passes through the system.
    Saturated  soils cannot adsorb nutrients well. Soils that drain very slowly may be
    chronically saturated and the system, therefore, inoperative much of the time. In
5-6

-------
a poorly drained soil, the wastewater is also likely to surface and run directly to
the lake. A streak of especially green grass growing over the drain field indicates
that  wastewater  nutrients  are fertilizing  the lawn  on  the  way  up. High
groundwater tables can also prevent treatment by periodically flooding the drain
system. Steep  slopes  cause either rapid flow-through or surfacing  of was-
tewater.
   Frequently a septic problem can be traced to improper  use and subsequent
malfunction. These problems commonly arise from underdesign, that is,  too
small a tank or an inadequate drain field.  Other problems are caused  by serving
more people than the system was designed  for,  using improper washing
products, following a poor septic tank maintenance schedule, and putting solids
in the  system (garbage disposal). Every health department or environmental
agency will have a good reference on the functioning and design of septic sys-
tems. EPA also has a design manual for onsite wastewater treatment and  dis-
posal systems that is available (U.S. Environ. Prot. Agency, 1980b).
   Alternative on-lot wastewater treatment techniques such as mound systems
(Fig. 5-2) and sand filters (Fig. 5-3) are available that may  be more suitable for
many lakeside properties. These systems use the septic tank for solids removal,
but not the typical soil drain field.
 Figure 5-2.-Mound Systems.


   The mound system is suitable for rocky or tightly bound soils or areas with a
 high water table. Instead of a drain field, a mound is created with fill material. The
 wastewater from a septic or aerobic tank is allowed to seep through the soil in
 the mound, which provides the treatment (Fig. 5-2).
   A sand filter system can also be used where soils are unsuitable for conven-
 tional drain fields. A 2 to 3-foot bed of sand is installed in or above ground  to fil-
 ter wastewater as it is released from the septic tank. The filtered wastewater can
 be disposed through the soil as in  a conventional septic drain field (Fig. 5-3).
           Septic tank

               Recirculation tank
                                       Chlorinator
                                       (optional)
 Stream
discharge
Figure 5-3.- Sand Filters.
                                                                            5-7

-------
    Mound and sand filter systems represent only minor modifications to the typi-
  cal septic system.  They do not require major construction or substantially in-
  crease cost. However, effluent from these systems can still enter the lake if the
  groundwater movement is toward the lake. For any on-lot system, very careful
  attention must be paid to the conditions of the site, the suitability of the system
  for treating the waste, and to providing proper maintenance of the system.
    Holding tanks,  with or without chemical treatment, can eliminate the dis-
  charge problem. Because holding tanks must be pumped on a regular basis to
  remove the wastewater, they are not as convenient as conventional systems, but
  for cottages or homes that receive limited weekend use, they can be an effective
  alternative to other treatment techniques and reduce local lake problems.
    As with the septic tank/drain field system, soil characteristics, groundwater
  tables, usage conditions, slope, and other factors can influence the selection,
  design, and operation of alternative on-lot treatment methods. Local health or
  water pollution control agencies can assist the property owner in evaluating
  these conditions and selecting the appropriate treatment system. The important
  point is that alternative treatment technology to conventional septic systems is
  available and should be evaluated.
   Community Treatment

   Facilities
   For communities where existing sewage treatment facilities are adequate and
   available, the solution is simply to tie into the public sewer system. Conventional
   sewers are usually by far the major capital cost item of a wastewater system.
   However, alternative sewer system designs are available that are much cheaper
   than conventional systems but  can still be tied into the public sewer system.
   These sewers are smaller in size and are installed at shallow depths. They have
   no manholes and fewer joints,  which reduces rain and groundwater intrusion
   into the sewer, thus reducing the treatment plant capacity required to treat this
   additional water.
     Three general types of alternative sewer systems might be much  better for
   small communities or individual homeowners when  a  major municipal  or
   regional facility already exists and has available capacity. In the first type, small-
   diameter gravity sewers  carry  septic tank effluent away from the home. The
   pipes, which are usually plastic, can be small (4-inch diameter) and  placed at
   less slope than a conventional sewer. Operation and maintenance requirements
   are low.
      Pressure sewer systems -  the second type - use a small pump at eacn
   house to move wastewater under pressure through small diameter plastic pipes
   to a treatment facility or a larger interceptor sewer (Fig. 5-4).
      The third general type is a vacuum sewer system (Fig. 5-5) that draws
   wastewater from each home through small collector pipes to a central collection
   station by vacuum. Wastewater entry into the system is controlled by vacuum
   valves at each home or at groups of homes. The vacuum collection station
   houses a pump that then delivers the collected wastewater to either the treat-
   ment facility or an interceptor sewer. Because of their limited ability to lift waste-
   water, vacuum sewers are best suited to flat areas where gravity sewers would
   be too expensive.
       In many communities, however, small-scale treatment is the only feasible ap-
    proach, but site conditions prohibit the use of on-lot systems. Where lot sizes or
    soil conditions are not suitable for onsite systems,  cluster systems can be used
5-8

-------
                                              2"-12" Plastic
                                              Pressure Main
              •Dwelling
                                    1"-2" Plastic
                                    Service Piping
                              Ball or
                              Gate Valve
                                   —A—,
                Septic
                Tank
                     Effluent Pump
  Check Valve

  'Pumping
   Chamber
 Figure 5-4.-Pressure sewer systems.
                                          Vacuum
                                          Pump
             Sewage
             Buffer
             Volume
             Interface
             Valve
                        3"-6" Plastic
                        Vacuum Mains
       Transport Pockets
           To Treatment
           Facility
Sewage
Pump
 Figure 5-5.-Vacuum sewer system.

(Fig. 5-6). Here, wastewater is conveyed by small-diameter sewers to a neigh-
borhood drainfield, mound, or sand filter. Construction and operating costs for
onsite or cluster systems are usually low, and the systems can be very simple to
operate. The key to their success is an efficient organization to manage their
operation and maintenance.
  Some treatment systems are particularly appropriate for small communities.
Among the simple and reliable centralized treatment systems that are well suited
to small community situations are ponds, lagoons, trickling filters (Fig. 5-7),
oxidation ditches and overland flow treatment (Fig.  5-8). These systems  are
described  in  more  detail in Appendix C including  their advantages, disad-
vantages, maintenance, and cost. All of these well-established methods provide
standard or better levels of treatment. In general, they cost less to build and  run
than the common method of treatment called activated sludge. They also use
less energy and are easier to operate and  maintain. When a community is start-
ing  to  plan a wastewater project, it should select an engineer who has  ex-
                                                                        5-9

-------
                         CLUSTER SEPTIC SYSTEM
     Figure 5-6.-Cluster sewer system.

   perience with these small community technologies. If the ongoing project did
   not consider these technologies, a reevaluation of alternatives might be in order.
   Information on particular systems appropriate for small communities can be ob-
   tained from local contractors specializing in wastewater treatment,  the local or
   State health departments,  water pollution control agencies, or EPA. EPA has
   several excellent publications available, including their Innovative and Alternative
   Technology Assessment Manual (EPA No. 430/9-78-009).
            Figure 5-7.-Trickling filter.
5-10

-------
                                   EVAPOTRANSPIRATION


                                   GRASS AND VEGETATIVE LITTER


                                          ROUNDOFF COLLECTION


                                              SHEET FLOW
 Figure 5-8.-Overland flow system.
Water  Conservation  to

Reduce  Lake  Problems
With a lake nearby, conserving water might not seem critical. Reducing water
usage, however, also reduces wastewater discharges. Water saving devices
such as flow-reducing showerheads and water saving toilets (or just using less
water in the tank) can cut household wastewater flows by as much as 25 percent
(U.S. Environ. Prot. Agency, 1981). Table 5-2 lists several water conservation
procedures. These procedures were taken from a bulletin issued  by the local
Arkansas Cooperative Extension Service (U.S. Dep. Agric. 1984). The Extension
Service offices in each county have more information on this and  other topics
that may be of interest to the lake homeowner and manager.  Most of these pro-
cedures are very simple, even obvious, but the water they conserve can permit
smaller wastewater treatment facilities if these procedures are followed in many
homes around the lake. Even if a smaller treatment facility is not possible, reduc-
ing water use can lower day-to-day operating costs for expenses such as treat-
ment chemicals and utilities.
   Water conservation is particularly appropriate in cases where existing treat-
ment capacity is limited or near the maximum. If a community is connected to a
regional  sewer system, conservation measures can be effective  in reducing
treatment charges, which are usually based on the volume of sewage treated.
This volume, in most cases, is monitored through water meter readings, and the
treatment charge is prorated on a household water usage basis.
   Water conservation, then, not only costs less in the long run but also reduces
the potential loading of organic matter and nutrients to the lake, partly as a result
of reduced wastewater discharges. More careful usage may also lower nonpoint
source loadings from activities such as watering lawns.
                                                                  5-11

-------
       Table 5-2.—Conscientious use of water can prevent excess run off and reduce
                   the volume of waste water treated, both of which help protect lake
                   water quality

       	    WATER CONSERVATION TECHNIQUES
       • Inspect the plumbing system for leaks.
       • Install flow control devices in showers.
       • Turn off all water during vacations or long
         periods of absence.
       • Check the frequency with which home
         water softening equipment regenerates
         and backwashes. It can use as much as
         100 gallons of water each time it does this.
       • Insulate hot water pipes to avoid having to
         clear the "hot" line of cold water during use.
       • Check all faucets, inside and out, for
         drips.  Make repairs promptly. These
         problems get worse—never better.
       • Reduce the volume of water in the toilet
         flush tank with a quart plastic bottle filled
        with water (bricks lose particles, which
        can damage the valve).
       •  Never use the toilet as a trash basket for
        facial tissues, etc. Each flush uses 5 to 7
        gallons of water. Items carelessly thrown in
        could clog the sewage disposal problems.
       • Accumulate a full laundry load before
        washing, or use a lower water level setting.
       • Take showers instead of baths.
       • Turn off shower water while soaping body,
        lathering hair, and massaging scalp.
       • Bottle and refrigerate water to avoid
        running excess water from the lines to get
        cold water for meals. Shake bottle before
        serving to  incorporate air in the water so
        that it doesn't taste flat.
       • To get warm water, turn hot water on first;
        then add cold water as needed. This is
        quicker this way and saves water, too.
       • Wash only full loads of dishes. A dish-
        washer uses about 9 to 13 gallons  to
        water per cycle.
       • When washing dishes by hand, use one
        pan of soapy water for washing and a
       second pan of hot water for rinsing.
        Rinsing in a pan requires less water than
        rinsing under a running faucet.
 • Use rinse water—"gray water"—saved
  from bathing or clothes washing to water
  indoor plants. Do not use soapy water on
  indoor plants. It could damage them.
 • Vegetables requiring more water should
  be grouped together in the garden to
  make maximum use of water applications.
 • Mulch shrubs and other plants to retain
  moisture in the soil  longer.
  Spread leaves, lawn clippings, chopped
  bark or cobs, or plastic around the plants.
  Mulching also controls weeds that com-
  plete with garden plants for water.
  Mulches should permit water to soak into
  the soil.
 • Try "trickle" or "drip" irrigation systems in
  outdoor gardens. These methods use 25
  to 50 percent less water than hose or
  sprinkler methods. The tube for the trickle
  system has many tiny holes to water
  closely spaced plants. The drip system
  tubing contains holes or openings at
  strategic places for tomatoes and other
  plants that are more widely spaced.
• Less frequent but heavier lawn watering
 encourages a deeper root system to
 withstand dry weather better.
• Plan landscaping and gardening to
 minimize watering requirements.
•When building or remodeling,  consider:
 —Installing smaller than standard bath
  tubs to save water.
 —Locating the water heater near area
  where hottest water is needed—usually
  in the kitchen/laundry area.
5-12
     How  to  Assess  Potential

     Sources
     Consider the relative importance and contributions of point sources and non-
     point sources to the lake. Preparing a water and nutrient budget as discussed in
     Chapter 3 and described in Chapter 4 is an essential beginning.
       The watershed to lake surface area ratio is also important.  This ratio can indi-
     cate whether point or nonpoint sources are likely to dominate water quality. This
     ratio  is quite simple to calculate: Lake area ratio equals the watershed area
     divided by lake area (computed in acres). If the watershed is small, local point

-------
sources and septic tank drainage are probably quite important. As the water-
shed to lake surface ratio increases, these sources might still be important, but
nonpoint sources also must be considered.
Assessing Point and

Domestic Wastewater  Sources
With an existing on-lot system, the first step is to contact the local or State health
department or water pollution control agency to determine whether the system
is operating satisfactorily. If it is, finding out how to maintain the system in good
condition is all that is necessary. If the system is not working well, however, cor-
recting the malfunction will be necessary. The agency that checked the system
can provide advice and referrals for further information and may even offer ser-
vices to correct treatment system problems.
   When considering installing an on-lot system, the individual  homeowner or
community should contact the local city or county agent and find out what or-
dinances may exist for minimum setbacks from the lake, mandatory wastewater
treatment, or other requirements.
   If it is absolutely necessary for a community treatment system to discharge to
the lake, it is important to determine whether the additional phosphorus loading
will promote algal problems. Chapter 4 describes methods to evaluate this, but it
is strongly recommended that wastewaters not be discharged directly to a lake.
   A community treatment system may already be discharging into the lake or
into a stream that enters the lake; however, information on whether it does and
whether it meets its permit requirements is available from the local or State water
pollution control agency. When a community system does discharge directly to
the lake or incoming stream, it is important to check the discharge area during
the summer for problems such as algal blooms, turbid  water, or other condi-
tions.  The permit for each treatment facility is periodically available for public
review and comment before being reissued. If it appears that problems are oc-
curring in the lake, the local water pollution control agency should be notified of
the potential problem.
 Nonpoint Sources
The importance of nonpoint sources of pollution became apparent as municipal
and industrial point sources were controlled. In many cases, projected reduc-
tions in nutrients and improvements in water quality were not reached. Agencies
responsible for lakes and streams attempted to find out why. Point sources,
which  had  been  perceived  to  contribute to the majority of water quality
problems, had masked nonpoint source pollution problems. Once point sources
were subjected to corrective actions, the importance of nonpoint sources be-
came apparent. Only by stepping away from the narrow viewpoint (that point
sources caused nearly all water quality problems) were water quality managers
able to see the lake and watershed as an integrated system being affected by
diverse sources of pollutants.
   By approaching the  management of lakes and streams from a broader
perspective, water managers and scientists found that in many systems non-
point sources were equal to or greater than point-source contributions and, in
general, nonpoint sources were major contributors of sediment organic matter
                                                                   5-13

-------
    and nutrients to a lake. Although the nutrient concentrations in runoff waters or
    the amount of nutrients adsorbed to the sediments were not as great as the
    nutrient concentrations in a point source, the total load (concentration times
    flow) can be substantial and far exceed point-source contributions.
    Cultural  Sources  of

    Sediments, Organic  Matter,

    and  Nutrients
    Figure 5-9 illustrates a typical lakeside scene from the window of a lakeside
    home. Many sources of nutrients and sediments to the lake are depicted:

       • Flower and vegetable gardens - contribute nutrients, sediments, and
         pesticides if not properly managed

       • Septic tank systems - contribute nutrients and bacteria

       • A well-manicured lawn - contribute nutrients (fertilizers) and herbicides
      Although not illustrated, car maintenance can  contribute nutrients to a lake
    from wash water  and oil slicks from improperly  dumped motor oil. The very
    presence of people on a lake conducting day-to-day activities is in part respon-
    sible for nutrients and sediments that accumulate in the lake.
                                          ROAD . •^•>>^*iiJ4:M
                                          RUNOFF .
                                            ... .  SHORELINE EROSION
                                            FERTILIZERS &
                                             PESTICIDES
5-14
     Figure 5-9.-Watershed activities as seen from individual homesite.


      These examples are of pollutants that occur off an individual lot. Even if the in-
    dividual contribution is insignificant, the cumulative contribution from all the in-
    dividual lots surrounding a lake could be significant. In addition, it is very
    important that homeowners living near the lake exhibit concern for their own pol-
    lution if they wish to convince others in the watershed to improve their habits.

-------
  As  explained earlier,  nonpoint sources are likely to be important in large
watersheds. A common method to determine the relative importance of various
sources of nutrients and sediments to a lake is to determine the area of the
watershed in relation to the area of the lake. For example, if there are 100 acres
in the watershed and the surface area of the lake is 100 acres, then the water-
shed to lake surface area ratio is 1 to 1 (also represented as 1:1). In small water-
sheds  (for example, a  1:1 ratio), the  local  sources  of  organic matter and
nutrients, such as septic systems and runoff from lawns and gardens carrying
nutrients, might represent the primary contributors of pollutants to the lake.
  Referring back to Figure 5-9, additional sources were illustrated across the
lake. Construction activities can be significant sources of sediments, especially
during rainstorm events.  Runoff from roads are additional sources of nutrients,
sediments, and heavy metals.
  As the watershed to lake surface area ratio becomes larger, other sources of
pollutants such as agricultural runoff carrying animal wastes (organic matter),
soil, and nutrients become increasingly important. Urban runoff from streets,
storms, and rooftops will become significant sources of sediment, organics (oils
and greases), nutrients, and heavy metals to lakes. Silvicultural activities also will
become increasingly important as sources of sediments. In large watersheds,
the contribution from urban,  silvicultural, and agricultural areas are generally
more significant than those from lakeshore homes.
What are  Best  Management

 Practices?
Before a discussion is initiated on how to restore a lake, background on techni-
ques available to improve water quality must be developed.
   The lake association or local residents have a number of options available to
improve the water quality  of the lake. They range from picking up litter around
the lake to the implementation of  best management practices (BMPs) in the
watershed. Best management practices have been developed for agricultural,
silvicultural,  urban, and construction activities. Agricultural practices, for ex-
ample,  have been developed for cropland, pastures,  barnyard  or  manure
management, and pesticide control. Silvicultural practices have been developed
for activities such as road construction in timberlands, timber harvest techni-
ques, regenerating forest  lands cut or killed by disease or fire, and the use of
pesticides. Urban practices have been designed to keep city streets and road-
sides clean, while construction practices were developed for erosion and runoff
control.
   In general, these best management practices were not designed with water
quality  protection as a  goal, but rather to maintain productivity on the land,
reduce costs of pesticides and fertilizers,  or prevent lawsuits because of mud
slides or flooding on neighboring properties. Regardless of their original intent,
many of these practices are useful in lake restoration projects.
   Managers of lakes and streams focus on best management practices to con-
trol four primary, interactive processes: (1) erosion control, (2) runoff control, (3)
nutrient control, and (4) pesticide or toxic controls. These processes are highly
interactive because runoff  control, for example, offers benefits for reducing sedi-
ments, nutrients, and pesticide contamination in lakes and streams. Control for
other factors, however, may still be  necessary. Runoff control, for example, may
minimize water erosion,  but wind  erosion may account for 10-14 tons of soil loss
per acre every year from croplands  in some of the Great Plains States.
                                                                       5-15

-------
       Table 5-3 lists various best  management practices applied  during different
    land use activities. Definitions and explanations as to their effectiveness, capital
    costs, longevity, confidence,  adaptability, potential effects, and concurrent land
    management practices can be found in Appendix D. In this analysis effective-
    ness refers to how well a practice reduces sediments, organic matter, nitrogen,
    phosphorus, and runoff. Capital costs refers to the costs that would be incurred
    by the  farmer,  forester,  contractor, or municipality  to  implement the best
    management practice. Operational and maintenance costs refers to those costs
    required to keep the best management practice working properly.
     Table 5-3.—A list of Best Management Practices applied during different
     	land use activities.	
                            BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES
               AGRICULTURE
                                                   CONSTRUCTION
     Conservation Tillage
     Contour Farming
     Contour Stripcropping
     Integrated Pest Management
     Range and Pasture Management
     Crop Rotation
     Terraces
     Animal Waste Management
     Fertilizer Management
     Livestock Exclusion

     	URBAN	
     Porous Pavements
     Flood Storage
     Street Cleaning

              SILVICULTURE
     Ground Cover Maintenance
     Road and Skid Trail Management
     Riparian Zone Management
     Pesticide/Herbicide Management
Nonvegetative Soil Stabilization
Disturbed Area Limits
Surface Roughening

	MULTICATEGORY	
Streamside Management Zones
Grassed Waterways
Interception or Diversion Practices
Streambank Stabilization
Detention/Sedimentation Basins
Vegetative Stabilization
       Longevity is either short term or long term. For this discussion, short term
    means the practice is good only for a year or season. Long-term practices are
    those that last longer than  1  year. The terminology is not clear-cut because
    some practices have to be applied every year but are considered to be long term
    because the implementation of the practice is not designed to provide instant
    results. An example is conservation tillage. In conservation tillage, plant residue
    is left on the field after harvest. When a conservation tillage practice is initiated,
    the farmer does not expect to  have significant results in the first year but will be
    able to maintain or protect the productivity of the land over the long haul. The
    benefits the lake receives are also not noticeable in the first year but will be per-
    ceived over a period of years.
       Confidence  is based upon how consistently a best management practice
    works in reducing a problem. One might have little confidence in a best manage-
    ment practice that works only on a hit or miss basis. In many cases, the scientific
    evidence is not yet available to assess the confidence associated with a given
    best management practice.
       When a best management  practice can be used in a variety of geographic
    areas and situations,  it is considered to be adaptable. For example, the adap-
    tability of conservation tillage is ranked as good instead of excellent because it is
    limited in Northern States that  experience late, cool springs or in heavy, poorly
    drained soils, even though it can be applied in a variety of geographic areas.
5-16

-------
    Potential treatment side effects refers to the possibility of causing another
  problem by treating the problem of immediate interest.  For example, even
  though the use of conservation tillage can reduce soil erosion,  runoff, and
  nutrient losses, the increased use of chemicals may lead to groundwater pollu-
  tion.
    When a best management practice is applied, there is generally a supporting
  best management practice that will increase the effectiveness of the primary
  practice. In the case of implementing a conservation tillage program, a fertilizer
  management and integrated pesticide management program should also be in-
  itiated as a supporting practice.
  Lake Restoration  Begins  in

  the  Watershed
  The best place for any lake association to start a restoration project is in its own
  backyard. There are a number of actions individual lake homeowners can in-
  itiate, for example:

    • Collecting the litter tossed in yards and along the roads.

    • Leaving the grass or shrubs up to the lakeshore or along roads uncut to
      act  as a buffer strip to reduce nutrient and sediment loads to a lake.

    • Modifying agricultural best management practices for flower or vegetable
      gardens. Although agricultural best management practices were
      designed for large fields (40-1,000 acres), they can be scaled to
      backyard  plots.

    • Adopting a form of conservation tillage, integrated pest management,
      and fertilizer management. Leaving after-harvest vegetable crop residue
      in gardens can minimize local sources of nutrients, organic matter and
      sediments.

   During  the growing  season, integrated  pest  management  and  fertilizer
 management may be appropriate.  Integrated pest management  is a  practice
 that considers the best timing dosage and handling of pesticides for maximum
 effectiveness with minimal waste  or overuse.  Other considerations  include
 selecting resistant vegetable varieties, optimizing vegetable/flower planting time
 rotating plants, and using biological controls. Local Extension agents are good
 reference sources to determine resistant plant variety locally suitable.
   Fertilizer management considers the proper time to spread a fertilizer and the
 proper amount to optimize  plant growth with minimal impact on the lake. Fer-
 tilizer and pesticide management actually save money because the proper
 amount of fertilizer  or pesticide is applied when it does the  most good This
 reduces both the amount and the number of times fertilizers and pesticides need
 to be used. Again the local  Extension agent can be of assistance In addition
 Soil Conservation Service (SCS) personnel can provide information on locally
 dominant soil types and assist in determining the appropriate amount and type
 of fertilizer.
  Once lake homeowners have initiated best management practices on their
 own lots, it is time  to start moving outward into the watershed.  By working
together, lakeshore property owners can accomplish a number of small projects
that will help reduce nutrient and  sediment loads to  a lake.  For example
eliminating curbs and gutters allows the road runoff to proceed over grassed
areas  that  will filter sediments and  utilize the  nutrients.  Best management
                                                                     5-17

-------
     practices that could be applied include vegetative stabilization, grassed water-
     ways,  streamside management zones,  streambank stabilization,  and deten-
     tion/sedimentation basins. These practices, described  in Appendix D, all help
     reduce the input of organic matter, silt, and nutrients to the lake.
       In a streamside management zone, the natural vegetation is maintained be-
     side the stream. If vegetation has been removed, it should be replanted. Planting
     erosion-resistant grasses in natural or constructed drainage  channels to make a
     grassed waterway is another practice that lake associations might encourage. In
     concept, vegetative stabilization is similar to grassed waterways and streamside
     management zones, using erosion-resistant plants or plants that are known to
     stabilize soil in erosion-sensitive areas such as steep slopes.  If a stream entering
     the lake has currents that are eroding banks, however, vegetation may not suf-
     fice. Another project that a group might initiate is streambank stabilization where
     a layer of carefully graded rocks (rip rap) is placed over the area of erosion. In
     some cases, a blanket of nonvegetative fiber or layer of sand  must be placed
     before rip rapping. The area may also  require detention/sedimentation basins
     designed to slow runoff for a short time and to trap heavier sediment particles.
     Additional information is available from the SCS and local drainage improvement
     districts or land improvement contractors.
       With a large watershed, the tasks facing the lake association become more
     complex. Now the organization has to work with  property owners who may not
     live near the lake, private contractors, municipalities (such  as zoning commis-
     sions), and county planning agencies that may or may not be concerned about
     the lake.  In some cases local ordinances or zoning regulations might need to be
     passed to regulate construction or other land use activities. The lake organiza-
     tion may require that construction areas implement best management practices
     such as  nonvegetative soil  stabilization,  disturbed area limits, and surface
     roughening.
       Nonvegetative soil stabilization includes actions such as  covering disturbed
     areas with mulches, nettings, crushed stone, chemical binders,  and  blankets or
     mats. This  best management practice is a temporary measure that should be
     used until a long-term cover is developed.
       The best management practice  known as disturbed area  limits is nothing
     more than  a common sense approach  to minimize the area disturbed by the
     construction activity. If vegetation is removed, surface  roughening  can be ap-
     plied on  the exposed  soil.  Conventional construction equipment  is  used to
     scarify, or groove, the soil along the contour of a slope. In practice, the grooves
     spread the runoff horizontally and increase the time for water to soak into the
     ground.
       As the watershed to lake surface area becomes larger, the task of watershed
     management becomes more expensive and  more complex. It is important to
     realize that not all areas of the watershed are equally important and to identify
     those that  are critical contributing areas so that available funds can be op-
     timized. A critical area is one that  contributes excessive amounts  of soil and
     nutrients  to the lake or a stream course that  enters the lake. How to delineate
     these areas is discussed in Chapter 3 on Problem Identification. An educational
     program  on watershed management should also be  considered. The  only
     reason some individuals contribute nonpoint source loads to  lakes is their lack of
     awareness of the impact of their actions. Educational approaches are critical in
     successfully implementing a management plan (see Chapter 8).
       Any one or all of the best management practices listed in Table 5-3 and in Ap-
     pendix D may be applicable in the lake's watershed. The best approach is to tar-
     get those areas that are concentrating the most significant sediment, organics,
     or nutrient loads. This may entail starting a modest monitoring  program as dis-
     cussed in Chapter 8.
5-18

-------
  The practices just discussed addressed the actions a lake association can
take around the lake. To maintain these practices and protect lake quality might
require the use of regulations, zoning, or ordinances. These regulatory proce-
dures can be effective tools for lake and watershed management and are dis-
cussed in Chapter 9.
Guidelines  and
Considerations
Controlling nonpoint sources and identifying the most feasible alternatives can
be considered as a seven-step process. These steps include:
  Step 1. Form a lake association or lake district: Several voices have more
strength than one. The  North American Lake Management Society is an or-
ganization that can help  organize a lake association. Some States have already
formed a Federation or  Congress of Lake Associations. Members from other
lake associations can be a good source of information.
  Step 2. Identify potential problem sources: Start with the lake homeowners
and then  move around the lake and out into the watershed. This is the first step
to define the extent of the problem. Refer to Chapter 3.
  Step 3. Identify Critical  Areas: Critical areas are those areas that are con-
tributing a majority of the sediments and nutrients to the lake.  Not all areas
necessarily contribute equally to lake problems. Refer to Chapter 3. Part of iden-
tifying a critical area is common sense. If a farmer is plowing up to the edge of a
stream, a feedlot is located on a stream or lake, or a clearcut is located close to
a stream, those areas become potential candidates for critical areas. In many
cases,  the  lake association will not  be able  to directly correct watershed
problems created by agricultural, urban, or silvicultural activities. Ordinances or
local zoning regulations might be necessary (see Chapter 9).
  Step 4. Initiate watershed management practices: Common best manage-
ment practices were explained earlier, and it was stated that they were initially
developed for purposes besides water quality improvement. The intent of this
document is to develop in lake associations and lake homeowners an apprecia-
tion of the relationship between the lake and the watershed. Generally no one
practice is adequate by itself, and many practices must be integrated.
  Step 5. Determine allocation of resources: A lake association or lake dis-
trict will in all likelihood be limited by resources. The best place  to start in any
watershed management program is in the association's own backyard. Many of
the best management practices considered for agricultural, urban, or silvicul-
tural activities are applicable in the lake homeowner's backyard on a reduced
basis. Buffer strips around the lake are just as applicable to a homeowner as to a
farmer, as are fertilizer management, pesticide management,  conservation til-
lage, street cleaning, or nonvegetative soil stabilization. The  association can
eliminate curbs and  gutters and allow  runoff from stormwater to filter through
buffer strips along roadways. A common sense approach is the key, and a lake
association will probably be more effective in the upper watershed if they correct
their own problems first.
  Step 6. Investigate regulations and zoning: Consider regulations or zoning
time and  space to resolve lake problems both of land use and lake users (see
Chapter 9). A lake problem  is a limitation on a desired use. In some instances,
other lake uses and users are the problems. Some uses will not be compatible in
all lakes,  so it is important to decide which  lake uses have the greatest  priority
                                                                       5-19

-------
  and manage to achieve these uses. Regulations can assist in achieving these
  uses.
    Step 7. Employ tools in combination: Consider an integrated program of
  watershed management and in-lake restoration. To develop an effective lake
  management plan, all the available tools should be considered, and the ap-
  propriate ones incorporated in the plan. The next chapter discusses the third leg
  of the lake management triangle-lake restorations.
  Examples of Point and
  Nonpoint  Improvement
  Projects
  Lake Washington: Point-Source

  Diversion

  Lake Washington is considered to be a classic example of water quality improve-
  ment with the diversion of sewage. In 1958 the public voted to divert sewage
  from Lake Washington, but the first diversion did not take place until 1973, and it
  took 5 more years to complete the system. With the first diversion, which
  stopped about 28 percent of the effluent, the lake stopped deteriorating, and
  during the 5-year diversion period the lake showed signs of recovery. Between
  1967 and 1968 the change in water quality took place rapidly. Edmondson
  (1972) reported that the content of phosphorus in the surface waters decreased
  about a fourth of  its maximum  value, microscopic plants  decreased, and
  transparency increased (see Chapter 4).
   Annabessacook Lake, Cobbossee Lake,

   and  Pleasant Pond:  Point-Source
   Diversion/Nonpoint  Source Waste

   Management/in-Lake Treatments
   Annabessacook Lake is an example of a hit or miss approach to lake restoration.
   For years, the lake was considered to be the most polluted lake in Maine. From
   1964 to 1971 residents attempted to solve their algae problems with copper sul-
   fate, but each year the effectiveness became shorter and resistant algae
   predominated. In 1969 steps were taken to divert sewage from the lake. The
   diversion resulted in an improvement, but algae growth continued to be a
   nuisance. To accelerate recovery hypolimnetic aerators were installed, but there
   was no positive response.
5-20

-------
  After over 30 years of frustration in attempts to improve water quality in the
chain of lakes (Annabessacook Lake,  Cobbossee Lake, and Pleasant Pond),
lakeshore property owners, local officials, and concerned citizens formed the
Cobbossee Watershed District, which  was to serve as a quasi-governmental
agency similar to a school district or sewer authority. Through their taxing
authority, a Federal water quality management (208) planning grant, and the
Agricultural Stabilization and Conservation Service, they were able to conduct a
formal study of nonpoint sources of pollution to formulate a comprehensive res-
toration plan.
  In Pleasant Pond, agriculture was found to  be the dominant source of phos-
phorus nonpoint pollution and the second leading cause in Annabessacook and
Cobbossee Lakes. Lake sediments were the primary source in Annabessacook
Lake. After  careful consideration, a two-pronged approach was taken. An
agricultural waste management program was undertaken in the watershed and a
nutrient inactivation was applied to the lake. The major agricultural activities in
the watershed were dairy and poultry farming,  and it was a widespread practice
to spread manure on frozen ground and snow. Therefore, to implement a waste
management program, a storage capacity for 6 months of accumulated manure
was necessary.
  By using animal waste management (storage during winter months) and alum
(aluminum sulfate)  plus sodium aluminate to inactivate phosphorus,  the total
phosphorus loads were reduced approximately 45 percent. From the lake users
viewpoint the improvement in water clarity has been a positive benefit  (U.S.
Environ. Prot. Agency, 1980a).
East  and West Twin  Lakes: Septic Tank

Diversion

The results of septic tank diversion and alum treatment were part of a research
project (Cooke et al. 1978) funded by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agen-
cy. This study is included as an example because it demonstrates that septic
tanks can affect a lake even when sited in ideal soil.
  Prior to septic tank diversion, fecal coliform levels ranged from too numerous
to count  to 260 colony forming units/100 ml. The standard for fecal coliform
colony forming units is 200/100 ml, and levels above this limit resulted in the
lakes being closed to contact recreation. After diversion,  fecal coliform levels
quickly reformed to near zero levels  in groundwater, streams,  and lakes.  Al-
though the septic  systems were  sited in soils presumably ideal, Cooke et al.
(1978) found perched water tables in the leach field. They assumed the perched
water table was the result of organic material clogging the leach field and reduc-
ing permeability. This situation allowed nutrient-rich and  fecal material to be
washed from the lawns to ditches and  streams that entered the lakes.
  A  concurrent decrease in phosphorus concentrations was not observed be-
cause the lakes continued to  receive untreated storm flow and runoff from
diverse nonpoint sources typical of eutrophic lakes. Cooke  et al. (1978) con-
cluded that the diversion of septic tanks did prevent the situation from becoming
worse and potentially reaching a point where all recreation would have to cease.
                                                                       5-21

-------
      CHAPTER 6
Lake and Reservoir
   Restoration and
     Management
	   Techniques

-------
CHAPTER 6




LAKE AND RESERVOIR

RESTORATION AND

MANAGEMENT TECHNIQUES




Introduction

This chapter covers the major restoration and management techniques that are
used within lakes and reservoirs. Somewhat like prescriptions for treating lake
ailments, these techniques have benefits, side effects, and limitations. All have
demonstrated and proven value, but none is suitable for every lake, for an all-in-
clusive range of problems, or even for a  specific problem under varying cir-
cumstances.
  With that warning delivered, what can the reader expect to gain from this
chapter? Its threefold objective is to help the reader

   • Understand the limits of lake and reservoir restoration and management
    methods

   • Ask the critical questions involved in choosing the most appropriate
    procedure

   • Become familiar with the various methods with regard to their basic
    ecological principles, their mode of action, their effectiveness and
    potential negative impacts, and - where known - their costs


The  Principles of Restoration

The lake user needs to consider two important ideas regarding lake protection
and restoration before proceeding to study and select methods appropriate to
any particular lake or reservoir:
                                                    6-1

-------
      First, in the long term, the condition of a waterbody is dictated primarily by the
   quality and quantity of water entering it. While there can be qualifications to this,
   including effects offish, sediment release of nutrients, and basin shape, it is clear
   that nearly all restoration procedures will be overwhelmed by continued high in-
   comes of silt, organic matter, and nutrients. Protection and watershed manage-
   ment (see Chapter 5) are therefore paramount to restoration.
      Second, lake restoration is, by definition, the use of ecologically sound prin-
   ciples to attempt to bring about long-term improvement in lake or reservoir con-
   dition (Cooke et al. 1986).
      Restoration techniques can be divided into three general groups, based  upon
   the ecological principles behind them:
      1. Control of plant growth through control of factors such as light or nutrients,
   or substrate  (sediments)
      2. Improvement of conditions for certain organisms that are capable of con-
   trolling excessive vegetation biologically
      3. Removal of nuisance organisms or sediments
      Lake restoration does not include symptomatic treatments such as  an her-
   bicide or algicide application, although these chemicals can form an important
   part of a vegetation management program. Such programs are not restorative
   because they do not treat the causes of excessive vegetation and therefore must
   be frequently reapplied.  Furthermore,  some of them are associated with un-
   desirable side effects.
      Costs are a very important consideration, as well. The more management-
   and symptom-oriented the technique, the greater the likelihood that the  long-
   term benefit-to-cost ratio will be  poor. While a restoration-oriented technique
   usually costs more at the outset, restoration lasts. It is hardly wise to consider a
   restoration program that provides at least 10 years' worth  of benefits to be "ex-
   pensive" compared  to a management "bargain" that has to be repurchased 10,
   20, or 30 times in the same span without ever solving the real problem.
      Some readers will be aware of products or procedures not mentioned  here.
   Ultimately, some of these could  prove to be  effective and  have minimal  un-
   desirable side effects. As these techniques are thoroughly tested and proven to
   be effective, they will be added to this chapter. Only techniques that have been
   fully described  in the open scientific  literature are listed  in this Manual.  Lake
   managers should always ask for scientific documentation regarding a proce-
   dure or technique,  especially one not described here, and should  never
   hesitate to discuss it with a lake restoration expert not financially involved in its
   sale or installation.


   Are Protection  and Restoration

    Possible?

    Some eutrophic lakes and most reservoirs probably cannot be restored.  Either
    they cannot be protected or the users' expectations are not consistent with
    achievable conditions. An estimation of the degree to which a waterbody can be
    improved is one of  the functions of the diagnostic/feasibility  study (Chapter 3),
    which answers questions relating to sources of nutrients, silt, and organic matter
    loadings, and the present  condition  of the lake. For example,  if the primary
    source stream is of poor quality and it is not feasible or practical to improve it,
    protection will be impossible. For another example, reducing nutrient loading
    won't cure a weed  problem if the nutrients already in the lake's sediments are
    capable of  sustaining it. A diagnostic/feasibility study will  forewarn the lake
    manager of these possibilities.
6-2

-------
  Reservoirs are extremely difficult to protect and therefore to restore. As
described in Cooke et al. (1986) and  Cooke and Kennedy (1988),  reservoirs
have features not usually found with natural lakes and which can interfere with
any restoration project. Reservoirs usually have a very large drainage basin,
possibly covering several social or political units, and often with extensive areas
of nonpoint source discharges, making loadings very high and the probability of
improvement in stream quality low. As noted in Chapter 2, reservoirs are usually
dominated by  a single, high-volume, source stream. This stream may not only
carry a heavy  load of silt, organic matter, and nutrients but may also wash out
reservoir restoration treatments such as phosphorus inactivation, or reintroduce
undesirable  organisms. Reservoirs can also have extensive areas of shallow
water with dense weed beds and high sediment nutrient release rates. It may be
possible, however, to improve an embayment of a reservoir.
  The current uses of the lake or reservoir, or those planned for it, may be in-
compatible with the implementation of some restoration techniques,  or may be
inconsistent with achievable improvements. For example,  potable water sup-
plies must be treated with very great care. Not only are most herbicides banned
from water supplies, but some restoration procedures such as sediment removal
may require expensive, special equipment in order to protect raw potable water
quality.
   Sometimes, limited, specialized uses of a lake or reservoir can make restora-
tion more likely. For example, weed control alone might suffice for  a boating-
fishing-water skiing lake if algal blooms do not interfere with these uses. The
answer might be found in a management program of harvesting or herbicide
treatment. If the  lake  is also used for swimming, however, in-lake restoration
work and an expensive stream diversion project might become necessary.
   Some lakes have always been highly productive, and no amount of money or
effort will make these waterbodies crystal clear and free of algae, weeds, and
shoals. Some geographic areas, or "ecoregions," have  richer, more  erodible
soils and higher  annual precipitation.  Loading  to lakes of these regions, even
without cultural influences, will be high. Therefore, the goals of lake  restoration
must be realistically set to limits imposed by natural background incomes of
substances and to the chemistry of lake sediments.
   A factor often overlooked by lake users who desire restoration is the shape of
their lake's basin. Most lakes are small and shallow and thus offer ideal  condi-
tions for plant growth. These lakes may be dominated by weed-choked areas;
their low volume may  do little to dilute nutrient loading; and their sediments may
offer a rich supply of nutrients to rooted macrophytes. While some of these lakes
can respond well to restoration efforts, a combination of procedures may be re-
quired. In other lakes,  such as those that average less than 7 feet deep, the costs
of deepening  might be prohibitive, and other techniques might provide primarily
symptomatic  relief at high cost.
   The word restoration therefore  must be considered in light of both what is
desired by the lake or reservoir users and what is possible. In many cases, con-
tinual  maintenance work, in addition  to the restoration  procedure, will be re-
 quired to maintain the desired water quality. And often the route to long-term
 improvement will extend over several years while diagnostic/feasibility studies
 are under way and restoration procedures are successively tested and imple-
 mented. In all cases, whether involving lakes in which long-term improvement is
 predicted or  lakes in which it is impossible,  an adequate diagnosis/feasibility
 study is necessary to provide a rational basis for decisions prior to beginning
 one or more in-lake restoration/management procedures.
                                                                            6-3

-------
     Lake  and  Reservoir

     Restoration and  Management

     Techniques

     Most of the techniques to manage and improve lakes and reservoirs were sug-
     gested years ago. But only in the last decade have we accumulated enough well-
     documented experiences to evaluate them.  Much of this evaluation research
     was supported through the U.S.  EPA's Clean Lakes Program and  by research
     grants in basic and applied limnology from the U.S. EPA, the National Science
     Foundation (NSF),  and several other governmental and private agencies and
     corporations. The much-needed further development of our knowledge of lakes
     and reservoirs will require continued support by these organizations.
       Five types of lake or reservoir problems are frequently encountered by lake
     users. These are (1) nuisance algae;  (2) excessive shallowness; (3) excessive
     rooted plants ("weeds" or  macrophytes)  and their attached algae mats; (4)
     drinking water taste, odor, color, and organics; and (5) fishing quality. For each
     of these major problem areas, several in-lake techniques have been found to be
     effective, long-lasting, and generally without significant negative impact when
     used  properly. These procedures will  be described, under the  appropriate
     problem, with regard to their underlying ecological principles and mode(s) of ac-
     tion, effectiveness (including brief case histories),  potential  negative impacts,
     and additional benefits and costs. The reader will be referred to further reports in
     the basic scientific literature. The less well-studied or less effective procedures
     will also be briefly described.
      Finally, Tables 6-1 and 6-7 will summarize these techniques in a matrix that
     presents a qualitative evaluation of each for control of algae and macrophytes.
    This evaluation represents the consensus of some lake and reservoir manage-
     ment experts who have ranked these techniques with regard to short- and long-
    term effectiveness, costs, and potential negative impacts. These matrices can be
     used to aid in making decisions about the appropriate in-lake technique.


     Basic Assumptions

    It is very important for the reader to remember that the following discussions of
    in-lake technique effectiveness, except where explicitly stated, always assumes
    that the loadings of nutrients, silt, and organic matter to the lake or reservoir
    have already been  controlled. Most in-lake procedures will be quickly  over-
    whelmed by continued high income of substances. To repeat the lesson of
    Chapter 5, the lake and watershed are coupled. In-lake programs can comple-
    ment watershed efforts, as well. Algae, turbidity,  and sedimentation problems,
    for example, may persist despite load reductions or diversion projects unless an
    in-lake procedure is also used.
      As for restoration and management techniques that are not mentioned in this
    Manual, in nearly every case, these procedures have not been described  in the
    open scientific literature and therefore have not had the benefit of testing, dis-
    cussion, explanation, and criticism that is so vital  to the development of techni-
    ques of proven effectiveness and minimal negative impact. Caution should be
    exercised in the use of a procedure not listed here.
6-4

-------
Problem I:  Nuisance Algae


Biology  of Algae

Algae can become serious nuisances in all aquatic habitats. In lakes and reser-
voirs two growth forms are most troublesome: mats of filamentous algae as-
sociated  with  weed  beds,  and free-floating microscopic  cells,  called
phytoplankton, which form green scum on the water surface and contribute to
taste and odor problems in drinking water. Algae reproduce almost exclusively
through cell division. When growth conditions are ideal (warm, lighted, nutrient-
rich), algae multiply rapidly and reach very high densities ("blooms") in a few
days.
  The factors that control the abundance  of phytoplankton, including blue-
green algae, form the basis for attempts to manage and limit them. Frequently
the quantity of algae in a lake can be shown to be directly related to the con-
centration of an essential plant nutrient. In many cases this element is phos-
phorus. Sometimes the lake and watershed can  be manipulated to make
phosphorus concentration low enough to limit algal growth.  Some restoration
techniques therefore concentrate on controlling the income of phosphorus or on
curtailing phosphorus release and cycling within the lake. Compared to phos-
phorus, other essential plant nutrients such as carbon and nitrogen are very dif-
ficult to manipulate to control algal growth. Other factors important to  algal
growth can be manipulated to produce long-term control. Light may be limiting
to growth, when nutrients are very  abundant, and  can be manipulated to
produce long-term control, sometimes by artificially circulating cells  into deep,
dark water. In other cases, particularly where nutrients cannot be manipulated,
control can be achieved by enhancing grazing on cells by animals. All of these
procedures, and others, will be described in the following paragraphs.
  Filamentous algae are very difficult to control. With the exception of algicide
applications, procedures to accomplish this are often associated with proce-
dures to control weeds and, therefore, will be discussed in the macrophyte sec-
tion.
Algae/Techniques with

 Long-Term  Effectiveness


 Phosphorus Precipitation and
 Inactivation

• PRINCIPLE. The release of phosphorus stored in lake sediments can be so
 extensive that algal blooms persist even after incoming phosphorus has been
 significantly lowered, as seen in the Shagawa Lake example in Chapter 4. Phos-
 phorus precipitation removes phosphorus from the water column. Phosphorus
 inactivation, on the other hand, is a technique to achieve long-term control of
 phosphorus release from lake sediments by adding as much aluminum sulfate
 to the lake as possible within the limits dictated by environmental safety (see
 Potential Negative Impacts).
                                                                 6-5

-------
       These two techniques are used after nutrient diversion. Both attempt to keep
     phosphorus concentration in the water column low enough to limit algal growth.

     •  MODE OF ACTION. Iron, calcium, and aluminum have salts that can com-
     bine with (or sorb) inorganic phosphorus or remove phosphorus-containing par-
     ticulate matter from the water  column as part of a floe. Of these elements,
     aluminum is most often chosen because phosphorus binds tightly to its salts
     over a wide  range  of ecological  conditions, including low or zero dissolved
     oxygen. In practice, aluminum sulfate (alum) or sodium aluminate is added to
     the water, and pin-point,  colloidal aggregates of  aluminum  hydroxide  are
     formed. These aggregates rapidly polymerize and grow in size  into a visible,
     brownish floe or precipitate that settles to the sediments in a few hours, carrying
     phosphorus sorbed to its surface and bits of organic and inorganic paniculate
     matter in the floe. After the floe settles to the sediment surface, the water will be
     very clear. If enough alum is added, a layer of 1-2 inches of aluminum hydroxide
     will cover the  sediments  and  prevent phosphorus from entering the  water
     column as an "internal load" (Chapter 2). In many lakes, assuming sufficient
     diversion of external nutrient loading, this will mean that algal cells will become
     starved for this essential nutrient. In contrast, some untreated lakes, even with
     adequate  diversion of nutrients, will continue to have algal blooms that are sus-
     tained by sediment nutrient release. Good candidate lakes for this procedure are
     those that have had nutrient diversion and have been shown, during the diag-
     nostic/feasibility study, to have high internal phosphorus release. Impoundments
     are usually not good candidates because of an inability to limit nutrient income.
     Treatments of lakes with low doses of alum may effectively remove phosphorus
     (called phosphorus  precipitation),  but may be inadequate to provide long-term
     control of phosphorus release from lake sediments (phosphorus inactivation).
       Dissolved inorganic phosphorus, the phosphorus form that many believe
     algae use for growth and reproduction, sorbs tightly to this floe. After the floe
     falls to the sediment surface, it  appears to continue to sorb phosphorus as it
     slowly settles and consolidates  with the sediments, and in this way acts as a
     chemical barrier to phosphorus release from the sediments.

     • EFFECTIVENESS. This procedure has proven to be highly effective and
     long-lasting in thermally stratified natural lakes, especially where an adequate
     dose has been given to the sediments and where sufficient diversion of nutrient
     incomes has occurred. There has been almost no experience in using this pro-
     cedure in  reservoirs. In reservoirs, adequate nutrient diversion is very difficult,
     and therefore treatment effectiveness might be very brief; in addition, high flows
     may wash the floe out or quickly cover it with another layer of nutrient-rich silt.
       Case histories  have been extensively documented in Cooke and Kennedy
     (1981, 1988) and Cooke et  al. (1986). Successful treatments have been made to
     large, deep lakes as well as to the more common smaller ones and farm ponds.
    Treatment longevity has extended beyond 10 years in some cases and to 5
    years in many. Shallow, nonstratified lakes appear to have shorter periods of ef-
    fectiveness of the  treatment than stratified lakes and thus have not proven to be
    ideal candidates for alum treatment. In some cases the phosphorus-sorbing floe
    layer has become covered with new,  phosphorus-rich sediments.
      Typical  lake responses to alum treatment include

       • sharply lowered phosphorus concentrations

       • greatly increased transparency (and improved conditions for weeds)
       • algal blooms of much reduced intensity and duration
6-6

-------
• POTENTIAL NEGATIVE IMPACTS. The addition of aluminum salts to lakes
has the potential for serious negative impacts, and care must therefore be exer-
cised with regard to dose. The potential for toxicity problems is directly related
to the alkalinity and pH of the lake water. pH and alkalinity must be determined in
the diagnostic studies (see Chapter 3) before this treatment is implemented.
When alum or aluminum  sulfate (Ala(SO4)3 ' 14 HaO)  is added, aluminum
hydroxide (AI(OH)s) is readily formed in water at pH 6 to 8. This compound is the
visible precipitate or floe described earlier. However, pH and alkalinity of the
water will fall at a rate dictated by the initial alkalinity or buffering capacity of the
water. In soft water, only very small doses of alum can be added before alkalinity
is exhausted and the pH falls below 6. At pH 6 and below, AI(OH)2 and dissolved
elemental aluminum (Al+3) become the dominant forms. Both of these can be
toxic to lake species. Well-buffered, hard-water lakes are therefore good can-
didates for this type of lake treatment because a large dose can be given to the
lake without fear of creating toxic forms of aluminum. Soft-water lakes must be
buffered, either with sodium aluminate or carbonate-type salts,  to prevent the
undesirable pH shift and  to generate enough AI(OH)3 to control phosphorus
release. Dose is therefore lake-specific. Details of dose determination can be
found in Cooke et al. (1986).
   Another potentially negative effect of phosphorus inactivation  is the sharp in-
crease in water transparency, which may allow an existing weed infestation to
spread into deeper water.

•  COSTS. Phosphorus inactivation, the addition of alum to lake sediments for
long-term control for phosphorus release, will have a high initial cost. For ex-
ample, at West Twin Lake, Ohio,  a 40-acre (16-ha) area of lake  sediments was
dosed with 100 tons of alum (Cooke et al. 1982). At current prices, that would
cost about $14,000. However, labor is the real cost and is determined by the
amount of chemical to be added (Cooke et al.  1986). More rapid, less expensive
application systems are under development. It should be noted that phosphorus
inactivation is a long-term treatment so  that costs are amortized.  Peterson
 (1982a) has shown that on this basis, phosphorus inactivation is  apparently less
costly than sediment removal for nutrient and algal control. If a dose sufficient to
simply remove phosphorus from the water column is used, initial costs could be
much lower, but long-term effectiveness may be sharply reduced.


 Sediment Removal

•  PRINCIPLE. The release of algae-stimulating nutrients from  lake sediments
can also be controlled by removing the layer  of  the most highly enriched
 materials. This may produce significantly lower in-lake nutrient concentrations
and less algal production, assuming that there has been adequate diversion or
treatment of incoming materials.

•  MODE OF ACTION. Several  types of dredging equipment  exist for use in
varying circumstances (Cooke et al. 1986). A hydraulic dredge equipped with a
 cutterhead is the most common choice. In this design, the cutter loosens sedi-
 ments that are then transported  as a slurry of 80-90 percent water through a
 pipeline that traverses the lake from the dredging site to a remote disposal area.
 Figures 6-1 and 6-2, from Barnard (1978), illustrate the typical  dredge and its
 side-to-side path across the lake.
    Other types of dredges, including the grab-bucket design,  are used in special
 situations.
                                                                          6-7

-------
      FLOATING LINE
         . SPUD WELLI
            •• SPUD
                            ENGINE HOUSE    LEVER ROOM
MAIN PUMP x   HOIST .,   -
  C^'          *
                           HULL
     Figure 6-1.-Configuration of a typical cutterhead dredge (from Barnard, 1978).
                            DREDGE
                                                      PORT SWING WIRE
                      B © D
                     0C
                              WINCH
                   ADVANCE

             -SPUD (DOWN)
                                                                   FRONT
                                                          D

                                                           WINDROW

                                                     STARBOARD SWING WIRE
     Figure 6-2.-Spud-stabbing method for forward movement, and resultant patterns of the cut
     (from Barnard, 1978).

       Normally, a permit from the  U.S. Army Corps of Engineers will be  required
    before dredging can commence, even if a private lake is involved.

    • EFFECTIVENESS. Sediment removal to retard  nutrient release can be highly
    effective. A good  example is that of Lake Trummen, Sweden, where the upper
    3.3 feet of sediments were extremely rich in nutrients. This layer was removed,
    increasing lake mean depth from 3.6 feet to 5.76 feet, and disposed of in diked-
    off bays or upland ponds. Return flow from the ponds was treated with alum to
6-8

-------
remove phosphorus. The total phosphorus concentration in the lake dropped
sharply and remained low for 9 years (Fig. 6-3). Other case histories have been
described by Peterson (1982b) and Cooke et al. (1986). While removing the en-
tire nutrient-rich layer of sediment can control algae, dredging is most frequently
done to deepen a lake or to remove and control macrophytes (see the section in
this chapter on Macrophyte Control Techniques).


                        TOTAL PHOSPHORUS, MG V1
 1.0 -
 0.5 -
 Figure 6-3.-Total phosphorus concentration in Lake Trummen, Sweden, before and after
 dredging (courtesy of Gunnar Anderson, Department of Limnology, University of Lund, Swe-
 den). Shaded line indicates period of dredging.

• POTENTIAL NEGATIVE  IMPACTS. The  potential for serious negative im-
pacts on the lake and surrounding area is very high. Many of these problems are
short-lived and can be minimized with proper planning. Among the most serious
environmental problems is the failure to have a disposal area of adequate size to
handle the high volume of turbid,  nutrient-rich water that accompanies the sedi-
ments. Unless  the sediment water slurry can be retained long enough for
evaporation, the runoff water will be discharged to a stream or lake. Turbidity,
algal blooms, and dissolved-oxygen depletions  may occur in the  receiving
waters. These problems may also develop in the lake during the dredging opera-
tion itself, but this is usually temporary.
   Finally, an analysis of the sediments  for the presence of heavy metals (par-
ticularly copper and arsenic,  both of which have been extensively used as herb-
icides), chlorinated hydrocarbons, and other potentially toxic materials should
be carried out prior to dredging. Special precautions, some of them expensive,
will be required if these substances  are present in  high concentrations. Chapter
8 describes implementation procedures and permit procedures, which are criti-
cal to the success of a dredging project.
   While the potential for negative impacts is high, proper dredge selection and
disposal area design will minimize them.

• COSTS.  Sediment removal is expensive.  Peterson (1981) reported a cost
range of $0.18 cubic yard  (yd3) to $10.71 yd3 ($ 1975) for 64 projects, and found
that costs from $0.95 to $1.33 (in 1975 dollars) were common and could be con-
sidered "reasonable" for hydraulic dredging. Dredging costs are highly variable,
depending upon site conditions, access, nature of  the sludge, and other factors.
In addition, the costs Peterson (1981)  reported  do  not  include  disposal,
transport, or monitoring costs. Peterson (1982a) concludes that phosphorus in-
activation is somewhat less expensive than sediment removal as a method to
control nutrient release.
                                                                           6-9

-------
    Dilution and Flushing
    • PRINCIPLE. Lake  waters  that have low concentrations  of an essential
    nutrient are unlikely to exhibit algal blooms. While the ideal is to divert or treat
    nutrient-rich waters before they empty into the lake, it is possible to lower the
    concentration of nutrients within the lake and to flush out algal cells by adding
    sufficient quantities of nutrient-poor water from some additional source (dilu-
    tion). High amounts of additional water, whether low in nutrients or not, can also
    be used to flush algae out from the lake faster than they grow.

    • MODE OF ACTION. Phosphorus is often the nutrient that limits algal growth.
    Its concentration in the lake water is a function of its concentration in incoming
    water, the flushing rate or residence time of the lake or reservoir, and the net
    amount lost to the sediments as particles settle during water passage through
    the system. When water that is low in phosphorus is added to the inflow, the ac-
    tual phosphorus loading will increase, but the  mean phosphorus concentration
    will decrease, depending upon initial flushing rate and inflow concentration. Con-
    centration will also  be  affected by the degree to which loss of phosphorus to
    sediments decreases and counters the dilution. Uttormark and  Hutchins (1980)
    conclude that lakes with low initial flushing rates are poor candidates because
    in-lake concentration could increase unless  the dilution water is  essentially
    devoid of phosphorus. Internal  phosphorus release could further complicate the
    effect.
       Dilution also produces washout of cells. These facts point out the need for a
    water and nutrient budget, as well as a study of basin volume, before prescribing
    a procedure such as this one.
       Flushing can control algal biomass by cell washout. The flushing rate must be
    near the cell growth rate to be effective. Flushing rates of 10-15 percent  of the
    lake volume per day are believed to sufficient (Cooke et al. 1986).

    • EFFECTIVENESS. Very few documented case histories of dilution or flush-
    ing exist,  in part because additional water is not often available,  especially water
    that is low in nutrients. The best documented case of dilution is that of Moses
    Lake, Washington (Welch and Patmont, 1980; Cooke et al. 1986),  where low-
    nutrient Columbia River water  was diverted through the lake. Water exchange
    rates of 10-20 percent per day were achieved, and dramatic improvements in
    transparency and algal  blooms occurred. Effectiveness  of this method is very
    high.

    • POTENTIAL NEGATIVE IMPACTS. Outlet structures must be capable of
    handling the added discharge, and the increased volume released downstream
    could have negative effects. Water used for dilution or flushing should be tested
    before it  is introduced to the  lake or reservoir  to  be sure that no toxics are
    present.

    • COSTS. Costs will vary greatly from site to site, depending upon the need for
    pumps, extensive engineering, outlet structure repair, and the  proximity  of the
    new water.
6-10

-------
 Algae/Additional  Procedures

 for  Control

 None of these techniques is considered to be completely ineffective. However,
 none is well enough understood or has produced enough positive results to be
 considered an established and effective, long-term procedure. This group of
 techniques will be briefly described here, and the reader contemplating their use
 is referred to Cooke et al. (1986) and Cooke and Kennedy (1988) for detailed dis-
 cussions of case histories and negative environmental impacts.


 Artificial  Circulation

 The objective of artificial circulation is to eliminate thermal stratification, or to
 prevent its formation, through  the injection of compressed air from a  pipe or
 ceramic diffuser at the lake's bottom. The rising column of bubbles, if sufficiently
 powered, will produce lake-wide mixing at a rate that will  eliminate temperature
 differences between top and bottom waters. Control of algal blooms may occur,
 possibly through one or more of these processes:
   1.  In light-limited algal communities, mixing to the lake's bottom will increase
 a cell's time in darkness, leading to reduced net photosynthesis.
   2. The introduction of dissolved oxygen to the lake's bottom may inhibit phos-
 phorus release from sediments, curtailing this internal nutrient source.
   3.  Rapid circulation and contact of water with the atmosphere, as well as the
 introduction of carbon dioxide-rich bottom water during the  initial period of
 mixing, may increase the water's carbon dioxide content and lower pH,  leading
 to a shift from blue-green algae  to less noxious green algae.
   4.  Zooplankton that consume algae may be more difficult for sight-feeding
 fish to prey upon when mixed to the lake's bottom. If this improves zooplankton
 survival, consumption of algal cells may also increase.
   Highly variable results from case to case have occurred. In most instances
 problems with low dissolved oxygen (which can occur  with deep discharge
 dams, for example) have been solved.  In about half the cases, and where very
 small  temperature differences from top to bottom have been maintained all sum-
 mer, algal blooms have been reduced (see reviews by Pastorok et al  1981-
 Cooke et al. 1986). In other cases,  phosphorus and turbidity have increased and
 transparency has decreased.
   Failure to achieve the desired objective may be caused by lake chemistry or
 equipment. Lorenzen and Fast (1977) conclude that to adequately mix a lake an
 air flow of at least  1.3 cubic feet  per minute (1.3 ft3/min) per acre of lake surface
 is required to maintain oxygen within the lake.  Underdesign is a major cause of
failure for this technique. This is a highly specialized area, and the system  should
 be designed by a professional who is experienced in artificial circulation Correct
air flow pressure depends on site conditions. Algae control may also depend on
a particular lake's water chemistry.
  Costs are low,  and will primarily be for the compressor and installation of
pipes and diffuser.
                                                                    6-11

-------
    Hypolimnetic  Aeration
    Hypolimnetic aeration is  different from artificial circulation in objective and
    operation. Artificial circulation employs a curtain of bubbles to achieve complete
    mixing and isothermal conditions, but  hypolimnetic aeration most commonly
    employs an airlift device to bring cold hypolimnetic (the deep, stagnant water
    layer) water to the surface of deep lakes. The water is aerated by contact with
    the atmosphere, some gases such as carbon dioxide and methane are lost, and
    then the water is returned to the hypolimnion (Figs. 6-4 and 6-5). There is no in-
    tention to destratify the lake.
                       : IRON PIPE
     Figure 6-4.-Destratification system installed at El Capitan Reservoir, California (from Loren-
     zen and Fast, 1977).
      A common use of this procedure is to maintain a cold-water fishery in a lake
    where the hypolimnion is normally oxygen-free. Another use is to eliminate taste
    and color problems in drinking water w!*ridrawn from a cold hypolimnion. This is
    done by  introducing oxygen, which v   produce chemical  conditions that will
    favor precipitation of iron and manganese, the elements most often associated
    with color in drinking water. Also, the procedure could be used to improve the
    quality of water discharged downstream from a hypolimnetic discharge.
      There is little documentation of its successful use in control of nuisance algae,
    although  there is evidence that hypolimnetic aeration can control phosphorus
    release from lake sediments by promoting its  combination with iron. Iron addi-
    tions to the hypolimnion during aeration could enhance phosphorus removal
    and thereby control internal phosphorus release. Hypolimnetic aeration could
    become a type of phosphorus  inactivation procedure under high oxygen-high
    iron conditions, and in this way perhaps promote some control of algae.
      Hypolimnetic aerators need sufficiently a large hypolimnion to work properly;
    consequently, their use in shallow lakes and reservoirs should be viewed with
    great caution.
6-12

-------
 Figure 6-5.-Aqua Technique's Umno partial air-lift hypolimnetic aerator. The arrows indi-
 cate the direction of air flow. (Courtesy of Aqua Technique).


   Costs of hypolimnetic aeration are dictated by the amount of compressed air
needed  (a function of hypolimnion area, the rate of oxygen consumption in the
lake, and the degree of thermal stratification). A procedure for calculating this is
presented in Cooke et al. (1986).
Hypolimnetic Withdrawal

The cold, deep layers of a thermally stratified eutrophic lake or reservoir may
have  higher nutrient concentrations than upper  layer  waters. Any vertical
entrainment of this water to the epilimnion will introduce nutrients to it and pos-
sibly trigger an algal bloom. This can happen naturally as the lake's epilimnion
thickens during the summer, during the passage of a cold front, and during
spring and fall turnover periods. The objective of hypolimnetic withdrawal is to
                                                                       6-13

-------
   remove this nutrient-rich, oxygen-free water either through a deep outlet in the
   dam or by a siphon, thereby accelerating the lake's phosphorus loss, resulting in
   a decrease in phosphorus concentration in surface waters.
      There are few documented case histories of this procedure (reviewed in
   Cooke et al. 1986; Nurnberg,  1987). Gachter (1976) describes a very successful
   project with a small, Swiss lake where phosphorus and nitrogen concentrations
   declined, dissolved oxygen and transparency increased, and blue-green algal
   blooms decreased following withdrawal.
      Serious negative impacts are possible. The discharge water may be of poor
   quality and may require aeration or other treatment. State or Federal regulatory
   agencies  may  require  a permit to  discharge this water.  Also, hypolimnetic
   withdrawal could produce thermal instability and thus destratification,  which
   could introduce nutrient-rich, anoxic water to the epilimnion.  An algal bloom
   could ensue. Negative effects to biota appear to be unlikely.
      Costs should be comparatively low and would involve a capital outlay for
   pump, pipe, and an aeration device.
    Sediment Oxidation

    This is a new and highly experimental procedure (Ripl, 1976), and few case his-
    tories exist. The objective of the procedure is to decrease phosphorus release
    from sediments, as with phosphorus inactivation. Iron as ferric chloride is added
    to sediments, if they are low in iron, to enhance phosphorus precipitation. Lime
    is also added to bring sediment pH to 7.0-7.5, the optimum pH for denitrification.
    Then calcium nitrate is injected into the top 10 inches of sediments to promote
    the oxidation or breakdown of organic matter and denitrification. The entire pro-
    cedure is often  called RIPLOX after its originator (Ripl, 1976).
      Lake Lillesjon, a 10.5-acre Swedish lake with a 6.6 foot mean depth, was the
    first to be treated, at a cost of $112,000. Most costs were for equipment develop-
    ment and the preliminary investigation. Chemical costs were about $7,000. The
    treatment lowered sediment phosphorus release dramatically and lasted at least
    2 years. A portion of a Minnesota lake was treated, but high  external loading
    overwhelmed its effects. No negative  impacts have been reported.


    Food  Chain  Manipulation

    A developing body of evidence supports the conclusion that the amount of algae
    in the  open  water of  a  lake or  reservoir might be  controlled  as much  by
    zooplankton  grazing as by the quantity of nutrients. Zooplankton  are micro-
    scopic, crustacean animals that can, as a community of several species, filter up
    to the entire epilimnion each day as they graze on algae, bacteria, and bits of or-
    ganic matter. They are found in every lake and reservoir. The most efficient
    grazers, which  remove more particles over the widest range of particle sizes, are
    the largest sized zooplankton species. These large zooplankton,  however, are
    preferentially eaten by fish, including  the fry of nearly every fish species and the
    adults of bluegill, pumpkinseed, perch, alewives, and others. In lakes dominated
    by adults of species such as largemouth bass, walleye, and northern pike, large-
    bodied zooplankton are more likely to survive and grazing on algae can be very
    high. Conversely, lakes dominated by small panfish have the possibility of in-
    tense feeding on zooplankton and may have severely reduced grazing on algae
    and thus more extensive algal blooms. This type of algal control by animals in
    the food chain is "top down" control and differs fundamentally from our usual
    conception of algal control through  nutrient limitation. Figures 6-6 and 6-7 are
    pictorial models of these food web interactions.
6-14

-------
       PISCIVOROUS
           FISH
           r
           EAT
                                    1-2 FT
     PLANKTIVOROUS
           FISH
                                                "-1 FT
           EAT
      ZOOPLANKTON
T
EAT
                                               1/10 IN
         ALGAE
            r
                                             MICROSCOPIC
           USE

        NUTRIENTS
                      NUTRIENTS
         RECYCLE

            A
         BENTHIC
       ORGANISMS
Figure 6-6.-The aquatic food chain.
                                                      6-15

-------
              Comparison of Top-down Effects on Food Chain
     Low predator biomass
           ^-
           i
       High zooplankton
        feeders biomass
        Low zooplankton
            biomass
       High phytoplankton
            biomass
      • Low Secchi depth
      • HighpH
      • Stressed 02 supply
    High predator biomass
                                         1
                                  Low zooplankton
                                   feeders biomass
             L	
       High biomass of
   large-bodied zooplankton
                                                          Role of
                                                          carnivorous
                                                          zooplankton
                                                          uncertain
                             Low biomassl I Possibly high
   of small     |  biomass of
j phytoplankton 11 large, colonial
           t  11 phytoplankton
                                                          Role of
                                                          nutrient load
                                                          and
                                                          hydrophysical
                                                          conditions
                                                          uncertain
    • High Secchi depth
    • Normal or high pH
    • Normal or extreme
      values
      Figure 6-7.-Hypothetical scheme showing the connections involved in biomanipulation.
6-16

-------
   Shapiro et al. (1975) have defined biomanipulation as the procedure of en-
hancing grazer control of algae by eliminating zooplankton-eating fish through
the use of fish poisons or fish winterkill, or by adding enough predators to limit
the consumption of beneficial zooplankton by small fish. With such manipula-
tions, it might be possible to improve a lake without an expensive nutrient diver-
sion. However, it should be noted that a simple addition of predatory fish, such
as walleyes, may not be sufficient to produce any measurable control of algae.
This might be true in very large eutrophic lakes. As well, mortality among added
fish could be high. The evidence of the beneficial effects of controlling the den-
sity of stunted panfish is sound enough to warrant projects involving lake users
in the control or removal of small fish, especially on small lakes.
   Other conditions in addition  to heavy grazing  by fish  might reduce
zooplankton  grazing  on  algae.  An oxygen-free  hypolimnion,  common in
eutrophic lakes, eliminates this zone as a daytime refuge of zooplankton from
sight-feeding fish and thus enhances zooplankton mortality. An aeration device
might  eliminate this problem.  Another cause  of  zooplankton mortality,  as
pointed out by Shapiro (1979), is from the toxic effects of pesticides that enter
the lake with agricultural runoff. The  use of copper sulfate for temporary algal
control can also produce significant  zooplankton mortality at doses far below
those needed for algal control. Severe mortality of zooplankton could explain
the common "rebound" of algae following a copper treatment.
   An extensive review of the evidence about this  method of algae control is
found in Cooke et al. (1986) and Cooke and Kennedy (1988). Figure 6-7, from
Benndorf et al. (1984), summarizes biomanipulation. This method may be one of
the few alternatives for lakes where  nutrient diversion is not feasible. It means
that removal of those "trophy" bass and northerns by fishermen makes little
ecological  sense where clear water is  desired. It also makes poor ecological
sense to stock a lake with zooplankton-eating fish such as gizzard shad where
clear water is desired. Food web manipulation is probably not feasible in reser-
voirs because undesirable fish may be continually introduced.
   Another type of biomanipulation that could improve lake transparency is to
eliminate fish such as the common carp or bullheads that are bottom browsers.
Browsing has been shown to release  significant amounts of nutrients to  the
water column as these fish feed and digest food. Removing such fish, however,
is exceedingly difficult since they are tolerant of very low levels of dissolved
oxygen and high doses of fish poisons.
   Costs of biomanipulation are not known. Fish poisons are expensive and in
many cases would entail an expensive cleanup of dead fish. The cost of restruc-
turing a food web through enhancement of a predatory fish population will, of
course, be specific to each lake. Because of the high interest in fish and fishing
at most lakes, significant volunteer labor and expertise might be available. State
fish and game personnel would be an excellent resource for stocking densities
and species likely to survive in any given area.


Algicides

Copper sulfate (CuSC-4) is the most widely employed algicidal chemical. It is
registered for use in potable waters, although restrictions apply in some States.
Simazine is also extensively used to control algae.
   Copper inhibits algal photosynthesis and alters nitrogen metabolism. In prac-
tice, copper sulfate is applied by allowing granules placed in  burlap or  nylon
bags to dissolve as they are towed behind a boat. In alkaline waters (150 mg
CaCOa (calcium carbonate)  per liter, or more) or in waters high in organic mat-
ter, copper can be quickly lost from solution and thus rendered  ineffective. In
these cases, a liquid  chelated form  is  often used.  This formulation allows the
                                                                           6-17

-------
   copper to remain dissolved in the water for a period long enough to kill algae.
   Both planktonic algae, including nuisance blue-green species, and species form-
   ing filamentous mats in weed beds will be killed by doses of 1 -2 mg CuSCWL
   (0.8 milligrams of copper per liter (mg Cu/L)).
     Copper sulfate is often effective, although the response may be brief and re-
   quire additional applications. There are several undesirable impacts, and it is in
   no way a lake restoration agent since no causes of the problem are addressed.
     Negative impacts include toxicity to fish and the occurrence of dissolved
   oxygen depletions when overly large areas are treated within a short period of
   time. Hansen and Stefan (1984) have provided one of the very few examinations
   of the long-term ecological consequences of the addition of a toxic substance to
   a lake for the purpose of short-term relief from algal blooms. They report that 58
   years of copper sulfate use in a group of Minnesota lakes, while effective at times
   for the temporary control of algae, have produced dissolved oxygen depletions,
   increased internal nutrient cycling, occasional fishkills, copper accumulation in
   sediments, increased tolerance to copper by some nuisance blue-green algae,
   and undesirable effects to fish and the fish-food community. They conclude that
   short-term control (days) of algae has been traded for long-term degradation of
   the lakes.
     Costs of algicides are related to dose, to longevity of effect, and to applicator
   fees. The usual dose of granular copper sulfate for control of planktonic algae is
   about 5.4 Ibs per acre-foot of water. An acre-foot is an acre of water 1 -foot deep.
   The most commonly used chelated products are applied  at 0.6 gallons per acre-
   foot. The price for chemicals in 1986 was about $5.15 per acre-foot for granular
   copper sulfate at a dose of 5.4 Ibs per acre-foot, and $20.10 per acre-foot of a
   chelated product at a dose of 0.6 gallons per acre-foot. Application  procedures
   are more rapid for the liquid chelated form, and there have been claims that its
   effect on algae will last longer than granular copper sulfate, suggesting that an-
   nualized costs for use of the chelated form, especially in hard-water lakes, may
   be similar to the granular form. Fees of the licensed, insured applicator are not
   included here.
   Algae/Summary  of
   Restoration  and  Management
   Techniques
   Table 6-1 summarizes the procedures described in the preceding sections.
   Qualitative evaluation of the procedures with regard to short- and long-term ef-
   fectiveness, costs, and potential negative impacts are presented. These judg-
   ments are the consensus of a panel of 12 lake and reservoir restoration experts.
    Problem  II:  Excessive

    Shallowness
    The incomes of silt and organic matter from agricultural erosion, construction,
    shoreline collapse, urban drainage, and other sources can rapidly increase the
    area of very shallow water. Not only can this interfere with recreational activities
6-18

-------
Table 6-1.—Comparison of lake restoration and management techniques for
          control of nuisance algae
TREATMENT (ONE APPLICATION)
Phosphorus Inactivation
Dredging
Dilution
Flushing
Artificial Circulation
Hypolimnetic Aeration
Sediment Oxidation
Algicides
Food Chain Manipulation
Rough Fish Removal
Hypolimnetic Withdrawal
SHORT/
TERM
EFFECT
E
F
G
F
F
F
G
G
G
G
G
LONG/
TERM
EFFECT
E
E
G
F
?
7
E
P
9
P
G
NEGATIVE
COST
G
P
F
F
G
G
F
G
E
E
G
EFFECTS
F-G
F-G
G
G
F
F
?
P
9
9
F
   E = Excellent   F = Fair
   G = Good P = Poor
such as boating, but shallow, nutrient-rich sediments are ideal areas for growth
of nuisance aquatic plants.
  Details about sediment removal were provided in an earlier section in this
chapter. This procedure is the only practical way to bring about lake or reservoir
improvement when shoaling is a problem, and dredging has therefore  become
one of the most frequently prescribed techniques. A properly designed feasibility
study of the lake and the disposal sites is an essential first step, and in nearly all
cases a permit from the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers will be required. Dredging
projects are expensive, and have the potential for severe negative impacts un-
less correctly designed, but they are often highly effective. Continual  incomes of
silt will return the lake to its predredged condition, and therefore silt  sources
should be controlled.
Problem III:  Nuisance  Weeds

(Macrophytes)


Biology of  Macrophytes

Overabundant rooted and floating plants are a major nuisance to lake and reser-
voir users. In extreme cases, particularly in ponds and in shallow, warm, well-
lighted lakes and waterways of the Southern United States, weeds (sometimes
called macrophytes) can cover the entire lake surface. Weeds obviously inter-
fere with recreation and detract from aesthetic values of a lake. They can also in-
troduce significant  quantities of nutrients and organic  matter  to the  water
column, perhaps stimulating algal blooms and raising dissolved oxygen con-
sumption.
   Macrophytes are  generally grouped into classes called  emergents (repre-
sented by cattails), floating-leaved (water lilies), and submergents (pondweeds),
plus the mats of filamentous algae that develop in weed beds. Understanding
the factors that control weed growth is the first step in controlling weeds.
   Macrophytes reproduce both by the production of flowers and  seeds and by
asexual propagation from fragments and shoots extending from roots. Growth
rates of macrophytes can be very high.
                                                                  6-19

-------
    Available light is a very significant factor in where the weeds will grow and
  how profusely. Submergent plants will grow profusely only where underwater il-
  lumination is  sufficient. Steep-sided  lakes therefore support a much smaller
  development of common nuisance weeds because most of the sediments are
  too dark or too deep. Similarly, turbid lakes and reservoirs are unlikely to have
  dense beds of submerged plants. Thus high silt incomes to a lake can create a
  favorable weed habitat as the lake fills in, unless the silt  loading also creates
  severe turbidity. Significant reductions in algal blooms can also enhance light
  penetration and allow weeds to grow  better.
     Since most macrophytes obtain their nutrients via roots, they can therefore be
  abundant in lakes in which nutrient concentration of the water column has been
  reduced through diversion.  When the sediments are either highly organic or
  highly inorganic (sand), macrophyte growth may be poor because it is more dif-
  ficult for roots to obtain nutrients in these sediment types. In these two extremes,
  emergent plants may replace submergents because their more extensive  root
  systems are better adapted to these conditions. Further  discussions of these
  ideas regarding macrophyte biology can be found in Barko and Smart (1986)
  and Duarte et al. (1986).
     No native animals have been found that graze on macrophytes at rates suffi-
  cient to control them. Biological controls therefore  are confined to exotic
  animals.
     Short-term management of macrophytes through cutting or herbicides has
  been practiced for years. The development of ecologically sound procedures to
  produce long-term control has lagged far behind, in part because we have, until
  recently, understood very little about macrophyte physiology and the environ-
  mental  factors that control their growth. The following paragraphs briefly
  describe the procedures known to produce long-term control. Since short-term
   management techniques are likely to continue to be used, for example during
   implementation of a longer term treatment, these are described in a separate
   section.
   Macrophytes/Long-Term

   Control  Techniques


   Sediment Removal  and Sediment Tilling

   • PRINCIPLE. Sediment removal can limit submerged weed growth through
   deepening, thereby producing light limitation,  or by removing favorable sedi-
   ments to growth and leaving sand. Both dredging and rototilling can limit plants
   through removal of roots.

   • MODE OF ACTION. Sediment removal was described in some detail in ear-
   lier paragraphs on algal control. The amount of sediments removed, and hence
   the new depth and associated light  penetration, is critical to successful long-
   term control of rooted, submerged plants. There appears to be a direct relation
   between water transparency, as simply determined with a Secchi disk,  and the
   maximum depth of colonization (MDC) by macrophytes. Canfield et al. (1985)
6-20

-------
provide these equations to estimate MDC in Florida and Wisconsin from Secchi
disk measurements:

       STATE                       EQUATION
       Florida                       log MDC = 0.42 log SD + 0.41
       Wisconsin                     log MDC = 0.79 log SD + 0.25
       where SD = Secchi depth in meters

   For example, suppose the Secchi transparency of a Florida lake is usually
about 6 feet. How far from shore can we expect to find rooted macrophytes (the
MDC)? A hand-held calculator can be used to obtain the answer and to suggest
how deep near-shore areas would have to be  to have minimal quantities of
rooted, submerged macrophytes. In this  case,  transform 6 feet to meters (feet x
0.305 = meters). This will be 1.83 meters. The log of 1.83 is 0.26. Then substitute
this in the equation for a Florida lake, as follows:

                    log MDC  = (0.42xlog1.83) + 0.41
                             = (0.42x0.26) + 0.41
                             = 0.52

   To  obtain depth (MDC) in meters use the calculator to find the antilog of
0.52 = 3.31 meters. To convert meters  to feet, multiply this  answer by 3.28
= 10.9 feet. This means that for a Florida  lake with a Secchi disk transparency of
about 6 feet, we would expect some submerged weeds in 11 feet of water and
more weeds in  progressively  shallower water. In this  example,  very large
amounts of sediments might have to be  removed in order to create large areas
of the lake with depths of 10-11 feet. Examination of a bathymetric map (Chapter
3) will indicate whether this is the case. The equation also indicates that actions
that greatly improve water clarity, such as erosion control or phosphorus inac-
tivation, may enhance weed distribution and abundance.
   Rototilling  and  the  use of  cultivation  equipment  are  newer procedures
presently under development and testing by the British Columbia Ministry of En-
vironment (Newroth and Soar, 1986). A rototiller is a barge-like machine with a
hydraulically operated tillage device that  can be lowered to depths of 10-12 feet
(3-4 meters) for the purpose of tearing out roots. Further descriptions are found
in Cooke et al. (1986).  Also, if the water level in the lake can be drawn down, cul-
tivation equipment pulled behind tractors on firm sediments can achieve 90 per-
cent root removal.

• EFFECTIVENESS. The  use of  sediment  removal for long-term control of
macrophytes is effective when the  source of sediments is controlled. Dredging
below the lake's photic zone will prevent  macrophyte growth. The cost of dredg-
ing, however, often places the use of this technique in doubt.
   Newroth and Soar (1986) reported that rototilling to remove watermilfoil is as
effective as three to four harvesting operations.

• POTENTIAL  NEGATIVE IMPACTS. The negative impacts of sediment
removal have already been discussed under algal control.

• COSTS. Costs were described earlier under algal control.
   Newroth and Soar (1986) have studied costs of the rototiller and amphibious
cultivator and found them to be similar to herbicides and harvesting, but opera-
tion speed is slower.
                                                                         6-21

-------
    Water Level  Drawdown

    • PRINCIPLE AND MODE OF ACTION. Exposing sediments to prolonged
    freezing and drying  provides an opportunity to carry out several management
    procedures. Some rooted plant species are permanently damaged by these
    conditions and the entire plant, including roots and perhaps seeds, is killed if ex-
    posed to freezing for 2-4 weeks. Other species, however, are either unaffected or
    enhanced. Drawdown also allows repair of dams and docks, fish management,
    sediment removal, and installation of sediment covers to control plant growth.

    • EFFECTIVENESS. Cooke et al.  (1986) summarize the  responses of 74
    aquatic  plants to drawdown. Table 6-2 lists the responses of some common
    species.
       Many case histories exist,  and they illustrate three important facts:
       1. Freezing and desiccation are required; wet, cold lake sediments, or wet
    sediments covered with snow may have little negative effect on plants.
       2. The technique is species-specific.
       3. Successful drawdown-freezing operations should be alternated every 2
    years with no drawdown so that resistant species do not become firmly estab-
    lished.

    	Table 6-2.—Responses of common aquatic plants to drawdown	
    DECREASE
    Coontail (Ceratophyllum demersum)
    Brazilian elodea (Elodea = Egeria densa)
    Milfoil (Myriophyllum spp.)
    Southern naiad (A/ay'as guadalupensis)
    Yellow Water Lily (Nuphar spp.)
    Water Lily (Nymphaea odorata)
    Bobbin's  Pondweed (Potamogeton robbinsii)

    INCREASE
    Alligator Weed (Alternanthera philoxeroides)
    Hydrilla (Hydrilla verticillata)
    Bushy Pondweed (A/a/as flexilis)

    VARIABLE
    Water Hyacinth (Eichhornia crassipes)
    Common Elodea (Elodea canadensis)
    Cattail (Typha latifolia)     	


       Two case histories illustrate these points. Beard (1973) describes winter draw-
    down of Murphy Flowage, Wisconsin. Before drawdown, 75 acres were closed in
    spring and summer  to fishing because of  a dense infestation of pondweeds
    (Potamogeton  robbinsii, P. amplifolius), coontail,  Eurasian  watermilfoil, and
    water lily. Drawdown opened 64 acres, and although some resistant plants in-
    creased, fishing improved. Geiger (1983) used winter drawdown in an attempt to
    control Eurasian watermilfoil  in an Oregon lake. The  mild, wet winter of the
    Pacific Northwest did not provide sufficient freezing, and the  weeds increased
    and had to be treated with 2,4-D.

    • POTENTIAL NEGATIVE IMPACTS. Algal blooms have occurred after some
    drawdowns. The causes are unclear, but may be related to nutrient release from
    sediments or to an absence of competition from weeds. The most significant
6-22

-------
problem with drawdown can be loss of use of the lake during the time it is drawn
down.
   Drying and freezing  can sharply reduce the abundance  of benthic inver-
tebrates essential to fish diets. Also, an oxygen depletion in the remaining water
pool can occur, leading to a fishkill. Dissolved oxygen should be monitored in
small-volume systems, and an aerator should be installed if needed.

• COSTS. If the lake is controlled by a dam with drawdown capability, expen-
ditures will be minimal. Additional costs are associated with loss of use of the
lake.


Shading and Sediment Covers

The use of dyes in the water and coverings on the water surface to limit the light
available to plants and the application of plastic sheets over the sediments to
stop plant growth are prompted by the well-known facts that rooted plants re-
quire light and cannot grow through physical barriers. Applications of silt, sand,
clay, and gravel have also been used, although plants sooner or later can root in
them.
   Sediment  covering   materials,  such  as  polyethylene,  polypropylene,
fiberglass, and nylon can be used in small areas such as dock spaces and swim-
ming beaches to completely terminate plant growth. Large areas are not often
treated because the costs of materials and application are  high.

•  EFFECTIVENESS. Case histories  of the use of sediment  covers  are
described in detail in Cooke (1980), Cooke et al. (1986),  and Cooke and Ken-
nedy (1981). Engel (1982) lists these advantages to their use:
   1. Use is confined to a specific area.
   2. Screens are out of sight and create no disturbance on shore.
   3. They can be installed in areas where harvesters  and spray boats cannot
reach.
   4. No toxics are used.
   5. They are easy to install over small areas.
   And these disadvantages:
   1. They do not correct the cause of the problem.
   2. They are expensive.
   3. They are difficult to apply over large areas or over obstructions.
   4. They may slip on steep grades or float to the surface after trapping gases
beneath them.
   5. They can be difficult to remove or relocate.
   6. They may tear during application.
   7. Some materials are degraded by sunlight.
   8. A permit may be required.

   Successful use is related to selection of materials and to the quality of the ap-
plication. The  most  effective materials are gas-permeable  screens  such as
Aquascreen  (fiberglass), polypropylene, Dartek (nylon), and to a lesser extent,
common burlap. Polyethylene and synthetic rubber trap gases beneath them.
Proper application requires that the screens be placed flush with the sediment
surface and  staked or securely anchored. This is difficult to accomplish over
heavy plant growth, making spring or during winter drawdown ideal times for ap-
                                                                        6-23

-------
    plication. Scuba divers are used for application in deep water, greatly increasing
    costs. Depending upon siltation rate, sediment covers will accumulate deposits
    on them, which allows plant fragments to root. Screens then must be removed
    and cleaned. Details of application procedures are found in Cooke et al. (1986)
    and Cooke and Kennedy (1981).
      Surface shading has received little attention. Polyethylene sheets, floated on
    the lake surface, were used by Mayhew and Runkel (1962) to shade weeds. They
    found that 2-3 weeks of  cover were  sufficient  to eliminate  all  species of
    Potamogeton for the summer if the sheets were applied in spring before plants
    grew to maturity. Coontail was also controlled but Chara was not. This proce-
    dure may be a useful alternative to traditional methods of weed control in small
    areas such as docks and beaches.
       Dyes have been applied to small areas such as ponds to light-limit algae and
    weeds.

    • POTENTIAL NEGATIVE IMPACTS.  Negative features of sediment covers
    appear to be few. Benthic invertebrates may be eliminated (Engel, 1982), but dis-
    solved oxygen depletions have not been  a problem.

    • COSTS. Table 6-3, modified from Cooke and Kennedy (1981), summarizes
    costs of some sediment-covering materials. These costs do not include applica-
    tion fees.

     Table 6-3.—Characteristics of some sediment covering material  (revised from
                Cooke and Kennedy, 1988)
                  SPECIFIC            APPLICATION      GAS
     MATERIAL     GRAVITY    COST    DIFFICULTY   PERMEABILITY COMMENTS
     1. Black         0.95   $1,860/acre    High     Impermeable Poorchoiceof
       Polyethylene                                           materials-easily
                                                            dislodged;
                                                            "Balloons"

     2. Polypropyl     0.90   $3,240/acre     Low      Permeable  Effective
       (Typar)

     3. Fiberglass-    2.54   $8,700/acre     Low      Permeable  Effective
       PVC (Aqua-
       screen)

     4. Nylon         >1.0   $3,240/acre  Moderate   Impermeable Effective if vented

       (Dartek)

     5. Burlap        <1.0   $1,375/acre  Moderate    Permeable  Effectiveupto
     	                                             1  season; rots
    Biological Controls
    • PRINCIPLE. Significant improvement in our future ability to achieve lasting
    control of nuisance aquatic vegetation in  many areas of North America may
    come from use of plant-eating or plant pathogenic biocontrol organisms, or from
    a combination of current procedures such  as harvesting, drawdown, and herb-
    icides with these organisms. Biological control has the objective of achieving
    long-term control  of plants without introducing expensive machinery or toxic
    chemicals.
6-24

-------
MODE OF ACTION
GRASS CARP (Ctenopharyngodon idella Val.): Grass carp are an exotic
fish (imported originally from  Malaysia  to the United States in 1962)
known to be voracious consumers of macrophytes. They have very high
growth rates (about 6 Ibs, or 2.5 kg, per year at the maximum rate; Smith
and Shireman, 1983). This combination of catholic diet and high growth
rate can produce  control,  or  more likely, eradication of plants within
several seasons.
   Grass  carp do  not consume aquatic plant species equally  readily.
Generally, they avoid cattails, spatterdock, and water lily. The fish prefer
plant species that include elodea, pondweeds (Potamogeton spp.),  and
hydrilla. Low stocking densities can produce  selective grazing on the
preferred plant species while other less preferred species, including mil-
foil, may even increase. Overstocking, on the  other hand, will produce
weed eradication.  Feeding preferences are  listed in Nail  and  Schardt
(1980), Van Dyke et al. (1984), and Cooke and Kennedy (1981).

INSECTS: Six insect  species have been imported to the United States
under quarantine and have received U.S. Department of Agriculture ap-
proval for release to U.S. waters. These insects are confined to the waters
of Southern States and are specific to the control of alligatorweed and
water hyacinth.  At present, neither exotic nor native  insects are used
against Northern plants.
   These six species have life histories that are specific to the host plants
and are therefore confined in their distribution to infested areas. They are
also limited in range by the cold weather of States north of Georgia-North
Carolina.
   Their reproductive rates are slower than their target plants. Therefore,
control is slow,  although it can be enhanced  by integrated techniques
wherein plant densities are reduced at a site with harvesting or herbicides,
and insects are concentrated on the remaining plants.
 EFFECTIVENESS
 GRASS CARP: The use of grass carp is operational in several States (for
 example, Florida, Texas,  Arkansas),  although they remain banned for
 public and  private  use in many States. They are undergoing thorough
 evaluation throughout the United States, especially the sterile triploid
 variety. Most studies have found that the fish are exceptionally effective in
 reducing or eliminating nuisance vegetation, although there have been
 undesirable side effects. Two case histories illustrate their use.
    Martyn et al. (1986)  describe the introduction of  diploid (able  to
 reproduce)  grass carp into Lake Conroe, Texas, a water supply impound-
 ment for Houston.  Submersed  weeds occupied about 44 percent of the
 20,000 acres at maximum infestation. Most plants were hydrilla (Hydrilla
 verticillata), although milfoil and coontail were also abundant. Between
 September  1981  and September 1982, 270,000 grass carp, 8 inches or
 longer, were introduced.  By October 1983, all submersed plants were
 gone. Associated  with this  eradication was  an increase in  algae,  a
 decrease in transparency, and an increase in open-water fish species as-
 sociated with plankton. Fish associated with weed beds declined.
    Van Dyke et al. (1984) have reported on the effects of diploid grass
 carp stocking in three central Florida lakes and one reservoir. Hydrilla was
 eliminated for 6 years and may  have been eradicated from the lakes. Few
 rooted plants remain. Illinois pondweed (P. illinoiensis) was eliminated
                                                                        6-25

-------
        from the reservoir, and milfoil was greatly reduced. Control in all four sites
        was slowly achieved but has been long-lasting. Eurasian watermilfoil has
        returned to the reservoir, apparently because carp escaped.
           Grass carp have not been successful weed management agents in the
        sense that small numbers could be stocked to achieve a partial elimina-
        tion of plants. Shireman et al. (1983) attempted to do this in Lake Pearl,
        Florida, by stocking carp at low densities and  using some herbicides on
        an infestation of hydrilla. Carp were stocked at increasing rates over a 2-
        year period while herbicide additions continued. After 2 years, a carp den-
        sity was finally reached that had an impact on  the  plants,  and then
        eradication occurred. Stocking rates appear to vary geographically, with
        the type, diversity, and  coverage of  plants, and with the management
        goal. A detailed discussion  of stocking rates and food preferences is
        found in Cooke and Kennedy (1988), and State fisheries personnel can be
        an excellent source of information. Lake homeowners and managers are
        strongly advised not to stock a lake unless competent technical advice
        about your specific  lake has been obtained.  State fisheries  personnel
        should be contacted prior to stocking because this practice is not legal in
        all States (see Table 6-4).
           Further descriptions of case histories can  be found in Cooke et al.
        (1986) and Cooke  and Kennedy (1988).

      Table 6-4.—State regulations on possession and use of grass carp (modified from
                 Allen and Wattendorf, 1987)

      A. Diploid (able to reproduce) and Triploid (sterile) permitted
        Alabama          Hawaii            Kansas           Oklahoma
        Alaska           Iowa              Mississippi        New Hampshire
        Arkansas         Idaho             Missouri           Tennessee

      B. Only 100% Triploids permitted
        California         Illinois            New Jersey        South Carolina
        Colorado          Kentucky          New Mexico       South Dakota
        Florida           Montana          North Carolina     Virginia
        Georgia           Nebraska          Ohio              West Virginia

      C. 100% Triploids permitted for research only
        NewYork          Louisiana          Oregon           Wyoming

      D. Grass Carp prohibited
        Arizona           Maryland          North Dakota       Utah
        Connecticut       Massachusetts     Pennsylvania       Vermont
        Delaware          Michigan          Rhode Island       Washington
        Indiana           Minnesota         Texas             Wisconsin
        Maine	Nevada	


        INSECTS: Insects  have proven to be highly effective controls of alligator-
        weed and water hyacinth. For example, Sanders and Theriot (1986) report
        that the water hyacinth weevil (Neochetina eichhorniae) has been respon-
        sible for at least a 50 percent decrease in the water hyacinth distribution in
        Louisiana since 1974. Insect control has been particularly effective when
        combined with another plant  management technique. Two case histories
        illustrate this point.
          Center and Durden  (1986) studied the  effect of the water hyacinth
       weevil in a Florida canal. When a canal section was harvested at the peak
        of the  growing season,  both  water hyacinths and weevils were severely
        reduced. Subsequent plant growth was much greater than the weevil
        population,  and control  was  greatly delayed. Another section was
       sprayed  with  2,4-D at  season's end, allowing plants and weevils to
6-26

-------
     recover simultaneously. Insect control occurred more rapidly. Chemical
     or mechanical control, along with insects, will be more effective if done in
     early fall or winter to minimize interference with the insect.
       Haag (1986) studied a Florida pond that was 100 percent covered with
     water hyacinth. Weevils (N.  eichhornia and N. bruchi) were present in
     small numbers. About 20 percent of the pond was isolated with a barrier
     while the rest was sprayed with 2,4-D in monthly increments of 25 percent
     of the remaining pond area. Weevil density slowly increased in the iso-
     lated area and by the following year exerted 100 percent control of water
     hyacinth in the entire pond. Eradication allowed alligatorweed to invade,
     but its spread was checked by the alligatorweed flea beetle, Agasicles
     hygrophila.
       This work supports the conclusion that weed eradication with herb-
     icides, a common strategy,  will also eliminate the insects and allow a
     prompt return of the weeds. By leaving a reservoir of weeds and by "herd-
     ing"  the  insects to it, sufficient insect density is achieved to produce
     longer term weed control.
 • POTENTIAL NEGATIVE IMPACTS
    GRASS CARP: Grass carp can produce a major change in the structure
    of a lake  or  reservoir, particularly when  macrophytes are eradicated.
    Eradication of plants is almost certain if overstocking occurs. Increases in
    nutrient concentrations, blue-green algal blooms, turbidity, and changes
    in fish communities have been commonly reported (Cooke et al.  1986;
    Cooke and  Kennedy,  1988). The long-term consequences of  plant
    eradication are very poorly understood.
       The  introduction  of grass carp into hydrologically open systems
    (reservoirs, man-made ponds) has raised important questions about es-
    cape and  reproduction in habitats where vegetation  is desirable. While
    environmental requirements for successful reproduction are stringent and
    were once believed to be an adequate barrier to their multiplication in
    North American waters, grass carp have apparently  reproduced in  the
    United  States.  More recently, sterile triploid grass carp have  been
    developed and are the only type of grass carp permitted in many States.
    While their reproduction is not possible, their escape in large numbers
    from a hydrologically open system, such as a reservoir, can still pose a
    significant  threat to a downstream habitat where aquatic vegetation is
    desired.
    INSECTS: Significant negative environmental impacts  of insects have not
    been observed,  except for changes in aquatic habitats associated with
    macrophyte elimination.


•  COSTS. Cost comparisons for biological controls  are generally not yet avail-
able for biological controls, but these methods do appear to be far less  costly
than the traditional alternatives of chemical or mechanical  treatments. These lat-
ter techniques, in addition to the costs of equipment, materials, labor, and in-
surance, must be reapplied frequently. Shireman  (1982) and Shireman et al
(1985) report that $117,232 had been spent on endothal for the temporary con-
trol of hydrilla in Lake Baldwin, Florida. The hydrilla problem was eliminated with
grass carp at a cost of $8,499 ($43 per acre). Unlike  herbicide or harvesting
treatments, the grass carp exert control for many years with one treatment, so
that costs are amortized. Byway of comparison, harvesting costs in Florida can
easily be $1,000 per acre while chemical costs in Florida range from $200 to 400
                                                                         6-27

-------
    per acre (Cooke and Kennedy, 1988). Harvesting and herbicide costs in Nor-
    thern climates are essentially the same. Also, Shireman (1982) points out that in
    1977, the cost of chemical treatment of 37,000 acres of hydrilla in Florida was
    $9.1 million; the cost of grass carp to provide long-term control would have been
    about $1.71 million if stocked at a density of 14 fish of 8 inches or longer per
    acre.
    Macrophytes/Techniques  with

    Shorter-Term  Effectiveness


    Harvesting

    •  PRINCIPLE. Harvesting is a procedure to cut and remove nuisance rooted
    plants and associated filamentous algae. Unlike herbicide applications where
    plants are left in the lake to die, decompose, and release nutrients and organic
    matter, harvesters may have some restorative value in lakes with dense infesta-
    tions and low external  loading because these materials are removed. Some
    potable water supply systems use them to reduce the release of  organics,
    which, when chlorinated in the treatment plant, produce potentially carcinogenic
    molecules such as trihalomethanes (THM's). Harvesters can clear an area of
    vegetation without the posttreatment waiting period associated with herbicides
    and without significant danger to nontarget species.

    •  MODE OF ACTION. The typical harvester is a highly maneuverable, low-draft
    barge designed with one horizontal and two vertical cutter bars, a conveyor to
    remove cut plants to a hold on the machine, and another conveyor to rapidly un-
    load plants (Fig. 6-8). Some manufacturers sell shore conveyor units to assist
    loading from harvester to truck and high-speed barges to carry cut plants from
    the harvester to shore. Harvesters vary in size and storage capacity from about
    200 ft  (6 m3) of cut vegetation to 800 ft3 (23 m3). Cutting rates range from about
    0.2 to 0.6 acres per hour,  depending on machine size. The barge itself can be
    very useful with other like improvement procedures, including applying alum.
         Primary power source
         2 cylinder deutz diesel
                                            Operator console

                                                 Cutting bed rams
                                                         Vertical sickle bar
                                                         cutters
    Figure 6-8.-The Aquamarine Corporation's H650 harvester. (Courtesy of the Aquamarine
    Corporation).
6-28

-------
  Weed disposal is usually not a problem, in part because lakeshore residents
and farmers often will use the weeds as mulch and fertilizer. Also, since aquatic
plants are more than 90 percent water, their dry bulk is comparatively small.

• EFFECTIVENESS. Most harvesting operations are successful  in producing
at least temporary  relief from nuisance plants and in removing organic matter
and nutrients without the addition of a potentially deleterious substance. Plant
regrowth can be very  rapid (days or weeks),  especially in Southern waters
where midsummer  growth rates of water hyacinth can exceed the  rate at which
they can be harvested. Several case histories illustrate this.
  A bay of LaDue Reservoir (Geauga Co., Ohio) was harvested  in July 1982,
using  the traditional method in which the operator treats the weed bed like a
residential lawn and  simply mows the area.  Stumps of Eurasian watermilfoil
plants, about 0.5-3  inches in height, were left, and complete regrowth occurred
in 21  days. In contrast, Conyers and  Cooke (1983) and Cooke  and Carlson
(1986) have found that  the slower method of lowering the cutter blade about 1
inch into the soft lake mud will produce season-long control of milfoil by tearing
out roots. Of course this cutting technique is of little value where sediments are
very stiff and in deeper water where the length of the cutter bar (usually 5-6 feet)
cannot reach the mud. When only plant tops are cut, regrowth may be rapid.
There is evidence of a  carry-over effect (less growth in the subsequent year),
especially if an area has had multiple harvests in one season.
  Some weed species are more sensitive to harvesting than others. Nicholson
(1981) has suggested that harvesting was responsible  for spreading milfoil  in
Chautauqua Lake, NY,  because the harvester spreads fragments of plants from
which new growths can begin. On the other hand, he considers Potamogeton
spp., another nuisance  plant, to be far more susceptible because these species
emphasize sexual reproduction and regenerate poorly from fragments. Harvest-
ing therefore could mean that milfoil could replace Potamogeton.
  There are few data on the actual restorative effects of harvesting, in the sense
of removing  significant amounts  of  nutrients or in reducing the release  of
nutrients and organic matter to the water column. If nutrient income is moderate
and weed density is high, as much as 40-60 percent of  net annual phosphorus
loading could be removed with  intense harvesting. This would  be a significant
nutrient removal in  many cases. Milfoil may be a large contributor of phosphorus
to the water column throughout the summer (Smith and Adams, 1986), strongly
suggesting that removing this plant through harvesting could curb this source of
nutrients to algae.  An herbicide application would leave the plants to decom-
pose  and release nutrients and organic material to the water column. On the
other hand, harvesting  itself can increase water column phosphorus concentra-
tion either through  mechanical disturbance of sediments or by enhancing condi-
tions for phosphorus release from sediments (Cooke and Carlson,  1986).
   Effective use of a  harvester to manage  aquatic plants and to  minimize
regrowth during the season includes the purchase of a machine of  sufficient size
to handle the affected areas, the use of proper cutting techniques,  and the siting
of disposal areas nearby the areas to be harvested.

•  POTENTIAL NEGATIVE IMPACTS. Cooke et al. (1986) and Cooke and Ken-
nedy  (1988) have listed some of the possible negative effects of harvesting:
   1. Cutting and removing vegetation can be energy- and labor-intensive and
therefore costly.
   2. Only relatively small areas can be treated per unit time, which may create
lake user dissatisfaction.
   3. A high capital outlay for equipment is required.
                                                                         6-29

-------
      4. Plants may fragment and spread the infestation.
      5. Small fish may be removed.
      6. Operating depths are limited.
      7. Favorable weather is required.
      8. Machine breakdown can be frequent, especially if an undersized piece of
    equipment is purchased.

    • COSTS. Harvesting costs in the Midwest have ranged from $135 to $300 per
    acre when costs from extreme situations are omitted (Table 6-5), making the
    technique somewhat less costly than herbicide treatments. Costs in Florida have
    exceeded $1,000 per acre. Costs of a particular project will relate to machine
    cost, labor, fuel,  insurance, disposal charges, and the amount of downtime. Es-
    timates of manpower time and costs can be obtained from the HARVEST model
    developed by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (Hutto and Sabol, 1986), which
    runs on a personal computer. The program is available from Program Manager,
    Aquatic Plant Control Research Program,  Environmental Laboratory, Waterways
    Experiment Station, Vicksburg, MS 39180.


     Table 6-5.—Cost comparisons, in 1987 dollars, of three symptomatic treatments
                for nuisance aquatic weeds (Florida data for grass carp)
                      PROCEDURE  COSTRANGE
                      Harvesting
                       Midwest   $135-300 per acre
                       Florida    $300-5,000 per acre

                      Herbicides
                       Midwest   $200-400 per acre
                       Florida    $200-400 per acre

                      Grass Carp*  $85 per acre
                                 (cost is also amortized due to
                                 long-term effectiveness)
                     '12 inch or greater fish, stocked at 14-20 per acre
    Herbicides

    • PRINCIPLE AND MODE OF ACTION. Poisoning nuisance aquatic weeds is
    perhaps the oldest and most widely used method to attempt their management.
    Few alternatives to herbicides existed until recently. The pesticide industry has
    grown  and has  been more  carefully regulated  so that  some  of  the  most
    dangerous and toxic herbicides, such as sodium arsenite,  have been replaced
    with chemicals that have much lower toxicity to nontarget biota and  leave
    degradable residues.
      An herbicide treatment can be an effective short-term management proce-
    dure to produce a rapid reduction in vegetation for periods of weeks to months.
    Pesticide use cannot be equated with lake restoration, since causes of the weed
    problem are not addressed nor are nutrients or organic matter removed. Plants
    are left to die and decompose. New plants will shortly regrow, sometimes to den-
    sities greater than before.
6-30

-------
  The use of herbicides remains controversial and emotion-charged, in part be-
cause they have been promoted as, and confused with, restoration procedures,
and in part because their positive and negative features have been poorly under-
stood by both proponents and opponents. For example, as carefully pointed out
by Shireman et al. (1982), herbicide treatments are presently the only means of
opening the vast acreage of water infested with the exotic water hyacinth (Eich-
horniae crassipes) in Florida and other Southeastern States. This is a case in
which chemicals for management are a necessity until some other more long-
term control can be established. Their broad-scale use in other climates, often
for the purpose of  seasonal eradication of weeds,  is  more controversial, espe-
cially since equally cost-effective alternatives have smaller environmental im-
pacts.  Many opponents of herbicides fear their effects on fish and  fish-food
organisms. Some chemicals can be toxic at high doses, but most have low
toxicity to aquatic organisms. The impacts of herbicides on humans  is poorly
understood, and there is almost no information on the long-term ecological con-
sequences of their use.
   Lake managers who  choose herbicidal chemicals need to exercise all proper
precautions. As shown in Table 6-6, some chemicals are specific to  certain
species, and therefore a careful identification of the nuisance plants is needed.
Users should follow the herbicide label directions exactly, use only an herbicide
registered by the U.S. EPA for aquatic use, wear protective gear during applica-
tion, and be  certain to protect desirable plants. Most  States require applicators
to be licensed and to have adequate insurance. Among the important factors to
be considered  before adopting a management program with herbicides are the
following questions:
   1. What is the acreage and  volume of the  area(s) to be  treated?  Proper
dosage is based upon these facts.
  2. What plant species are to be controlled? This will determine the herbicide
and dose to be used.
  3. What will the long-term costs of this decision be? Herbicides must be reap-
plied annually or in some cases, 2-3 times per season.
  4. How is this waterbody used? Many herbicides have restrictions (days) on
water use, following application.
  5. Is the applicator licensed and insured, and has a  permit been  obtained
from the appropriate regulatory body?
  There are several useful and well-written reference  manuals to facilitate plant
identification and the determination of the  proper chemical and its dose. These
include (1) Aquatic Weeds. 1979. Fisheries Bulletin No. 4, Department of Con-
servation,  Springfield, IL  62706; (2)  Submersed Aquatic Weeds  and Algae
Guide. 1984. Pennwalt  Corp., Three Parkway, Philadelphia, PA 19102; and (3)
How fo Identify and Control Water Weeds and Algae. 1979. Appl ied Biochemists,
Inc., Mequon, Wl 53902.
• EFFECTIVENESS. Table 6-6 lists some aquatic weeds and the herbicides
known to control them. The following paragraphs briefly describe each com-
monly used herbicide.
   Diquat. The effectiveness of diquat is inactivated in turbid water due to its
sorption to particles. It does not persist in the water but can remain toxic in lake
sediments for months. Many users combine it with copper sulfate, producing a
potent, broad-scale herbicide-algicide. The reader is cautioned to note the toxic
features of copper, described in an earlier section.
   Endothall. Endothall  is sold in several formulations: liquid (Aquathol K),
granular dipotassium salt (Aquathol), and the di (N,  N-dimethylalkylanine) salt
                                                                         6-31

-------
      Table 6-6.—Common aquatic weed species and their responses to herbicides
                    (adapted from Nichols, 1986)

EMERGENTSPECIES
Allernantherca philoxeroides
(alhgatorweed)
Dianthera americana
(water willow)
Glyceria borealis
(mannagrass)
Phragmites spp (reed)
Ranunculus spp (buttercup)
Sagittaria sp (arrowhead)
Scirpus spp (bulrush)
Typha spp (cattail)
FLOATING SPECIES
Brasen/a schreberi
(watershield)
Eichhorniae crassipes
(water hyacinth)
Lemna minor (duckweed)
Nelumbo lutea
(American lotus)
Nuphar spp (cowlily)
Nymphaea spp (waterlily)
SUBMERGED SPECIES
Ceratophyllum demersum
(coontail)
Chara spp (stonewort)
Elodea spp (elodea)
Hydrilla verticillata
(hydrilla)
Myriophyllum spicatum
(milfoil)
Najas flexilis (naiad)
Najas guadalupensis
(southern naiad)
Potamogeton amplifolius
(large-leaf pondweed)
P. crispus
(curly-leaf pondweed)
P. diversifolius (waterthread)
P. natans
(floating leaf pondweed)
P. pectinatus
(sago pondweed)
P. illinoiensis
(Illinois pondweed)
DIQUAT





YES



NO
NO
YES

NO

YES1

YES
NO

NO
NO

YES

NO2
YES


YES

YES
YES


?
YES

NO
YES

YES



ENDOTHAL





NO



NO
NO
NO

NO



NO
NO

NO
NO

YES

NO2
?


?

?
?


YES
YES

YES
YES

YES



2,4-D

YES

YES

NO


YES
YES
YES
?

YES

YES

NO
7

YES
?

YES

NO2
NO


YES

NO
NO


NO
NO

NO
YES

NO



GLYPHOSATE
(RODEO)

YES





YES



YES






NO

YES
YES



NO2 NO2



NO

NO













FLURIDONE
(SONAR)

YES







YES
YES
9

NO

NO

YES


YES
YES

YES


YES
YES

YES

YES
YES






YES

YES

YES

      YES = Controlled
      BLANK - Information unavailable
NO = Not Controlled
9 - Questionable Control
      1 plus chelated copper sulfate   2 controlled by copper sulfate
      Sources Anonymous, 1979, Arnold, 1979, Gangstad, 1986, McCowen et al, 1979, Nichols, 1986, Pennwalt Corp , 1984,

             Schmitz, 1986
6-32

-------
(Hydrothal) in liquid and granular forms. Effectiveness can range from weeks to
months. The potassium salt forms have been shown to persist in the water for 2
to 46 days.
  2,4-D. 2,4-D is sold in liquid or granular forms as sodium and potassium salts,
as ammonia or amine salts, and as an  ester. Doses of 18-36  Ibs per acre are
usual for submersed weeds, most often of the dimethylamine (DMA) salt or the
butoxyethanolester  (BEE). This herbicide  is particularly effective  against
Eurasian watermilfoil (granular BEE applied to roots early in the season) and
against water hyacinth (a foliage spray). 2,4-D has a  short persistence in the
water but can be detected in the mud for months.
  Glyphosate. This herbicide,  known  as  Rodeo,  is effective  against floating
leaves  and emergent aquatic plants but not against  submersed species.
   Fluridone. Fluridone (Sonar) is sold in liquid and pellet formulations as an
herbicide for emersed and submersed weeds. It is  a persistent compound and
will not exert effect until 7-10 days after application. Control may be evident for
an entire season. Sediments may remain toxic to plants for more than a year.
   Label  registration restrictions on water use following treatment are very  im-
portant and should be followed carefully regardless of  the herbicide  chosen.
Each State has its own regulations as well.
• POTENTIAL NEGATIVE IMPACTS. Many, but not all, nontarget aquatic or-
ganisms appear to have high tolerances to the herbicides just discussed. Diquat
is a notable exception because of its toxicity to some Crustacea, a staple of fish
diets.
   The primary environmental impacts include release of nutrients to the water
column and  consumption of dissolved  oxygen during plant  decomposition.
Algal blooms, dissolved oxygen depletions, and nutrient release from sediments
can follow a treatment. Another significant problem is that a species unaffected
by the herbicide may replace the target species. Chara and Potamogeton often
invade a treated area. When a target  weed is replaced by an algal bloom or a
resistant weed, another chemical may have to be used, making herbicide treat-
ment even more expensive.
   Shireman et al. (1982) caution that  these lake or pond characteristics almost
invariably produce water quality changes following treatment with an herbicide
for weed control:
   1. High water temperature
   2. High plant biomass to be controlled
   3. Shallow, nutrient-rich water
   4. High percentage of the lake's area to be  treated
   5. Closed or nonflowing habitat
   Competent applicators will be cautious in treating a lake with these condi-
tions.
   There has been a long-standing debate over the effects of 2,4-D on humans.
An apparent resolution has been published that establishes that men exposed to
2,4-D and/or 2,4,5-T for more than 20 days per year have a sixfold increased risk
of non-Hodgkins' lymphoma (Hoar et  al. 1986).
•  COSTS. Herbicide treatments are costly for what they accomplish. They
produce no restorative benefit, show no carry-over of effectiveness to the follow-
ing season, and may  require several applications per year. The short-term
benefit-cost ratio can be desirably high,  but the long-term benefit-cost ratio is
likely to be very low.
                                                                          6-33

-------
      Their ranges of per-acre costs for harvesting and herbicide treatments are
    similar, but grass carp are significantly less than either (Table 6-5). It should be
    recalled, however, that harvesters remove nutrients and organic matter (a poten-
    tial source of THM precursors and of dissolved-oxygen consumption)  and can
    have a carry-over effect to subsequent seasons.
      One study of harvesting and herbicide (Diquat and copper sulfate)  costs
    showed that harvesting was more expensive only in the initial year when the
    machinery was purchased. In the following years, maintenance, operation, in-
    surance, and weed disposal costs were lower than costs for chemicals alone.
    Harvesting, in this case history, cost $115 per acre and herbicides cost $266 per
    acre, so that over a 5-year period,  not including herbicide price inflation or ap-
    plicator fees, the use of chemicals would have been 2.6 times more expensive
    than harvesting and without the benefits of nutrient and organic matter removal
    (Conyers and Cooke, 1983)
      Shireman (1982) has compared the costs of chemical and biological (grass
    carp) control of hydrilla in Florida. A chemical treatment of 37,000 acres in 1977
    cost $9.1 million, whereas a grass carp introduction would have cost $1.71 mil-
    lion. Of  course the grass carp exert  control slowly while herbicides provide
    prompt, though short-term relief.
      Table 6-5 provides regional cost ranges which could be expected for her-
    bicides. Variations in costs are brought about by size of area to be treated, den-
    sity of the infestation, species, and problems unique to a particular lake.
    Macrophytes/Summary of

    Restoration  and Management

    Techniques
    Table 6-7 is a summary of the procedures described in this section. Qualitative
    evaluations about short- and long-term effectiveness, costs, and potential for
    negative side effects are presented. These judgments are the consensus of 12
    lake and reservoir restoration experts.

    Table 6-7.—Comparison of lake restoration and management techniques for
              control of nuisance aquatic weeds
TREATMENT SHORT/TERM
ONE APPLICATION EFFECT
Sediment Removal
Drawdown
Sediment Covers
Grass Carp
Insects
Harvesting
Herbicides
E
G
E
P
P
E
E
LONG/TERM
EFFECT
E
F
F
E
G
F
P
COST
P
E
P
E
E
F
F
CHANCE OF
NEGATIVE EFFECTS
F
G
E
F-G
E
F-G
P
    E - Excellent  F = Fair  G = Good   P = Poor
6-34

-------
Problem IV:  Eutrophic

Drinking Water  Reservoirs


Nature of the Problem

Those who drink water from surface water supply reservoirs often detect un-
pleasant tastes, odors,  and color. They  may be unaware of  more serious
problems that are unknown to the user, but are of concern to  potable water
treatment plant managers, and State and Federal EPA officials: the presence of
potentially toxic materials in finished water. Toxic material can  enter drinking
water supplies directly by runoff from the land (for example, herbicides). They
can also be created in the finishing process when treatment plant chemicals in-
teract with organic molecules  in the raw water to form potentially dangerous
compounds  such as trihalomethanes, or THM's.
  Many of the problems in potable water treatment are caused by eutrophic
conditions in the water supply reservoir. Poor taste and odor are associated with
algal blooms. Some of these algae, the blue-greens, produce toxins lethal to
domestic animals and may be linked to certain summer illnesses in humans.
  Colored water is usually  caused by a high concentration of iron and man-
ganese in the raw water. This occurs when the raw water intake is deep and
withdraws oxygen-free  hypolimnetic  water. THM's are  a  class  of  organic
molecules — chloroform is in this class — that are produced through an interac-
tion between the disinfectant (chlorine) added to raw water to kill  microbes, and
certain organic molecules in the raw water. The organic molecules come from
the watershed, primarily in the form of plant decay products, and from weeds
and algae in the reservoir. THM's are believed to be carcinogenic. The U.S. EPA
has set an upper average amount (0.1 ppm), past which finished water should
not go.
  Other eutrophication-related problems  in water supply systems include a
gradual loss of water storage as silt deposits increase, rapidly escalating costs
connected with increased chemical use to clean the raw water, and such in-
plant problems as clogged filters.
Water  Supply  Reservoir Management

The traditional approach to improving drinking water quality is to upgrade the in-
plant treatments. Sometimes this is effective, particularly where the water supply
is in good to very good condition. In other cases, the modifications of the plant
required to remove organics are exorbitant. Granulated active carbon (GAC) is
the most likely process to be added, and this might cost a modest sized city $20
million in capital costs plus $1 million annually for operation.
   The better the incoming water, the less it will cost to finish. Ultimately, water-
shed and reservoir protection and restoration may be less costly than extensive
in-plant modifications. As already pointed out, however, reservoirs are very dif-
ficult to protect because their drainage basins are often large relative to reservoir
area and usually include several political and economic units. The city or con-
trolling authority may have to embark on a long-term effort to buy land, en-
courage or subsidize wastewater treatment plant upgrades, and help land users
to employ modern agricultural practices.
                                                                   6-35

-------
       One alternative or an addition to drainage basin management is the use of
    chemicals such as alum in the river to strip phosphorus from the water before it
    enters the  reservoir.  This can involve a detention basin,  or the addition of a
    chemical to the stream (Cooke and Carlson, 1986).
       Another option is to divert river water into a smaller, square-sided,  weedless
    basin, where silt deposition and additions of flocculent could occur. Wahnbach
    Reservoir, an example of this, was described in Chapter 4. The basin can be pe-
    riodically drained and dredged.
       Water supply reservoirs near highways, railroads, and within industrial areas
    are vulnerable  to accidental spills of toxic materials.  Few are protected or
    prepared for this. The side basin described above, built large enough to hold a 3-
    5 day supply, could also serve as an emergency raw water  supply.
       Theoretically, most of the techniques described earlier  in this  chapter could
    be used to improve water quality, or to actually restore the reservoir after poor
    quality waters are diverted. In practice, however, restoration techniques are not
    easily applied to reservoirs because of their size and the  difficulty  of reducing
    loadings. The following paragraphs list drinking water quality problems and pos-
    sible in-reservoir solutions.


    Color

    Iron and  manganese appear in oxygen-free raw water. Two solutions are com-
    mon:  using a hypolimnetic aerator or elevating the intake from the hypolimnion
    to the epilimnion. Drawing water from the epilimnion can introduce taste and
    odor,  and the  aerator could destratify a shallow reservoir, triggering an algal
    bloom.


    Taste and Odor

    Algal blooms, particularly blue-green algae, not only can impart an unacceptable
    taste and odor but can  also increase the demand for treatment chemicals and
    decrease filter runs. There are few solutions if nutrient diversion is  not adequate.
    Artificial circulation could reduce productivity of algae in deep reservoirs,  but is
    unlikely to be effective in shallow ones. Sediment  removal and especially phos-
    phorus inactivation, both procedures to curtail sediment nutrient release, will be
    eventually overwhelmed by high loading,  but offer the possibility of improvement
    for several years. Copper sulfate, an algicide, can be used for short-term  relief,
    but applications are often followed by more severe blooms and  by release of
    substances that add to THM production.


    Loss of Storage Capacity

    This problem can only be solved through silt removal and  curtailment of silt in-
    come. A stringent permitting process may be imposed by the U.S. Army Corps
    of Engineers if dredging is chosen because the reservoir is  a potable water sup-
    ply.


    Trihalomethane  Production

    A search for sources of organic THM precursor molecules in the drainage basin
    must be undertaken, followed by appropriate land management to  curtail their
    generation. Marshes are known to be important sources. A substantial fraction of
    the organics can come from sediments, weeds, and algae, strongly suggesting
    that in-reservoir management of these  plants  could produce  a significant
6-36

-------
 decrease in THM production. Harvesting would be an effective procedure.
 Another possibility is to add clean well water to the raw water at the intake in
 order to dilute it.
 Problem V:  Fish  Management


 Nature of the Problem

 Most lakes and reservoirs are used to some extent for fishing, and many (ac-
 cording to fishermen) are  considered unsatisfactory. Problems with fishing
 usually fall into these categories:
   1. Conflicts between users - including high fishing pressure
   2. Overabundance and population imbalances - especially of "stunted"
 fish or undesirable species
   3. Survival - including poor reproduction and die-off of desirable species
   User conflicts are not trivial. Chapter 9  addresses the problem of regulating
 these conflicts.
   Fish production is directly related to lake fertility. Unfortunately, the nutrient-
 rich water that favors high fish biomass may also promote algal blooms repug-
 nant to swimmers. High fishing pressure can both degrade fishing quality and
 limit the use of the lake for other purposes, including high-speed boating. Fisher-
 men often complain that a lake is "fished out" or has too many little fish or too
 many "trash" species. This leads to vocal demands for restocking, a process
 that is likely to have only short term  benefits.
   Improvement of a lake or reservoir for fishing requires fish management. Ben-
 nett (1970), citing  Leopold (1933),  defines fish management as "the art and
 science of producing sustained crops of wild fish for recreational and commer-
 cial uses." Competent programs include a diagnostic study and then implemen-
 tation of management options that  are ecologically sound and within financial
 constraints.
 Diagnosis and  Management

 Just as with lake restoration, a diagnosis of the condition of the fish community
 is the first step in a fish management program. For most situations, this involves
 fish sampling to provide an  assessment of the lake's present fish population.
 Various sampling methodologies and strategies are available, the specific ap-
 proach being dependent upon the region in the country where the lake is lo-
 cated, the type of fish to be sampled, the purpose of the sampling, and the
 characteristics of the particular lake. Before attempting to diagnose fishery con-
 dition, a consultation  with State or local fisheries professionals is strongly
 recommended.
  Fisheries management, as described earlier, is often an integral part of a lake
 restoration plan. It is important to remember that lake ecosystems are complex
 and highly  interconnected.  Fishermen may  urge a lake manager to  stock
 predators, such as walleye, muskie,  or bass to improve fishing or even a lake's
water quality. However, corrective stocking frequently fails. Often the lake is at
or near its productive capacity. Game fish fry stocked in a poor quality lake may
                                                                    6-37

-------
     not  survive the many sources of mortality, including intense predation. The
     stocking of significant numbers of older fish is expensive and the animals are
     more difficult to obtain. High fishing pressure can quickly reduce their numbers
     once stocked.  Similarly,  some lake managers have heeded advice to  stock
     forage species, such as  shad, only to discover later that  shad grazing on
     zooplankton was sufficient to permit algal bloom (see the section on biological
     controls in this chapter) and their reproduction exceeded predation on them.
       There are several valuable sources of information about fish management.
     Each State has a fisheries unit that can provide important guidelines specific to
     that geographic area.
6-38

-------
         CHAPTER 7
Hypothetical Case Study

-------
CHAPTER 7
HYPOTHETICAL CASE  STUDY
Purpose of Case Study
Armed with all the explanations, guidance, instructions, and information in the
preceding chapters, could a lake user or lake association  group "do  lake
management?" The answer is yes; these associations are the driving force be-
hind the many lake restoration and management programs in the United States.
They may hire experts, but the burden of making the critical decisions and bear-
ing the responsibility for organizing and sustaining a restoration program is typi-
cally borne at the grass roots level. The hypothetical case study in this chapter
illustrates how a lake management or restoration program is carried out. This
case study integrates the information and material from the previous sections,
including problem definition, in-lake restoration techniques, watershed manage-
ment, data analysis, and the evaluation and selection of management alterna-
tives.
  Lynn Lake — a hypothetical waterbody — suffers from excessive algae,
aquatic weeds, and siltation. Like most lakes that are managed and restored to
good condition by involved citizens, Lynn Lake is extremely popular locally. It is
not one of the largest or most important lakes in the State,  or even well-known
outside the State. Restoration will take major effort and a considerable dedica-
tion of local citizens —  but it can be done. The rest of the case study will
demonstrate how this is accomplished.
Lynn  Lake -  A Case  Study
Lynn Lake is located completely in Kent County. A county park is located on the
western side of the lake, but the entire perimeter is accessible to the public. The
lake is used heavily for fishing, swimming, and boating; well-used jogging and
walking trails circle the lake. Swimming is often prohibited because of high levels
of algae and bacteria. Boating is impaired by macrophytes that cover 50 percent
                                                             7-1

-------
  of the lake. Siltation of the inlet areas of the lake has also limited the use of these
  areas for boating. Lynn Lake (Fig. 7-1) has two major tributaries: Kimmel Creek
  and Tag Run. The City of Middletown is located on Kimmel Creek and has a
  secondary wastewater treatment plant that discharges to the creek. Upstream of
  Middletown  is Blue Ridge, a 200-unit  subdivision that is presently under con-
  struction. Tag Run, the other tributary, is surrounded mostly by wetlands, ponds,
  and undeveloped land.
7-2

-------
Problem  Definition
Because of concern over the declining condition of the lake, the county col-
lected several water samples and analyzed them for nutrients (phosphorus and
nitrogen) and algae. The results indicated that the lake has high levels of phos-
phorus and nuisance blue-green algae. County officials decided to conduct a
survey over the July 4th weekend to ask residents what problems they had ob-
served and to gage the degree of concern and potential support for restoring the
lake to better condition. The survey questions shown in Table 7-1, were asked to
residents who used the lake over the holiday weekend.  Interest in the lake
proved  high because 70 percent of  the  households in the Lynn Lake basin

                 Table 7-1.—Public  Opinion Questionnaire.

 1  How  often do you visit Lynn Lake?	
 2. How far do you travel to visit Lynn Lake?_
 3. When you visit Lynn Lake, what activities do you participate in?
   D Picknicking          D Jogging             D Swimming
   D Walking             D Boating             D Other	
 4. Since Lynn Lake appears to be suffering from excessive algae, aquatic weeds and
   siltation, do you support a lake restoration program that would include a study of the
   lake and the implementation of a program to eliminate the lake problems?
    D Yes   D No    H  Undecided

 5. Restoration of Lynn Lake will require the expenditure of County funds. Partial funding of
   the restoration program may be obtained from a State or Federal grant. Realizing this,
   do you still support the implementation of a lake restoration program for Lynn Lake?
   D Yes, only if State or Federal funds are available to offset the cost of the program.
   D Yes, even if only County funds are used
   D No    D  Undecided
responded to the questionnaire. Results of this informal survey, summarized in
Table 7-2, indicated that the public participated in all recreational aspects of the
lake, with picnicking and boating being the dominant uses. Results also showed
that 98 percent of those who answered the questionnaire supported a lake res-
toration project if partially funded by State or Federal grants, and 94 percent
supported the program if funded solely by the county.
   It should be noted at this point, that while Lynn Lake meets all of the criteria
for a U.S. EPA Clean Lakes grant, including the fact that it is a publicly owned
waterbody with several recreational water  uses available to everyone, many
lakes do not meet these criteria. Furthermore, many problem lakes do not re-
quire the infusion of Federal funds to accomplish an effective lake protection
and restoration program. The approach to the diagnosis and development of a
management plan provided here, moreover, is generally applicable to most lake
situations,  including private lakes and others for which Clean Lakes Program
funds are not applicable.
   Based on  the results of the survey, the county held a special meeting in
August to discuss a restoration program for Lynn Lake. County staff presented
the results of the  questionnaire and outlined a proposed study of the lake.
During the discussion  period, the citizens  repeated their support for the
proposed restoration project. Many lake users believed that the lake's problems
were caused  by discharges from the Middletown treatment plant, erosion and
                                                                           7-3

-------
                  Table 7-2.—Public Opinion Questionnaire Results

     1.  How often do you visit Lynn Lake?	
          TIME          PERCENT
          Daily              3
          Weekly           32
          Monthly           56
          Annually           9

     2.  How far do you travel to visit Lynn Lake?	
          MILES         PERCENT
          0-12             29
          2-5              33
          5-10             36
           >10              2

     3.  When you visit Lynn Lake, what activities do you participate in?
         78  Picknicking         32  Jogging           	2_ Swimming
         59 Walking             61   Boating           	 Other Model Boats: 1
                                                    	Necking:    1
     4.  Since Lynn Lake appears to be suffering from excessive algae, aquatic weeds and
        siltation, do you support a lake restoration program that would include a study of the
        lake and the implementation of a program to eliminate the lake problems?
          100%  Yes     0%  No     0%  Undecided

     5.  Restoration of Lynn Lake will require the expenditure of County funds. Partial funding of
        the restoration program may be obtained from a State or Federal grant. Realizing this,
        do you still support the implementation of a  lake restoration program for Lynn Lake?
         98  Yes, only if State or Federal funds are available to offset the cost of the program
         94  Yes, even if only County funds are used
          2  No      0  Undecided
    runoff from new construction (especially the Blue Ridge Development), erosion
    from farmland, and nutrients leaching from failing septic systems. They also sug-
    gested that erosion from roadway construction and maintenance being per-
    formed by the State Highway Department was contributing to the sedimentation
    problem. Several lake users indicated that the shoreline was sloughing in a few
    areas. Green algal scums and weeds, however, were universally agreed to be
    the major problem.
       At the end of the meeting, the county formally formed a special committee to
    investigate the possibility of restoring Lynn Lake. The committee was made up of
    the County Engineer, the Director of the County Planning Department, the Direc-
    tor of Middleton Public Works, and four interested lake users. The County Com-
    missioners also approved a motion to hire a consultant if help could  not be
    found through the county staff or State office first. It was agreed that the special
    committee would seek out recommendations of firms capable of helping with the
    restoration project, review qualifications, and recommend a consultant.
       In the next month, members of the special committee sought information and
    sources of help in lake restoration. They asked the State Water Control Board
    and the State Health Department whether any programs existed that could be
    used to study or restore Lynn Lake. Since no State program or funding dedi-
    cated to lake preservation  or  management existed, the committee  asked for
    general information on lake restoration and as much guidance as possible. A
    staff member of the State Water Control Board was able to give them names of
    lake associations and municipalities in the State that were involved in lake res-
    toration. The committee contacted them to find out how they had carried out
    their projects and who they might recommend as a consultant. One member of
    the special committee was also a member of the North American Lake Manage-
    ment Society (NALMS). The special  committee called the  NALMS office in
7-4

-------
  Washington, DC, and asked for help. They ordered a booklet on lake restoration
  and explained the types of problems Lynn Lake was having. The NALMS office
  sent a list of consultants in Lynn Lake's area who specialized in lake restoration
  and a list of NALMS members who had agreed to help lake associations and
  municipalities with general questions such as how to find help and how to estab-
  lish a  public information program to support the work.
    The committee contacted lake associations and municipalities in the State
  that had begun restoration projects and asked them who they had used to carry
  out the work, how they had paid for it, what to expect, what the consultant had
  done for them,  how much the program had cost, whether it had  been effective
  and whether they were satisfied with the results.
    At the next meeting, the special committee reported its findings. The commit-
  tee voted to initiate a lake restoration program that would include the followino
  activities:                                                         a
    1. Forming a Lake Restoration Advisory Committee
    2. Selecting a consultant to perform the lake study, evaluate the management
 alternatives, assist in implementing  the restoration program, and help the as-
 sociation find funding to support the work and prepare any grant application
 packages
    3. Developing a detailed work plan
    4. Submitting a  grant application to the EPA  for a Phase  I Diagnos-
 tic/Feasibility Study
    5_ Performing a study of Lynn Lake that would quantify the problems and
 problem sources and result in the development of a comprehensive lake and
 watershed management program
   6. Submitting a grant application to EPA  for a Phase II Lake Restoration
 Program if Lynn Lake qualified for a Phase I grant
   7. Implementing the restoration program
 Lake Restoration Advisory

 Committee
The first step in the restoration program was to form an advisory committee that
would be responsible for providing direction throughout the program. A commit-
tee representing the various interests in the watershed was formed and con-
sisted of  representatives from the following  municipalities,  agencies  and
groups:
  Friends of Lynn Lake - a fund-raising organization
  Lynn Lake Fishing Club
  Kent County
  The Kent County Homebuilders Association
  Kent County Soil and Water Conservation District
  U.S. Soil Conservation Service (SCS)
  Middletown Sewer Authority
  State Water Control Board
  State Health Department
  State Highway Department
  East Kent Garden Club
                                                                     7-5

-------
  Responsibilities of the Lake Restoration Advisory Committee included:

     • Reviewing consultant qualifications and recommending a consultant to
       the County Commissioners
     • Providing direction throughout the project by frequently meeting with the
       consultant
     • Reviewing the consultant's work including data analysis, conclusions,
       and recommendations
     • Obtaining public input to the proposed management alternatives

     • Approving the final lake and watershed management plan prepared by
       the consultant
     • Recommending the acceptance and implementation of the management
       plan to the County Commissioners
     • Assisting in the implementation of the lake and watershed management
       plan.
   Consultant Selection
   Since no one involved in the project was experienced in lake studies and res-
   toration, the county decided to retain a consultant to assist them in developing a
   lake restoration program.  Realizing that they would be applying for Federal
   funds from the EPA's Clean Lakes Program, they followed the Federal procure-
   ment guidelines provided in 40 CFR Part 33  - "Minimum Standards for Procure-
   ment Under EPA Grants." The county decided to use the negotiation method of
   procurement. The Advisory Committee mailed requests for qualifications to eight
   firms, reviewed the qualifications, and interviewed three firms. They asked each
   firm to indicate its specific experience in several of the lake management areas,
   as listed in Chapter 3.
      The  Committee selected  a  consultant  who demonstrated  the  necessary
   qualifications and experience, especially the  successful completion of projects
   involving algae and weed problems similar to those experienced at Lynn Lake.
   The consultant was selected to provide the  following services:
      1. Develop a detailed work plan that would meet all requirements of an EPA
   Phase I Diagnostic/Feasibility Study
      2. Develop a Phase I grant application
      3. Perform a diagnostic study, with or without Clean Lakes funding
      4. Assist in the selection of a cost-effective restoration program
      5. Develop a grant application for the Phase II Lake Restoration Program if
   Lynn Lake appears to be eligible for such funding
      6. Design in-lake and watershed management practices
      7. Implement the restoration program
      By including all of these tasks in the consultant selection process, the Com-
   mittee  ensured that one consultant would be involved from start to finish and that
   further consultant selection procedures would not be required.
7-6

-------
Detailed  Work Plan
The consultant developed a work plan that included the following activities:
   1. Study of lake and watershed characteristics
   2. Study of lake and watershed aesthetics and recreational characteristics
   3. Limited lake monitoring
   4. Limited watershed monitoring
   5. Data analysis
   6. Development and evaluation of management alternatives
   7. Selection of a watershed management and lake restoration program
   8. Projection of benefits
   9. Environmental evaluation
   10. Presentation to the homeowners association
   11. Progress reports and final report
   In developing the detailed work plan, the consultant reviewed the limited ex-
isting water quality data on Lynn Lake and evaluated the natural characteristics
of the lake and watershed. The consultant also met several times with the Ad-
visory Committee to discuss project goals, potential problem areas in the water-
shed  (such  as  Middletown   treatment  plant,  erosion from  agriculture,
construction and roadway maintenance, and septic system leachate), and the
availability of local resources that could be used during the study.
   In-kind services from local sources and State offices may be counted as part
of the State's contribution for Clean Lake Program funding. See Chapter 8 for
suggestions regarding Federal Agencies that may support lake restoration or
watershed management (nonpoint source control) programs.
   To keep the diagnostic study costs to a minimum, the consultant decided that
the following local resources could be used as in-kind services:


Local in-kind services:

1. KENT COUNTY

    • provide boat for lake monitoring

    • provide land use data for study
    • assist in the installation of watershed monitoring  stations
    • assist in the evaluation and selection of management alternatives
    • assist in public participation activities
    • review and comment on final report

    • attend project meetings
2. SOIL CONSERVATION SERVICE

    • identify agricultural problem areas
    • assist in the identification and evaluation of  agricultural control
     measures, attend project meetings

    • provide cost information

    • provide technical information
    • advise on funding through other USDA programs
                                                                        7-7

-------
    3. MIDDLETOWN SEWER AUTHORITY

      • provide wastewater treatment plant effluent data

      • analyze lake and stream samples in treatment plant laboratory


    4. STATE WATER CONTROL BOARD

      • review progress reports and final report

      • attend project review meetings


      The final work plan included a detailed description of study tasks,  project
    responsibilities, the project budget (cash and in-kind services), and the project
    schedule. Costs for in-kind services were calculated using an hourly cost rate
    based on salary plus overhead.
    Phase  I Grant Application
    The county decided to apply for EPA Clean Lakes financing because the Lynn
    Lake project appeared to be an ideal candidate. It not only met the criteria for
    public access but was also the most heavily used public lake within a 3-hour
    commuting radius. Furthermore,  the  lake's deterioration  was pronounced;
    without restoration the lake was likely to become unusable for several  recrea-
    tional pursuits within a few years. The enthusiastic public support for restoration
    was also in the lake's favor. Clean Lakes funding provides a matching form of
    grant (that is, 70% Federal, 30% State funds); both the  county and the general
    public were willing to support the cost of a restoration project.
      The consultant developed a Phase I grant application that consisted of the
    completed EPA application forms along with the detailed work plan. Although
    the consultant developed the grant application for the county,  the official ap-
    plicant was the State Water Control Board since EPA regulations only allow
    Clean Lakes Program grants to be given to  State agencies. The State Water
    Control Board, therefore, reviewed the grant application and submitted it along
    with their priority ranking of the project.
      After  both the EPA regional and headquarters offices had reviewed and
    evaluated the application, the EPA approved the application and offered the
    State a Phase I grant. The State then subcontracted with Kent County to perform
    the Phase I study. Kent County in turn contracted with the consultant to perform
    the technical tasks of the Phase I study.
    Lake  and  Watershed Study

    Study of Lake and  Watershed
    Characteristics
    The study of lake and watershed characteristics was performed primarily
    by collecting and analyzing  secondary data — data already available from
    other sources including 208 Water Quality Management Plans, U.S. Geological
7-8

-------
 Survey (USGS) maps, aerial  photographs, and State and  local  publications.
 Using these sources, the consultant obtained the following information:
    1. Physical lake characteristics (area, depth, mean flow)
    2. Some general chemical and biological characteristics of the lake (tempera-
 ture, dissolved oxygen, nutrients, algal population, fish population)
    3. Watershed characteristics (drainage area, land use, topography, geology,
 and soils)
    4. Possible pollutant sources (wastewater  treatment  plant discharge, con-
 struction sites, agricultural areas, and failing septic systems)
    Insufficient existing data were available to clearly define the  lake's mean
 depth, its volume, or its chemical and biological condition. The work plan was
 designed to fill  in these and other gaps in information. Also,  although the con-
 sultant, working with the input from the Advisory Committee, was able to identify
 potential pollutant sources, available information was insufficient to quantify and
 rank them.
    The products of this task were some basic information about the lake and a
 set of watershed maps illustrating land use, topography, geology, soils, and pos-
 sible pollutant sources.
 Study of Previous  Uses and

 Recreational Characteristics
 Using existing reports and information, the consultant identified the following in-
 formation on the lake and watershed:
   1. Historical uses (walking, jogging, boating, swimming, fishing, and picnick-
 ing)
   2. Past lake problems (excessive algae, aquatic weeds, and siltation leading
 to loss of recreational uses)
   3. Public access locations
   The product of this task was basic information on lake uses and users, infor-
 mation  useful for  clarifying  project  goals  and developing a management
 program.
 Lake  Monitoring

 Because of the lake's shape, three sampling stations were located on it, as
 shown in Figure 7-2. One station was located over the deepest part of the lake
 while the other two stations were located in the two arms of the lake to ade-
 quately characterize lake quality. Samples were collected monthly from Septem-
 ber through April and biweekly from May through August. Besides meeting EPA
 monitoring requirements, the sampling program was designed to obtain more
 samples during the  warm  weather period (May through August) when the
 biological activity and chemical changes are at their maximum.
  Three depths were sampled at each station because lake stratification oc-
 curred. Water samples were collected at 1/2 meter below the surface, 1/2 meter
above the bottom, and near middepth. The middepth station was located within
the  metalimnion, the water  stratum where temperature and dissolved oxygen
changes the most.
                                                                       7-9

-------
                         Dam
       Figure 7-2.-Lynn Lake monitoring stations.
       Each water sample was analyzed in the laboratory for the following chemical
    parameters:
           Total Phosphorus
           Soluble Reactive Phosphorus
           Organic Nitrogen
           Ammonia Nitrogen
           Nitrate Nitrogen
Total Suspended Solids
Alkalinity
Iron
Manganese
       Field measurements at each sampling station included a temperature and dis-
    solved-oxygen profile with measurements taken at intervals of 1 meter (using a
    combined temperature-dissolved-oxygen  meter). Field measurements also in-
    cluded pH, conductivity, and  Secchi  depth. The Secchi depth measures the
    transparency of the water.
7-10

-------
  Water samples collected from the 1/2-meter depth were also analyzed for
chlorophyll-a, phytoplankton,  and  zooplankton.  Chlorophyll-a  measures the
algal biomass in the surface waters of the lake. The phytoplankton (floating
algae) and  zooplankton  (floating microscopic animals) analyses consisted of
identifying and  counting the various algae and microscopic animals in the
samples.
  A macrophyte (aquatic weed) survey was performed in August and consisted
of identifying the type and distribution of aquatic plants in the lake. Since siltation
of the lake is a problem, bathymetric (bottom contour) and sediment depth sur-
veys of the lake were performed  to determine the water and sediment depth of
the entire lake. The surveys consisted of measuring the water depth with a depth
recorder and the depth  of the unconsolidated  (loose)  bottom sediments by
probing with a steel rod  at cross sections throughout the lake. A survey crew
was used to pinpoint the  location of the cross sections.
  At each  of the three  lake stations a sediment sample was collected and
analyzed for the following parameters:
          Sediment Sample Parameters
        Total Phosphorus             Iron
        Total Nitrogen                Manganese
        Percent Solids                EP Toxicity Test
        Percent Organic  Solids

  The products of this task were physical, chemical, and biological data on the
lake water and sediments. These data would be analyzed later to determine the
present  ecological condition of the lake. Another product of this task was
bathymetric data that would be used to calculate the volume of the  lake and to
determine whether dredging was a feasible management alternative.
Watershed Monitoring
As discussed in Chapter 4, the first step in analyzing and modeling a lake is to
establish a water balance and budget of materials (for example, nutrients, sedi-
ment, organic matter). Chapter 4 also indicated that a water balance and
materials budget could be obtained either indirectly by comparing the water-
shed to a similar watershed or directly by monitoring the streamflow and pol-
lutant loads over a 1-year period. The direct measurement method is obviously
more accurate and reliable than the indirect estimate method, but it also requires
more resources. Since sufficient funds and resources were available, the direct
measurement method was used to calculate an annual water balance and pol-
lutant budget.
  To calculate an annual sediment and nutrient budget for Lynn Lake, the con-
sultant with assistance from Kent County installed stream monitoring stations on
Kimmel  Creek, Tag  Run, and the lake's outlet as shown in Figure  7-3. Each
stream station consisted of an automatic water level recorder  and sampler.
Volunteers serviced  the station. The consultant measured cross-sectional area
and velocity of the  stream during selected rain events. This information was
used to develop a stream  rating curve that correlates stream water level with
streamflow. This information was used in conjunction with the water level read-
ings to calculate streamflows throughout the study period. A staff gage was also
installed in the lake to monitor changes in lake level and thus water storage (or
loss) to or from the lake.
   In some lakes, groundwater income can be a very important source of water
and, sometimes, of  nutrients. Because Lynn Lake had  a very high income of
water via the two streams, it was believed that groundwater was an insignificant
                                                                        7-11

-------
     Figure 7-3.-Location of stream monitoring stations.
    component of the overall water budget. In reservoirs, this may often be the case.
    In many natural lakes, stream inflow is small, and groundwater may be very im-
    portant. In these cases, wells would  have to be placed around  the lake and
    groundwater inflow determined. At the same time, nutrient concentration  in
    groundwater would also be determined.
      An automatic water sampler (Fig. 7-4) was electrically connected to the water
    level recorders and programmed to collect water samples when the stream level
    increased during rain events. These are water level changes that occur very
    rapidly, often (it seems) during the  night or on holidays when volunteers cannot
    be present to note them. During each rain event, discrete water samples were
    collected at 1/2-hour intervals over the stream hydrograph as shown in Figure
    7-5. (Depending on the size of the stream and land use in the watershed, the
    sampling time  interval  can be adjusted from  15  minutes to several hours.)
    After each storm event,  selected water samples were taken to characterize sedi-
    ment and nutrient  loading at various times during  the storm.  Samples (that is,
    1-2 samples) were taken as the flow increased, near the peak discharge, and as
    the flow decreased.
      Each selected sample was analyzed for the following parameters:
           Total Phosphorus             Ammonia Nitrogen
           Soluble Reactive Phosphorus   Nitrate Nitrogen
           Total Nitrogen                Total Suspended Solids
7-12

-------
Figure 7-4.-Automated stream monitoring station used to collect flow and water quality
data.
  E
  to
  CD
  +-•
 C/)
Storm Hydrograph
                             Time
 Figure 7-5.-Typical stream hydrograph showing increase in stream water level during a rain
 event and showing how an automatic sampler collects water samples at select time inter-
 vals.
                                                                               7-13

-------
     These selected samples  permitted the development of a nutrient/sediment
   concentrations versus flow relationship that was used to estimate loads during
   nonsampled storms, based on the flow records.
     A total of  nine storm events were  monitored. These  nine  storm  events
   provided sediment and nutrient loading data representative of nonpoint  source
   pollution such as watershed erosion and runoff. Dry weather stream monitoring
   was also performed to obtain baseflow stream loading data. Dry weather stream
   monitoring consisted of collecting grab samples from the two tributaries and the
   lake's outlet once each month during the study.  Each sample was analyzed for
   the same variables as the wet weather samples.
     The products of this task were flow and  water quality data for both dry and
   wet weather conditions for the two tributaries and the lake's outlet, as  well as
   changes in water storage in the lake. Water loss via evaporation and water fall
   directly on the lake were estimated from data  obtained at a nearby National
   Oceanic and Aeronautic Administration (NOAA) weather station.
   Data Analysis


   Lake Analysis

   The lake's mean and maximum depths and volume were calculated for the
   bathymetric survey data. The hydraulic residence time, the theoretical time re-
   quired to displace the lake volume as explained in Chapter 2, was calculated
   using the lake volume and the mean annual discharge from the lake. The limiting
   nutrient was suggested by the nitrogen to phosphorus ratio in the lake during the
   study period. If the total nitrogen to total phosphorus ratio is greater than 10 to 1,
   phosphorus is usually the limiting nutrient. Throughout most  of the study, the
   nitrogen to phosphorus was generally greater than 17,  indicating that phos-
   phorus was generally the limiting nutrient. Therefore, the in-lake and watershed
   management  program should be concentrated on reducing phosphorus loads
   entering and within Lynn Lake.
      Figure  7-6  illustrates some summer temperature and  dissolved-oxygen
   profiles for Lynn Lake. Temperature stratification began in late May and became
   progressively more pronounced over the summer. In most cases, a shallow lake
   with as large a surface area as Lynn Lake's would destratify frequently from sum-
   mer storms. Lynn  Lake, however,  is sheltered from prevailing winds by high
   bluffs and trees so that it remains stratified all summer. Cool weather in Septem-
   ber, however, allowed enough heat loss from the lake to make destratification
   possible.
      Dissolved-oxygen began to deplete in the bottom waters of Lynn Lake right
   after  the  lake stratified. By  mid-July the entire hypolimnion was devoid  of
   oxygen,  a common  symptom  in a eutrophic lake. An absence of dissolved
   oxygen in waters overlying the sediments provides ideal conditions for release of
   phosphorus from the sediments to the water column. In Lynn Lake,  summer-
   long  monitoring  of phosphorus  concentrations from surface  to  bottom
   demonstrated that the  hypolimnion had greatly elevated concentrations, and
   studies before and after summer storms demonstrated that small mixing events
   circulated some of this phosphorus to surface waters and stimulated immediate
   growths of algae. A calculation of the rate of internal phosphorus release, using
   phosphorus income-outgo data and changes in the amount  of phosphorus in
   the water column,  revealed that 118 Ibs were released between the end of May
   and the middle of September when Lynn Lake destratified. An introduction of
   dissolved oxygen  to bottom waters when the lake mixed  in the fall changed
7-14

-------
      0

     10

     20

     30
        May 13
    June 16
                     July 14
                     July 28
 Temp.  0     10   20   30 0    10   20   30 0    10    20   30 0   10   20   30
  D.O.  0     5   10
        August 11
15 0     5   10
    August 25
15 0    5    10   15 0    5    10   15
    September 10       September 23
 Temp. 0
  D.O. 0
                 10   150     5

                • Temperature (°C)
            10   150
                                                 10   15 0
                    •Dissolved oxygen (mg/1)
                             10   15
 Figure 7-6.-Representative temperature and dissolved oxygen profiles for Lake Station 1.
 Thermal stratification and dissolved-oxygen depletion occurred from June through mid-
 September. Zero dissolved oxygen conditions in the bottom waters adversely affect the
 cold-water fishery and cause the release of phosphorus from the lake sediments.

chemical conditions there, and more phosphorus was precipitated to the sedi-
ments than was released.
   Chlorophyll-a and phytoplankton levels varied during the study. However, the
mean  summer chlorophyll-a concentration was 18 ppb, which is indicative of
eutrophic conditions. During the summer and early fall, the phytoplankton was
dominated by nuisance blue-green algae. Except for periods after rain events,
the Secchi disk transparency decreased with  increased phytoplankton levels. A
comparison of  Lynn  Lake data to EPA eutrophication criteria is  presented in
Table 7-3. This comparison indicated that Lynn Lake is eutrophic. A summary of
Lynn Lake characteristics, based on study results, is presented in Table 7-4.
 Table 7-3.—Comparison of  Lynn Lake data to eutrophic classification criteria
            (EPA, 1980)
 PARAMETER
                                                               LYNN LAKE
                                        EUTROPHIC CRITERIA  CONCENTRATION
Total Phosphorus (ppb as P)
    (winter)
Chlorophyll a (ppb)
    (summer)
Secchi Depth (m)
                      greater than 25

                      greater than 10

                       less than 2.0
                            50.0

                            18.0

                             1.1
   Another indication of Lynn Lake's eutrophic condition was found in Carlson's
index. This index, as Chapters 3 and 4 explain, can be a valuable tool for quan-
tifying lake trophic status from  basic, readily attainable data. Indices calculated
from Lynn Lake range from 58 to 61, indicative of eutrophic conditions (see Fig.
7-7).
                                                                             7-15

-------
                       Table 7-4.—Characteristics of Lynn Lake
     Lake Area (acres)	
     Watershed Area (acres)	
     Watershed to Lake Area Ratio	
     Mean Depth (feet)  	
     Maximum Depth (feet)	
     Volume (acre-ft)  	
     Outflow (acre-ft/yr)	
     Mean Hydraulic Residence Time (years)
     Tropic Condition	
     Limiting Nutrient	
	 500
	 4400
	9:1
	 20
	 45
	  10000
	 4501
	2.2
. . Eutrophic
Phosphorus
                        OLIGOTROPHIC     MESOTROPHIC EUTROPHIC    HYPEREUTROPHIC
                   20    25   30    35   40    45
                                                       60   65   70   75    80
        TROPHIC STATE
              INDEX
        TRANSPARENCY
            (METERS)
                                                           • AVERAGE MEASUREMENTS
                                                          UNDER CURRENT CONDITIONS
     Figure 7-7.-Carlson's Trophic State Index for Lynn Lake, indicating that Lynn Lake is eu-
     trophic.
       Evaluation of the lake data indicated that Lynn Lake was suffering from the fol-
    lowing problems:

        • excessive algal growth

        • excessive weed growth in the inlet area

        • excessive siltation in the inlet area

        • phosphorus release from the lake sediments


    Watershed Analysis

    The lake and stream data were used to calculate an annual water balance and
    nutrient budget, using the techniques discussed in Chapter 4. In addition to the
    stream and outlet monitoring, data were also collected for the Middletown treat-
    ment plant and for the quantity and quality of rainfall in the watershed. The an-
    nual water balance was calculated using the equations provided in Chapter 4.
7-16

-------
   Stream and lake  data collected over a  1-year  period  consisted  of water
quality data for 12 monthly dry-weather samples and  nine composite storm
samples. The annual stream phosphorus load to Lynn Lake was calculated by
adding  both the dry weather and wet weather loads. The  dry weather or
baseflow load was calculated using the 12 monthly phosphorus concentrations
and the continuous streamflow data.
   Since the nine monitored  storms  only  represented  a portion of  the total
storms that occurred during the monitoring period, a statistical relationship be-
tween the total phosphorus concentrations and flow was used with other storm
flows to calculate the annual  wet weather  phosphorus  load. The phosphorus
load for the area draining directly into Lynn Lake was  extrapolated using the
stream load data.
   The annual point-source load from the Middletown treatment plant was calcu-
lated from daily flow records and biweekly chemical data. The annual direct rain-
fall phosphorus load was calculated from rainfall quantity and  quality  data
collected during the study.
   Table 7-5 lists the annual water balance and phosphorus budget for Lynn
Lake. This table follows the format provided  in Table 4-1 of Chapter 4. It provides
a complete accounting of drainage areas, flows, and loading. Similar tables were
developed for nitrogen and sediment budgets.

 Table 7-5.—Annual water balance and external phosphorus loading for Lynn Lake


ITEM
Kimmel Creek
Tag Run
UngaugedArea
WWTP
Atmosphere
Total
Evaporation
Outflow

AREA
ACRES
300
3500
100
500
4400
500
4400

FLOW
AC-FT/YR
375
3885
111
80
1250
5701
1200
4501
%PF
TOTAL
INFLOW
6.6%
68.1%
1 .9%
1 .4%
21 .9%
100.0%
21 .0%
79.0%
Net Phosphorus Retention
TOTAL P
LOADING
LBS/YR
180
315
9
655
89
1248
612
636
%PF
TOTAL
LOADING
14.4%
25.2%
0.7%
52.5%
7.1%
100.0%
0.0%
49.0%
51 .0%

RUNOFF
FT/YR
1.25
1.11
1.11
2.50
1.30
2.40
1.02

TOTAL P
EXPORT
LB/AC-YR
0.600
0.090
0.090
0.178
0.284


 phosphorus loading model predictions for Lynn Lake
 T - mean hydraulic residence time (years)
  = Lake volume (ac-ft) / mean outflow (ac-ft/yr)
  = 10,000 ac-ft / 4,501 ac-ft/yr
  = 2 22 years
 PI - average inflow p concentration (ppb)
   - total p loading (Ibs/yr) x 368 / lake outflow (ac-ft/yr)
  = 1,248 Ibs/yr x 368 / 4,501 ac-ft/yr
   = 102 ppb
 P = predicted lake phosphorus concentration (ppb)
  = PI / (1 + VT)
  = 102 / (1 + V2 22) =  41 ppb
 observed lake phosphorus concentration = 50 ppb


   Application of the phosphorus loading model described in Chapter 4 (Table
 4-2), to Lynn Lake yielded a predicted lake phosphorus concentration of 41 ppb,
 as compared with the average measured concentration of 50 ppb. The higher
 measured value  suggested the presence of an additional external or internal
 phosphorus source which is not considered in Table 7-5. Based upon geologic
 factors and lake  water balance information, the consultant concluded  that sig-
 nificant groundwater contributions were unlikely. Review of lake monitoring data
 indicated that soluble phosphorus was released from bottom sediment during
 periods when the bottom waters were devoid of oxygen. Severe algal blooms
 often followed periods of high winds, which caused mixing of phosphorus-rich
 bottom waters into the surface layer. Based  upon these considerations, it was
 concluded that lake bottom sediments were likely to be important internal sour-
 ces of phosphorus which should be addressed in a restoration program.
                                                                            7-17

-------
       Since the external loads listed in Table 7-5 do not indicate specific land uses
     or activities that produced these loads, the consultant performed field investiga-
     tions throughout the watershed to identify specific nonpoint source problem
     areas. The study indicated that Tag Run is in good condition. The Soil Conserva-
     tion Service provided specific information on  problem agricultural areas in the
     watershed. Active construction sites were also visited to estimate the magnitude
     of soil erosion occurring during rain events. Based on the external phosphorus
     budget and an evaluation of the field investigation, the consultant concluded that
     the following phosphorus sources were significant and should be controlled:
        • Middletown wastewater treatment plant
        • agricultural activities (Tag Run)
        • construction activities (Kimmel Creek)


     Evaluation of  Management Alternatives

     Management alternatives for Lynn Lake were divided into watershed  manage-
     ment and in-lake management alternatives. The first priority was to determine
     whether watershed management practices were needed to reduce the pollutants
     entering the lake. After all, the best in-lake management program  will not suc-
     ceed if an excessive income of nutrients, silt,  and organic matter continues to
     enter the lake. Therefore,  it is important to determine whether the annual pol-
     lutant load to the lake is  excessive. For Lynn Lake, the significance of  annual
     phosphorus loading to the lake was estimated by using the Vollenweider Phos-
     phorus Loading Diagram shown in Figure 7-8. This  diagram is explained in
     Chapter 4. This curve, relating the average inflow phosphorus concentration to
     the ratio of mean depth to hydraulic residence time, indicates that the  annual
     phosphorus loading to Lynn Lake is probably excessive and should be control-
     led.
       Future projections for  Lynn Lake shown in Figures 7-7 and  7-8 assume im-
     plementation of the  recommended management strategies, as described  below.
     Advanced treatment of Middletown wastewater discharge would reduce  annual
     external phosphorus loading by 491 pounds per year. The consultant estimated
     that  implementation of the recommended watershed management practices
     would reduce the phosphorus loading from Kimmel Creek by approximately 25
     percent, or 45 pounds per year. Overall, the external phosphorus loading would
     be reduced by 43 percent from 1,248 to 741 pounds per year.  Figures 7-7 and
     7-8 indicate that this reduction would restore Lynn Lake to a mesotrophic  status.
    Average water transparency would increase from 1.1 to 2.7 meters and average
     chlorophyll-a concentrations would decrease from 16 to 5 ppb. The selection of
     specific alternatives to achieve these results is described in the next section.


     Evaluation Criteria

    The following criteria were used in the evaluation of lake and watershed manage-
     ment alternatives:
       • effectiveness
       • longevity
       • confidence
       • applicability
       • potential negative impacts
       • capital costs
       • operating and maintenance costs
7-18

-------
       1000
 m
 Q.
 a.

 6
 2
 O
 <•>
 w
        100
    I
 O  o
i
o
         10
                              I LYNN LAKE |   	. •

                              CURRENT CONDITIONS
             P=6
              _             	 __ —POST-RESTORATION
                                                      HYPER-EUTROPHIC
                                                     EUTROPHIC,
                                                      MESOTROPHIC
             p=io
                                                      OLIGOTROPHIC
                  PREDICTED LAKE PHOSPHORUS (PPB)
                         l
          .01             .1              1              10              100

                        HYDRAULIC RESIDENCE TIME (YEARS)
                                LAKE VOLUME/OUTFLOW

 Figure 7-8.-Vollenweider phosphorus loading curve for Lynn Lake indicating that Lynn Lake
 is eutrophic and receiving excessive phosphorus loading.
Effectiveness

Effectiveness relates to how well a specific management practice meets its goal.
For instance, dredging would be considered effective if it met the identified goals
of increasing the lake's depth and capacity, removing excessive nutrients from
the lake, and eliminating weed problems. A management practice may  be par-
tially effective in that goals may be incompletely met. For instance, dredging
may increase the depth and capacity, but excessive nutrients may still  exist in
the remaining sediments or algae may continue to be a problem in some areas
of the lake.
   For some management practices, such as dredging,  the effectiveness can be
determined initially based on the specific design and extent of the practice. If all
of the loose sediments  are  removed from the lake, all  goals  will be met.
However, if funds are limited and only partial dredging is carried out, only partial
effectiveness will be obtained. The decision, therefore,  becomes a trade-off be-
tween effectiveness and other factors such as costs, available funds, negative
impacts, and public acceptability.
   For other  management practices such as alum treatment or sedimentation
basins,  effectiveness is not straightforward and  cannot be completely defined
prior to  implementation. Alum treatment, for example, depends upon many fac-
tors that could influence its effectiveness. If, following alum addition, high sedi-
ment or nutrient loads continue to enter the lake, the beneficial effects of alum
treatment would be negated. Similarly, a detention basin  is designed to treat a
specific streamflow. If rain events occur that produce a streamflow in excess of
the design flow, the effectiveness of the basin will be reduced. Effectiveness of
management practices, therefore,  must be evaluated  based on  the past ex-
perience of the effectiveness of the  practice, the commitment to implement part
or all of the required practice, and an analysis of the risks and variabilities in-
volved.
                                                                          7-19

-------
    Longevity

    Longevity reflects the duration of treatment effectiveness. Treatments are usually
    categorized as short-term or long-term. A treatment or management practice is
    defined as short-term if it is effective for one year or less. Weed harvesting, for
    example, is usually a short-term technique that is immediately effective, but may
    only last  for a period of several  weeks or a single  growing season. The short-
    term longevity of a treatment or management practice, however, is not inherent
    in the  process;  it usually varies with specific environmental  conditions. Three
    copper sulfate treatments might control algal blooms on one lake for an entire
    growing season, while on another lake, weekly treatments would be necessary
    to overcome  the effects of a high flushing rate and incomes of new nutrient-
    laden water. Treatment or management practices  that produce short-term ef-
    fects will result  in long-term effectiveness if they are reapplied each year. For
    example, a farmer may use conservation tillage each  year to produce a long-
    term benefit from the method.
       A treatment or management practice is usually defined as long-term if it  is ef-
    fective for more than a year. The long-term effectiveness, like short-term effec-
    tiveness,   depends  on   both  environmental  conditions and  the  specific
    management  practice. A sedimentation basin will provide long-term treatment
    effectiveness  if  it is properly designed  for specific environmental conditions,
    such as streamflow fluctuations and pollutant loadings,  and if it is properly main-
    tained. If, however, the  basin was  designed  too small, it will not continue to
    remove pollutants effectively. If the accumulated sediments are not periodically
    removed, the long-term effectiveness will be decreased by poor maintenance.
    Dredging will provide long-term effectiveness  if the  dredging program  was
    properly  designed  and if watershed management practices have already been
    implemented. If excessive siltation  still occurs,  the long-term effectiveness of
    dredging will  be decreased. Construction of grass waterways on farmland will
    provide long-term  effectiveness if properly designed  and if maintained each
    year.
    Confidence

    Confidence refers to the number and quality of reports and studies supporting
    the effectiveness rating of a treatment. Some in-lake procedures such as dredg-
    ing have been extensively applied and studied. Confidence in the effectiveness
    of dredging is high, based on its record of successful application. Other techni-
    ques such as lake aeration have not been studied as extensively, and their con-
    fidence evaluation is therefore lower. In addition, poor confidence can arise from
    a variable record. It is not currently understood, for example, why aeration works
    well in some lakes and does not in others.
    Applicability

    Treatment applicability refers to whether or not the treatment directly affects the
    cause of the problem and whether it is suitable for the region in which it is con-
    sidered for application. For example, nutrient concentrations in runoff from Mid-
    western agricultural fields are often high and promote noxious algal blooms. The
    perceived problem is algal blooms, but the cause is excessive nutrients. Nutrient
    inactivation, with alum, can temporarily reduce nutrient levels in the lake water,
    but cannot address the true origin of the problem — upstream agricultural water-
    sheds.  Nutrient inactivation, therefore,  is not applicable to the problem of incom-
7-20

-------
ing nutrients; it can be applicable, however, to the problem of nutrient release
from sediments into the water column. Flushing may be highly applicable where
water is plentiful, but not in a region where water is scarce.
Potential Negative Impacts

Lakes are dynamic ecosystems; changing one element of the lake ecosystem
may cause a beneficial or adverse change in another element. In developing a
lake management program, the lake manager should take a holistic view of the
ecosystem to ensure that a proposed management practice does  not cause a
negative impact on the lake ecosystem. For example, control of algae may bring
about an expansion  of the submersed macrophyte problem penetration. Ob-
viously,  some  practices have short-term  negative impacts  that cannot  be
eliminated. Dredging usually destroys the bottom-dwelling organisms, but new
organisms usually recolonize within a year.
Capital Costs

Standard approaches should be  used to evaluate  the cost effectiveness of
various alternatives. In evaluating costs of alternative methods, the lake manager
must balance the other factors already described; namely, effectiveness, lon-
gevity, confidence, applicability, and potential negative impacts. It is rare that the
benefits of different management practices are equal.  Furthermore, limited funds
and resources often force the lake manager to select  the most affordable rather
than the most cost-effective alternative. Many municipalities and lake associa-
tions elect to treat their lakes' weed problem annually with a herbicide rather
than dredge their lakes because they do not have sufficient funds for dredging.
   Assuming, however, that the benefits of alternative management practices are
equal or nearly equal, the annual  cost method  should most likely be used to
determine the most cost-effective alternative. In  this method, all  costs must be
calculated using the same discount rate, and the annual cost must be based on
the same period of analysis.
   An example of the annual cost method is provided for comparing dredging
and alum treatment of Lynn Lake.  The targets of dredging and alum treatment
are almost the same - to reduce phosphorus in  the lake.
Cost Comparison: Alum Treatment Versus Dredging

Assume:
   1. Dredging has a lifespan of 20 years, assuming that 1 foot of sediment is
uniformly removed over 150 acres and that external loading is reduced.
   2. Alum treatment has a lifespan of 6 years.
   3. Benefits are equal.
   4. Dredging has a one-time cost of $500,000 ($2 per yd3).
   5. Alum treatment costs $35,000 every 6 years, assuming that the entire area
beneath the metalimnion (100 acres) is treated at a cost of $350 per acre.
   The annual cost method is often used to compare alternatives. The main ad-
vantage of this method over all other methods (such as present worth) is that it
                                                                       7-21

-------
    does not require making the comparison over the same number of years when
    the alternatives have different lives.  The equivalent annual cost is calculated as
    follows:
        Equivalent Annual Cost =  Present Cost (Capital Recovery Factor)
       The capital recovery factor  is obtained  from standard interest  tables for
    various interest rates and time periods.  Figure 7-9 shows a typical table for an
    interest rate of 6 percent.  Based on the assumptions described above, the cost
    analysis is as follows:

       Annual Cost  for Dredging  Lake: From  Figure 7-9 for a time  period of 20
    years (N =20), the capital recovery factor is  0.08718. Therefore, the equivalent
    annual cost is calculated as follows:
        Equivalent Annual Cost =  $500,000 (0.08718) = $43,590/year


6.00%
Discrete Cash Flow
Discrete Compound Interest Factors
Single payments I
Compound
Amount
N P/P
i
2
1
i«
5
6
7
8
1
10
1 1
12
13
11
15
16
17
18
19
20
22
214
25
26
20
30
32
3U
35
36
38
10
15
so
55
60
65
70
75
80
85
91
95
100
1.0600
1 . 1236
1. 1910
.2625
.3382
.1185
. 5036
.5938
.6895
.7908
1 . 8903
2.0122
2. 1329
2. 2609
2. 3966
2.S10U
2.6928
2.8513
3.0256
3.2071
3.6035
1 . 0189
1. 2919
1 . 5191
5.1117
5.7U35
6.153H
7. 2510
7.686 1
8.1173
9. 15U3
10. 2957
13. 7616
18.1202
21. 6503
32. 9877
1<4 . 1150
59.C759
79.0569
105. 796
11 1.579
189.165
253.516
339.302
Present J
Worth |
P/F 1
0.91 31
0.8910
0.8396
0.7921
0.7173
0.7050
0.6651
0.6271
0.5919
0.5511
0.5268
0.1970
0.1688
0.1123
0.1173
0. 3936
0.3711
0.3503
0. 3305
0. 31 18
0.2775
0.2170
0.2310
0.2 198
0. 1956
0.1711
0. 1550
0. 1 379
0.1301
0. 1227
0. 1092
0.0972
0.0727
0.051 1
0 .01 06
0.0 J03
0.0227
O.P 169
0.0 126
0.0095
0.0071
0.0053
0.0039
0.0029
Uniform series payments
Sinking
Fund
A/F
1 .
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
1.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0 .
0.
0.
1.
0.
0.
0.
0 .
0.
0.
0 .
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
1 .
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
roooo
1B511
31111
22859
17710
11336
11911
10101
C8702
C75S7
06679
0592S
05296
C175B
01296
Q3895
C3511
C3236
C2962
027 18
C2305
01968
01823
01691
01159
01265
01 101
Q0960
C0897
00810
C0736
00616
C0170
00311
00251
01 1HR
C01 39
00103
C0077
C1057
riPI 3
00032
00021
OOP18
Compound
Amount
F/A
i .
2.
3.
1.
5.
6.
8.
9.
1 1.
13.
11.
16.
18.
21 .
23.
25.
28.
30.
33.
36.
13 .
50.
51.
59.
68.
79.
91.
101.
111.
1 19.
1 35.
151.
212.
290.
391 .
533.
719.
967.
1 301.
1716.
2312.
3111.
1209.
56 38.
TOO
060
181
375
637
975
391
897
191
181
972
870
882
015
276
673
213
906
760
786
392
816
865
156
528
058
891
181
135
121
901
762
711
336
17?
128
18 i
032
919
600
982
175
101
368
Capital
Recovery
A/P
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
p
0
0
0
0
P
0
0
0
0
p
0
0
p
0
n
p
0
0
0
0
0
.06000
.51511
. 1711 1
. 28859
. 23710
.21336
. 17911
. 16101
. 11702
. 13587
. 12679
. 1 1928
. 1 1296
. 11758
. 10296
.19895
.09511
.19236
.08962
.08718
.08305
.07968
.07823
. 17690
.07159
.07265
. 17 100
. 06960
. 06897
. 06839
. 06736
. If 616
.06170
.06311
. 06251
. 06 1H8
.06139
. 06 103
. 06077
. 06057
. P601 3
.06032
. 16021
. 06018
Present
Worth
P/A
0.
i.
2.
3.
1.
1.
5.
6.
6.
7.
7.
a.
a.
9.
9.
10.
10.
10.
1 1.
1 1.
12.
12.
12.
1 3.
1,3.
1 3.
11.
11.
11.
11.
11.
15.
15.
15.
15.
16.
16.
16.
16.
16.
16.
16.
16.
16.
9131
83 11
67 )0
1651
2121
9173
5921
2098
80 17
3601
8869
3838
8527
2950
7122
1059
1773
8276
15R1
1699
01 16
5501
7831
0132
1P62
7618
0810
3681
1982
6210
8160
016 3
1558
76 19
9905
1611
2891
3815
1558
5091
5189
5787
6009
6175
N
i
2
1
1
5
6
7
a
9
10
1 1
12
1 3
1 1
15
16
17
18
19
20
22
21
25
26
28
30
32
31
35
36
38
10
15
50
55
60
65
70
75
80
85
90
95
101
    Figure 7-9.-Discrete cash flow of 6.00% discrete interest factors. Blank and Tarquin, 1983.
7-22

-------
    Annual Cost for Alum Treatment: From Figure 7-9 for a time period of 6
  years (N = 6), the capital recovery factor is 0.20336.  Therefore, the equivalent
  annual cost is calculated as follows:
      Equivalent Annual Cost = $35,000(0.20336) = $7,118/year
    From this comparison, it is obvious that alum treatment is the more cost-ef-
  fective alternative since the equivalent annual cost is $7,118 for alum treatment
  and $43,590 for dredging.  Cost estimates for these treatments,  while based on
  an average of some actual case histories, cannot be applied, even as estimates,
  to any other real lake situations. Each lake will have important and unique fea-
  tures that will produce unique unit costs.
 Watershed Management Alternatives

 Watershed management practices, described in Chapter 5, consist of numerous
 methods,  including the  installation of agricultural  and silvicultural  practices,
 stabilization of eroding shorelines,  erosion control for construction sites, runoff
 control for all development, and the repair of failing septic systems. It also in-
 cludes nonstructural practices such as the development of model erosion and
 runoff control ordinances.
    To be cost effective,  watershed management practices  should be  imple-
 mented in priority areas.  Priority rating systems usually include factors such as
 proximity to  lake, existing pollutant loadings, potential reductions in  pollutant
 loadings, and costs. For small watersheds where specific, limited watershed
 management alternatives can be identified, the evaluation and selection process
 is  relatively straightforward and can be performed as described later in this
 chapter. However, for large watersheds where only large-scale generic water-
 shed management  alternatives such as agricultural practices or streambank
 erosion control can  be identified, the selection process is more complicated. For
 small watersheds, the costs and effectiveness of management practices can be
 readily estimated, but  for large watersheds neither can be easily identified.
 Therefore,  selection of a  management program for a large watershed is much
 more subjective and qualitative than for a small watershed. By its very nature, a
 large watershed management  program must be evolutionary and long term-
 First, priority areas are identified; then the  most suitable management practices
 are selected and implemented.
   The watershed management information contained in Chapter 5 was used in
 evaluating  the effectiveness, longevity, and applicability of various watershed
 management practices.
   Based on the results of the diagnostic portion of the study, the consultant for
 Lynn Lake identified specific priority areas in the watershed. These areas in-
 cluded the  Middletown wastewater treatment plant, specific agricultural areas in
 the watershed, and several developing areas of the watershed. Various manage-
 ment practices for each high-priority area were  identified and evaluated  using
 the evaluation criteria discussed previously. An evaluation  matrix,  shown  in
 Table 7-6, was developed to evaluate the various management practices  Infor-
 mation from Chapter 5, Managing the Watershed, and other reference  sources
 was used to develop a rating based on conditions specific to Lynn Lake such as
 land use,  activity, soil conditions,  topography, and pollutant loadings. This
 matrix format  can be used for decisionmaking on any lake. The evaluations  in
Table 7-6, however, apply only to Lynn Lake.
                                                                        7-23

-------
    Wastewater Treatment Plant Upgrade

    Table 7-5, the annual phosphorus budget for Lynn Lake, indicates that the Mid-
    dletown treatment plant contributes 52.5 percent of the annual total phosphorus
    income to Lynn Lake. In addition to being the dominant phosphorus source, the
    treatment plant discharges phosphorus primarily in the form of soluble reactive
    phosphorus, a form readily available for algal and weed growth. Also, the plant
    discharges this highly available phosphorus throughout the year,  even during
    summer low flow conditions. It is important,  therefore, that this  phosphorus
    source be significantly reduced.
      There are two alternatives for eliminating or reducing the phosphorus entering
    the lake from the treatment plant:  diverting the plant effluent to another water-
    shed that is not adversely affected  by high phosphorus levels or providing ter-
    tiary treatment to remove a significant portion of the phosphorus from the plant's
    effluent. Diversion of the treatment plant's effluent to another watershed was
    rejected because the cost of the pipeline and  pumping station needed for the
    diversion would cost approximately $400,000 - more than the cost of adding ter-
    tiary treatment to the plant. It was also rejected because the citizens in the ad-
    jacent watershed opposed the diversion of effluent to their watershed.
      The addition of tertiary treatment facilities to  the existing secondary treatment
    plant would reduce the effluent phosphorus concentration by 75 percent, from 2
    ppm to 0.5 ppm. The tertiary treatment facilities would include the addition of a
    sand filter and alum treatment to  the existing plant. Addition of the tertiary
    facilities would cost approximately $300,000 for the 100,000 gallon-per-day treat-
    ment plant. Operation  and maintenance costs  would increase by about 25 per-
    cent primarily because  of increased chemical and sludge disposal costs.
      As shown in Table 7-6, the addition of tertiary treatment facilities to the Mid-
    dletown plant was rated excellent for all categories except capital, operations
    and maintenance costs. Although the costs of tertiary treatment are high, ter-
    tiary treatment must be implemented to reduce the dominant phosphorus load
    to Lynn Lake.
    Sedimentation Basins

    An effective practice for controlling sediment and phosphorus loads to Lynn
    Lake is the construction of sedimentation basins on the major tributary streams,
    just upstream of the lake. As shown in Table 7-6, the basins were rated "good"
    overall, except for the costs, which were rated "fair." Construction of the basins
    would only be cost effective if upstream watershed management practices were
    not implemented or were not effective. Construction of the basins, therefore, was
    rejected and postponed until upstream management practices could be imple-
    mented and evaluated. If additional sediment and phosphorus load reductions
    were required after upstream management practices were implemented, then
    the construction of the sedimentation basins should be reconsidered.
    Agricultural Practices

    The ratings of agricultural practices, shown in Table 7-6, were developed in con-
    junction with the Soil Conservation Service  and the County Conservation Dis-
    trict. Priority management practices were developed based on these ratings and
    included animal waste management, grassed waterways, buffer strips, and con-
    servation tillage. Secondary emphasis was given to pasture  management, crop
    rotation, and runoff diversion.
7-24

-------
Table 7-6.—Watershed management evaluation matrix

PRACTICE
Addition of Tertiary Treatment to Middletown
Treatment Plant
Construction of Sedimentation Basins at
Inlets to Lake
AGRICULTURAL PRACTICES
— Conservation Village
— Contour Farming
— Pasture Management
— Crop Rotation
— Terraces
— Animal Waste Management
— Grass Waterways
— Buffer Strips
— Diversion of Runoff
CONSTRUCTION CONTROLS
— Erosion Control Ordinance
— Runoff Control Oridnance
— Field Inspections
Legend: E = Excellent G = Good F


EFFECTIVENESS
E

G

F-E
F-G
F-G
F-G
F-G
E
E
E
G

E
E
E
= Fair P = Poor


LONGEVITY
E

E

G
P
E
G
G
E
E
E
G

E
E
E



CONFIDENCE
E

G

G
F
E
G
G
E
G
E
F-G

E
E
E



APPLICABILITY
E

G

G
G
G
G
G
E
G
E
F

E
E
E


POTENTIAL
NEGATIVE
IMPACTS
E

G

F
E
E
E
E
E
E
E
E

E
E
E



CAPITAL
F

F

F
E
E
E
F
F
G
G
F

E
E
E



O&M
F

F

F
E
E
E
G
F
E
E
G

E
E
E


01 	 ~ 	 	 	 —

-------
  Construction Controls

  Construction-development controls were divided into three general categories:
     • erosion control ordinance
     • runoff control ordinance
     • field inspections
     An erosion control ordinance provides rules and guidelines to regulate the
  control of erosion from an active construction site. Although the State has an or-
  dinance  to control erosion on  construction  sites, the  Advisory Committee
  recommended that the county enact a county-wide erosion control ordinance
  more restrictive and enforceable than the State ordinance. In general, control of
  erosion should be a local, not a State, regulated function.
     A runoff control ordinance, in contrast to an  erosion control ordinance,
  provides rules and guidelines for  controlling  runoff and erosion from  new
  developments after construction is  completed. The  consultant developed a
  runoff  control  ordinance that  required  that  the  peak  postdevelopment
  stormwater runoff rate not exceed the peak predevelopment runoff rate. It also
  contained an  equation  for estimating the phosphorus load from the  new
  development and  stipulated that the postdevelopment phosphorus load not ex-
  ceed the predevelopment load.
     No ordinance is effective if  it  is not adequately implemented and inspected.
   Field inspections of  all  construction sites during and after  construction are
   necessary to ensure that all ordinance conditions are being met. All three con-
   struction-development controls (that is, erosion control ordinance, runoff control
   ordinance, and field inspections) were rated excellent in all categories in Table 7-
   6. Implementation of all three controls will eliminate or significantly reduce runoff
   and erosion problems for new developments.
     In summary, the watershed management program recommended by the Ad-
   visory Committee consisted of the following:
      • Addition of tertiary treatment facilities to the Middletown treatment plant
      • Implementation of priority agricultural practices in priority agricultural
        areas
      • Development and adoption of erosion control and runoff control
        ordinances
      • Development of a field inspection program for construction and
        development sites
     After these practices are implemented, the annual sediment and phosphorus
   loads to Lynn Lake would be re-evaluated to determine whether additional prac-
   tices, such as the construction of sedimentation basins, are needed.


   In-Lake Management Alternatives

   In-lake management practices applicable to the control of excessive algal and
   weed growth and loss of depth were identified and evaluated using the informa-
   tion contained in Chapter 6,  Lake and  Reservoir Restoration and Manage-
   ment Techniques. Each management technique was evaluated based on the
   lake and watershed data collected during the study. The results of this evalua-
   tion, presented in Table 7-7, indicate that the most feasible and cost-effective in-
   take management practices include the following:
       • Alum treatment to precipitate and inactivate phosphorus
       • Dredging of the lake inlet areas
7-26

-------
Table 7-7.—In-Lake management evaluation matrix


PRACTICE
Alum Treatment to Precipitate and
Inactivate Phosphorus
Dredging of Whole Lake
Dredging of Lake Inlet Areas
Dilution
Flushing Artificial Circulation
Hypolimnetic Aeration
Sediment Oxidation
Addition of Algicides
Food Chain Manipulation
Hypolimnetic Withdrawal
Water Level Drawdown to Remove Weeds
Weed Harvesting
Biological Controls to Reduce Weeds
Addition of Herbicides
Legend: E = Excellent G = Good F =
-si


EFFECTIVENESS
E
P
E
F
F
F
G
G
G
G
F
G
G
G
Fair P = Poor


LONGEVITY
G
E
E
F
F
F
G
P
Unknown
G
F
P
G
P



CONFIDENCE
G
E
E
F
P
F
P
E
P
G
F
G
F
G



APPLICABILITY
E
P
E
P
F
F
F
F
F
G
P
G
G
F

POTENTIAL
NEGATIVE
IMPACTS
F-G
F-G
G
F
F
F
G
P
Unknown
F-P
F-P
F
F-P
P


CAPITAL
COST
G
P
F
P
P
P
F
G
E
G
F
F
G
G


O&M
COST
G
E
E
P
F-P
F-P
G
P
E
E
G
P
G
P


-------
       Alum treatment, after the addition of tertiary treatment to the Middletown
    treatment plant, was selected because the study data indicated that internal cy-
    cling of phosphorus from the lake sediments was a source of phosphorus to
    Lynn Lake.  The lake characteristics are conducive to alum treatment: The flush-
    ing rate is low (0.45 times per year), and the annual phosphorus loading after
    watershed management practices are implemented  will be relatively low.  Lab
    studies were performed to determine the alum dosage required to both remove
    phosphorus from the lake water and to inactivate (seal) the phosphorus in the
    sediments.  Additional alum treatments may be required every 6 years based on
    case studies of other similar lakes treated with alum.
       Alum treatment on a 3- to 5-year basis was compared to dredging of the
    whole lake using the  cost comparisons described earlier.  Alum treatment was
    judged the most cost-effective method of controlling phosphorus from lake sedi-
    ments.  If, however, a secondary benefit, lake deepening, was added, dredging
    of the whole lake may  be the most cost-effective alternative.  However, since
    Lynn Lake is deep enough for its intended recreational uses, lake deepening was
    rejected as a benefit,  and alum treatment was selected as the practice to inac-
    tivate phosphorus in the sediment.
       Dredging of lake inlet areas, however, was selected as a feasible manage-
    ment practice since the siltation of the lake primarily affected the inlet areas that
    were shallow and unusable for boating.  Many of the aquatic weeds also grow in
    these inlet areas.
       Other in-lake practices were rejected for a variety of reasons.   Dilution and
    flushing were rejected  because a source of dilution water was not available.
    Pumping of groundwater to flush and dilute the lake was rejected because of
    high costs and the potential depletion  of groundwater. Aeration of the whole
    lake was rejected because of the lack of confidence in the practice and the high
    capital and  operation costs. Insufficient data are available on the effectiveness
    of whole lake aeration.  Hypolimnetic aeration (aerating only the bottom waters)
    was rejected because it was evaluated "fair" in all categories except costs, which
    were rated "poor." Sediment oxidation was rejected  because of the "poor" con-
    fidence  rating; insufficient data are available on the effectiveness of sediment
    oxidation.
       The addition of algicide was rejected  because it is a "Band-Aid" approach that
    has poor longevity and produces negative environmental impacts.   Algicide,
    however, can be added on a temporary basis while the watershed management
    program is being implemented, but algicide should not be used as a long-term
    management program.   Weed  harvesting  and the addition of herbicides were
    also rejected for similar reasons.
       Food chain manipulation was rejected because the longevity and negative im-
    pacts are unknown and the confidence level was rated "poor." Biological con-
    trols to  reduce weeds were  rejected  for lack of  confidence.  Water-level
    drawdown, although it was rated "good" for effectiveness, was rejected because
    the citizens did not want the lake water lowered.
       Hypolimnetic withdrawal, the discharge of nutrient-laden bottom waters, was
    temporarily rejected  because of concern over potential downstream  impacts
    and potential in-lake effects on the thermal stratification of the lake. Discharge of
    bottom waters high in nutrients and low in dissolved oxygen could adversely af-
    fect water quality downstream of Lynn Lake. The Advisory Committee decided
    that these potential impacts should be further investigated before a bottom dis-
    charge would be allowed.
       In summary, the in-lake management program recommended by the Advisory
    Committee consisted  of the following:
        • Alum treatment to precipitate and inactivate phosphorus
        • Dredging of the lake inlet areas
7-28

-------
 Public Hearing

 Prior to the final selection of watershed and in-lake management alternatives, the
 Advisory Committee held a formal public hearing. The consultant presented an
 overview of the study along with a description of the conclusions and proposed
 management plan. In describing the proposed management program, the con-
 sultant clearly explained the evaluation criteria used in developing the proposed
 management plan. Comments from the public on all aspects of the study and
 management plan were solicited by the Advisory Committee.
   In general, the public comments were positive and supported the proposed
 management program.  Some questioned whether the restoration  program
 would cause an increase in county taxes. Others wanted to know whether their
 sewerage fees would increase when the treatment plant was upgraded to ter-
 tiary treatment. They were told that county taxes would not increase but that the
 sewerage hookup and user fees would increase by a small amount.
   Several citizens recommended that the monthly monitoring results for the
 treatment plant's effluent be sent to the  county and the Advisory Committee to
 ensure that the plant met its treatment requirements.  Others recommended that
 the Advisory Committee  be maintained until the management plan was com-
 pletely implemented and that the county hire a full-time lake manager to oversee
 the implementation of the management plan.  The Advisory Committee directed
 the consultant to include these recommendations in his final management plan.
Selection of  Management Plan

The Advisory Committee in conjunction with the consultant presented the final
lake and watershed  management plan to the County Commissioners for their
review. After they revised the plan, the Commissioners approved the plan and
directed the County Engineer to forward the Phase I Study Report and Manage-
ment Plan to the State Water Control Board and  EPA for their reviews. The plan
was approved by both the State and EPA.
                                                                    7-29

-------
    CHAPTER 8
  Implementing a
Management Plan

-------
CHAPTER 8




IMPLEMENTING A

MANAGEMENT  PLAN	




Management  Means

Implementation
A well-evaluated and carefully designed management plan is useless if it is never
carried out, and it may be either useless or disastrous if it is but poorly followed.
Management includes not only diagnosing problems and evaluating alternative
solutions, but also includes putting the chosen plan into action.
  Proper implementation requires money, manpower, planning and scheduling,
and permission. Even on private lakes, various permits and regulations must be
satisfied before many lake restoration techniques can be applied. If the water-
shed is not entirely owned by a single lake user, coordination among parties be-
comes a sizable task in itself. And, in all cases, education is a necessary
counterpart to accomplishment. It can never be assumed that the majority of
local residents will be aware of the major and minor disruptions to their tranquil
lake environment once implementation begins. Broadcasting the goals of the
project before work begins will foster both public support and patience during
the implementation phase.


Who Does  the Work?

For many lake managers, homeowners, and other interested persons, the most
important step in implementation is the selection of a knowledgeable and ex-
perienced  consultant or contractor. It is at the implementation stage that the
benefits of experience become obvious. The opportunities for delays, minor ac-
cidents, misunderstandings, and oversights in a restoration project are plentiful.
                                                         8-1

-------
    Experienced contractors are more likely to foresee these problems and be better
    prepared to handle unexpected ones.
      Whoever pays the contractor has responsibilities as well. For example, an as-
    sociation may hire a lake manager or consultant, who, in turn, hires contractors
    to carry out various tasks. The lake  manager represents the owners' interests.
    The  manager's responsibilities  include  overseeing  the budget, oversight,
    monitoring progress to ensure the project is on schedule, and acting as liaison
    between the association and  the contractor to be sure that both sides under-
    stand each other's intents  and that work is not delayed while the contractor
    awaits important decisions.


    Selecting  Consultants  or Contractors

    Selecting the right consultant or contractor involves a number of considerations.
    The criteria used in Chapter 3 will ensure that the selection process identifies
    qualified contractors who have a responsible record and the right background to
    solve the particular problem. The list in Chapter 3 also includes criteria for select-
    ing a consultant who will be able  to assist in other phases of lake management
    such as identifying the problem, evaluating watershed and lake management
    practices, and formulating the lake management plan as well as implementing
    the plan once it is developed.
      Consulting services can  range from assistance in one specific area such as
    lakeshore erosion to the design, execution, and implementation of the entire lake
    management program. The expertise required for lake management can be spe-
    cialized or broad, depending on the specific services requested, but should in-
    clude limnology or aquatic ecology, watershed management  practices,  lake
    restoration techniques, economic analysis, planning,  engineering, and water
    quality evaluations. Many lake associations prefer to work with a single firm from
    the preliminary study to project completion, but it may be wise in some cases to
    hire more than one consultant to take advantage of the strengths and specialties
    offered by different providers.
      The expertise needed to implement a lake restoration plan can be  found at
    universities, public and private research organizations, environmental consulting
    firms, or engineering firms specializing in lake management.  Many  firms or
    groups that specialize in lake management put together teams of individuals with
    special experience and expertise that can be targeted to a specific set of lake
    problems. In this case, the consultant or contractor may change team members
    as needed to accomplish the work most efficiently. The North  American Lake
    Management Society (NALMS) also provides names  of members who can
    provide services by area of specialty.
      Initially, identifying  candidate consultants  and  contractors  can  be ac-
    complished by contacting (1)  other lake associations to find out who they have
    used previously, (2) local and State environmental agencies and groups to find
    out who has conducted similar studies in the past, (3) a referral service offered
    through the NALMS, or (4)  other professional organizations. Table 8-1 lists State
    agencies that might be contacted, and Appendix E provides more detailed infor-
    mation on various State and  Canadian provincial agencies involved with  lake
    management. Because of the importance of  the consultant or contractor in
    properly implementing the lake management program, several individuals or
    groups should be interviewed. The criteria listed in the case study in the previous
    chapter can be used as a  starting point for questions related to their expertise
    and capabilities.
      Asking for references is imperative. The hiring agency should write,  or better
    yet, call these references in addition to evaluating the responses of candidates to
    interview questions.  Lake  management  is not a cookbook process;  there is
8-2

-------
  some art to lake management as well as engineering and science. Innovation
  should be an important criterion. There are, however, certain important com-
  ponents in implementing any lake management program. These are discussed
  in the remainder of this chapter. This information also can be used to initiate
  questions for the consultant during the evaluation and selection process.
  Institutional  Permits,  Fees,

  and  Requirements
  Every State and many Federal agencies have institutional requirements (for ex-
  ample, permits, fees, and notifications) that must be met before lake restoration
  or watershed management practices can be implemented. Some of these re-
  quirements are briefly summarized in Table 8-1. DO NOT assume this is a com-
  plete list of all the agencies that need to be contacted. Local, city, and county
  agencies might also require various permits or fees or fulfillment of necessary
  conditions.
    These institutional requirements, in many instances, are technique specific as
 well. The requirements for dredging,  for example, will be quite  different from
 those for herbicide application or harvesting. The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
  is authorized, after proper notice and public hearings, to issue general permits to
 permit dredging or fill  procedures if in the Corps' determination the dredging
 operation will have minimal adverse environmental effects or impacts.
    If a State has assumed permit responsibility, a copy of every permit applica-
 tion is forwarded to the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. Copies also are for-
 warded to the Secretary of the Interior and the Fish and Wildlife Service. Some
 States may have additional  requirements, such as the  State of Washington
 where an application must be made  to the  State Department of Game for a
 hydraulic permit for any alteration of the stream or lake bed, including the instal-
 lation of a flow or temperature measuring device.
   In a lake restoration plan that calls for dredging, taking the sediment out of the
 lake represents only one  part of  the  implementation process. The dredged
 material, or spoils, must be properly disposed of as fill or taken to an approved
 disposal area. Disposal procedures must conform with local, State, and Federal
 requirements. This might require monitoring of the runoff or leachate from the
 disposal area.
   In addition to requirements for implementation of the various techniques,
 there are also various OSHA requirements to protect the health, well-being and
 safety of the individuals working on the project. Ear protection and safety shoes
 might be required for the dredge workers, for example, or special safety precau-
 tions might be mandated to protect workers while they are mixing chemicals for
 alum applications or dispersing herbicides for weed control. An example of the
 language that can be included in contracts to promote and ensure a safe im-
 plementation program is shown in Appendix F. DO NOT assume this language
 will satisfy the legal requirement in your State or county. Contact a local attorney
 to be sure you are adequately covered.
  The  institutional requirements for  each lake  management program  will
 depend on the specific restoration and management practices proposed. If the
 lake management plan  is well organized and detailed beforehand, the various
agencies will be able to indicate the specific procedures and guidelines that
must be followed. Even if the lake manager or association is researching and
filing for all permits and fulfilling other requirements, it makes sense to ask con-
sultants and contractors if they are familiar with the appropriate regulations and
                                                                      8-3

-------
Table 8-1.— Summary of state's lake programs
PERMITS
FORMAL silo
LAKES SUPPORTING FUNDING PERMIT i i S <
STATE PROGRAM AGENCIES STATE LOCAL AGENCIES 5 £ J S
Alaska None DEC State & Federal funding on a case on case DEC is is
by case basis
REQUIRED
<. i i
11 ill
B 8 g c i OTHER
IS IS IS
Anzona None F&G Management monies from Federal sources and F&G No formal permit required
hunting and fishing licenses
Arkansas None DPC & E Federal funding for lake classification DPC&E is is is
California None SWRCB, F&A, F&G, Legislative matching funds for 10 million to SWRCB >s ts V is
Local Government Lake Tahoe
(X is IS
Colorado None DOH Diagnostic studies DOH
Connecticut Legislation DEP 1 ) Small amount Lake authonties where DEP
budgeted for algae & lake is within boundar- wetland is is is
weed control IBS of more than one DEP water
2) Funding on case-by- town Town's budgets compl is
case basis through include lake work DEP
legislation pesticide is is
Delaware None DNR, F&W
Florida Grants DER DNR is is V*
DER *x Stormwater Permitting
GFC
WMD is
Georgia None DNR
Hawaii None No expressed need
Idaho Noformalpro- IDWH(DOE) AWQ Matching IDWH
gram but benefits (DOE)
from Agriculture
Water Quality
Illinois Lakes Program EPA, DOA, DOC, IDOA funding for soil EPA
Provides tech as- DENR, AISWCD conservation in priority
sistance and direc- watersheds $2 million/
tion. No grants. yearfor 5 years
Permits only for treatment of
public water supplies orfor
variances from water quality
standards.
Indiana DEM DEM, DNR DEM, DNR, no formal DR(FWL) V is
grants State
appropriations.
Iowa DNR, DALS Legislative None DNR is
Yearly appropriations to
DALS for erosion
control
is Flood plain management

-------
                                                                              Table 8-1.—Summary of state's lake programs (cont.)
PERMITS
FORMAL < M S
LAKES SUPPORTING FUNDING PERMIT i S S 5
STATE PROGRAM AGENCIES STATE LOCAL AGENCIES J ₯ 5 S
Kansas Grants KDHE(WQA)F&G KDHE
Kentucky None DNR(DW),EP Matching
REQUIRED
5, t 3
i! I !!
No formal permit process.
Kentucky Dept. of Fish & Wildlife
controls introduction of grass
carp to control macrophyte
Louisiana None DEQ(OWR) State Matching Fees & Fines
Maine Grants EPA Planning Matching 75% of 25% Can levy fees DEP is >s is is
Committee $100,000 in 1982
is Sewer systems
Maryland None DHMH.OEP Local initiative
Massachusetts State Clean Lake DEQE Matching Matching DEQE is \s \s **
Program, Techni- DFW
cal Assistance
Michigan Inland Lakes DNR(ILU) 50% Matching DA
Management DNR-SWQ
&ILU
DNR-WMD
PNR-LR
Minnesota None MPCA, DNR, SWCD Some funds through Watershed districts MPCA
DNR for fisheries and have taxing authority
SWCD for land 50% match required
practices
Missouri None DNR(DivEQ) None U.S Army is
Clearinghouse (COE)DNR
Montana No formal pro- DH&ESDFWP Proceeds available DH&ES
gram; monies from coal tax by
may be alloted legislature.
from legislature
No formal permit process
LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS
DNR — Departmentof Natural Resources DENR — Departmentof Energy and Natural Resources
F&W — Fish & Wildlife DEP — Departmentof Environmental Protection
DER — Departmentof Environmental Regulation DWPC — Division of Water Pollut on Control
GFC — Game and Fish Commission DEC — Departmentof Environmental Conservation
EPA — Environmental Protection Agency DEQ — Departmentof Environmental Qual ty
WMD — Water Management District DWNR — Departmentof Water and Natural Resources
DOA — Departmentof Agriculture (state level) SWCB — StateWater Con rol Board
DOC — Department of Conservation DFW — Departmentof F sh and Wildlife
DOG — Department of Game DOE — Department of Ecology
DOH — Departmentof Health DOF — Departmentof F sheries
AISWCD — Association of Illinois Soil and Water Conservation Districts DILHR — Departmentof Industry Labor and Human Relations
01

-------
u> -
o>
Table 8 1. Summary of state's lake programs (corrt.)
	 	 DCdUITS
<3
5 1 1 2
. „.,«« c-i nMWMa-nfcjft FUNDING PEHMI1 m c c e
PROGRAM A™ES STATE LOCAL AGENCIES 5 t 1 3
Nebraska None WPC(DEC) None 	 __ 	 1^2^ 	
Nevada None (only DivEP Local motive. DIV.EP
	 ; 	 u 	 M 	 FiF<; nnA Local initiative. DOE *- v
New Hampshire None DES, DOA Wetlands
Board v f
F&G *
Pr-antc DEP Diagnostic/Feasibility Dcr
tationupto50%
New Mexico Inventory* EID Staff position Local mitotive Eg^ ""
G&F »
Newark Lakes Program DEC Projects funded through DEC * v »
Funds proTects State legislature on a
case-by-case basis
North Carolma No formal DHS.DWR.DWLR Legislative Case °WLR
nmnram DV Case 	 _ 	
North Dakota Grants DH {Div WS& PC) Matching
Fish & Game 	
Ohio No overall EPA(DWQMSA) Case-by-Case Basis OEDA& ^^
coordinated USGS, DNR, SWC, UNH
program. Div. W, Div WL, Local
soil & water conserva-
tion districts 	 	 	 	 	
Oklahoma None DPC Local initiative 	 	
Oregon No formal DEO State matching DEQ
Pennsylvania Mostly DER
REQUIRED
s, i S
§f 8 in
I 8 SET OTHER

tory board
r
const., or significant changes
to environment or at discretion
of DEP
v> shed management
• recommendation
• is V V Harvesting & Drawdown
depending on mag., location,
& importance of lake. EIS if
large, unusual project, Dredge/
Fill may Mine Land Reclama-
tion permit if spoils are great.
permit of DWR.



"
Rhode Island None DEM Federal, States, local OH Any a|teratlon water
quality or physical dis-
ruption of water course

-------
co

PERMITS
FORMAL _, m i
I AlfCO < Q P
bouth Dakota Lakes Program DWNR Water Facilities Con- Water Project Districts DWNR 	 \£^±
struction-funds various can tax, pass bonds GTP *• v
water projects including Sanitary Districts can
lakes. Dredging grants set sewer fees Water-
;;. f. — ; 	 	 	 	 up to 50% shed Districts can tax
program UIIJ.LO Local initiative DH&EC
Texas None TWRD 	 	 	
utan No formal DH(Div EH) ~~ Local — T~t 	 n 	
program. initiative DH
Program Grants On-going funding
	 Proaram State 25% Local 25%
Virginia p^ram"9 W°B State and Federal funds WCB 	
Washington Grants DOE Phase 1 up to 75% -551= 	 * * ^ ~
	 Phase II up to 75% nr;
W9St Virginia None DNR(DivWR) ~ 	 	
Wisconsin LakeManage- DNR.DOA.DILHR Portion of Federal excise Lake Districts can tax. ~5NR 	 1^~^
mem program tax on recreation directed DOA
to Lake Management
Program provided project
	 improves sport fishery
Wyoming None DEQ Funds from EMOS 	 Local initiative" 	 npn 	
REQUIRED
1 Illll
Water quality variance

No formal permit process
<•» i«« <^ Permits required form-lake
treatments
"
•^ Hydraulic Permits
*•
LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS
DN^ — Department of Natural Resources HCMD r,
F&W _ Fish & Wildlife ncp ~~ DePartmentof Ener9y and Natural Resources
DER - Department of Environmental Regulation nwpr ~ Department of Environmental Protection
GFC - Game and Fish Commission n^r ~ Division of Water Pollution Control
EPA - Environmental Protection Agency npo ~ Department of Environmental Conservation
WMD - Water Management District nvvrjR ~ Department of Environmental Quality
DOA _ Departmentof Agriculture (state level) °WCB ~ Department of Wa.er and Natural Resources
DOC - Department of Conservation nFW ~ State Water Control Board
DOG - Department of Game nnp ~ Department of Fish and Wild ife
DOH - Department of Health ^OF ~ °ePar;mento'E<:ology
AISWCD _ Assoc,a,,ono,,,,lno,sSo,,andWa,erConserva,,onD,stnC,s SPLHR ~ o^So! ^labor and H,,man pola,,nn.

-------
   agencies for the proposed lake management project. The degree of help and
   completeness of information  may be excellent in some government offices.
   Other offices give out pertinent information more grudgingly, and only if the right
   questions are asked. The contractor's previous experience will be especially
   valuable if this latter situation is the case.
    Implementation  Costs  Money
   Two questions that arise from this statement are "How much will it cost?" and
   "Are funds available to implement this project?"


    Plans and Specifications
   The first question can be addressed by having the consultant or contractor, lake
    manager, or interested  groups  or  individuals develop a set  of plans and
    specifications for the various lake management techniques that are feasible.
    Economic considerations were part of the evaluation that preceded choosing a
    management alternative, so a rough approximation of cost is already available.
    At implementation, this estimate can be refined by pricing materials and man-
    power needed; calculating the cost of the time required for implementation,
    equipment needs, and any construction prior to implementation; and, finally, es-
    timating the cost of a postmonitoring  program.
      The cost of postrestoration monitoring should be factored directly into the
    overall cost of implementation because it is the only approach for evaluating
    whether treatments are effective.
      The preliminary set of plans and specifications does not have to be extremely
    detailed because it will be revised before it is let for bids, but it needs to provide
    sufficient information to approach potential funding agencies for money.
    Funding Sources

    Federal Agencies
    For lakes with public access, the Clean Lakes Program, administered through
    the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, is a source  of funds both for diag-
    nosis and evaluation  of lake problems and also for implementation of lake
    management programs. The Clean Water Amendments of 1987 provide for both
    Phase I (Diagnostic/Feasibility Studies) and Phase II  (Implementation) manage-
    ment programs to improve lake water quality. Much of the work discussed in this
    Guidance Manual came out of Clean Lake Studies. New rules and regulations for
    Clean Lakes funds are currently being prepared by EPA. Contact the State agen-
    cies listed in Table 8-1  and Appendix E for information on the current program.
      Funds also  might  be  available from other Federal agencies for various
    aspects of lake management. For example, funds might be available to aid in
    solving water and pollution abatement problems on agricultural land through the
    U.S. Department of Agriculture, Agricultural Stabilization and Conservation Ser-
    vice (ASCS). Cost-sharing grants enable the design of management systems to
    improve water quality and to stabilize runoff of nutrients or soils to water cour-
    ses. Long-term agreements allow for preservation of wetlands areas.
      Soil and water conservation are encouraged by grants  and cost sharing
    through the ASCS. Advisory service and counseling to improve flood prevention,
8-8

-------
streambank protection, and wildlife protection is also promoted. The Soil Con-
servation Service, which is primarily technical, administers the Rural Clean Water
Program grants.
   Guaranteed and insured loans also are made available through the Farmers
Home Administration to improve farmland conditions such as soil conservation,
treatment of farm wastes,  and reduction of fertilizer and pesticide runoff into
receiving areas.
   The Forest Service offers research grants and financial assistance to improve
watershed management. Studies that determine the fate of pesticides and fer-
tilizers after forest applications are funded, as  are reforestation research and
habitat improvement research.
   Loans and project grants are available through the Department of Commerce
to encourage economic improvements in financially depressed areas. Support
for water and sewage facilities is an activity that aids in improving the water
quality of lakes and streams. In some instances,  cities or regions that have
strong, organized offices of economic development have sponsored or provided
a great deal of assistance in lake projects.
   The Office of Education provides educational grants to support research and
development of methods to improve public understanding of water quality is-
sues.
   The Department of Housing and Urban Development supports a broad range
of planning and management activities to improve land management to protect
natural resources.
   The Office of  Mining Reclamation and Enforcement makes available grants
and payments to restore waters damaged by mining.
   The Bureau of Reclamation improves recreation development and flood con-
trol and aids in protecting municipal and  industrial water  supplies through
project grants and loans.
   The U.S. Fish  and Wildlife Service aids in habitat development and in enhan-
cement of fisheries resources and researches the effect of pesticides on fish and
wildlife through formula grants.
   The U.S. Geological Survey offers  help to the States through cooperative
programs  that  provide  50  percent matching  grants to  investigate the
physicochemical properties of the State waters as well as the geology and quan-
tity of streamflow from watersheds and basins.  This agency also manages the
State Water Research Institute Program, which can  be of great  assistance in
aiding lake  restoration efforts.


State Agencies

The potential funding status of various State agencies is shown in Table 8-1. This
varies annually, so these agencies need to be contacted well in advance to
determine their current or projected funding status.
   Each State and territory has a designated State Water Resource Research In-
stitute or Center on the campus of at least one land grant university in the State.
In nearly all instances, these units have staff and  libraries that can be of great as-
sistance to  individuals or  groups  seeking   information about  restoration
programs, such as the State agencies involved, the rules and regulations involv-
ing shoreline development, in-stream and lake manipulations, dredging, and ap-
plication of chemicals to  lakes.  In  most instances, they will  be aware of
assistance programs to implement a restoration  project. Each institution or cen-
ter also  has contact with, or directories of, the more prominent lake researchers
and agency personnel  of the State.
                                                                          8-9

-------
    Local  Funding Sources

    In some States, lake management districts have been authorized with enabling
    legislation that permits millage or tax assessments. Watershed management dis-
    tricts, irrigation districts, conservation districts, or sewer districts may have the
    authority to fund watershed management or lake management plans that will im-
    prove lake quality. Private foundations might have funds available for particular
    aspects of lake management such as nature conservancy (for example, preserv-
    ing or enhancing wetlands around a lake) or other considerations.
      Local  clubs, organizations, or community agencies  might provide funds or
    sponsor fund-raising activities. For example, if fishing is a desired lake use, local
    fishing clubs might be interested in sponsoring a fishing tournament, community
    dance, or other activity to raise money. Local activities can raise significant
    amounts  of money. The  small community of  Republic, Washington,  raised
    $25,000 in direct contributions to meet a State matching requirement to fund
    studies on nearby Curlew Lake.
      For many grants or awards,  a fund  matching arrangement requires the
    recipient to  raise a  percentage of revenue to qualify.  This matching money,
    however,  does not have to be out-of-pocket cash. Often, in-kind services are
    credited  with a value in lieu of actual cash. Contributed time at an approved,
    audited rate can satisfy the matching requirements. City, county, or State agen-
    cies, for example, might provide an in-kind match by filing permit applications,
    coordinating public meetings, or monitoring  restoration  activities or other
    aspects of the project.
      Once funding sources have been  identified, the project can be submitted to
    prospective consultants and contractors for bids.
    Implementation  Requires

    Contracts
    Invitations to bid can be announced locally, but because lake management is a
    specialized area, it is generally better to announce the invitation to bid at the
    State or regional level. Various organizations have newsletters that are read by
    lake management  contractors and consultants, so it is a good idea to also con-
    sider placing an announcement in these. One of the requirements that should
    accompany the bids  by potential contractors or consultants is a list of their
    qualifications. In the invitation to bid, a minimum set of qualifications should be
    specified as a  prerequisite to consideration. Prequalification prevents contrac-
    tors from wasting  their time submitting bids on projects for which they are not
    competitive and reduces the time the lake manager has to spend reviewing bids.
      Evaluation of the bids and selection of the contractor should be based on the
    quality of the proposed work as well as price. The lowest cost will not always
    result in the desired lake quality. A local attorney familiar with engineering con-
    tracts can be used to prepare a contract or review the contract submitted by the
    individual or firm selected for the project.
      The person preparing the contract should consider including a requirement
    for a contract  bond and liability insurance (see  Appendix F). A contract bond
    guarantees that the work or implementation of the lake management plan will be
    completed in accordance with the contract documents (that is, the lake manage-
    ment plan with associated specifications) and that all costs will be paid. Ex-
    amples of a bid bond, payment bond, and performance  bonds are included in
8-10

-------
Appendix F. These are examples only. Contact a local attorney to obtain a legal
contract.
Implementation  Takes Time
Inclement weather, unanticipated obstacles, and other factors can delay the im-
plementation of the lake management program. Some of these delays may be
unavoidable, but their impact can be minimized. One of the first products the
successful contractor or consultant should deliver is a detailed project schedule
and contingency options for every critical activity. A critical activity is one that
must be completed before another activity can proceed or be finished. As an ex-
ample, a restoration plan that includes dredging will come to a complete stop if
the business of acquiring and preparing an approved disposal site is not  begun
early enough. Until the disposal site is ready, nothing can come out of the lake.
  Smooth implementation depends on careful scheduling. Not only do critical
activities need to be timed to one another, but convenience, ideal operating con-
ditions, and maximal efficiency also need to be kept in mind. It is better to plan a
project so that dredging coincides with a time of year when usage is low but the
lake is accessible, such as fall or early winter. This will allow for maximum boat-
ing safety as well. Alum treatment can be scheduled (1) for late spring following
the major spring flow to aid  in inactivation of new nutrient input,  (2) in the fall to
intercept the release of nutrients from decaying macrophytes, or (3) after dredg-
ing to inactivate suspended phosphorus and to reduce exposure  of rich sedi-
ments to overlying  water columns.   Watershed  manipulation such as
streambank revetment or levee construction can best be accomplished when
water flow is low. Implementation of streamside management zones should
coincide with the  peak growing season so that vegetation can  become  estab-
lished before winter.
  Microcomputer scheduling programs are available to permit daily, weekly, or
monthly  tracking  of the  project's progress. These programs can be revised
quickly to determine  the impact of delays on project implementation and re-
schedule other activities to  minimize these delays. The lake manager needs to
review these schedules on a weekly basis during  peak  construction  or im-
plementation periods.
  The lake manager, contractor,  or other interested party should audit the
project's progress and expenditures at least quarterly to assure the budget is
living up to the schedule.
  Monthly progress reports should be required for the contractor.
Public  Education  is Critical

for Sound  Lake  Management
Public education  must begin before implementation ever occurs, but it is par-
ticularly critical during implementation. Various desired lake uses generally are
partially restricted while restoration is in progress. Activities such as shoreline
stabilization, alum treatment, and dredging restrict lake usage. People typically
respond positively when they understand what is occurring and why. People
react negatively when they are uninformed about these same activities.
                                                                 8-11

-------
    In many States,  public meetings  are a requirement  for lake  restoration
 projects. Every opportunity should be used to discuss progress in all phases of
 lake restoration at lake association and lake homeowner meetings. It is essential
 to prepare lake residents and users for what may take place during the im-
 plementation phase.
    Materials, including slides, films, and videotapes of other lake projects, may
 be used to familiarize the public with the type of equipment and procedures that
 will be used during lake restoration. NALMS can provide a videotape or slide
 show on lake management for use in a public information program.




  Postmonitoring  is an  Integral

  Part  of  Implementation
  The greatest current deficiency in lake management is the lack of information on
  treatment longevity and effectiveness. Postmonitoring must occur if these are to
  be determined.
     Results from lake management and restoration projects are not always ob-
  vious to the naked eye. Postmonitoring can help identify changes in the lake and
  whether or not the trend is toward improvement. If monitoring shows that an im-
  provement is not occurring, the data can be used to help diagnose the cause. In
  addition, restoration projects can result in a short-lived improvement because
  some factor not accounted for in the restoration plan is counteracting the work
  that was done. By maintaining a continuing monitoring program, such problems
  can be detected as they develop.
     Postmonitoring is one of the most cost-effective activities of the entire lake
  management program. Postmonitoring,  however, is not  free;  it does cost
  money The amount of money is directly related to the number of stations, the
  number of samples, the number of variables, and the sampling frequency. The
  number of  stations and number of depths was discussed in Chapter 3. In
  general, for oval  or round lakes a single station over the deepest point in the lake
  might be satisfactory. Additional stations will be required as the lake or reservoir
  becomes more irregular with multiple caves and embayments or much longer
  and narrower.                                              ...
     The number and type of variables and sampling frequency are prioritized in
  Table 8-2 These priority groups are based on the amount of money available for
   monitoring. The priority group I that is sampled at the minimum frequency (for
   example 4 times per year at spring overturn, summer, fall overturn, and winter)
   costs the least amount of money. These variables are labeled as A variables. If
   the A variables can be sampled at the minimum frequency and if  the lake
   manager still has some money in the budget for additional sampling, it is recom-
   mended that the frequency of sampling  these priority group I variables be in-
   creased to  include sampling at spring overturn and then monthly  until fall
   overturn (about 6 times during the growing season) with one winter sample. This
    represents the B category. If there is still money available,  additional variables
    (identified as C variables in priority group II  - total phosphorus, chlorophyll-a,
    conductivity) should be added to the quarterly samples. Additional funds would
    result in the addition of D variables (total nitrogen, turbidity, and pH) with month-
    ly sampling of total phosphorus, chlorophyll-a and conductivity during the grow-
    ing season. As  more  money becomes available, additional variables are added
    and  the sampling frequency increases to biweekly sampling during the growing
    season with one winter sample and, finally, to biweekly sampling during the
    growing season and monthly during the rest of the year.
8-12

-------
 Table 8-2.—Budget guidance for establishing a monitoring program. To use, price
             all items labelled "A". If more funds are available, price all items label-
             led B. Continue until budgetory limitations prevent any further prog-
             ress through the alphabet.
LAKE MONITORING PROTOCOL
PRIORITY PARAMETER
GROUPS
Secchi Transparency
Temperature
1 Dissolved Oxygen
Water Level
Total Phosphorus
II Total Nitrogen
Chlorophyll-a
Conductivity
Turbidity
PH
III Soluble Reactive
Phosphorus
Nitrogen Species
Suspended Solids
Iron3
Manganese3
IV Macrophyte Map4
Phytoplankton Species5
SAMPLING FREQUENCY1
MINIMUM +1 +2 +3
A
A
A
A
C
D
C
C
D
D
E
E
D
F
F
A
E
E
G
B E
B E
B E
B E
D E
F —
D E
D E
E G
D G
G —
G —
G
F
F
F
F
F
N/A
F
—
(simple)
(Complex)
(bloom forms)
(seasonal composite)
 1Sampling frequencies
    Minimum = 4 times a year
    + 1     = Minimum and 6 times during growing season
    + 2    = Minimum and 12 times during growing season
    + 3    = 12 times during growing season, plus 6 times during winter
 zSprmg overturn only, unless total nitrogen is less than 30 times total phosphorus (TN TP <30)
 3For drinking water supplies only
 4Simple = photograph, percent of lake surface area covered
  Complex = areal coverage by species
 5Bloom forms = dominant algae during periods of low transparency
  Seasonal composite = pooled sample from throughout the growing season from which common algae
                species can be determined
   This approach should provide some postmonitoring of all lakes with greater
monitoring effort when funds are available. Regardless of the question asked or
problem addressed,  there  is no substitute for data. Table 8-3 explains briefly
where samples are taken for commonly measured chemical and physical data.
   The reliability of the conclusions drawn from monitoring data is directly re-
lated to the  quality of  the  data.  There  are well-established  and  accepted
methods and procedures for chemically analyzing water samples. There are also
well-established  and accepted  procedures  for quality  assurance  and  quality
control of the analyses.  It is imperative that whatever laboratory, consultant, or
contractor collects and  analyzes these samples uses these accepted methods
and has acceptable quality assurance/quality  control  procedures. Ask if the
methods used are accepted, standard  methods and ask to see the quality as-
surance/quality control results from previous water quality analyses on lakes or
streams. Laboratories that  analyze sewage  might not be able to analyze lake
water samples because the constituent concentrations may be 100-1000 times
less than sewage. Test kits  are appropriate for some analyses but should not be
used for  most routine  water  quality analyses.  Water quality analyses cost
money; make sure the quality of the data warrants the cost.
                                                                               8-13

-------
  Table 8-3.—Long-term monitoring requires proper siting and appropriate selec-
              tion of parameters                 ^	
                      LONG-TERM MONITORING CONSIDERATIONS	

  SITING
  Ambient Water Generally, one site over the deepest part of the lake. Should not be near a
  Quality       dam, close to shore, or near stream inflows or point source influents. Lakes
                with distinctive subbasins, coves, fingers, or multiple inlets may require
                additional sampling sites (see Chapter 3)

  Budgets      Flow rates, water levels, and concentrations can be measured on major tri-
                butaries and estimated on minor inflows. Accurate assessment of lake vol-
                ume be necessary to account for nonpoint source loading and runoff vol-
                ume entering the lake. Nonpoint sources are difficult to monitor; a profes-
                sional will base siting on lake-specific hydrology, basin morphometry and
                other factors. Reference land-use-based export coefficients can provide a
                good first approximation, often sufficient to disguise problems. Budgets
                are usually limited to diagnostic studies, but long-term monitoring may be
                employed to track success of a restoration project or management technique.

  Sources      Monitoring sites can usually be limited to major inflowing streams or point
                source outfalls to the lake or tributary—particulary near suspected sources
                of sediment, nutrients, organic matter, or chemicals. Unless a special
                problem or land  use exists, rates from these stations can be used to inter-
                polate rates from minor inflows. In seepage lakes, groundwater obser-
                vation wells may be necessary.
   PARAMETERS
   Complete Water Samples taken from two depths (1 ft below surface and 2 ft above
   Chemistry    lake bottom)

                The following constituents are commonly measured, but a professional
                may recommend additional (or fewer) constituents:
                Priority Group
                Dissolved oxygen
                Total phosphorus
                Total nitrogen
                pH
                Total alkalinity
                Turbidity
                Total suspended solids
                 Other Parameters Commonly Measured
                 Ammonia nitrogen                 Kjedahl nitrogen
                 Nitrate-nitrite nitrogen              Chlorine
                 Dissolved phosphorus             Calcium
                 Magnesium                       Sodium
                 Potasium                         Sulfates
                 lron                             Manganese
                 Total dissolved solids              Volatile solids
                 Color
    Total
    Phosphorus
Sampled at two depths (1 ft below surface, 2 ft above bottom) during late
winter to spring turnover; during growing season sampled at three depths
(surface, bottom, and at top of hypolimnion). Multiple measurements near
the surface are a priority

These parameters are profiled, or recored along a vertical axis (the water
column), from 1 ft below surface and at 3-6 ft intervals to the bottom. Meter
is required to measure pH and conductivity
8-14
    Water Temp-
    erature
    pH
    Conductivity
    Chlorophyll-a  Measured at 1 ft below lake surface, and as important as phosphorus

    Secchi        Extremely useful and simple measurement; minimal sampling schedule
    Transparency  can be inexpensively upgraded to weekly sampling with
                  volunteer observers

-------
Table 8-3.—Long-term monitoring requires proper siting and appropriate selec-
            tion of parameters (cont.)

            	LONG-TERM MONITORING CONSIDERATIONS	


OTHER USEFUL MEASUREMENTS
Lake Water    Frequency can be increased to weekly observations at low cost by using
Level          volunteer observers; volunteer programs to observe water levels during
              storm events, however, are difficult to conduct. If intensive sampling is
              required for a diagnostic study, automated equipment is generally used

Fish Survey    Netting during spawning season, boom shocking after Sept. 1. Electro-
              shocking every other year. Gill netting every sixth year. Obtain advice from
              State or local agency or fish and wildlife department

Macrophytes   Surveyed every third year for abundance and location by species during
              peak growing season, late summer

Phytoplankton  Water collected at 1 ft depth with water bottle to identify species and gen-
              eral abundance

Zooplankton   A vertical tow is made with a plankton  net for identification and general
              bundance

Macro-
invertebrates   Sampling is conducted in late winter in the lake and inflowing streams

Watershed    Inventory of existing land use with field verification (on-site observation
Map          and walking tours). Updated every 3 to 5 years, as necessary, can provide
              an excellent record of potential sources both for tracing the origin of prob-
              lems and planning to prevent problems            	
                                                                               8-15

-------
      CHAPTER 9
Lake Protection and
      Maintenance

-------
CHAPTER  9




LAKE PROTECTION  AND

MAINTENANCE	




Introduction
Fishing, swimming, boating, hiking, watching a sunset or a sunrise over the lake,
and sitting on the shore are all activities that occur in and around lakes. Water at-
tracts people, and it is this uncontrolled attraction that eventually results in the
impairment of these desired uses. This Manual is directed primarily at restoring
these desired lake  uses. Obviously, the  best solution would have been to
prevent the degradation of these uses from occurring. Now, the object is to
prevent these problems from occurring again once the lake is restored.
  This chapter discusses some of the approaches that can be used to protect
and maintain the desired lake uses. These approaches range from informal
backyard discussion of lakeshore maintenance or aquatic weeds to the passage
of laws to protect lakes. The key to lake protection and maintenance in all of the
approaches, however, is public involvement and organization.




Lake  Organizations
Many lake associations are organized in response to some lake crisis such as
nuisance weeds, fishkills, foul odors, or watershed development. People recog-
nize that collectively they can accomplish more as an organized group than they
can individually. This same rationale is true for lake protection and maintenance.
Preservation of a lake, its water quality, and the desired lake uses is far more
prudent than restoration, and certainly more cost effective.
  The types of lake organizations range from informal meetings of homeowners
to share information about their lake to the passage of enabling legislation to
form special lake districts to protect and improve lakes.  Wisconsin lake districts,
for example, have the power to tax, levy special assessments, borrow and bond
                                                              9-1

-------
    to raise money, make contracts, and other authority to protect and improve
    lakes. The critical element is the formation of the lake association. The protection
    and maintenance of lakes depends on the ability of lakefront property owners
    and lake users to identify their own interests and form an association to pursue
    these interests. There is an excellent pamphlet available from the North
    American Lake Management Society titled, Starting and Building an Effective
    Lake Association. The first step is to form a steering committee of interested in-
    dividuals. If your lake does  not have a lake association, you need to identify
    several others who share your interest and concerns and form the nucleus of the
    lake association. More information is available in the pamphlet mentioned above.
      One of the primary purposes of all lake organizations, however, should be
    educating the public and promoting  increased public involvement in  lake
    management. The more informed people are about lake problems, alternative
    management procedures, and  watershed effects, the more intelligent their
    decisions will be about selecting and implementing appropriate protection and
    maintenance procedures. This information is available from a variety of sources
    including many of the sources listed in the previous chapter and Appendix E.
    State  Department of Natural Resources or Environment, Game and Fish, and
    County Extension officials generally are willing to provide written information or
    talks to organizations about various aspects of lake or watershed management
    practices. Local university professors, consulting firms, or members of environ-
    mental groups can discuss ongoing or completed projects at other  lakes in the
    area. Local, State, and Federal officials also can discuss some of the regulatory
    procedures available for protecting and maintaining lakes.
    Regulations  in Lake and

    Watershed  Protection and

    Management Activities
    Reasonable and appropriate regulations can be an important part of a water-
    shed-lake protection and management plan. These regulations can be adopted
    for three general purposes: (1) protecting the lake by regulating watershed ac-
    tivities that cause erosion and pollution problems (the point and nonpoint source
    controls discussed in Chapter 5); (2) controlling development to protect the aes-
    thetics and benefits of the shoreland; and (3) regulating the lake usage to reduce
    conflicts among swimmers, boaters, fishermen, and others (Born and Yanggen,
    1972). Some of the  most serious lake problems occur because of conflicts
    among lake users.
    Controlled  Development
    Many of the same regulatory activities developed for other situations such as
    urban areas can be adapted to protect or maintain lake quality. Zoning, for ex-
    ample, was developed to minimize conflicts between  potentially incompatible
    land uses such as heavy industry/commercial areas and residential homes in
    urban areas. Zoning also can be used to protect lake quality. Setback zones or
    areas typically are used to protect highway corridors.  Setback regulations for
    piers, boathouses, wharves, and homes can help preserve the shore cover,
    vegetation, and aesthetics. Some lake communities have a minimum setback of
9-2

-------
 75-100 feet for all buildings, including homes. A variety of zoning regulations are
 available for lake management and protection. Some of these are listed in Table
 9-1.  Many of these procedures were summarized by Public Technoloav Inc
 (1977).                                                                 ay>     '
                    Table 9-1.—A variety of zoning techniques
       TOPIC
                                            DEFINITION
  Zoning          The regulation of building types, densities, and uses permitted in dis-
                  tricts established by law.

  Special Permits/  Administrative permits for uses that are generally compatible with a
  Special Excep-   particular use zone, but that are permitted only if certain specified stan-
  tions/Conditional dards and conditions are met.
  Use Permits
 Variances
 Floating Zones
 Conditional
 Zoning
                 Administrative permits for uses that are generally compatible with a
                 particular use zone, but that are permitted only if certain specified
                 standards and condition are met.

                 Use zones established in the text of a zoning ordinance, but not
                 mapped until a developer proposes and the legislative body adopts
                 such a zone for a particular site.

                 An arrangement whereby a jurisdiction extracts promises to limit the
                 future use of land, dedicate property, or meet any other conditions. The
                 arrangement is either stated in general terms in the zoning ordinance or
                 imposed on a case-by-case basis by the legislative or administrative
                 body, prior to considering a request for a rezoning.

Contract Zoning   An arrangement whereby a jurisdiction agrees to rezone specified land
                 parcels subject to the landowner's execution of restrictive covenants or
                 other restrictions to dedicate property or meet other conditions stated in
                 the zoning ordinance or imposed by the legislative or admini-
                 strative body.

Cyclical Rezoning The periodic, concurrent consideration of all pending rezoning applica-
                tions, generally as part of an ongoing rezoning program, focusing upon
                one district at a time.
 Comprehensive
 Plan
 Consistency
 Requirement

 Zoning
 Referendum
                Provisions that require all zoning actions, and all other government
                actions authorizing development, to be consistent with an indepen-
                dently adopted comprehensive plan.
                Ratification of legislatively approved land use changes by popular vote,
                before such changes become law.
Prohibitory Zoning The exclusion of all multifamily, mobile, modular, industrialized, prefab-
                 ricated, or other "undesirable" housing types from an entire jurisdiction
                 orfrom most of the jurisdiction.

Agricultural       The establishment of "permanent" zones with large (that is multiacre)
Boning/Large Lot  minimum lot sizes and/or a prohibition against all nonagricultural devel-
zoning/Open     opment (with the exception of single-family residences and possibly
Space Zoning     selected  other uses).

Phased Zoning/   The division of an area into (1) temporary holding zones closed to most
Holding Zones/    nonagricultural uses and/or with large minimum lot sizes and (2) ser-
bhort-Term Ser-   vice areas provided with urban services and open for development in
vice Area         the near term (for example 5 years)
                                                                                  9-3

-------
                   Table 9-1.—A variety of zoning techniques (cont.)
          TOPIC                               DEFINITION
     Performance    An arrangement whereby all or selected uses are permitted in a dis-
     Zoning/Perform- trict if they are in compliance with stated performance standards, that
     ance Standards  is, if they meet stated community and environmental criteria on pollu-
                    tion, hazards, public service demands, etc.

     Flexible Zoning/  Freedom from minimum lot size, width, and yardage regulations,
     Cluster Zoning/  enabling a developer to distribute dwelling units over individual lots in
     Density Zoning  any manner the developer desires, provided (usually) that the overall
     	density of the entire subdivision remains constant.	

       Planned development of the  lake's watershed  is an effective means of mini-
     mizing lake problems  because  of watershed development while maintaining
     economic growth in  the community. Subdivision regulations including minimum
     lot sizes, minimum frontage requirements, minimum floor area, height restric-
     tions,  and land use intensity ratings also are applicable for lakefront property or
     the  community around a lake.  Several  development approaches are  listed  in
     Table  9-2 (Public  Technology,  Inc.).  Planned unit developments allow much
     greater flexibility in arranging  lots in clusters rather than all along the shoreline
     (see Fig. 9-1). Clustering lots in given areas also makes it more economical, and
     efficient, for small-scale water systems and waste treatment systems. Planned
     unit development can be combined with special protection, critical area,  or en-
     vironmentally sensitive area designations to provide lots and homes for people
     in a lake  environment  and setting  while protecting important environmental
     resources such as wetlands,  shorelands, groundwater recharge zones, or uni-
     que aquatic habitat.
                     Table 9-2.—A variety of development options
          TOPIC	DEFINITION	
     Planned Unit     A conditional use or floating zone regulated through specific design
     Development     standards and performance criteria, rather than through the traditional
     (PUD)           lot-by-lot approach of conventional subdivision and zoning controls.

     Subdivision      Procedures for regulating the division of one parcel of land into two or
     Regulations      more parcels—usually including a site plan review, exactions, and the
                     application of aesthetic, bulk, and public facility design standards.

     Minimum Lot Size The prohibition of development on lots below a minimum size.

     Minimum Lot Size A limitation on the maximum number of dwelling units permitted on a lot,
     Per Dwelling Lot  based on the land area of that lot (usually applied to multifamily housing).

     Minimum Lot Size  A limitation on the maximum number of rooms (or bedrooms) permitted on
     Per Room        a lot, based on the land area of that lot (usually applied to multifamily
                     housing).

     Setback, Front-    The prohibition of development on lots without minimum front, rear, or side
     age, and Yard     yards or below a minimum width.
     Regulations

     Minimum Floor    The prohibition of development below a minimum building size.
     Area

     Height Restriction  The prohibition of development above a maximum height.

     Floor Area Ratio   The maximum square footage of total floor area permitted for each square
     (FAR)            foot of land area.
9-4

-------
             Table 9-2.—A variety of development options (cont.)
      TOPIC
                                        DEFINITION
 Land Use Intensity Regulations that limit the maximum amount of permitted floor space and
 Rating          require a minimum amount of open space (excluding parking areas) and
                recreation space, and a minimum number of parking spaces (total and
                spaces reserved for residents only).

 Adequate Public  The withholding of development permission whenever adequate public
 Facilities        facilities and services, and defined by ordinance, are lacking, unless the
 Ordinance       facilities and services are supplied by the developer.

 Permit Allocation  The periodic allocation of a restricted (maximum) number of building per-
 System         mits or other development permits first to individual districts within ajuns-
                diction and then to particular development proposals.

 Facility Allocation  The periodic allocation of existing capacity in public facilities, especially in
 System         sewer and water lines and arterial roads, to areas where development is
                desired while avoiding areas where development is not desired.

 Development    A temporary restriction of development through the denial of building
 Moratorium/    permits, rezonmgs, water and sewer connections, or other develop-
 Interim Develop- ment permits until planning is completed and permanent controls and
 ment Controls   incentives are adopted, or until the capacity of critically overburdened
               public facilities is expanded.

 Special Protec-  Areas of local, regional, or State-wide importance—critical environ-
 tion Districts/    mental areas (for example, wetlands, shorelands with steep slopes);
 Critical Areas/   areas with high potential for natural  disaster (for example, f loodplains
 Environmentally and earthquake zones); and areas of social importance (for example,
 Sensitive Areas  historical, archaeological, and institutional districts)—protected by a
               special development review and approval process, sometimes involv-
               ing State-approved regulations.
Permits  and  Ordinances
Adequate public facilities ordinances and sanitary permits can be used to mini-
mize problems with septic systems or housing growth that exceeds the capacity
of existing waste treatment systems. Sanitary permits can be required prior to
building any structure for human occupancy. Sites that are not suited for septic
systems will not be issued building permits. Ordinances  can be developed to
limit building growth to a pace within the capacity of the treatment systems to
adequately handle the increased wasteloads. These ordinances can provide for
the orderly, and timely, expansion  of waste treatment  facilities to treat the
sewage.
   Zoning also can be used to minimize conflicts on the lake (Yanggen,  1983).
Both areal and time zoning can be used to reduce use conflicts by prohibiting
certain uses in selected areas or time of day. For example, certain areas of the
lake could be restricted for particular uses such as swimming or diving (Fig. 9-2).
Power boating and skiing  can be restricted to  open water areas with fishing
restricted  to shore areas. A minimum distance and/or speed also can be
specified;  for example, a power boat must be at least  100 feet away from an
anchored fishing boat or moving at no more than 5 mph.
                                                                             9-5

-------
      Cluster development
     Figure 9-1 .-Clustering of lots or homes in the portion of the watershed best suited to devel-
     opment reduces problems in the lake and maintains economic development in the water-
     shed. The same number of lots can be developed using the cluster approach  but water
     supply and waste treatment can be more efficient and effective. After Fulton, et al. 1971.
       Zoning can be established based on time of day as well as space. For ex-
    ample, pleasure motor boating or water skiing could be restricted to the hours of
    10 a.m. to 6 p.m. This would minimize conflicts with fisherman. Restrictions of
    motor sizes (for example, no motors on some lakes, only electric motors, or only
    motors less than 10 hp) are commonly used on small lakes or lakes in pastoral
    settings.
       All of these regulatory procedures  can be  combined to provide the most
    suitable approach for a particular lake or specific set of lake uses. Regardless of
    the regulations or restoration  practices employed, however, it is critical that lake
    management be an integrated program of watershed and lake management that
    is tailored to the particular uses and priority problems of the lake user.
9-6

-------
     Time Zoning
                                            Water-Skiing
                                          10 a.m. to 6 p.m.
  Figure 9-2.-Conflicts among multiple users can sometimes be avoided by restricting the
  space in which the activities occur or the time of day for these activities.            *
 Lake  Monitoring
Implementing a monitoring program has been discussed in previous chapters. It
is mentioned again to emphasize the importance of monitoring lake changes
through time. It is easier and much more cost effective to treat problems as they
start to develop  rather than after these problems  have  reached a crisis or
nuisance level. Monitoring is the only approach for determining whether protec-
tion and maintenance approaches are effective.
                                                                    9-7

-------
       Lakes are dynamic systems that age through time. As the lake ages, the ef-
    ficiency and effectiveness of  various management techniques  can change.
    Monitoring programs can record these changes and indicate (1) the need to
    alter the management procedures to maintain the same lake uses or (2) that the
    lake no longer can support these uses. Investment precedes dividends; invest-
    ing in monitoring pays dividends by ensuring lake management techniques are
    providing effective protection or maintenance of the desired lake uses.
       Chapter 8 provides guidance for establishing a monitoring program to obtain
    the most important information possible based upon financial ability.
9-8

-------
Epilogue
Not many books close by quoting from the Foreword to another book, but this
Manual is not just any book. Just as this final page is not the end at all; it only
punctuates your evolving understanding of lake and reservoir management — in
itself, a continuing, active,  iterative process.  So, from the foreword to Lake
Management Guide (NALMS, 1987):

      Lakes are the geological fireflies.  They have a limited lifespan,
      at least on a geological basis. Some come and go in a span of a
      few hundred years.  Even the oldest lakes formed by ancient
      shifts in the earth's  surface or glacial forces are impermanent.
      Occasionally, we can witness the complete death cycle of a lake
      in our own lifetimes.  Where this happens,  man is often impli-
      cated.

      Restoration and protection projects interrupt two great forces:
      nature's compelling pressures and man's habits. The projects in
      this book are aimed at correcting our own unhealthy habits. It is
      not as simple as stopping and undoing our own past mistakes,
      however; whatever man does to nature, nature will amend. If we
      cause an imbalance in fish populations toward rough fish, nature
      will seek an adjustment from there. If we allow erosion from our
      land to fill our lakes, nature will establish new territorial bound-
      aries—perhaps favoring a wetland where a lake once existed.

   May this Manual be your guide to understanding your lake, the processes
that affect it, and the ways you can protect and, if necessary, restore it. In other
words, may this final page represent a beginning for your lake.
                                                                     10-1

-------
References
Chapter 2
Reckhow, K.H., M.N. Beaulac, and J.T. Simpson. 1980. Modeling Phosphorus Loading and Lake
    Response Under Uncertainty: A Manual and Compilation of Export Coefficients. EPA-440/5-
    80-001. U.S. Environ. Prot. Agency, Washington, DC.
Vallentyne, J.R. 1974. The algal bowl: lakes and man. Misc. spec. publ. 22. Dep. Environ. Fish.
    Res. Board Can., Ottawa.
Chapter 3
Brezonik, P. 1984. Trophic state indices: rational for multivariate approaches.  In Lake and Reser-
    voir Management.  Proc.  3rd Annu. Conf. N.  Am. Lake Manage. Soc., Knoxville, TN. EPA
    440/5-84-001. U.S. Environ. Prot. Agency, Washington, DC.
Carlson, R.E. 1977.  A trophic state index for lakes. Limnol. Oceanogr. 22(2): 361-9.
Klessig, L.L.,  LM.  Mclntosh, and  R.E. Wedepohl. 1984.  Management efforts and financial
    strategies of Wisconsin lake districts: the first 10 years.  Pages 317-20 in Lake and Reservoir
    Management. Proc. 4th Annu. Conf. Int. Symp.  N. Am. Lake Manage. Soc., McAfee, NJ.
Omernik, J.M. 1987. Aquatic ecoregions of the conterminous United States. Ann. Ass. Am. Geogr.
Porcella, D.B., S.A. Peterson, and D.P. Larsen. 1979. Proposed method for evaluating the effects of
    restoring lakes. Pages 265-310 in Limnological and Socioeconomic Evaluation of Lake Res-
    toration Projects: Approaches and Preliminary Results. EPA 600/3-79-005. U.S. Environ. Prot.
    Agency, Washington, DC.
Reckhow, K. 1979.  Quantitative  Tools for Trophic Assessment. Spec. Rep.  U.S. Environ. Prot.
    Agency, Washington, DC.
Walker, W.W. 1984. Trophic state indices in  reservoirs.  Pages 435-40 in Lake and  Reservoir
    Management. Proc. 3rd Annu. Conf. N. Am. Lake Manage. Soc., Knoxville, TN. EPA 440/5-84-
    001. U.S. Environ. Prot. Agency, Washington, DC.
Chapter  4
Bernhardt, H.G. 1980. Reservoir protection by in-river nutrient reduction. Pages 272-7in Restora-
    tion of Lakes and Inland Waters.  Proc. Conf. Portland, Maine.  EPA 440/5-81-010. U.S. En-
    viron. Prot. Agency, Washington, DC.
Carlson, R.E. 1977. A trophic state index for lakes. Limnol. Oceanogr. 22(2): 361-9.
Connor, J.M., and M.R. Martin. 1986. Wetlands Management and First Year Response of a Lake to
    Hypolimnetic Aluminum Salts Injection. Staff Rep. 144. New Hampshire Water Supply Pollut.
    Control Commiss.
Connor, J.M., and G. Smith. 1983.  Kezar Lake Diagnostic/Feasibility Study. Staff Rep. 135. New
    Hampshire Water Supply Pollut. Control Commiss.
	.  An efficient method of applying aluminum salts for sediment phosphorus inactivation in
    lakes.  Water Resour. Bull. 22(4).
Dillon,  P.J., and  F.H. Rigler.  1974. The phosphorus-chlorophyll relationship in lakes.  Limnol.
    Oceanogr. 19(4): 767-3.
Heiskary, S.,  and W.W. Walker.  1987. Developing phosphorus criteria for Minnesota lakes.
    Presented at Annu. Symp. N. Am. Lake Manage. Soc., Orlando, FL.
Jones, J.R., and R.W. Bachman. 1978. Trophic status of Iowa lakes in relation to origin and glacial
    geology. Hydrobiolgia 57(3): 267-73.
Jones,  J.R., and G.F. Lee. 1981.  Impact of phosphorus removal at the Danbury, Connecticut
    sewage treatment plant on water quality in Lake  Lillinonah. Water Air Soil Pollut. 16: 511-31.
Larsen, D.P., and K.W. Malueg. 1980.  Whatever became of Shagawa Lake. Pages 67-72 in Res-
    toration of Lakes and Inland Waters.  Proc. Conf. Portland, Maine. EPA 440/5-81-010. U.S. En-
    viron. Prot. Agency, Washington, DC.
Larsen, D.P., and H.T. Mercier. 1976. Phosphorus retention capacity of lakes. J. Fish. Res. Board
    Can. 33:1742-50.
Smeltzer, E. 1987. Lake Morey Restoration Project-Interim Progress Report. Prepared for Region I,
    U.S. Environ. Prot. Agency. Vermont Dep. Water Resour. Environ. Eng.
                                                                                    10-3

-------
     Smeltzer, E., and E.B. Swain. 1985. Answering lake problems with paleolimnology.  Pages 268-74
         in Lake and Reservoir Management. Proc. Conf. N. Am. Lake Manage. Soc. McAfee, NJ.
     Soltero, R.A., and D.G. Nichols. 1984. The improved water quality of  Long Lake following  ad-
         vanced wastewater treatment by the city of Spokane, Washington. Pages 395-404 in Lake and
         Reservoir Management.  Proc. Conf. N. Am. Lake Manage. Soc. Knoxville, TN.
     Stauffer, R.E. 1981. Sampling Strategies for Estimating the Magnitude and Importance of Internal
         Phosphorus Supplies in  Lakes. EPA-600/3-81-015. Corvallis Environ. Res. Lab. U.S. Environ.
         Prot. Agency, Washington, DC.
     U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. 1978. National Eutrophication Survey, Working Pap. 474,
         475, 476, 477.  Corvallis Environ. Res. Lab. and  Las Vegas  Environ. Monitor. Support Lab.
         Washington, DC.
     Vollenweider, R.A.  1976. Advances in  defining  critical loading levels for  phosphorus in lake
         eutrophication. Mem. Inst. Ital. Idrobiol. 33:53-83.
     Walker, W.W. 1982. Model testing. Rep. 2. Empirical Methods for Predicting Eutrophication in Im-
         poundments. Off. Chief  Eng.  U.S. Army Rep. E-81-9.  U.S. Army Eng. Waterways Exp. Sta.,
         Vicksburg, MS.
     	. 1983.  Data and Analysis and Model Development for the Lake Morey 314 Diagnostic
         Study.  Prepared for Vermont Dep. Water Resour. Environ. Eng.
     	. 1985. Model refinements.  Rep. 3.  Empirical Methods for  Predicting Eutrophication in  Im-
         poundments. Off. Chief  Eng.  U.S. Army Rep. E-81-9.  U.S. Army Eng. Waterways Exp. Sta.,
         Vicksburg, MS.
     Chapter 5
     Cooke, G. D., R. T. Heath, R. H.. Kennedy, and M. R. McComas. 1978. Effects of diversion and
         alum applications on two eutrophic lakes. EPA-600/3-78-033. Environ. Res. Lab. Off. Res. Dev.
         U.S. Environ. Prot. Agency, Corvallis, OR.
     Edmondson, W. T. 1972. Nutrients and phytoplankton in Lake Washington. Pages 172-193 in G. E.
         Likens, ed. Nutrients and Eutrophication: The Limiting-Nutrient Controversy. Spec. Symp. Vol.
         1. Am. Soc. Limnol. Oceanogr. ©HANGINGINDENT = U. S. Environmental Protection  Agency.
         1980a.  Capsule Report:  Lake  Restoration in Cobbossee Watersheds. EPA-625/2-80-027.
         Center Environ. Res. Inf. Off. Res. Dev., Cincinnati, OH.
     	. 1980b. Design Manual. Onsite Wastewater Treatment and Disposal Systems. EPA 625/1-
         80-012. Off. Water Progr.Oper., Washington, DC.
     	. 1981. Flow Reduction, Methods, Analysis Procedures, Examples.
     U.S. Department of Agriculture. 1984. Water Conservation Checklist for the Home. EC553.-12m-4-
         84. U.A.R.
     Welch, E.B., and M.D. Tomasek. 1980. The continuing dilution of Moses Lake, Washington. Pages
         238-44 in Restoration of Lakes and Inland Waters. Proc. Conf. Portland, Maine. EPA 440/5-81-
         010. U.S.  Environ. Prot. Agency, Washington, DC.
      Chapter 6
     Allen, S.K., Jr. and R.J. Wattendorf. 1987. Triploid grass carp: status and management implica-
         tions. Fisheries (12)4: 20-24.
     Anonymous. 1979. How to Identify and Control Water Weeds and Algae. Applied Biochemists, Inc.,
         Mequon, Wl.
     Arnold, W.R. 1979. Fluridone, a new aquatic herbicide. J. Aquat. Plant Manage. 17: 30-3.
     Barko, J.W., and R.M. Smart.  1986. Effects of sediment composition on growth of submerged
         aquatic vegetation. Tech. Rep. A-86-1. U.S. Army Corps Eng., Vicksburg, MS.
     Barnard, W.D. 1978. Prediction and control of dredged material dispersion around dredging and
         open-water pipeline disposal operations. Tech. Rep. DS-78-13. U.S. Army Corps Eng., Vick-
         sburg, MS.
     Beard, T.D. 1973. Overwinter drawndown; Impact on the aquatic vegetation in Murphy Flowage,
         Wisconsin. Tech. Bull. No. 61. Wis. Dep. Nat. Resour., Madison.
     Benndorf, T., H. Kneschke, K. Kossatz, and E. Penz. 1984. Manipulation of the pelagic food web by
         stocking with predacious fishes. Int. Rev. Ges. Hydrobiol. 69: 407-28.
     Bruha, P., and E.D. Prince. 1973. How to build a freshwater artificial reef. Unpubl. mss. Virginia
         Polytechnic Inst. State Univ., Blacksburg.
     Bennett, G.W. 1970. Management of Lakes and Ponds. Van Nostrand Reinhold Co., New York.
     Canfield, D.E. Jr., K.A. Langeland, S.B. Linda, and  W.T. Haller. 1985.  Relations  between water
         transparency and  maximum depth  of  macrophyte colonization  in lakes. J. Aquat.  Plant
         Manage. 23: 25-8.
     Carlander, K.D. 1977. Handbook of Freshwater Fishery Biology. Iowa State Univ. Press, Ames.
10-4

-------
  Center, T.D., and W.C. Durden. 1986. Variation in waterhyacinth/weevil interactions resulting from
      temporal differences in weed control efforts. J. Aquat. Plant Manage. 24: 28-37.
  Colle, D.E., and J.V. Shireman. 1980. Coefficients of condition for largemouth bass, bluegill, and
      redear sunfish in hydrilla infested lakes. Trans. Am. Fish. Soc. 109: 521-531.
  Conyers, D.L., and G.D. Cooke. 1983. A comparison of the costs of harvesting and herbicides and
      their effectiveness in nutrient removal and control of macrophyte biomass. Pages 317-21 in
      Lake Restoration, Protection, and Management. Proc. 2nd Annu. Conf. N. Am. Lake Manage
      Soc., Vancouver, B.C. EPA-440/5-83-001. U.S. Environ. Prot. Agency, Washington, DC.
  Cooke, G.D. 1980. Covering bottom  sediments  as a lake restoration technique.  Water Resour
      Bull. 16:921-6.
  Cooke, G.D., and R.H.  Kennedy. 1981. Precipitation and inactivation of phosphorus as a lake res-
      toration technique. EPA-600/3-81-012. U.S. Environ. Prot. Agency, Washington, DC.
  Cooke, G.D., R.T. Heath, R.H. Kennedy, and M.R. McComas.  1982. Change in  lake trophic state
      and internal phosphorus release after aluminum sulfate application. Water Res Bull 18- 699-
      705.
  Cooke, G.D., E.B. Welch, S.A. Peterson, and P.R. Newroth. 1986. Lake and Reservoir Restoration
      Butterworth Publ., Boston.
  Cooke, G.D., and R.E. Carlson. 1986. Water quality management in a drinking water reservoir
      Lake Reserv. Manage. 2: 363-371 .
  Cooke, G.D., and R.H. Kennedy. 1988. Water Quality Management Techniques for Reservoirs and
     Tailwaters: In-lake  Reservoir Water  Quality Management Techniques. Tech  Rep E-87 U S
     Army Corps Eng., Vicksburg, MS.
  Duarte, C.M., J.  Kalff, and R.H. Peters. 1986. Patterns in biomass and cover of aquatic macro-
     phytes in lakes. Can. J. Fish. Aquat. Sci. 43: 1900-08.
  Engel, S. 1982. Evaluating sediment blankets and a screen for macrophyte control in lakes Off  In-
     land Lake Renewal, Wis. Dep. Nat. Resour., Madison.
  Gachter,  R.  1976. Lake restoration  by bottom water siphoning. Schweiz Zeit  Hydrol  38- 1-28
     (German).
  Gangstad, E.G. 1986. Freshwater Vegetation Management. Thomas Publ., Fresno, CA.
  Geiger, N.S. 1983. Winter drawdown for the control of Eurasian watermilfoil in an Oregon oxbow
     lake  (Blue Lake, Multnomah County). Pages 193-7 in  Lake Restoration, Protection, and
     Management. Proc. 2nd Annu. Conf. N. Am. Lake Manage. Soc., Vancouver, B.C EPA-440/5-
     83-001 . U.S. Environ. Prot. Agency, Washington, DC.
  Haag,  K.H. 1986. Effective control of waterhyacinth using Neochetina and limited herbicide ap-
     plication. J. Aquat. Plant Manage. 24: 70-5.
  Hanson, M.J., and H.G. Stefan. 1984.  Side effects of 58 years of copper sulfate treatment of the
     Fairmont Lakes, Minnesota. Water Res. Bull. 20: 889-900.
  Hoar, S.K., A. Blair, F.T. Holmes, C.D. Boyson, R.J. Robel, R. Hoover, and J.F.  Fraument.  1986.
     Agricultural herbicide use and risk of lymphoma and soft-tissue sarcoma  J Am Med  Ass
     256: 1141-7.
 Hutto, T.D., and B.M.  Sabol. 1986. Application of HARVEST, mechanical simulation model, as an
     operational aquatic macrophyte  management decision tool. Lake Reserv. Manage. 2: 267-70.
 Leopold, A. 1933. Game Management. Scribner's and Sons, New York.
 Lopinot, A.C. 1972. Pond Fish and  Fishing in  Illinois.  Fish. Bull. No. 5. III. Dep Conserv
     Springfield.                                                                         '
 Lorenzen,  M.W.,  and A.W.  Fast. 1977. A Guide to Aeration/Circulation Techniques for  Lake
     Management. EPA-600/3-77-004. U.S. Environ. Prot. Agency, Washington, DC.
 Martyn, R.D., R. L Noble, P.W. Bettoli, and R.C. Maggio. 1986. Mapping aquatic weeds with aerial
     color infrared photography and evaluating their control by grass carp. J. Aquat. Plant Manage.

 Mayhew, J.K., and  S.T. Runkel. 1962, The control of nuisance aquatic vegetation with black
     polyethylene plastic. Proc. Iowa Acad. Sci. 69:  302-7.
 McCowen, M.C., C.L. Young, S.D. West, S.J. Parka, and W.R. Arnold. 1979. Fluridone, a new her-
     bicide for aquatic plant management. J. Aquat. Plant Manage. 17: 27-30.
 Nail, L.E., and J.D. Schardt. 1980. Large-scale operations management test using the white amur
    at Lake Conway, Fla. Aquatic Macrophytes.   Pages 249-72in Proc. 14th Annu.  Meet Aquat
    Plant Control Res. Plann. Oper. Rev. Msc. pap. A-80-3.  U.S. Army Corps Eng., Vicksburg, MS.
 Newroth, P.R., and R.J. Soar. 1986.  Eurasian watermilfoil management using newly developed
    technologies.  Lake Reserv. Manage. 2: 252-7.
 Nichols, S.A. 1986. Community manipulation for macrophyte management. Lake Reserv. Manage.
    £.* feT'O"3l .
Nicholson,  S.A. 1981. Changes in submersed macrophytes  in Chautauqua Lake  1937-1975
    Fresh w. Biol. 11: 523-30.
Nurnberg, G.K.  1987. Hypolimnetic withdrawal as a lake restoration technique. J Environ Eng
    Div. Am. Soc. Civil Eng. 113: 1006-17.
Pastorok, R.A., T.C. Ginn, and M.W. Lorenzen. 1981. Evaluation of aeration/circulation as a lake
    restoration technique. EPA-600/3-81-014. U.S. Environ. Prot. Agency, Washington, DC.
Pennwalt Corp. 1984. Submersed Aquatic Weeds and Algae Guide. Philadelphia.
                                                                                      10-5

-------
     Peterson, S.A. 1981. Sediment removal as a lake restoration technique. EPA-600/3-81-013. U.S.
         Environ. Prot. Agency, Washington, DC.
     	. 1982a. Dredging and nutrient inactivation as lake restoration techniques: a comparison, in
         Management of Bottom Sediments Containing Toxic Substances: Proc. 6th  U.S./Japan Ex-
         perts Meet. U.S. Army Corps Eng. Dredging Oper. Tech. Support Progr., Vicksburg, MS.
     	. 1982b. Lake restoration by sediment removal. Water Res. Bull. 18: 423-35.
     Ripl, W. 1976. Biochemical oxidation of polluted lake sediment with nitrate  a new lake restoration
         method. Ambio 5:132-5.
     Sanders, D.R., Sr. and E.A. Theriot. 1986. Large-scale operations management test (LSOMT) of in-
         sects and pathogens for control of waterhyacinth in Louisiana. II. Results for 1982-83. Tech.
         Rep. A-85-1. U.S. Army Corps Eng., Vicksburg, MS.
     Schmitz, D.C. 1986. The aquatic herbicide SONAR (Ruridone): A review of the scientific literature.
         Fla. Dep. Nat. Resour., Tallahassee.
     Shapiro, J.  1979. The importance of trophic level interactions to the abundance and species com-
         position of algae in  lakes. Soc. Int. Limnol. Workshop on  Hypertrophic Ecosystems. Dev.
         Hydrobiol. 2: 105-16.
     Shapiro, J., V. LaMarra, and M. Lynch. 1975. Biomanipulation: An ecosystem approach to lake res-
         toration. Pages  85-96 in  P. L  Brezonik and J. L.  Fox, eds. Symposium on Water Quality
         Management and Biological Control. Univ. Florida, Gainesville.
     Shireman, J.V. 1982. Cost analysis of aquatic weed control: Rsh versus chemicals in a Florida
         lake. Progr. Fish-Cult. 44:  199-200.
     Shireman, J.V., W.T. Haller, D.E. Canfield, and V.T. Vandiver. 1982. The impact of aquatic plants
         and their management techniques on the aquatic resources of the United States: An overview.
         EPA-600/4-81-007. U.S.  Environ. Prot. Agency, Washington, DC.
     Shireman, J.V.,  W.T. Haller, D.E. Colle, C.E. Watkins,  II, D.F. Durant, and D.E. Canfield. 1983.
         Ecological impact of integrated chemical and biological aquatic weed  control. EPA-660/3-83-
         098. U.S. Environ. Prot. Agency, Washington, DC.
     Shireman, J.V.,  M.V. Hoyer, M.J.  Maceina,  and  D.E. Canfield, Jr. 1985. The water quality  and
         fishery  of Lake Baldwin, Florida four years after macrophyte removal  by grass carp. Pages
         201-6 in Lake and Reservoir Management. Proc. 4th Annu. Conf.  N. Am. Lake Manage. Soc.,
         McAfee, NJ.
     Smith, C.S., and  M.S.  Adams.  1986.  Phosphorus transfer  from sediments by Myriophyllum
         spicatum. Limnol. Oceanogr. 31: 1312-21.
     Smith, C.R., and J.V. Shireman. 1983. White Amur Bibliography. Misc. Pap. A-83-7. U.S. Army
         Corps Eng., Jacksonville,  FL
     Uttormark,  P.O., and M.L. Hutchins. 1980. Input-output  models as decision aids for lake restora-
         tion. Water Res. Bull. 16: 494-500.
     Van Dyke, J.M.,  A.J. Leslie, Jr., and LE. Nail. 1984. The effects of the grass carp on the aquatic
         macrophytes of four Florida lakes. J. Aquat. Plant Manage. 22: 87-95.
     Welch, E.B., and C.R. Patmont. 1980. Lake restoration by dilution: Moses Lake, Washington. Water
         Res. 14: 1317-25.
     Chapter 7
     Blank, L.T., and A.J. Tarquin. 1983. Engineering Economy. McGraw Hill Book Co., New York.
     Chapter 9
     Born, S., and D. Yanggen.  1972. Understanding lakes and lake problems. Publ. G2411.  Univer-
         sity of Wisconsin-Extension, Madison.
     Fulton, J.K., E.W. Say, W.P. Miller, T.E.  Bletcher, Jr., and H.C. Koch, Jr. 1971. Inland Lakes:
         Analysis and Action. Ext. Bull. 718. Coop. Ext. Serv. Michigan State Univ., Ann Arbor.
     Public Technology, Inc. 1977.  Land Management: a Technical Report for State and Local Govern-
         ments.  Washington, DC.
10-6

-------
Index
2,4,5-T  6-32
2,4-D  6-26,6-31,6-32
208 Water Quality Management Plans   7-8
activated sludge  5-4, 5-5, 5-9
advisory committee   7-5
aeration of the whole lake   7-28
aerial photographs   3-9, 7-9
aesthetics   1-2, 3-4, 3-6, 7-7
aging   2-21
agricultural practices  7-24
agricultural runoff   6-17
Agricultural Stabilization and Conservation
  Service   8-8
Alaska  8-4
algae   3-3,3-4,6-4,6-18
algae biology  6-5
algae control   6-17,7-21
algal  5-3
algal biomass  2-5, 2-15, 3-16
algal blooms   2-15, 3-17, 3-4, 4-2, 5-3, 5-13,
  6-6,6-9,6-10,6-11,6-20
algal cells   6-10
algal concentrations  4-19
algal control  6-14,6-17,6-20
algal die-off   3-18
algal growth  3-16, 4-3, 4-19, 4-20, 6-5, 6-10
algal production  2-5
algal productivity  2-15
algicide application   6-2
algicides   2-22,6-17,6-19,7-28
alkalinity   3-11,6-7,7-10
alligatorweed flea beetle  6-26
alternative on-lot treatment methods  5-8
alternative on-lot wastewater   5-7
alternative solutions  8-1
alum  6-6, 6-7, 6-28, 6-36
alum treatment  3-25, 4-21, 7-19, 7-21, 7-26,
  7-28,8-11
ammonia   5-6
ammonia nitrogen   7-10,7-12
ammonium nitrogen  3-18
animal waste management   5-16,7-24
Annabessacook Lake  5-20, 5-21
annual cost method  7-21
annual water   7-16
annual water balance  7-17
anoxia   2-6, 2-17, 3-17, 6-17, 7-14, 7-17
aphoticzone   2-14
applicability  7-20
Aquascreen (fiberglass)  6-23
aquatic weed species  6-34
aquatic weeds  6-33
Arizona   8-4
Arkansas  6-25,8-4
artificial aeration/destratification  2-23
artificial circulation   2-22, 6-11,6-12, 6-19,
  6-36
atmosphere  2-4, 2-5, 4-11
atmospheric input   2-6
attainable uses  3-5
automated stream monitoring  7-12
automatic water sampler   7-12
bacteria   2-19,5-2
barge  6-28
basin-shape  6-3
bathymetric map   6-21
benefits   7-21
benthic invertebrates  6-23
best management practices   2-7, 5-1, 5-15,
  5-16, 5-17, 5-18, 5-19
bid bond   8-10
biochemical oxygen demand  2-5, 3-9, 3-10
bio-filters   5-4
biological controls  6-20, 6-24
biological indicators   3-19
biological productivity  2-7,  2-14, 2-19
biology of macrophytes  6-19
biomanipulation  6-16,6-17
biomass  2-15, 2-22, 3-19
biota  2-1,2-3
bloom frequency  4-3
blooms  6-5
blue-green algae   2-15, 2-16, 3-16, 3-19,
  4-22, 6-5, 6-11, 6-18, 6-27, 6-36, 7-3, 7-15
blue-green algal blooms   4-19
blue-greens  6-35
boating   3-3, 3-4, 3-6, 6-3, 6-19, 7-1, 9-1
bond  9-1
borrow  9-1
bottom contours   3-15
budget guidance  8-13
budgets  8-14
buffer strips   5-19,7-24
Bureau of Reclamation  8-9
California  8-4
capital costs  5-8, 5-16, 7-21
carbon dioxide  6-11
Carlson   3-21,4-13
Carlson's Trophic State Index (TSI)   3-21,
  3-24,4-13,4-14,7-15
carry-over effect  6-29
case study   7-1
cattails  6-25
causes  1-4, 3-9, 3-11, 2-23, 3-2, 3-3, 3-6
Cesium-137   3-15
change in storage  4-7, 4-9
Chara  6-24, 6-32
Chautauqua Lake, NY   6-29
chemical analyses  3-18
chemical and biological characteristics  7-9
chemical oxygen demand   2-5
chlorophyll   2-13, 3-9, 3-16, 3-19, 4-2, 4-3,
  4-12,4-18
chlorophyll-a   4-4, 4-5, 4-13, 4-14, 4-15,
  4-17, 4-18, 4-20, 4-21, 4-21, 4-22, 7-11,
  7-15, 7-18, 8-13, 8-14
City of Middletown   7-2
Clean Lakes Program  3-8,  7-3, 7-6,  7-8, 8-8
Clean Water Amendments of 1987  8-8
climate   2-23
cluster systems  5-9
clustering lots  9-4
                                                                                         10-7

-------
   Cobbossee Lake  5-20, 5-21
   cold-water fishery   6-12
   color  6-4,6-36
   Colorado  8-4
   community succession   2-15
   community treatment system   5-13
   concentrations  4-6, 4-9, 4-16
   condition  1-3
   conductivity   3-11, 7-10, 8-13, 8-14
   confidence  4-5, 5-16, 7-20
   conflicts   9-2
   conflicts users  6-37
   Connecticut   8-4
   conservation   5-16
   conservation districts  8-10
   conservation tillage  5-16, 5-17, 5-19, 7-24
   construction controls  7-26
   consultant  3-7, 7-4, 7-23, 8-1
   consultant selection  7-6, 8-3
   consulting  9-2
   consumption   2-14
   contact stabilization  5-4
    contingency options  8-11
    continuous streamflow data  7-17
    contour farming  5-16
    contour stripcropping  5-16
    contract bond  8-10
    contractor  8-1
    contractor selection  8-10
    contracts  8-10,9-2
    control of macrophytes  6-21
    control of nuisance algae   6-12
    control of nuisance aquatic weeds  6-35
    control strategies  3-9
    controlling development  9-2
    conventional septic systems   5-8
    conventional sewers  5-8
    conventional treatment  5-4
    coontail  6-22,6-24
    copper   6-17,6-37
    copper accumulation in sediments  6-18
    copper sulfate  5-20, 6-17, 6-33, 7-20
    corrective stocking  6-38
    cost comparison  6-33, 7-21
    cost comparisons for biological controls
       6-27
    costs   6-32,8-8
    costs of algicides  6-18
    costs of drawdown  6-23
    costs of hypolimnetic aeration   6-13
    County Conservation District  7-24
    criteria for selecting consultants   8-2
    critical area   5-18, 5-19, 9-4
    crop rotation   5-16, 7-24
     Crustacea  6-32
     crustacean   6-14
     cultural eutrophication   2-19, 2-21
     cultural sources   5-14
     cutting   6-20
     cutting rates   6-28
     Dartek (nylon)  6-23
     data  3-8,3-11,7-8
     data analysis  7-14
     data collection  3-11
     decomposition  2-10, 2-16, 2-19
Delaware   8-4
Delphi process  1-4, 3-5
density flows  2-11,2-13
density gradient  2-9
Department of Commerce   8-9
Department of Housing  8-9
depths  4-13,4-21
destratify  6-12,7-14
detention basin   5-16, 5-18, 7-19
diagnosing problems  8-1
diagnosis   3-7, 3-9, 3-10, 3-11
diagnostic models  4-1
diagnostic study   3-24, 7-23
diagnostic/feasibility studies  6-2, 6-3
diatoms  2-15
dilution   5-4,6-10,6-19,6-37,7-28
diquat  6-31,6-33
discharge  5-1
Discharge Monitoring Records  3-9
discharge rates  5-2
discrete cash flow  7-23
disposal sites  6-19,8-11
dissolved oxygen  2-10, 2-19, 3-11, 3-17,
   3-26, 3-27, 3-9, 5-2, 5-3, 6-11, 6-23, 7-9, 8-13
dissolved solids   3-18
disturbed area limits   5-16, 5-18
diversion   3-26, 5-20, 5-21, 6-6, 6-36
divert  5-20
domestic wastewater sources   5-13
 drain field   5-6
 drainage   5-1
 drainage basin  6-3, 6-36
 drainage lake  2-4
 drawdown  6-23,6-35
 dredging   3-4, 6-7, 6-19, 6-20, 7-19, 7-20,
   7-21,7-26,7-28,8-11
 dredging costs  6-9
 drinking water   3-4, 6-12, 6-35, 6-36
 drying  6-23
 dyes  6-23
 East Twin Lake  5-21
 ecology  2-1
 ecoregions  3-6, 3-16, 6-3
 ecosystems   2-1,7-21
 effectiveness 7-19
 effects on lake quality  1-5
 elodea  6-25
 emergent species  6-34
 endothall  6-31
 energy  2-17
 EPA  6-35,7-5
 epilimnion   2-8, 2-9, 2-11,6-13
 equivalent annual cost   7-22
 erodible soils  6-3
 erosion   3-15,5-18,6-18,9-2
 erosion control   5-15,6-21, 7-23, 7-26
 essential nutrients  2-14
  Eurasian watermilfoil  6-22, 6-26
 eutrophic  1-2, 2-17, 2-23, 3-17, 4-15, 4-23
 eutrophic classification  7-15
 eutrophication  1-2,1-5, 2-15, 2-17, 2-19,
    2-21,2-22,3-21,4-14,4-15
  eutrophication model  4-3, 4-4, 4-5
  eutrophy  2-19,2-21
  evaluation criteria   7-18
10-8

-------
  evaluation matrix   7-23
  evaporation   2-4,4-7
  export  4-9
  export coefficients  3-10,4-9
  extension  5-17
  external loading   4-20
  external loads  7-17
  external nutrient loading  2-23
  external phosphorus loading  4-20, 7-17
    7-18
  fall overturn  2-10
  Farmers Home Administration  8-9
  feasibility study  6-19
  fecal coliform   5-21
  federal agencies   8-8
  Federal Clean Water Act  5-3
  fees   8-3
  fertilizer management   5-16, 5-17, 5-19
  fiberglass  6-23
  filamentous algae   6-5, 6-28
  Fish and Wildlife Service  8-3
  fish management   6-37, 6-38
  fish species   6-14
  fish survey  8-14
  fisheries   6-26
  fishing  6-4,9-1
  fishkills   2-15, 2-6, 3-4, 3-18, 3-24, 6-18
  floating species  6-34
  flocculation  4-22
  Florida  6-21, 6-25, 6-26, 6-30, 8-4
  flow   3-11,3-14,3-18,4-3,4-6,4-12
  fluridone   6-32
  flushing  4-20, 6-10, 6-19,  7-21, 7-28
  flushing rate   4-3, 7-28
  food chain  2-17, 2-18, 6-15
  food chain manipulation  6-14, 6-19, 7-28
  food web   2-7,2-17,6-14
  food web manipulation   6-17
  Forest Service   8-9
 freezing   6-22,6-23
 funding  8-4, 8-5, 8-6, 8-7,  8-10
 funding sources  8-8
 fungi   2-19
 gas exchanges  2-10
 geology   3-6
 Georgia  6-25,8-4
 glacial lakes  2-20
 glaciation   2-20
 glyphosate  6-32
 granulated active carbon   6-36
 grass carp  2-23, 6-25, 6-26, 6-27, 6-31,
  6-32, 6-33, 6-35
 grassed waterways   5-16, 5-18, 7-20
 gravity sewers   5-4
 grazers  6-14,6-20
 grazing  6-17
 Great Lakes  2-12
 groundwater  2-20, 2-4, 3-10, 3-11,3-12,
  3-24, 3-9,  4-7, 4-8,  5-8, 5-21, 7-11, 7-17
 groundwater observation well   3-13
 groundwater recharge zones  9-4
 growth rates  6-25
 growth rates of macrophytes  6-19
habitat(s)  2-2, 2-7, 2-20
harvesting   2-22, 2-23, 3-4, 6-21, 6-28, 6-32,
    6-33, 6-35, 6-37
  harvesting costs   6-30
  Hawaii   8-4
  heavy metals   5-15,6-9
  herbicides  2-22, 3-4, 6-2, 6-20, 6-21, 6-29,
    6-30, 6-31, 6-32, 6-33,  6-34, 6-35
  holding   5-8
  homeowners  9-1
  hydraulic dredge  6-7
  hydraulic residence time (see also residence
    time)  2-5, 2-3, 2-7, 2-8, 2-14, 2-21,
  2-23, 3-10, 4-12, 4-16, 4-17, 4-20, 4-22, 7-14
  hydrilla  6-25,6-27
  hydrologic  4-22
  hydrologic cycle, the  2-4
  hydrology   2-23, 4-4, 4-7, 4-4, 4-7, 4-12
  hypereutrophic  4-15, 4-16, 4-19, 4-23
  hypereutrophy   2-19,2-21
  hypolimnetic aeration  2-22, 6-12, 6-19, 7-28
  hypolimnetic aerators  5-20
  hypolimnetic dilution  2-22
  hypolimnetic flushing  2-22
  hypolimnetic withdrawal  2-22, 6-13, 6-19
  hypolimnion  2-8,2-11,4-21,6-12
  Idaho  8-4
  Illinois  8-4
  impaired uses   3-1, 3-3
  implementation  8-1,8-11
  implementation costs 8-8
  Implementing the restoration program  7-5
  Indiana   8-4
  infilling   3-4
  infiltration  2-4
  inflow  4-7, 4-13, 4-16, 4-17
  inflow concentration  4-22
  inflowing stream   3-9
  in-kind services   7-7
  in-lake management  7-26
  in-lake procedures   6-4
 in-lake technique effectiveness   6-4
 insects  6-25, 6-26, 6-35
 integrated pest management  5-16, 5-17
 integrated sample   3-15
 interactions  3-6
 interception or diversion practices  5-16
 internal loading  3-24, 6-6
 internal nutrient cycling   6-18
 internal nutrient loading   2-22, 2-23
 Iowa  8-4
 iron   6-36, 7-10, 8-13
 irrigation districts   8-10
 Kansas  8-5
 Kentucky  8-5
 kettle lakes  2-20
 Kezar  Lake, NH   4-17, 4-20
 Kimmel Creek  7-2
 laboratories   8-13
 LaDue Reservoir   6-29
 lagoons  5-4, 5-5, 5-9
 lakes   1-2
 lake and watershed characteristics  7-7
 lake associations  2-1,3-5,3-7,5-1,5-15
  5-19,7-1,9-1
 Lake Baldwin, FL  6-27
lake basin   2-20, 2-23
                                                                                          10-9

-------
      lake budget  3-10
      lake conditions, factors in   2-3
      Lake Conroe, TX  6-25
      Lake Evaluation Index  3-23
      lake level  3-11
      Lake Lillesjon   6-14
      Lake Lillinonah, CT   4-17, 4-22
      lake maintenance   9-1
      lake management  2-22, 3-6, 3-26, 5-13
      lake management program  5-1
      lake mixing  2-12
      lake monitoring   7-9
      Lake Morey, VT  4-9,4-10,4-17,4-21
      lake organizations  9-1
      lake phosphorus  4-17
      lake problems  3-1, 3-6, 3-8
      lake production   2-11
      lake protection   9-1
      lake response models  4-12
      lake restoration  2-22, 6-2, 6-19, 7-4, 8-2, 8-3
      lake sediments  6-22
      lake shape  2-20, 2-23, 4-5
      Lake Superior   2-21
      lake systems  2-1,5-1
      Lake Trummen, Sweden   6-8
      lake types, desired use  3-5
      lake types, specific uses   3-5
      lake usage  8-11
      lake users   3-5, 3-6, 3-8
      lake uses  2-8, 3-4,  6-3
      lake volume  3-4,4-12
      Lake Washington, WA  4-17,5-4,5-20
      lake water level  8-14
      lake's basin  6-3
      land use  3-6, 3-9, 3-10, 4-21, 5-2, 5-15,
       5-16, 7-23, 8-14
      leach field   5-21
      Lead-210  3-15,3-24
      liability insurance  8-10
      licensed 31
      light  2-16, 3-16, 3-22, 4-20, 6-5, 6-11, 6-20
      light penetration  2-7,2-16
      lime  6-14
      limited lake monitoring  7-7
      limited watershed monitoring   7-7
      limnology  2-3, 3-7, 8-2
      littoral zone  2-7
      livestock exclusion  5-16
      loading  3-9, 3-10, 4-4, 4-5, 4-6, 4-12, 4-18,
       4-19,5-11,6-3,6-36,7-17
      loading estimates   4-7
      local initiative  3-5
      Long Lake, WA  4-17, 4-20
      longevity  5-16, 7-20
      loss of storage capacity 37
      Louisiana  8-5
      Lynn Lake   7-1
      macroinvertebrates   8-14
      macrophyte control   3-9, 6-9, 6-26
      macrophyte growth   5-3
      macrophyte map  8-13
      macrophyte production  2-17
      macrophyte survey  3-20, 7-11
      macrophytes  2-7, 2-11, 3-4, 3-8, 3-19, 4-3,
       5-3,6-4,6-19,6-33,7-1,8-14
macrophytes, species  3-20
Maine  8-5
management  3-6,3-24
management plan  5-18,7-29,8-1
management practice  7-19, 7-20, 7-23
management techniques  6-1,6-19
manganese  6-36, 7-10, 8-13
man-made causes  3-7
man-made sources  2-6
marshes  6-37
Maryland   8-5
Massachusetts   8-5
matching grant  7-8
maximum depth of colonization (MDC)
  6-20, 6-21
maximum depths  7-14
mean depths  4-17,7-14
mesotrophic  4-15, 4-23,
mesotrophy  2-19,2-21
metalimnion  2-8,2-11,4-21
metric system  1-1
metric units  4-2
Metropolitan Seattle  4-18
Michigan   8-5
microcomputer scheduling programs  8-11
Middletown Sewer Authority  7-8
milfoil  6-29
minimum distance  9-6
minimum speed  9-6
Minnesota  8-5
Mirror Lake  3-24, 3-25, 3-27
Missouri  8-5
mixed layer  4-5, 4-21
mixing  2-8, 2-9, 3-15, 3-17, 3-24, 3-26, 6-11
model capabilities  4-16
model predictions  4-5, 4-20
modeling   3-18,4-18
models  3-7,4-1,4-2,4-13,4-23
monitoring  3-22, 4-2, 4-5, 4-23
monitoring data   8-13
monitoring program  4-6, 5-18, 8-12, 8-13,
  9-7
Montana  8-5
morphometry  4-12
mound systems   5-7
multiple purposes  2-8
multiple uses  1-3
municipal treatment systems   5-3
murkiness (see "turbidity")
National Oceanic and Aeronautic
  Administration  7-14
National Pollutant Discharge Elimination
  System   5-2
National Science Foundation   6-4
natural background  6-3
natural causes  3-7
natural conditions  1-2, 2-19, 2-23, 3-6
natural vegetation  5-18
Nebraska   8-6
net sedimentation  4-10
Nevada  8-6
New Hampshire   8-6
New Jersey  8-6
New Mexico  8-6
New York   8-6
10-10

-------
  nitrate  3-18,7-10
  nitrate nitrogen  7-12
  nitrogen   2-14, 3-18, 4-4, 5-6, 6-17, 7-10
  nitrogen budgets  7-17
  nitrogen removal   5-4
  nitrogen species  8-13
  nominal group   1-4
  nominal group process  3-5
  nonpoint sources  5-1, 5-13, 5-15, 5-16,
    5-18,5-19,6-3
  nonvegetative soil stabilization  5-19
  North American Lake Management Society
    (NALMS)  7-4, 8-2, 9-2
  North Carolina  6-25, 8-6
  North Dakota  8-6
  North Twin Lake   3-19
  Northern lakes  4-13
  nuisance algae   6-4
  nutrient   3-5, 6-33, 7-3
  nutrient budget  3-24,5-12,7-16
  nutrient concentrations   5-4, 5-14, 6-7
  nutrient control   2-22,5-15
  nutrient cycling   2-17, 2-19
  nutrient diversion   6-36
  nutrient enrichment   2-21
  nutrient income 3-18, 3-24
  nutrient levels  7-20
  nutrient loading  2-6, 2-21, 3-7, 3-11,4-1,
   5-3,7-11,7-12,7-14
  nutrient losses   5-17
  nutrient recycling  2-22, 4-21
  nutrient release   6-8
  nutrient removal  6-29
  nutrient supply  2-4
 nutrients  2-5, 2-14, 2-19, 3-3, 3-9, 3-11,
   3-14, 3-18, 5-2, 5-3, 5-15, 5-18, 6-5, 6-13,
   6-20, 6-29
 nutrients release  5-3
 nylon  6-23
 observed responses   4-18
 odors  2-6, 2-15, 3-4, 3-8, 3-19, 5-3, 6-4, 6-36
 Office of Education  8-9
 Office of Mining Reclamation   8-9
 Ohio   8-6
 Oklahoma  8-6
 oligotrophic  2-17, 2-23, 3-6, 4-15, 4-16
 oligotrophy  2-19,2-21
 on-lot septic systems  5-5
 on-lot systems  5-4,5-13
 on-lot treatment systems   5-8
 Onondaga Lake, NY  4-17, 4-18
 onsite treatment and collection  5-4
 operational and maintenance costs   5-16
 ordinances  5-18,9-6
 Oregon   8-6
 organics   6-4,6-33
 organic loads  5-3
 organic matter  2-7, 5-2, 5-4, 5-18, 6-17, 6-18
 organic matter consumption   2-11
 organic matter decomposition  2-16
 organic matter production   2-11
 organic nitrogen   7-1
 OSHA requirements  8-3
 outflow  4-7
outlets  2-11
  overland flow treatment   5-5
  oxidation ditch   5-5
  oxygen   2-5, 2-14, 2-16, 2-17, 3-3, 6-16
  oxygen demand  5-4
  oxygen depletion  2-10, 2-15, 2-16, 3-18,
    5-2, 6-18
  oxygen production  2-5
  oxygen-demanding  5-3
  particulates   2-7
  pasture management  7-24
  payment bond   8-10
  pelagic zone  2-7
  Pennsylvania  8-6
  perception   3-5,4-14
  performance bond   8-10
  permits   6-9, 6-14, 8-3, 9-6
  permit responsibility  8-3
  pesticide  5-15,6-30
  pesticide management   5-19
  pesticide/herbicide management  5-16
  pH  3-11, 6-7, 6-11, 6-16, 7-10, 8-13, 8-14
  pH shift   6-7
  Phase I Diagnostic/Feasibility Studies   3-8,
   7-5, 7-6, 8-8
  Phase I Grant Application  7-8
  Phase II Lake Restoration Program  3-8, 7-5,
   7-6, 8-8
  phosphorus  2-14,  3-9, 3-10, 3-18, 3-21, 4-3,
   4-4, 4-5, 4-12, 4-13, 6-10, 6-36
  phosphorus balance  4-21
 phosphorus budget  3-24, 4-6, 4-10, 4-12,
   4-16, 4-22
 phosphorus concentration  4-16, 4-18, 4-20,
   4-22, 4-23, 5-4, 6-5
 phosphorus inactivation   2-22, 3-26, 6-6,
   6-12,6-19,6-21,6-37
 phosphorus income  3-18
 phosphorus loading  4-3, 4-15, 4-20, 4-23,
   7-14
 phosphorus loading models  4-3
 phosphorus precipitation   2-22, 6-5, 6-6,
   6-14
 phosphorus release   4-20,6-5,7-14
 photic zone  2-14,3-19
 photosynthesis  2-11, 2-14, 2-16, 2-17, 2-19,
   4-13,6-17
 physical characteristics  7-9
 phytoplankton   2-11, 2-14, 2-15, 6-5, 6-16,
   7-11,7-15,8-14
 phytoplankton community 2-16
 phytoplankton species  8-13
 Pickerel Lake   3-16
 plankton   2-16
 planktonic algae   6-18
 planned development  9-4
 planning   8-2
 plant density  3-20
 plant growth  6-2
 plant production   2-19, 2-22
 plant species   6-31
 plastics  6-23
 Pleasant Pond  5-20, 5-21
point sources   4-7, 4-8, 5-2, 5-13, 5-20, 7-17
point-source controls 4-2
point-source diversion  5-20
                                                                                        10-11

-------
   pollutant loadings   7-23
   pollutant sources  7-9
   polyethylene  6-23,6-24
   polyprophylene  6-23
   ponds  5-9
   pondweeds  6-22,6-25
   porous cover maintenance   5-16
   postmonitoring  8-8,8-12
   postrestoration  8-8
   Potamogeton  6-24,6-32
   potential negative impacts   7-21
   potential sources  8-14
   pothole lakes  2-20
   power to tax  9-1
   precipitation  4-7, 4-8, 4-22, 6-3
   predator   6-16
   predatory fish   2-17
   predevelopment runoff rate  7-26
   predicted responses  4-18
   predictive models  4-1
   prequalification  8-10
   pressure sewer  5-9
   pretreatment  5-5
   previous uses   7-9
   pricing  8-8
    primary producers  2-17
    primary production  2-13, 2-21
    primary wastewater  5-4
    priority  7-23
    priority problems  9-7
    problem  1-3,3-1,3-23
    problem definition   7-3
    problem diagnosis   3-2, 3-8
    problem identification   2-22, 3-5, 5-18
    problem perception  3-5
    problem sources  5-19
    producers   2-17
    productivity  2-4,2-20
    project schedule   8-11
    propagation  6-19
    public access  7-9
    public education   8-11
    public input   7-6
    public meetings   8-12
    public opinion  7-4
    Public Technology, Inc.  9-3
    rain event samples  7-12
    range and pasture management  5-16
    recreational characteristics  7-7,7-9
    recreational uses  7-28
    regulating watershed activities   9-2
    reservoir restoration  4-20
    reservoirs   2-8, 2-11, 2-13, 2-17, 3-6, 3-15,
       4-23, 6-3, 6-17, 6-20, 6-27, 6-36
    residence time  2-4
    respiration  2-10, 2-11, 2-14, 2-16, 2-19
    responses  4-19,4-20
    restocking  6-37
     restoration  4-16, 4-21, 6-1, 6-4
     restoration case histories   4-17
     restoration techniques  6-36
     Rhode Island  8-6
     rip rapping   5-18
     riparian zone management  5-16
     RIPLOX   6-14
road and skid trail management  5-16
rooted plant species  6-22, 6-28
rototilling  6-20
rough fish removal  6-19
runoff   2-3, 3-9, 4-6, 4-8, 4-9, 5-14, 5-15,
  5-17, 5-2, 6-9
runoff coefficients   3-10
runoff control   5-15
runoff control ordinance  7-26
runoff  diversion 7-24
Rural Clean Water  Program   8-9
sampling  3-14,3-15
sampling frequencies   8-13
sand filters   5-5, 5-7
sanitary permits   9-6
scheduling   8-11
Secchi  3-9,4-17
Secchi depth   3-16, 3-17, 4-16, 6-16, 7-10
Secchi disk  3-21,6-20
Secchi transparency   4-13, 6-21, 8-13, 8-14
secondary treatment   5-4
Secretary of the Interior  8-3
sediment  2-3, 2-7, 2-21, 3-3, 8-3
 sediment budget   7-11,7-17
sediment cores  2-21
 sediment covering material  6-24
 sediment covers   6-23, 6-35
 sediment loading   3-4, 3-11, 3-15, 7-12, 7-14
 sediment nutrient release   6-3
 sediment oxidation  2-22, 6-14, 6-19, 7-28
 sediment phosphorus release rates  4-20
 sediment removal  2-22, 6-7, 6-8, 6-19, 6-20,
   6-21,6-35,6-37
 sediment sample parameters  7-11
 sediment tilling   6-20
 sedimentation 2-7, 2-16, 2-19, 3-11,3-15,
   4-8, 4-20, 4-8, 4-9, 4-22, 6-4
 sedimentation basins  5-16, 5-18, 7-19,
   7-20,  7-23, 7-24, 7-26
 sediments  2-1,2-16, 3-24, 4-6, 4-16, 4-20,
   5-15,6-2,6-3,6-32,7-14
 sediments covering   6-23
 sediments loads   3-11
 sediments removal  6-9
 seepage lakes 2-4, 3-12, 4-7
 selecting a consultant  7-5, 8-2
 septic system  3-10, 3-11, 5-2, 5-6, 5-8
 septic tank  3-11, 4-8, 4-9, 5-5, 5-6, 5-21
 septic tank diversion   5-21
 septic tank input   2-6
 septic tank maintenance schedule  5-7
 septic tank mound system  5-5
 setback zones  9-2
 sewage  5-2
 sewer districts  8-10
 sewerage hookup  7-29
 sewering  4-22
 shading covers  6-23
  Shagawa Lake, MN   4-17, 4-20, 6-5
  shallow nonstratified lakes 6-6
  shallowness  6-4,6-18
  shoreline stabilization  8-11
  silt  2-7, 2-16, 5-18, 6-18
  slopes  5-6, 5-8, 5-18
  sludge 5-5
10-12

-------
small fish  6-17
small-diameter gravity sewers  5-8
small-scale treatment  5-8
small-scale treatment plants  5-4
soft-water lakes   6-7
soil  2-7, 5-7, 5-8
soil absorption  5-5
soil conditions  7-23
Soil Conservation Service  7-7, 7-18, 7-24,
  8-9
soil erosion   3-4,5-17
soil loss   2-7
soil types  5-17
soils   2-6, 3-5, 3-6, 5-5, 5-6
soil water tables  5-6
soils, fertile   2-21, 2-23, 3-6
solids   5-7
soluble reactive phosphorus  7-10, 7-12,
  8-13
sources   5-12,8-14
South  Carolina  8-7
South  Dakota  8-7
space  zoning 7
spatterdock   6-25
special assessments   9-1
special protection  9-4
spills  6-36
spring turnover   6-13
staff gage  3-11
standard methods   8-13
state agencies  8-2, 8-9
State Department of Game   8-3
State Water Research Institute Program  8-9
states lake programs  8-4, 8-5, 8-6, 8-7
stilling well   3-11,3-12
stocking rates  6-26
storm  sewers  3-24
stratification  2-8, 2-11,3-15, 3-17, 4-21
stratified  2-17,6-6
stratified lakes  3-15
stream gaging  3-11
stream hydrograph   7-12
stream inflow  3-9
stream loadings   4-8
streambank stabilization  5-16,5-18
streamside  management  8-11
streamside  management zones  5-16,5-18
street  cleaning   5-9
subdivision regulations  9-4
submerged species  6-34
submergent  6-20
surface area  4-17
surface roughening  5-16,5-18
surface shading   6-24
suspended  sediment  2-7
suspended solids  8-13
swimming   3-3, 3-4, 3-6, 4-14, 6-3, 6-37, 7-1,
   9-1
symptoms   1-4, 2-23, 3-2, 6-2
tables   5-8
taste  2-15,3-4,3-8,3-19,6-4,6-36
temperature  3-11, 3-15, 7-9, 7-10, 8-13
Tennessee   8-7
terraces  5-16
tertiary treatment  5-4, 7-26, 7-28
test kits  8-13
Texas   6-25,8-7
thermal destratification   6-14
thermal stratification  2-7, 2-8, 2-10, 2-12,
  5-2,6-11,6-13
thermocline  2-8, 2-10, 2-11, 4-4
THM's  6-35,6-37
time zoning 7
topography  7-23
total Kjeldahl  3-18
total nitrogen  3-18,7-12,8-13
total phosphorus  4-14, 6-9, 7-10,7-12, 8-13,
  8-14
total solids  3-18
total soluble phosphorus  3-18
total suspended solids  7-10,7-12
toxic controls  5-15
toxic materials   6-36
toxicity  6-32
transparency  3-11, 3-16, 3-22, 4-2, 4-3, 4-4,
  4-5,4-12,4-14,4-18,6-6
transpiration  2-4
trapping ability  2-7
treatment plant capacity   5-8
treatment plant upgrade   7-23
treatment systems   5-3
tributary  2-3, 2-8, 4-7, 4-8, 5-2, 6-2
trickling filters   5-5, 5-9
trihalomethane  3-4, 6-28, 6-35, 6-37
triploid grass carp   6-27
trophic level   2-17
trophic state  4-3
trophic state indices  3-7,3-11,3-21
trophic status  2-17
turbid  3-4, 4-4, 4-14, 5-13, 6-9
turbid lakes  6-20
turbidity  2-7, 3-6, 5-3, 6-4, 6-27, 8-13
turnover  2-17
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers  6-8,6-19,
  6-37, 8-3
U.S. Department of Agriculture   8-8
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency  8-8
U.S. EPA Clean Lakes grant  7-3
U.S. EPA's Clean Lakes Program   6-4
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service   8-9
U.S. Geological Survey (USGS)  7-9, 8-9
underdesign  5-6,5-7
university   9-2
usage   5-8
user  9-2
user conflicts  3-1,3-4
user perception  3-6
user survey  7-3
users   1-4, 6-3, 9-7
Utah   8-7
vacuum sewer system   5-8, 5-9
variability   4-5
vegetative stabilization   5-16, 5-18
Vermont  8-7
Virginia  8-7
volcanism  2-20
Vollenweider  4-17
Vollenweider Phosphorus Loading Diagram
  7-18
                                                                                         10-13

-------
     Wahnbach Reservoir, W. Germany  4-17,
       4-22
     Washington  8-7
     waste disposal   3-14
     waste management  5-21
     waste treatment facilities  9-6
     wastewater  5-2,5-4,5-5,5-6, 5-8
     wastewater discharge   2-6, 3-10, 3-11, 5-4,
       5-11
     wastewater input   2-6
     wastewater treatment   2-15, 5-3, 5-4, 5-10
     wastewater treatment plants  3-10
     water  4-6
     water, physical & chemical properties of
       2-12
     water, temperature-density relationship of
       2-12
     water balance  2-4, 4-7
     water budget  3-24, 4-7, 4-10, 4-12, 5-12
     water chemistry 8-14
     water column   2-8, 2-9, 4-6, 4-9
     water conservation  5-11,5-12
     water control  6-21
     water density  2-12
     water depth  7-11
     water hyacinth  6-30
     water hyacinth weevil   6-26
     water incomes  3-24
     water level  3-18,8-13
     water level changes  7-12
     water level drawdown   6-22
     water lily   6-25
     water quality  2-11, 4-5, 8-14
     water quality monitoring  3-14
     water sample  7-10
     water stage recorder 3-12
     water supply reservoirs   6-35, 6-36
     water table  3-10, 3-12, 3-13
     water temperature   8-14
water-level drawdown  2-22
water-level fluctuation  2-7
watershed   2-1, 2-2, 2-3, 2-5, 2-22, 2-23, 3-7,
  3-9,4-21,5-1,5-2,5-14,5-18
watershed, fertility  2-6
watershed, loadings   4-22
watershed, undisturbed  3-7
watershed analysis   7-16
watershed area  3-5,3-12
watershed characteristics  7-9
watershed development  4-2
watershed district  5-21
watershed disturbance  2-6, 2-21
watershed influences   2-21
watershed management  6-2, 7-23
watershed management districts  8-10
watershed management practices  5-19
watershed manipulation  8-11
watershed map  8-14
watershed monitoring  7-11
watershed to lake area ratio  2-23, 5-12,
  5-15,5-18
waterways  7-24
weed disposal   6-28
weed harvesting  7-28
weeds, see "macrophytes"
West Twin Lake  5-21
West Virginia  8-7
wetlands  5-3,9-4
wind  2-8
winter drawdown  6-23
Wisconsin   6-21,8-7,9-1
work  7-8
work plan  7-5
Wyoming  8-7
zoning   5-18,5-19,9-2
zoning regulations  9-3
zooplankton   2-15, 2-16, 3-22, 4-4, 6-14,
  6-16,6-17,6-38,7-11,8-14
10-14

-------
Appendix A
                                APPENDIX A

                               METRIC UNITS



                COMMON UNITS OF MEASURE IN LAKE MANAGEMENT
 Limnology, the primary science upon which lake management is based, uses metric
 units in professional publications. Although most units in this Manual are expressed in
 British/U.S. form, the reader is strongly encouraged to become more comfortable with
 common metric units—they are far easier to manipulate, and any further encounter with
 the literature and books on lake management will entail the metric system of measurement.
   The following table compares the two systems; to convert English units to metric, use
 the conversion factors supplied in this table.

                       METRIC TO ENGLISH CONVERSIONS
METRIC UNIT
LENGTH
Millimeter
Centimeter
Meter
Kilometer
WEIGHT
Microgram
Milligram
Gram
Kilogram
VOLUME
Milliliter
Liter
Kiloliter
(cubic meter)
SYMBOL

mm = 0.001 m
cm = 0.01 m
m = 1.0m
km = 1000m

ug = 0.000001 g
mg = 0.001 g
g = tog
kg = 1000 g

ml = 0.001 L
L = 1.0 L
kl = 1000 L
(m3)
ENGLISH UNIT

inch
inch
yard
mile

CONVERSION FACTOR*

0.03937
0.3937
1.094
0.6214

(no reasonable equivalent)
grain 0.015432
ounce(avoir) 0.03527
pound 2.205

ounce
quart
cu.yard

29.57
1.057
1.308
 • To convert metric to English multiply by factor
                         OTHER USEFUL CONVERSIONS
                                1 gallon = 3.785 liters
                          1 milligram/liter = 1 part per million
                               1 hectare = 2.47 acres
                              1 acre-foot = 32,590 gallons
                            1 cubic meter = 264 gallons
                                                                              A-1

-------
Appendix B
GLOSSARY
Adsorption: The adhesion of one substance to the surface of another; clays, for
   example, can adsorb phosphorus and organic molecules.

Aerobic:  Describes life or processes which require the presence of molecular
   oxygen.

Algae: Small aquatic plants which occur as single cells, colonies, or filaments.

Allochthonous: Materials (e.g., organic matter and sediment) which enter a lake
   from atmosphere or drainage basin; see autochthonous.

Anaerobic:  Describes processes  that occur in the absence of molecular
   oxygen.

Anoxia: A condition of no oxygen in the water. Often occurs near the bottom of
   fertile stratified lakes in the summer and under ice in late winter.

Autochthonous: Materials produced within a lake; e.g. autochthonous organic
   matter from  plankton versus allochthonous organic matter from terrestrial
   vegetation.

Bathymetric map: A map showing the bottom  contours and depth of a lake.
   Can be used to calculate lake volume.

Benthos: Macroscopic (seen without aid of a microscope) organisms living in
   and on the bottom sediments  of lakes and streams. Originally, the term
   meant the lake bottom, but it is now applied almost uniformly to the animals
   associated with the substrate.

Biomass: The weight of biological matter. Standing crop is the  amount  of
   biomass  (e.g., fish or algae) in a body of  water at  a given time. Often
   measured in terms of grams per square meter of surface.

Biochemical oxygen demand (BOD): The rate  of oxygen consumption by or-
   ganisms during the decomposition (= respiration) of organic matter, ex-
   pressed as grams oxygen per cubic meter of water per hour.

Biota: All plant and animal species occurring in a specified area.
                                                                    B-1

-------
   Chemical oxygen demand (COD): Nonbiological uptake of molecular oxygen
      by organic and inorganic compounds in water.

   Chlorophyll: A green pigment in algae and other green plants that is essential
      for the conversion of sunlight, carbon dioxide, and water to sugar. Sugar is
      then converted to starch, proteins, fats, and other organic molecules.
   Chlorophyll-a: A type of chlorophyll present in all types of algae, sometimes in
      direct proportion to the biomass of algae.

   Cluster development: Placement of housing and other buildings of a develop-
      ment in groups to provide larger areas of open space.
   Consumers: Animals that cannot produce their own food  through photosyn-
      thesis and must consume plants or animals for energy (see  producers).
   Decomposition: The transformation of organic molecules (e.g.,  sugar) to inor-
      ganic molecules (e.g., carbon dioxide and water) through biological and non-
      biological processes.
   Delphi: A technique that solicits potential solutions to a problem situation from a
      group of experts and then asks the experts to rank the full list of  alternatives.
   Density flows: A flow of water  of one density  (determined by temperature or
      salinity) over or under water of another density (e.g., flow of cold river water
      under warm reservoir surface water).

   Detritus: Nonliving dissolved and paniculate organic material from the metabo-
      lic activities and deaths of terrestrial and aquatic organisms.

   Drainage lakes: Lakes having a defined surface inlet and outlet.
   Drainage basin:  Land area from which water flows into a stream  or lake (see
      watershed).
   Ecology: Scientific study of relationships between organisms, and their environ-
      ment. Also, defined as the study of the structure and  function of  nature.
   Ecosystem: A system of interrelated organisms and their physical-chemical en-
      vironment. In this manual, the ecosystem is usually defined  to include the
      lake and its watershed.
   Environment: Collectively, the  surrounding  conditions, influences, and living
      and  inert matter which affect a particular organism or biological community.
   Effluent: Liquid wastes from sewage treatment, septic systems,  or industrial
      sources that are released to a surface water.
   Epilimnion: Uppermost, warmest, well-mixed layer of a lake during  summertime
      thermal stratification. The epilimnion extends from the surface  to the ther-
      mocline.

   Erosion: Breakdown and movement of land  surface, which is often intensified
      by human disturbances.
   Eutrophic: From Greek for "well-nourished," describes a lake of high photosyn-
      thetic activity and low transparency.

   Eutrophication: The process of physical, chemical,  and biological  changes as-
      sociated with nutrient, organic matter, and silt enrichment and sedimentation
      of a lake or reservoir. If the process is accelerated by man-made influences, it
      is termed cultural eutrophication.
   Fall  overturn: The autumn mixing, top to bottom, of lake water caused by cool-
      ing and wind-derived energy.
B-2

-------
  Fecal coliform test: Most common test for the presence of fecal material from    |
     warm-blooded animals.  Fecal  coliforms are measured because of con-
     venience.  They are  not necessarily harmful,  but indicate the potential
     presence of other disease-causing organisms.

  Flood plain: Land adjacent to lakes or rivers which is covered as water levels
     rise and overflow the normal water channels.

  Flushing rate: The rate at which water enters and leaves a lake relative to lake
     volume, usually expressed as time needed to replace the lake volume with in-
     flowing water.

  Flux: The rate at which a measurable amount of a material flows past a desig-
     nated point in a given amount of time.

  Forage fish: Fish that are prey for game fish, including a variety of panfish and
     minnows.

  Food  web: pattern of production  and consumption of organic matter in  an
     ecosystem. Green plants are an ultimate source of energy for all food chains.

  Ground water: Water found beneath the soil surface and saturating the stratum
     at which it is located; often connected to lakes.

  Hard water: Water with relatively high levels of dissolved minerals such as cal-
     cium, iron, and magnesium.

  Hydrologic cycle: The circular flow or cycling of water from the atmosphere to
    the earth (precipitation) and back to the atmosphere (evaporation and plant
    transpiration).  Runoff, surface water,  groundwater, and water infiltrated in
    soils are all part of the hydrologic cycle.

 Hydrographic map: A map showing the location of areas or objects within a
    lake.

 Hypolimnion:  Lower,  cooler  layer of a  lake  during  summertime thermal
    stratification.
 Influent: A tributary stream.

 Internal nutrient cycling: Transformation of nutrients such as nitrogen or phos-
    phorus from biological to inorganic forms through decomposition occurrina
    within the lake itself.

 Isothermal: The same temperature throughout; fall overturn.

 Lake district: A special  purpose unit of government with authority to manage a
    lake(s), and with financial  powers to raise funds  through  mill levy,  user
    charge, special assessment, bonding, and borrowing. May or may not have
    police power to inspect septic systems, regulate surface water use  or zone
    land.

Lentic:  Relating to standing water (versus lotic, running water).

Limnology: Scientific study of fresh water, especially the history, geology biol-
   ogy, physics, and  chemistry of lakes. Also termed freshwater ecology.

Littoral  zone: That  portion of a water body extending from the  shoreline
   lakeward to the greatest depth occupied by rooted plants.

Macroinvertebrates: Aquatic insects, worms, clams,  snails, and other animals
   visible without aid  of a microscope which may be associated with or live on
   substrates such as sediments and macrophytes. They supply a major portion
   of fish diets, and consume detritus and algae.
                                                                           B-3

-------
   Macrophytes:  Rooted and floating aquatic plants, commonly  referred to as
      waterweeds. These plants may flower and bear seed. Some forms, such as
      duckweed and Coontail (Ceratophyllum) are free-floating forms without roots
      in the sediment.
   Mandatory property owners association: Organization of property owners in a
      subdivision  or development with membership and annual fee required by
      covenants on the property deed. Association will often enforce deed restric-
      tions on members' property and may have common facilities such as  bath
      house, clubhouse, golf course, etc.
   Marginal zone: Area where land and water meet at the perimeter of a lake. In-
      cludes plant species, insects, and animals that thrive in this narrow, special-
      ized ecological system.
   Metalimnion: Layer of rapid temperature and density change in a thermally
      stratified lake. Resistance to mixing is high in the region.

   Morphometry: Relating to a  lake's physical  structure  (e.g. depth,  shoreline
      length).
   Nekton: Large aquatic and marine organisms whose mobility is not determined
      by water movement-for example fish and amphibians.

   Nominal group process:  A  process of soliciting concerns/issues/ideas  from
      members of a  group and ranking the resulting list to  ascertain group
      priorities. Designed to neutralize dominant personalities.
   Nutrient: An element or chemical essential to life, including  carbon, oxygen,
      nitrogen, phosphorus, and others.

   Nutrient budget: Quantitative assessment of nutrients (e.g. nitrogen or phos-
      phorus) moving into,  being retained in and moving out of an ecosystem;
      commonly constructed  for phosphorus due to its tendency to control lake
      trophic state.
   Nutrient cycling: The flow of nutrients from one component of an ecosystem to
      another, as when macrophytes die and release nutrients that become avail-
      able to algae (organic to inorganic phase and return).
   Oligotrophic: "Poorly nourished," from the Greek. Describes a lake of low  plant
      productivity and high transparency.
   Ordinary high water mark:  Physical demarcation line, indicating the highest
      point that water level reaches and maintains for some time. Line is visible on
      rocks, or shoreline, and  by the location of certain types of vegetation.
   Organic matter: Molecules manufactured by plants and animals and  containing
      linked carbon atoms and elements such as hydrogen, oxygen, nitrogen, sul-
      fur, and phosphorus.
   Ooze: Lake bottom  accumulation  of inorganic  sediments and the partially-
      decomposed remains of algae, weeds, fish, and aquatic insects. Sometimes
      called muck; see sediment.

   Pelagic zone: This is the open area of a lake, from the edge of the littoral zone to
      the center of the lake.
   Pathogen: A microorganism capable of producing disease. They are of  great
      concern to human health relative to drinking water and swimming  beaches.
B-4

-------
 pH: A measure of the concentration of hydrogen ions of a substance, which ran-
    ges from very acid (pH = 1) to very alkaline (pH  = 14). pH 7 is neutral and
    most lake waters range between 6 and 9. pH values less than 6 are con-
    sidered acidic and most life forms can not survive at pH of 4.0 or lower.

 Photic zone: The lighted region of a lake where photosynthesis takes place. Ex-
    tends down to a depth where plant growth and respiration are balanced by
    the amount of light available.

 Phytoplankton: Microscopic algae and microbes that float freely in open water
    of lakes and oceans.

 Plankton:  Planktonic algae  float  freely in  the open water. Filamentous algae
    form long threads and are often seen as mats on the surface in shallow areas
    of the lake.

 Primary productivity: The rate at which algae and macrophytes fix or convert
    light, water, and carbon dioxide to sugar in plant cells. Commonly measured
    as milligrams of carbon per square meter per hour.

 Producers: Green plants that manufacture their  own food through photosyn-
    thesis.

 Profundal zone: Mass of lake water and sediment occurring on the lake bottom
    below the depth of light penetration.

 Residence time: Commonly called the hydraulic residence time-the amount of
    time required to completely replace the lake's current volume of water with
    an equal volume of "new" water.

 Respiration: Process by which organic matter is oxidized by organisms, includ-
    ing plants, animals,  and bacteria. The process releases energy, carbon
    dioxide, and water.

 Secchi depth: A measure of transparency of water obtained by lowering a black
    and white, or all white, disk (Secchi disk, 20 cm in diameter) into water until it
    is no longer visible. Measured in units of meters or feet.

 Seepage  lakes:  Lakes having either an  inlet or outlet (but not both), and
    generally obtaining their water from groundwater and rain or snow.

 Sediment: Bottom material in a lake that has been deposited after the formation
    of a lake basin. It originates from remains of aquatic organisms, chemical
    precipitation of dissolved minerals, and erosion  of surrounding lands (see
    ooze).

 Soil retention capacity: The ability of a given soil type to adsorb substances
    such as phosphorus, thus retarding their movement to the water.
 Stratification: Layering of water caused by differences in water density. Thermal
    stratification is typical of  most  deep  lakes during  summer.  Chemical
    stratification can also occur.

 Swimmers itch: A rash  caused by the skin penetration of the immature stage
    (cercaria) of a flatworm (not easily controlled due to complex life cycle). A
   shower or alcohol  rubdown should minimize penetration.

Thermal  stratification:  Lake stratification caused by temperature-created dif-
   ferences in water density.

Thermocline: A horizontal plane across a lake  at the depth of the most rapid
   vertical change in  temperature and density in a stratified  lake. See metalim-
   nion.
                                                                          B-5

-------
   Topographic map: A map showing the elevation of the landscape at contours
     of 2, 5,10, or 20 feet. Can be used to delineate the watershed.
   Trophic state:  The degree  of  eutrophication  of  a  lake. Transparency,
     chlorophyll-a levels,  phosphorus concentrations, amount  of macrophytes,
     and quantity  of dissolved oxygen in the hypolimnion can be used to assess
     state.
   Voluntary lake property owners association: Organization of property owners
     in an area around a lake that members join at their option.
   Water table: The upper surface  of ground water;  below this point,  the soil is
     saturated with water.
   Water column:  Water in the lake between the interface with the atmosphere at
     the surface  and the interface with the sediment layer at the  bottom.  Idea
     derives from vertical series of measurements (oxygen, temperature, phos-
     phorus) used to characterize lakewater.
   Watershed: A drainage area or basin in which all land and water areas drain or
     flow toward a central collector such as a  stream,  river, or lake at a lower
     elevation.
   Zooplankton: Microscopic animals which float  freely in  lake water, graze  on
     detritus particles, bacteria, and algae, and may be consumed by fish.
B-6

-------
Appendix C
                                APPENDIX C

                        POINT SOURCE TECHNIQUES
Septic Tank: A septic tank followed by a soil absorption bed is the traditional on-site
system for the treatment and disposal of domestic wastewater from individual households
or establishments. The system consists of a buried tank where wastewater is collected
and scum, grease, and settleable solids are removed by gravity and a sub-surface
drainage system where waste water percolates into the soil.
 CRITERIA
                              REMARKS
  1. Status


  2. Applications



  3. Reliability

  4. Limitations



  5. Cleaning
 6. Treatment Side Effects
Most widely used method of on-lot domestic waste dis-
posal. Almost one-third of the U.S. population.

Used primarily in rural and suburban areas. Properly
designed and installed systems require a minimum of
maintenance and can operate in all climates.
Properly designed, constructed, and operated septic
tank systems are efficient and economical. System life
may equal or exceed 20 years.

Dependent on soil and site conditions, the ability of the
soil to absorb liquid, depth to groundwater, nature of
and depth to bedrock, seasonal flooding, and distance
to well or surface water. The sludge and scum layers in
tank must be removed every 3 to 5 years.

Groundwater contamination when pollutants are not
effectively removed by the soil. Increasing nitrate in
ground water. Soil clogging may result in surface
ponding with potential health problems.
                                                                              C-1

-------
                                     APPENDIX C
   Septic Tank Mound Systems: A septic tank and mound system is a method of on-site
   treatment and disposal of domestic wastewater than can be used as an alternative to
   the conventional septic tank-soil absorption system. In areas where problem soil condi-
   tions preclude the use of subsurface trenches or seepage beds, mounds can be installed
   to raise the absorption field above ground, provide treatment, and distribute the waste-
   water to the underlying soil over a wide area in a uniform manner.
    CRITERIA
                                   REMARKS
     1. Status
     2. Applications
     3. Reliability
     4. Limitations
     5. Cleaning

     6. Treatment Side Effects
Proven successful alternatives for difficult soil
conditions.

Alternative to septic tank-soil absorption system in
problem soil conditions. Increases amount of soil for
purification before effluent reaches groundwater.

Septic tank-mound systems are viable alternatives to
centralized treatment facilities. Dosing equipment
should be routinely maintained, and septic tanks must
be periodically pumped out for systems to operate
effectively.

Requires more space and periodic maintenance than
conventional subsurface disposal system, along with
higher construction costs. Cannot be installed on
steep slopes.

Septage requires disposal every 3 to 5 years.

Visual impact particularly in suburban areas. Drain-
age patterns and land use flexibility may also be
affected.                                	
C-2

-------
                                  APPENDIX C
Septic Tank-Sand Filter: Surface discharge of septic tank effluent is a method of on-site
disposal of domestic wastewater that can be used as an alternative to the conventional
soil absorption system. Where permitted by code, surface discharge units can be
employed in areas where subsurface disposal systems are not feasible. Sand filter
trenches are similar to absorption trenches,  but contain an intermediate layer of sand
as filtering material and underdrains for carrying off the filtered sewage. Buried sand
filters, which required less area than trenches, also can be used.
  CRITERIA
                                REMARKS
  1. Status
  2. Applications
  3. Reliability

  4. Limitations



  5. Cleaning
  6. Treatment Side Effects
Sand filtration has traditionally been employed to treat
septic tank effluent and has had success.

Surface discharge systems are alternative designs to
be used where site conditions, including geology,
hydrology, and lot size, preclude the use of the soil as
a treatment and disposal medium. Centralized man-
agement, rather than homeowners, are normally
required for successful operation.
Sand filters perform well, unless overloaded. Periodic
inspection is required to obtain proper functioning of
chlorination units.

These systems are more expensive than conventiona
on-site systems. Filter surfaces and disinfection
equipment require periodic maintenance. Buried sand
beds are inaccessible. Power is required for pumping
and some disinfection units. State or Federal dis-
charge permits along with sampling and monitoring
are required.

Sand with organic waste must be removed from inter-
mittent and recirculatmg filter surfaces when clogging
occurs and may be buried on-site or require off-site
disposal.

Treated effluents are discharged to surface waters.
Odors may emanate from open filters, and potential
                                                                                   C-3

-------
                                     APPENDIX C
   Faculative Lagoons: Faculative lagoons are intermediate depth (3 to 8 feet) ponds in
   which the wastewater is stratified into three zones. These zones consist of an anaerobic
   bottom layer, an aerobic surface layer, and an intermediate zone. Oxygen in the surface
   stabilization zone is provided by reaeration and photosynthesis. In general, the aerobic
   surface layer serves to reduce odors while providing treatment of soluble organic
   by-products of the anaerobic processes operating at the bottom.
    CRITERIA
                                  REMARKS
    1. Status



    2. Applications




    3. Reliability



    4. Limitations




     5. Cleaning


     6. Treatment Side Effects
Fully demonstrated and in moderate use especially foi
treatment of relatively weak municipal wastewater in
areas where real estate costs are not a restricting factor.

Used for treating raw, screened, or primary settled
domestic wastewaters. Most applicable when land
costs are low and operation and maintenance costs
are to be minimized.

The service life is estimated to be 50 years. Little oper-
ator expertise is required. Overall, the system is highly
reliable.

In very cold climates, faculative lagoons may exper-
ience reduced biological activity and treatment effic-
iency. Ice formation can also hamper operations. In
overloading situations, odors can be a problem.

Settled solids may required clean out and removal
once every 10 to 20 years.

Potential seepage of wastewater into ground water
unless lagoon is lined.	
C-4

-------
                                   APPENDIX C
Oxidation Ditch: An oxidation ditch is an activated sludge biological treatment process.
Typical oxidation ditch treatment systems consist of a single or closed loop channel 4
to 6 ft. deep, with 45° sloping sidewalls.  Some form of preliminary treatment such as
screening, communication or grit removal  normally precedes the process. After pretreat-
ment, the wastewater is aerated in the ditch using mechanical aerators which are
mounted across the channel. The aerators provide mixing and circulation in the ditch,
as well as sufficient oxygen transfer. A high degree of nitrification may occur in the
process without special modification because of the long detention times and high solid
retention times (10 to 50 d). Secondary settling of the aeration ditch effluent is provided
in a separate clarifier. Ditch loops may be oval or circular in shape. "EH" and "horseshoe"
configurations  have been constructed to maximize land usage.
 CRITERIA
                                REMARKS
  1. Status
 2. Applications




 3. Reliability


 4. Limitations


 5. Cleaning

 6. Treatment Side Effects
There are nearly 650 shallow oxidation ditch installa-
tions in the U.S. and Canada. Numerous shallow and
deep oxidation ditch systems are in operation in Eur-
ope. The overall process is fully demonstrated for car-
bon removal, as a secondary treatment process.

Applicable in any situation where activated sludge
treatment is appropriate. The process cost of treatment
is generally less than other biological processes in the
range of wastewater flows between 0.1 and 10 Mgal/d.

The average reliability is good with adequate removal
of oxygen-demanding material and solids.

Oxidation ditches are relatively expensive and require
skilled operators for good performance.

Requires weekly to monthly sludge removal.

Solid waste, odor, and air pollution impacts are similar
to those encountered with standard activate sludge
processes.                       	
                                                                                   C-5

-------
                                     APPENDIX C
   Trickling Filter: The process consists of a fixed bed of rock media over which wastewater
   is applied for aerobic biological treatment. Slimes form on the rocks and treat the
   wastewater. The bed  is dosed by a distributor system, and the treated wastewater is
   collected by an underdrain system. Primary treatment is normally required to optimize
   trickling filter performance. The low rate trickling filter media bed generally is circular in
   plan, with a depth of  5 to 10  feet.
    CRITERIA
                                   REMARKS
     1. Status

     2. Applications



     3. Reliability



     4. Limitations




     5. Cleaning



     6. Treatment Side Effects
This process is highly dependable in moderate climates.

Treatment of domestic and compatible industrial
wastewaters amendable to aerobic biological treat-
ment in conjunction with suitable pretreatment.

Highly reliable under conditions of moderate climate.
Mechanical reliability high. Process operation
requires little skill.

Vulnerable to climate changes and low temperatures,
filter flies and odors are common, periods of inade-
quate moisture for slimes can be common. High land
and capital cost requirements.

Sludge is withdrawn from the secondary clarifier at a
rate of 3,000 to 4,000 gal/Mgal of wastewater, contain
ing 500 to 700 Ib dry solids.

Odor problems; high land requirement relative to
many alternative processes; and filter flies.	
C-6

-------
                                   APPENDIX C
Overland Flow Treatment: Wastewater is applied by gravity flow to vegetated soils that
are slow to moderate in permeability and is treated as it travels through the soil matrix
by filtration, adsorption, ion exchange, precipitation, microbial action and also by plant
uptake. An underdrainage system consisting of a network of drainage pipe buried below
the surface serves to recover the effluent, to control groundwater, or to minimize trespass
of wastewater onto adjoining property by horizontal subsurface flow. Vegetation is a vital
part of the process and serves to extract nutrients, reduce erosion and maintain soil
permeability.
 CRITERIA
                                REMARKS
 1. Status


 2. Applications
 3. Reliability

 4. Limitations
5. Cleaning

6. Treatment Side Effects
 Has been widely and successfully utilized for more
 than 100 years.

 Can provide the following benefits: 1) an economic
 return from the reuse of water and nutrients to produce
 marketable crops or forage; 2) water conservation
 when utilized for irrigating landscaped areas; 3) a
 means of recovering renovated water for reuse or for
 discharge; 4) a means of controlling groundwater.

 Extremely reliable.

 Process is limited by soil type and depth, topography,
 underlying geology, climate, suface and groundwater
 hydrology and quality, crop selection and land avail-
 ability. Graded land is essential; excessive slope
 increase runoff and erosion. Climate affects growing
 season and application ceases during periods of fro-
 zen soil conditions. Prolonged wet spells limit appli-
 cation by Gulf states and the Pacific Northwest
coastal region.
Minimal, when properly operated.
                                                                                 C-7

-------
Appendix  D
Much of the material in this appendix was taken from EPA's Guide to
Nonpoint Source Pollution Control, published by the Office of Water in
1987.
                                APPENDIX D

                       BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES
 Conservation Tillage: A farming practice that leaves stalks or stems and roots intact
 in the field after harvest. Its purpose is to reduce water runoff and soil erosion compared
 to conventional tillage where the topsoil is mixed and turned over by a plow. Conservation
 tillage is an umbrella term that includes any farming  practice that reduces the number
 of times the topsoil is mixed. Other terms that are used instead of conservation tillage
 are (1) minimum tillage where one or more operations that mixed the topsoil are elimi-
 nated; and (2) no-till where the topsoil is left essentially undisturbed.
  CRITERIA
                               REMARKS
   1. Effectiveness
    a) Sediment


    b) Nitrogen (N)
    c) Phosphorus (P)


    d) Runoff


   2. Capital Costs
  3. Operation and
  Maintenance
  4. Longevity


  5. Confidence

  6. Adaptability
  7. Potential Treatment
    Side Effects
  8. Concurrent Land
    Management Practices
Fair to excellent, decreases sediment input to streams
and lakes. (40 to 90 percent reduced tillage, 50 to 95
percent no tillage).
Poor, no effect on nitrogen input to streams and lakes.
Fair to excellent, can reduce the amount of phos-
phorus input to streams and lakes. (40 to 90 percent
reduced tillage, 50 to 95 percent no tillage).
Fair to excellent, decreases amount of water running
off fields carrying sediment and phosphorus.

High, because requires purchase of new equipment
by farmer.

Less expensive than conventional tillage. Potential
inrease in herbicide costs. Potential increase in net
farm income.

Good, approximately every five years the soil has to
be turned over.

Fair to excellent.

Good, but may be limited in northern areas that exper-
ience late cool springs, or in heavy, poorly drained soils.
Potential increase in herbicide effects and insecticide
contamination of surface and groundwater. Nitrogen
contamination of groundwater.
Consider fertilizer management and integrated
pesticide management.
                                                                               D-1

-------
                           Best management practices (cont.)
    Integrated Pest Management: Pests are any organisms that are harmful to desired
    plants, and they are controlled with chemical agents called pesticides. Integrated pest
    management considers factors such as how much pesticide is enough to control a
    problem, the best method of applying the pesticides, the appropriate time for application
    and the safe handling, storage and disposal of pesticides and their containers. Other
    considerations include using resistant crop varieties, optimizing crop planting time,
    optimizing time of day of application,  rotating crops and biological controls.
      CRITERIA
                                    REMARKS
      1. Effectiveness
        a) Sediment

        b) Nitrogen (N)
        c) Phosphorus (P)
        d) Runoff


      2. Capital Costs

      3. Operation and
        Maintenance

      4. Longevity


      5. Confidence


      6. Adaptability
      7. Potential Treatment
        Side Effects
      8. Concurrent Land
        Management Practices
No effect, but pesticides attached to soil particles can
be carried to streams and lakes.
No effect.
No effect.
No effect, but water is the primary route for transport-
ing pesticides to lakes and streams.

No effect.

Farming cost, potential reduction in pesticide costs
and an increase in net farm income.

Poor, as pesticides are applied one or more times per
year to address different pests and different crops.

Fair to excellent, reported pollutant reductions range
from 20-90 percent.

Methods are generally applicable wherever pesticides
are used: forest, farms, homes.

Potential for ground and surface water contamination.
Toxic components may be available to aquatic plants
and animals.

See crop rotation, conservation tillage.
D-2

-------
                      Best management practices (cont.)
?£^HC'«an'"9-: Streets and parking lots can be cleaned by sweeping which removes
large dust and dirt particles or by flushing which removes finer particles. Sweeping
actually removes solids so pollutants do not reach receiving waters. Flushing just moves
1,1"°^   ^ draina9e svstem unless the drainage system is part of the sewer
system. When the drainage system is part of the sewer system, the pollutants will be
treated as wastes in the sewer treatment plant.
 CRITERIA
                              REMARKS
 1. Effectiveness
   a) Sediment

   b) Nitrogen (N)
   c) Phosphorus (P)
   d) Runoff

 2. Capital Costs


 3. Operation and
   Maintenance

 4. Longevity

 5. Confidence

 6. Adaptability
7. Potential Treatment
  Side Effects

8. Concurrent Land
  Management Practices
 Poor, not proven to be effective.
 Poor, not proven to be effective.
 Poor, not proven to be effective.
 No effect.

 High, because it requires the purchase of equipment
 by community.

 Unknown but reasonable vehicular maintenance
 would be expected.

 Poor, have to sweep frequently throughout the year.

 Poor.


To paved roads, might not be considered a worthwhile
expenditure of funds in communities less than 10,000.

Unknown.
Detention/Sedimentation basins.
                                                                             D-3

-------
                          Best management practices (cont.)
    Streamside Management Zones (Buffer strips): Considerations in streamside man-
    agement include maintaining the natural vegetation along a stream, limiting livestock
    access to the stream, and where vegetation has been removed planting buffer strips.
    Buffer strips are strips of plants (grass, trees, shrubs) between a stream and an area
    being disturbed by man's activities that protects the stream from erosion and nutrient
    impacts.
     CRITERIA
                                   REMARKS
     1. Effectiveness
       a) Sediment

       b) Nitrogen (N)

       c) Phosphorus (P)

       d) Runoff


     2. Capital Costs


     3. Operation and
       Maintenance

     4. Longevity

     5. Confidence

     6. Adaptability
      7. Potential Treatment
        Side Effects
      8. Concurrent Land
        Management Practices
Good to excellent, reported to reduce sediment from
feedlots on 4 percent slope by 79 percent.
Good to excellent, reported to reduce nitrogen from
feedlots on 4 percent slope by 84 percent.
Good to excellent, reported to reduce phosphorus
from feedlots on 4 percent slope by 67 percent.
Good to excellent, reported to reduce runoff from feed-
lots on 4 percent slope by 67 percent.

Good, moderate costs for fencing material to keep out
livestock and for seeds or plants.

Excellent, minimal upkeep.
Excellent, maintain itself indefinitely.

Fair, because of the lack of intensive scientific research.

May be used anywhere. Limitations on types of plants
that may be used between geographic areas.

With trees, shading may increase the diversity and
number of organisms, in the stream with the possible
reduction in algae.

Conservation tillage, animal waste management, live-
stock exclusion, fertilizer management, pesticide
management, ground cover maintenance, proper
construction, use, maintenance of haul roads and
skid trails.
D-4

-------
                       Best management practices (cont.)
 Contour Farming: A practice where the farmer plows across the slope of the land. This
 practice is applicable on farm land with a 2-8 percent slope.
  CRITERIA
                                REMARKS
  1. Effectiveness
    a) Sediment


    b) Nitrogen (N)
    c) Phosphorus (P)
    d) Runoff

  2. Capital Costs

  3. Operation and
    Maintenance

  4. Longevity

  5. Confidence

  6. Adaptability
  7. Potential Treatment
    Side Effects

  8. Concurrent Land
    Management Practices
  Good on moderate slopes (2 to 8 percent slopes), fair
  on steep slopes (50 percent reduction).
  Unknown.
  Fair.
  Fair to good, depends on storm intensity.

  No special effect.

  No special effect.


  Poor, it must be practiced every time the field is plowed.

  Poor, not enough information.

  Good, limited by soil, climate, and slope of land. May
  not work with large farming equipment on steep slopes.

  Side effects not identified.
 Fertilizer management, integrated pesticide manage-
 ment, possibly streamside management.
Contour Stripcropping: This practice is similar to contour farming where the farmer
plows across the slope of the land. The difference is that strips of close growing crops
or meadow grasses are planted between strips of row crops like corn or soybeans.
Whereas contour farming can be used on 2-8 percent slopes, contour Stripcropping can
be used on 8-15 percent slopes.
 CRITERIA
                               REMARKS
 1. Effectiveness
   a) Sediment

   b) Nitrogen (N)
   c) Phosphorus (P)
   d) Runoff

 2. Capital Costs


 3. Operation and
   Maintenance

 4. Longevity

 5. Confidence

 6. Adaptability
 7. Potential Treatment
   Side Effects

 8. Concurrent Land
   Management Practices
 Good, 8 to 15 percent slopes, provides the benefits of
 contour plowing plus buffer strips.
 Unknown, assumed to be fair to good.
 Unknown, assumed to be fair to good.
 Good to excellent.

 No special effect unless farmer cannot use the
 two crops.

 No special effect.
Poor, must be practiced year after year.

Poor, not enough information.

Fair to good, may not work with large farming equip-
ment on steep slopes.

Side effects not identified.
Fertilizer management, integrated pesticide
management.
                                                                               D-5

-------
                          Best management practices (cont.)
    Range and Pasture Management: The objective of range and pasture management is
    to prevent overgrazing because of too many animals in a given area. Management
    practices include spreading water supplies, rotating animals between pastures, spreading
    mineral and feed supplements or allowing animals to graze only when a particular plant
    food is growing rapidly.
      CRITERIA
                                   REMARKS
      1. Effectiveness
        a) Sediment

        b) Nitrogen (N)
        c) Phosphorus (P)
        d) Runoff


      2. Capital Costs

      3. Operation and
        Maintenance

      4. Longevity

      5. Confidence
      6. Adaptability

      7. Potential Treatment
        Side Effects

      8. Concurrent Land
        Management Practices
Good, prevents soil compaction which reduces infiltra-
tion rates.
Unknown.
Unknown.
Good, maintains some cover which reduces runoff
rates.

Low, but may have to develop additional water sources.

Low.


Excellent.

Good to excellent. Farmer must have a knowledge of
stocking rates, vegetation types, and vegetative
conditions.

Excellent.

None identified.
Livestock exclusion, riparian zone management and
crop rotation.
D-6

-------
                       Best management practices (cont.)
 Crop Rotation: Where a planned sequence of crops are planted in the same area of
 land. For example, plow based crops are followed by pasture crops such as qrass or
 legumes in two to four year rotations.
  CRITERIA
                                REMARKS
  1. Effectiveness
    a) Sediment
    b) Nitrogen (N)
    c) Phosphorus (P)
    d) Runoff

  2. Capital Costs
  3. Operation and
    Maintenance
  4. Longevity

  5. Confidence

  6. Adaptability

  7. Potential Treatment
    Side Effects

  8. Concurrent Land
    Management Practices
  Good when field is in grasses or legumes
  Fair to good.
  Fair to good.
  Good when field is in grasses or legumes.

  High if farm economy reduced. Less of a problem with
  livestock which can use plants as food.

  Moderate, increased labor requirements. May be off-
  set by lower nitrogen additions to the soil when corn is
  planted after legumes, and reduction in pesticide
  application.

  Good.

  Fair to good.

 Good, but some climatic restrictions.

 Reduction in possibility of groundwater contamination.

 Range and pasture management.
Terraces: Terraces are used where contouring, contour strip cropping, or conservation
tillage do not offer sufficient soil protection. Used in long slopes and slopes up to 12
percent; terraces are small dams or a combination of small dams and ditches that reduce
the slope by breaking it into lesser or near horizontal slopes.
 CRITERIA
                               REMARKS
 1. Effectiveness
   a. Sediment
   b. Nitrogen (N)
   c. Phosphorus (P)
   d. Runoff

 2. Capital Cost

 3. Operation and
   Maintenance

 4. Longevity

 5. Confidence

 6. Adaptability

 7. Potential Treatment
  Side Effect

 8. Concurrent Land
  Management Practices
 Fair to good.
 Unknown.
 Unknown.
 Fair, more effective in reducing erosion than total run-
 off volume.

 High initial costs.

 Periodic maintenance cost, but generally offset by
 increased income.

 Good with proper maintenance.

 Good to excellent.

 Fair, limited to long slopes and slopes up to 12 percent.

 If improperly designed or used with poor cultural and
 management practices, they may increase soil erosion.

Fertilizer and pesticide management.
                                                                               D-7

-------
                          Best management practices (cont.)
    Animal Waste Management: A practice where animal wastes are temporarily held in
    waste storage structures until they can be utilized or safely disposed. Storage units can
    be constructed of reinforced concrete or coated steel. Wastes are also stored in earthen
    ponds.
     CRITERIA
                                   REMARKS
      1. Effectiveness
       a) Sediment
       b) Nitrogen (N)
       c) Phosphorus (P)
       d) Runoff
      2. Capital Costs

      3. Operation and
       Maintenance
      4. Longevity
      5. Confidence
      6. Adaptability
      7. Potential Treatment
       Side Effects
      8. Concurrent Land
       Management Practices
Not applicable.
Good to excellent.
Good to excellent.
Not applicable.
High because of the necessity of construction and
disposal equipment.
Unknown.
Unknown.
Fair to excellent if properly managed.
Good.
The use of earthen ponds can possibly lead to ground
water contamination.
Fertilizer management.
    Nonvegetative Soil Stabilization: Examples of temporary soil stabilizers include
    mulches, nettings, chemical binders, crushed stone, and blankets or mats from textile
    material. Permanent soil stabilizers include coarse rock, concrete, and asphalt. The
    purpose of soil stabilizers is to reduce erosion from construction sites.
      CRITERIA
                                   REMARKS
      1. Effectiveness
        a) Sediment
        b) Nitrogen (N)
        c) Phosphorus (P)
        d) Runoffs
      2. Capital Costs
      3. Operation and
        Maintenance
      4. Longevity
      5. Confidence
      6. Adaptability
      7. Potential Treatment
        Side Effects
      8. Concurrent Land
        Management Practices
Excellent.
Poor.
Poor.
Poor on steep slopes with straw mulch, otherwise good.
Low to high, depending on technique applied.
Moderate.

Generally a temporary solution until a more perma-
nent cover is developed. Excellent for permanent soil
stabilizer.
Good.
Excellent.
No effect on soluble pollutants.

Runoff detention/retention.
D-8

-------
                       Best management practices (cont.)
 Porous Pavement: Porous pavement is asphalt without fine filling particles on a gravel
CRITERIA
1. Effectiveness
a) Sediment
b) Nitrogen (N)
c) Phosphorus (P)
d) Runoff
2. Capital Costs

3. Operation and
Maintenance

4. Longevity
5. Confidence
6. Adaptability
7. Potential Treatments
Side Effects
8. Concurrent Land
Management Practices
REMARKS

Good.
Good.
Good.
Good to excellent.
Moderate, slightly more expensive than conventional
surfaces.
Potentially expensive, requires regular street main-
tenance program and can be destroyed in freezing
climates.
Good, with regular maintenance (i.e., street cleaning),
in southern climates. In cold climates, freezing and
expansion can destroy.
Unknown.
Excellent.
Groundwater contamination from infiltration of soluble
pollutants.
Runoff detention/retention.


Flood Storage (Runoff Detention/Retention): Detention facilities treat or filter out
pollutants or hold water until treated. Retention facilities provide no treatment. Examples
of detention/retention facilities include ponds, surface basins, underground tunnels,
excess sewer storage and underwater flexible or collapsible holding tanks.
 CRITERIA
                               REMARKS
 1. Effectiveness
   a) Sediment
   b) Nitrogen (N)
   c) Phosphorus (P)
   d) Runoff

 2. Capital Costs
 3. Operation and
   Maintenance

 4. Longevity

 5. Confidence

 6. Adaptability

 7. Potential Treatment
   Side Effects

 8. Concurrent Land
   Use Practices
 Poor to excellent, design dependent.
 Very poor to excellent, design dependent.
 Very poor to excellent, design dependent.
 Poor to excellent, design dependent.

 Dependent on type and size. Range from $100 to
 $1,000, per acre served, depending on site. These
 costs include capital costs and operational costs.

 Annual cost per acre of urban area served has ranged
 from $10 to $125 depending on site.

 Good to excellent, should last several years.

 Good, if properly designed.

 Excellent.

Groundwater contamination with retention basins.
Porous pavements.
                                                                                 D-9

-------
                           Best Management Practices (Cont.)
     Sediment Traps: Sediment traps are temporary structures made of sandbags, straw
     bales, or stone. Their purpose is to detain runoff for short periods of time so heavy
     sediment particles will drop out. Typically, they are applied within  and at the periphery
     of disturbed areas.
      CRITERIA
                                    REMARKS
      1. Effectiveness
        a) Sediment
        b) Nitrogen (N)
        c) Phosphorus (P)
        d) Runoff

      2. Capital Cost

      3. Operation and
        Maintenance

      4. Longevity

      5. Confidence

      6. Adaptability

      7. Potential Treatment
        Side Effects

      8. Concurrent Land
        Management Practices
Good, coarse particles.
Poor.
Poor.
Fair

Low

Low, require occasional inspection and prompt
maintenance.

Poor to good.

Poor.

Excellent.

None identified.
Agricultural, silviculture or other construction best
management practices could be incorporated
depending on situation.
     Surface Roughening: On construction sites, the surface of the exposed soil can be
     roughened with conventional construction equipment to decrease water runoff and slow
     the downhill movement of water. Grooves are cut along the contour of a slope to spread
     runoff horizontally and increase the water infiltration rate.
      CRITERIA
                                    REMARKS
      1. Effectiveness
        a) Sediment
        b) Nitrogen (N)
        c) Phosphorus (P)
        d) Runoff

      2. Capital Cost

      3. Operation and
        Maintenance

      4. Longevity

      5. Confidence

      6. Adaptability

      7. Potential Treatment
        Side Effects

      8. Concurrent Land
        Management Practices
Good.
Unknown.
Unknown.
Good.

Low, but requires timing and coordination.

Low, temporary protective measure.

Short-term.

Unknown.

Excellent.

None identified.

Nonvegetative soil stabilization.
D-10

-------
                       Best Management Practices (Cent.)
 Riprap: A layer or loose rock or aggregate placed over a soil surface susceptible to
 erosion.
  CRITERIA
                                REMARKS
  1. Effectiveness
  a) Sediment
    b) Nitrogen (N)
    c) Phosphorus (P)
    d) Runoff

  2. Capital Cost

  3. Operation and
    Maintenance

  4. Longevity

  5. Confidence

  6. Adaptability

  7. Potential Treatment
    Side Effects

  8. Concurrent Land
    Management Practices
  Good, based on visual observations.
  Unknown.
  Unknown.
  Poor.

  Low to high, varies greatly.

  Low.


  Good, with proper rock size.

  Poor to good.

  Excellent.

  In streams, erosion may start in a new,
  unprotected place.

  Streamside (lake) management zone.
Interception or Diversion Practices: Designed to protect bottom land from hillside
runoff, divert water from area! sources of pollution such as barnyards or to protect
structures from runoff. Diversion structures are represented by any modification of the
surface that intercepts or diverts runoff so that the distance of flow to a channel system
is increased.
 CRITERIA
                               REMARKS
 1. Effectiveness
   a) Sediment
   b) Nitrogen (N)
   c) Phosphorus (P)
   d) Runoff

 2. Capital Cost


 3. Operation and
   Maintenance

 4. Longevity

 5. Confidence

 6. Adaptability

 7. Potential Treatment
  Side Effects

 8. Concurrent Land
  Management Practices
 Fair to good (30 to 60 percent reduction).
 Fairto good (30 to 60 percent reduction).
 Fair to good (30 to 60 percent reduction).
 Poor, not designed to reduce runoff but divert runoff.

 Moderate to high, may entail engineering design and
 structures.

 Fair to good.
Good.

Poortogood, largely unknown.

Excellent.

None identified.
Since the technique can be applied under multiple
situations (i.e., agriculture, silviculture, construction)
appropriate best management practices associated
with individual situations should be applied.
                                                                               D-11

-------
                          Best Management Practices (Cont.)
    Grassed Waterways: A practice where broad and shallow drainage channels (natural
    or constructed) are planted with erosion-resistant grasses.
      CRITERIA
                                   REMARKS
      1. Effectiveness
        a) Sediment
        b) Nitrogen (N)
        c) Phosphorus (P)
        d) Runoff

      2. Capital Cost

      3. Operation and
        Maintenance

      4. Longevity

      5. Confidence

      6. Adaptability

      7. Potential Treatment
        Side Effects

      8. Concurrent Land
        Management Practices
Good to excellent (60 to 80 percent reduction).
Unknown.
Unknown.
Moderate to good.

Moderate.

Low, but may interfere with the use of large equipment.

Excellent.

Good.

Excellent.

None identified.
Conservative tillage, integrated pest management,
fertilizer management, animal waste management.
D-12

-------
                      Best management practices (Cont.)
Maintain Natural Waterways: This practice disposes of tree tops and slash in areas
away from waterways. Prevents the buildup of damming debris. Stream crossings are
constructed to minimize impacts on flow characteristics.
 CRITERIA
                               REMARKS
  1. Effectiveness
   a) Sediment
   b) Nitrogen (N)
   c) Phosphorus (P)
   d) Runoff
  2. Capital Cost

  3. Operation and
    Maintenance
  4. Longevity
  5. Confidence
  6. Adaptability
  7. Potential Treatment
    Side Effects
  8. Concurrent Land
    Management Practices
Fair to good, prevents acceleration of bank and
channel erosion.
Unknown, contribution would be from decaying debris.
Unknown, contribution would be from decaying debris.
Fair to good, prevents deflections or constrictions of
stream water flow which may accelerate bank and
channel erosion.
Low, supervision required to ensure proper disposal
of debris.
Low, if proper supervision during logging is main-
tained, etherise $160-$800 per 100 ft stream.
Good.
Good.
Excellent.
None identified.
Proper design and location of haul and skid trails;
Streamside management zones.
                                                                                D-13

-------
                        Best management practices (Cent.)
  Haul Roads and Skid Trails: This practice is implemented prior to logging operations.
  It involves the appropriate site selection and design of haul road and skid trails. Haul
  roads and skid trails should be located away from streams and  lakes. Recommended
  guidelines for gradient, drainage, soil stabilization, and filter strips should be followed.
  Routes should be situated across slopes rather than up or down slopes. If the natural
  drainage is disrupted, then artificial drainage should be provided. Logging operations
  should be restricted during adverse weather periods. Other goods practices include
  ground covers (rock or grass) closing roads when not in use, closing roadways during
  wet periods, and returning main haul roads to prelogging conditions when logging ceases.
    CRITERIA
                                  REMARKS
    1. Effectiveness
      a) Sediment


      b) Nitrogen (N)
      c) Phosphorus (P)
      d) Runoff

    2. Capital Cost
     3. Operation and
       Maintenance
     4. Longevity

     5. Confidence

     6. Adaptability

     7. Potential Treatment
       Side Effects

     8. Concurrent Land
       Management Practices
Good if grass cover is used on haul roads (45 percent
reduction); Excellent if crushed rock is used as ground
cover (92 percent reduction).
Unknown.
Unknown.
Unknown.

High, grass cover plus fertilizer $5.37/100 ft roadbed,
crushed rock (6 in) $179.01 /100 ft roadbed.

High, particularly with grass which may have to be
replenished routinely and may not be effective on
highly traveled roads.

Unknown.

Good for ground cover, poor for nutrients.

Good.

Potential increase in nutrients to water course if
excess fertilizers are applied.

 Maintain natural waterways.
D-14

-------
 Appendix  E
 INTRODUCTION
In preparation for the State/Provincial Lake Management Programs workshop
held at the Sixth Annual NALMS Symposium in Portland, Oregon, lake manage-
ment program managers from each State and Province were asked to provide
information on their programs. The information received from States and Pro-
vinces is summarized in the following pages. This document is only intended as
a preliminary compilation of State/Provincial lake management program infor-
mation. Thus, in some cases the agency that supplied information for this listing
may not have been the only agency in  the State/Province dealing with lake
management issues.
  For further details about the information summarized herein please contact
Richard S. McVoy (617/366-9181), DEQE,  Div. of Water Pollution Control, Lyman
School, Westview Building, Westborough, MA 01581.
                                                             E-1

-------
                                ARIZONA
  Purpose


  Emphasis
  Program
  Elements
   Funding
   Source(s)

   Staff

   Interactions
     Arizona Game & Fish Department
              P.O. Box 9099
        Phoenix, Arizona 85068-9099

Protection and management of sport  and non-game fisheries
and aquatic resources (streams and reservoirs).

Focus on long range management and short term emergency
response (pollution spills and fishkills).

1. Extensive limnological  surveys which include analysis  of
   water, sediment, and tissue samples to determine any chan-
   ges in the aquatic resources due to pollution.
2. Fisheries surveys to  identify  species  composition, relative
   abundance, age, growth condition and length frequencies.
3. Creel surveys to determine  species  harvest,  catch  rates,
   fishermen opinion, preference,  and fish distribution among
   anglers.
4. Periodic angler questionnaire to understand the needs and
   wants of the angler.
5. Habitat alterations (artificial reefs, stream deflectors, fencing,
   revegetation,  bank stabilization, and aquatic weed removal)
   to attract fish  and to improve habitat and water quality.
6. Establish fishing regulations to fish resource.
7. Employ outboard motor restrictions.

 Federal and State hunting and fishing money.


 18 (aquatic resource background).

 Public: Trout Unlimited, Anglers United, Bass Clubs.
 Private: Not listed.
 Governmental:  Federal- Army  Corps,   Forest Service,  Land
 Management, Reclamation, National Park Service
 State: Dept. Health Services, State Parks, Salt River Project
 Academic: U. Arizona, Arizona State U., Northern Arizona U.
    Program
     Elements
    Arizona Department of Health Services
        Division of Environmental Health
          Central Palm Plaza Building
          2005 North Central Avenue
            Phoenix, Arizona 85004

  1. Discharge limitations for point discharges to surface waters.
  2. Promulgation of surface water quality standards.
  3. Developing a non-point source control program.
E-2

-------
                             ARKANSAS
 Purpose
    Arkansas Game and Fish Commission
           2 Natural Resources Drive
             Little Rock, AR 72205

  Fisheries management of existing lake ecology.
Purpose
Emphasis
Program
Elements
                           CONNECTICUT
   Department of Environmental Protection
            Water Compliance Unit
          Lakes Management Section
             165 Capitol Avenue
          Hartford, Connecticut 06106

 To  develop  and   implement  water  quality  management
 strategies and policies which will deal with the problem of lake
 eutrophication, particularly excessive algae and aquatic plant
 growth.

 The program focuses on management of both Statewide con-
 cerns (nonpoint source management policy and construction
 grants program) and individual lake projects.  Grants are used
 as a key aspect of management.

 1. Trophic status assessment: A study  completed in the late
   1970's was the basis for establishing program priorities.
 2. Municipal/industrial discharge management: Evaluation of
   lake water quality benefits attained after the implementation
   of advanced wastewater treatment through State construc-
   tion grants.
 3. Water quality standards: No discharges to Class A lakes. Dis-
   charges to certain Class B lakes can't raise phosphorus
   levels above 0.003 mg/l. A lake trophic classification system
   is included.
 4.  Nonpoint source control:  Development and  distribution of a
   guide to best management practices for controlling nonpoint
   sources in lake watersheds.
 5. Federal Clean Lakes Program: Administration of grants from
   Section 314 Program for Phase I  studies and Phase II  im-
   plementation projects.
6. Algae and weed control program: Administration of a reim-
   bursement program to provide State funds  to communities
   for algae and weed control. $30-60,000/yr.
7. Special projects: State appropriations have been made for
   projects to a) purchase a hydraulic dredge for lake manage-
   ment projects and b)  develop individual lake management
   projects.
                                                                       E-3

-------
 Assistance/
 Service
  Funding
  Sources
  Staff
  Interactions
  Other Lake-
  Related
  Programs
Handbooks on best management practices for nonpoint source
controls,  algae and  weed  control  methods,  and  nuisance
aquatic vegetation control;  reimbursement funds for aquatic
weed/algae control; and technical assistance to towns, lake as-
sociations, and private pond owners.

Individual lake projects funded through Federal 314 grants and
State legislative  appropriations.  Staff is  Federally  funded
through water quality program grants.

Three  environmental  analysts  contribute  part  time to the
program.

Public: Provide information to public.
Governmental: Grants/reimbursements to municipalities.

DEP, Pesticides Section, Hazardous Materials Management
Unit;'DEP, Fisheries Bureau; DEP, Water Resources Unit
E-4

-------
                             DELAWARE
        Department of Natural Resources & Environmental Control
                        Division of Fish and Wildlife
                            89 Kings Highway
                             P.O. Box1401
                            Dover, DE 19903

Purpose       Provide maximum fishing opportunity for freshwater anglers.

Emphasis      Applied research and management dealing  primarily with in-
               dividual problem lakes. Some problems (e.g.,   Hydrilla) deal
               with multiple water bodies.

Program       1. Fisheries management through  (a)  evaluation of fish intro-
Elements        ductions,  (b) investigation  of largemouth bass regulation
                 changes, (c) impact of advanced fingerling stocking, (d) res-
                 toration of  herring  runs into freshwater impoundments, and
                 (e) evaluation of freshwater fishing by mail creel survey.
               2. Investigation of vegetation removal in ponds by (a) evaluation
                 of partial  aquatic vegetation  removal,  (b)  evaluation of
                 biological control, (c) Hydrilla investigations.
               3. Evaluation of dredging on a freshwater community including
                 the impact of wetlands loss on a pond and sediment map-
                 ping of public ponds.

Assistance/    Biologist  available to assist owners on all  ponds (private or
Services       public).

Funding       Federal funds through the Dingell-Johnson Program and State
Sources       funds through license receipts.

Staff           6 (primarily biology/ecology/fisheries background).

Interactions    Public: Creel interviews and angler diaries.
               Private: None  listed.
               Governmental: Technical assistance to State/county parks and
               recreation departments and soil conservation services.

Other Lake-    Soil Conservation Service: Technical  aid to private  owners;
Related        University of Delaware Extension Service;  Delaware State Col-
Programs      lege Cooperative Fisheries Unit
                                                                          E-5

-------
                               FLORIDA
  Emphasis
  Program
  Elements
  Assistance/
  Services
   Funding
   Sources

   Staff
Florida Game and Fresh Water Fish Commission
             207 West Carroll Street
              Kissimmee, FL 32741

  Primarily management oriented; dealing with problem lakes or
  watersheds.  Discharge  of  sewage  is  the  only  Statewide
  problem. Normally grants are  not  pursued but assistance is
  provided for local governments to apply.

  1. Development of lake restoration plans based on needs of
     aquatic  habitat, fisheries,  and wildlife and considering such
     factors as water quality and  quantity, elevation manipulation
     and aquatic plant management.
  2. Point and non-point source considerations.
  3.  Many plans have been developed using drawdown or
     pumpdown to restore aquatic habitat and associated  fish
     and wildlife values.
   4. Cooperation with  Federal,  State,  and  local  agencies  and
     elected officials to  implement planned programs.

   Develop or assist in development of restoration plans for public
   lakes of greater than  5 acres. Also provide services by recom-
   mending management techniques to enhance fish and wildlife
   values.

   Entirely from sale of fishing licenses.
    5 fisheries biologists; 2 technicians; 1  secretary (strong back-
    grounds in lake drawdown, pollution  control methodologies,
    and surface water hydrology).
   Interactions
    Public: Considerable from phone calls to formal public hear-
    ings.
    Private: Work with consultants during project planning and im-
    plementation.
    Governmental: Many other agencies during the planning and
    implementation of projects.
E-6

-------
Purpose
Emphasis
Program
Elements
Assistance/
Services

Funding
Sources

Staff

Interactions
	IDAHO	

      Department of Health and Welfare
            Division of Environment
                 State House
            Boise, Idaho 83720-990

 Responsible for protecting all surface and underground waters.
 Although there is no specific lake management program, efforts
 are underway to formally create one.

 Focuses on individual  lake problems (trophic  status assess-
 ments, source  evaluations, and problem-solving alternatives)
 and broader range problems (State water quality standards and
 nonpoint source control strategies). Grant administration is also
 a function of the Division.

 Lake protection efforts  are primarily a "grass roots" movement
 which the State tries to augment in the following ways.
 1. Networking  by (a) maintaining contacts and  exchanging  in-
    formation with lake associations, NALMS, resource agencies
    and universities; (b) facilitating the formation  of new lake as-
    sociations;  and  (c) organizing and  participating  in  lake
    management task forces.
 2. Provide  information and  education by  (a)  holding public
    workshops on  lake management topics and  (b) developing
    and providing informational materials on lake protection.
 3. Provide  technical support by (a) conducting water quality
    studies to evaluate lake conditions and sources of problems,
    (b) participating in cooperative studies with lake associa-
    tions or other agencies, (c) providing technical advice to lake
    associations on special projects,  (d) providing laboratory
    support  for other water quality studies, and (e) providing
    guidance and training for voluntary monitoring activities.
 4. Providing funding for (a) construction of municipal  sewage
    treatment facilities and (b)  implementation  of agricultural
    best management practices.

 See Program elements above.
 Positions are Federally funded. Treatment facility and agricul-
 tural BMP grants are Federal and State funded.

 2 half-time limnologists.

 Public: Extensive contact with local lake associations.
 Private: Not listed.
 Governmental: Not listed.
                                                                          E-7

-------
                                ILLINOIS
  Purpose


  Emphasis
  Program
  Elements
   Assistance/
   Services
   Funding
   Sources

   Staff
   Interactions
 Illinois Environmental Protection Agency
      Division of Water Pollution Control
             Planning Section
            2200 Churchill Road
          Springfield, Illinois 62706

To protect, enhance, and restore the quality and usability of lake
ecosystems.

An integrated, multidisciplinary approach to lake use enhance-
ment involving watershed protection and in-lake management
to mitigate past damage.

1. Monitoring and lake classification to guide decision making.
   (a) Volunteer Lake Monitoring Program (VLMP): 250 lakes
   monitored for Secchi disc transparency; 12 for nutrients and
   suspended solids.; (b)  Ambient Lake Monitoring Program
   (ALMP): about 20 lakes/year monitored by Division person-
   nel.
2. Development and implementation of lake/watershed manage-
   ment plans for public lakes under the Federal Clean Lakes
   Program: Administration of the  CLP funded protection/res-
   toration projects.  Currently, three projects ongoing; 2 com-
   pleted.
3. Technical assistance and coordination to promote planning
   and implementation initiatives funded by other sources: In-
   teractions with other Federal, State, and local groups and
   agencies.

 Information and training for VLMP volunteers, other educational
 and  technology   transfer   information,  development   of
 lake/watershed implementation plans.

 Federally funded through Sections 314, 106, and 205(j) of the
 Clean Water Acts.

 3 full-time aquatic biologists  (Springfield HQ)  plus regional of-
 fice technicians and aquatic biologists.

 Public: Citizen volunteers (VLMP), Illinois Lake Management As-
 sociation, Northeastern Illinois Planning Commission.
 Private: Not listed.
 Governmental: Federal - USEPA, USDA.
  State: Dept. of Agriculture, Dept. of Conservation, State Water
  Survey.
E-8

-------
                   Illinois Department of Conservation
             Division of Fish & Wildlife (Impoundment Program)
                          Lincoln Tower Plaza
                        524 South Second Street
                      Springfield, Illinois 62701-1787

Purpose       The Impoundment Program has stewardship of protecting, en-
               hancing, and insuring the wise use of aquatic resources in order
               to sustain quality angling for sport-fishermen.

Emphasis      The program focuses on data acquisition, management plans
               and techniques, and public information.

Program       1. Investigations and  surveys: Monitoring of fish populations
Elements        and environments to detect changes which require manage-
                 ment strategies to be implemented.
               2. Technical assistance:   Provide consultation,  management
                 guidelines,  plans, and  policies to public  and private im-
                 poundment owners to conserve the fishery resources while
                 providing quality sportfishing.
               3. Information dissemination:  Publish and distribute results of
                 surveys, management projects, fish population status, tech-
                 nical management reports,  and impoundment management
                 plans to provide information regarding fishing opportunities
                 and impoundment management to lake managers and sport
                 fishermen.

Assistance/    Technical assistance,  management plans, published informa-
Services       tional materials.

Funding       Not listed.
Sources

Staff           One program manager, 5  regional fisheries administrators,  17
               district fisheries managers.

Interactions    Public: Extensive response to inquires for information.
               Private: Not listed.
               Governmental: Not listed.

Other Lake-    Illinois Dept. of Conservation Fisheries management and State
Related        park management; Illinois  State Water Survey: Lake manage-
Programs      ment research; Illinois Lake Management Assoc.: Non-profit or-
               ganization to promote understanding and comprehensive lake
               resource management.
                                                                        E-9

-------
                                  INDIANA
                       Department of Natural Resources
                             Division of State Parks
                        Room 616, State Office Building
                        Indianapolis, Indiana 46204-2267

                  Maintenance of lakes within State parks.

                  The primary interest includes both the broad and specific cases
                  of controlling siltation in lakes and ponds. A major concern is
                  whether silt removal and control is equal in value to the benefits
                  of saving the lakes.

                  1. Hydraulic dredging: For about 4 years this method has been
                    used  to offset siltation.
                  2. Research on less expensive siltation control methods: This
                    program is planned to start next year pending State funding.

                  Hydraulic dredging.
Purpose

Emphasis
Program
Elements
Assistance/
Services

Funding
Sources

Staff
    Interactions
    Other Lake-
    Related
    Programs
Through State legislature.


4 people for dredging program (maintenance background). No
lake specialists employed.

Public: Not listed.
Private: Not listed.
Governmental:  Division  of  Water and  Division of Fish and
Wildlife provide lake management experts.

DNR, Division of  Water; DNR,  Division  of Fish and  Wildlife:
Manages lakes for fisheries.
E-10

-------
                               KANSAS
Purpose


Emphasis
Program
Elements
Assistance/
Services

Funding
Sources

Staff
Interactions
   Department of Health and Environment
          Bureau of Water Protection
      Water Quality Assessment Section
                Forbes Field
         Topeka, Kansas 66620-0110

 To provide water quality information on lakes and address cur-
 rent concerns of the public and the Department.

 Program stresses data acquisition and investigation to address
 individual lake problems and to assess generic problems such
 as eutrophication or nonpoint sources. Response to public con-
 cerns is a key focus of the program.

 1. Routine lake monitoring: 15-30 lakes/year.

 2. Special investigations: Performed  in-house or in cooperation
   with other State, Federal, or local  agencies, these studies in-
   clude:  (a) the formation of trihalomethanes in drinking water
   supply reservoirs,  (b) the occurrence and  persistence of
   pesticides in drinking water reservoirs, (c) the effects of non-
   point source  pollutants on lake water quality, and (d) the
   causes and control of taste and odor problems  reported  by
   the public or treatment plant operators.

 Special investigative surveys in response to public notifications
 of observed lake problems.

 The lake monitoring program is funded by the Federal and State
 governments.

 4 staff with aquatic biology backgrounds assist (% each)  in the
 lake monitoring  program. Also, 3-5 part-time  environmental
technicians assist (20% time, total).

 Public: Extensive response to public requests.
Private: Little to none.
Governmental: Grants for special studies.
Academic: Grants for special studies.
                                                                        E-11

-------
                                 KENTUCKY
                    Department of Environmental Protection
                                Division of Water
                                Fort Boone Plaza
                                 18ReillyRoad
                            Frankfort, Kentucky 40601

    Purpose      To provide  lake water quality data  for making  management
                  decisions on the use of point and nonpoint source controls to
                  alleviate use impairments.

    Emphasis     Data acquisition.
    Program
    Elements
    Assistance/
    Service

    Funding
    Sources

    Staff

    Interactions
1. Ambient monitoring program: Nine lakes are monitored for
   eutrophication trends and  potential acid precipitation im-
   pacts.
2. Lake classification survey: The survey was completed in 1983
   using Federal Clean Lakes Program funds. This information
   is used to make decisions on new point source discharges in
   lake watersheds.
3. Citizens  participation program  (Water Watch): Designed to
   actively  educate the public  about  water quality problems.
   One element ("adopt a lake" program) allows local groups to
   learn about their lakes and watersheds.

Staff assistance in educating volunteer groups on lake sampling
and limnology; advise on private lake management problems.

Mainly Federal (Section 205j) funds.
2 part-time employees (aquatic biologists).

Public: Local volunteer groups through the monitoring/educa-
tion program. Response to inquires on lake problems.
Private: Consulting firms, developers.
Governmental:  Federal - Army Corps of Engineers, Soil Con-
servation Service.
Interstate: Tennessee Valley Authority.
State: Department of Fish and Wildlife Resources.
Local: City officials.
E-12

-------
                              LOUISIANA
                   Department of Environmental Quality
                         Office of Water Resources
                        Natural Resources Building
                              P.O. Box 44091
                       Baton Rouge, Louisiana 70804

 Purpose      Responsible for protecting and preserving the quality of all sur-
               face waters in the State. Lake water quality problems are hand-
               led within the framework of the  whole program; there is no
               separate lake program.

 Emphasis     This water  quality  management and  planning  program  is
               designed to be flexible so that a variety of activities can be used
               to deal with whatever problems arise. Grant aid has been used
               for both general and specific lake  investigations.

 Program      1.  Monitoring: Establishment and  implementation of monitoring
 Elements         networks.
               2.  Water quality data assessment: On a case-by-case basis for
                  any waterbody.
               3.  Wastewater discharge permits: Development,  issuance, and
                  enforcement of permits for discharges to any water body.
               4.  Lake classification: An inventory of lakes and their trophic in-
                  dices  was completed using Federal Clean Lakes Program
                  funds.

               Technical expertise and databases available. Field staff respond
               to  water quality complaints and fishkills.

               Combination  of Federal  grants and self-generated fund from
               permit fees and fines.

               About 100 members for all water quality issues.

               Public: Attend public meetings on water quality issues.
               Private: With consultants and private industry regarding the per-
               mitting process.
               Governmental: Regulatory agreement with  Louisiana  Depart-
               ment of Wildlife and Fisheries.

Other Lake-    Louisiana Department of Agriculture: Nonpoint  sources; Soil
Related        and  Water Conservation  Commission:  Nonpoint sources;
Programs      Department of Transportation: Water sources and quantity-
               Department of Health: Water quality (coliforms); Department of
               Wildlife and Fisheries: Fish  resources; Soil and  Conservation
               Service: Nonpoint sources,  irrigation; U.S. Geological Survey:
               Flow and hydrology
Assistance/
Services

Funding
Sources

Staff

Interactions
                                                                        E-13

-------
                                     MAINE
    Purpose
    Program
    Elements
    Assistance/
    Services

    Funding
    Sources

    Staff

    Interactions
  Department of Environmental Protection
              State House #17
           Augusta, Maine 04333

To direct long-term planning, protect lake water quality, and in-
form and educate the public so as to maintain or improve the
present water quality of Maine's 5000 lakes and ponds.

1. Vulnerable Lake Identification: Determining which lakes need
   protection or restoration using vulnerability indices, value in-
   dices, lake benthic indices,  volunteer monitoring programs,
   critical area program, and LURC wildlands lake assessment.
2. Priority List: Included on the list are lakes (a) with declining
   water  quality, (b) sensitive  for phosphorus loading, (c)  in
   critical  areas, and  (d) with  cultural stress  but stable water
   quality.
3. Protection Plans: Plans are formulated taking into account
   water quality data from volunteer monitoring and diagnostic
   studies, land use trends, lake associations (lobby), town offi-
   cials,  local   ordinances,   soils  information,  subdivision
   reviews, and conservation easements.
4. Best Management  Practices: Encouragement in the use  of
   BMPs at the State level through site and subdivision review,
   the Great Ponds Act, and the Wetlands Act. DEP assistance
   is  provided for  municipalities on development  review, or-
   dinances and zoning, watershed districts, and town enforce-
   ment roles.
5. Development of a  broad  base of support through general
   public and school education programs.
6. Lake  Restoration:Problem  lakes which deviate from the
   natural State  are marked for efforts to  control cultural ac-
   tivities.
7. Nonpoint Source  Reduction: Efforts are aimed at agriculture,
   forestry, and transportation.
8. Other  issues being  studied  include: conflicting  policies,
   cumulative impact guidelines, scenic values, open space for
   lakes, conflicting  uses, and aquatic plant issues.

Technical guidance to municipalities and lake associations.
State funds.


Not listed.

Not listed.
E-14

-------
                        MASSACHUSETTS
            Department of Environmental Quality Engineering
                    Division of Water Pollution Control
                    Lyman School, Westview Building
                   Westborough, Massachusetts 01581

Purpose      To restore, preserve, and maintain publicly owned  lakes and
              ponds for recreation and enjoyment.

Emphasis     The program focuses on  providing monetary and technical as-
              sistance to communities for lake  restoration and  on water
              quality data acquisition.

Program      1. State Clean Lakes  Program: Administration of a matching
Elements        grant aid program to provide funds for diagnostic/feasibility
                 studies,  long-term  restoration/preservation  projects,  and
                 short-term inlake maintenance projects.
              2. Federal  Clean Lakes Program: Administration  of Federally
                 funded CLP implementation projects.
              3. Water quality monitoring: Limnological sampling to obtain
                 lake water quality data a) to determine baseline lake condi-
                 tions, b) to monitor post-implementation project changes,
                 and c) to respond to public concerns about lake problems.
              4. Aquatic Nuisance Control Program: Administration of legisla-
                 tively funded, short-term  algal  or  aquatic  weed control
                 projects.

Assistance/   Staff is funded by a combination of State and Federal money.
Services      Matching grants are provided from  State funds only or a com-
              bination of State and Federal funds. Aquatic nuisance control is
              provided with State funds.

Staff         10 (backgrounds in aquatic biology, sanitary biology, fisheries
              biology, and geology).

Interactions   Public: Extensive response to public requests for grants, sur-
              veys and information.
              Private:  Dealings with consultants and contractors working on
              studies and implementation projects.
              Governmental: Federal - Clean Lakes Program grants.
              State: Cooperation with  other  DEQE agencies, Division of
              Fisheries & Wildlife, and Dept. of Environmental Management.
              Local: Grant contracts with communities.

Other Lake-    Division of Fisheries & Wildlife:  Manages fisheries  resources;
Related       lake liming program; Department  of Environmental Manage-
Programs      ment: Manages lakes in  State parks; DEQE, Division of Water
               Supply: Water supply reservoirs; DEQE, Division  of Wetlands:
              Wetlands Protection Act.
                                                                         E-15

-------
                               MICHIGAN
  Purpose
  Emphasis
  Program
  Elements
   Assistance/
   Services

   Funding
   Sources

   Staff

   Interactions
     Department of Natural Resources
    Land and Water Management Division
       Inland Lake Management Unit
                Box 30028
          Lansing, Michigan 48909

The Inland Lake Management Unit serves as a focal point and
information source for lake and watershed  management ac-
tivities.

Lake management through the administration of regulatory and
public assistance programs dealing with both specific lakes and
broad lake issues.

1. Aquatic nuisance control: Provide information to the public
   on nuisance aquatic macrophyte and algae control and on
   swimmer's itch  control (including  oversight  of  a research
   grant  on swimmer's itch control). Responsible  for issuing
   permits for herbicide use in surface waters.
2. Lake Improvement Boards:  Serve as Department of Natural
   Resources representatives on Lake Boards formed to under-
   take lake restoration/management projects.  Boards have
   authority to tax riparian owners to fund projects. Currently
   there are 60 active boards.
3. Federal Clean Lakes Program: Classification of all lakes over
   50 acres was completed in  1982. CLP grants have been ad-
   ministered for two demonstration projects,  four Phase I
   studies, and two Phase II projects.
4. Inland Lake Self-help  Monitoring  Program:  Established  in
   1974, the program involves volunteers in measuring Secchi
   disc  transparency. Until  1982   chlorophyll-a   was  also
   measured.
5. Technical reviews: Staff are called on to review (a) NPDES
   permit effluent limits for phosphorus discharges to lakes or
   within 20 miles  upstream of lakes, (b) recommendations  on
   the establishment of legal lake levels, and (c) dredge and fill
   permits which might impact lake water quality.
 6. Nonpoint source management: The  ILMU  provided  input
   (with  the Surface Water Quality Division) to a recently estab-
   lished State NPS control incentives grant program.

 Public information bulletins and assistance, Self-help Monitor-
 ing Program, technical assistance to other agencies.

 Combined Federal (50%) and State (50%).
 4 (backgrounds in limnology).

 Public: Extensive inquires for information from public; work with
 Self-help Program volunteers and Lake Boards.
 Private: Deal with consultants on Lake Board feasibility studies.
E-16

-------
              Governmental: Federal - EPA Clean Lakes Program.
              State:  Coordinate with Dept. of Agriculture, Surface Water
              Quality Div.  (DNR),  Engineering-Water  Management  Div.
              (DNR), Fisheries Div. (DNR), and other Div. of Land Resource
              Programs units (DNR).

Other Lake-   Michigan Department of Agriculture: licensing of herbicides and
Relate        herbicide applicators; DNR,  Surface  Water Quality Division:
Programs     NPDES permits &  NPS  control;  DNR,  Engineering-Water
              Management Division:  Lake  level  control; DNR,  Fisheries
              Division: Fisheries management; DNR,  Division of Land Resour-
              ces: Dredge and fill permits.
                                                                        E-17

-------
                               MINNESOTA
   Purpose


   Emphasis
   Program
   Elements
   Assistance/
   Services
   Funding
   Sources

   Staff
   Interactions
    Minnesota Pollution Control Agency
        1935 West County Road/B-2
         Roseville, Minnesota 55113

To preserve and protect Minnesota's lakes and to increase and
enhance their public use and enjoyment.

The  Minnesota Pollution  Control  Agency  (MPCA)  stresses
protection  and management  through the use of grants on
specific lakes.

1. Minnesota  Clean Lakes Program: Since 1977 the MPCA has
   administered and supplemented the Federal Clean Lakes
   Program. Because the MPCA feels that local leadership, con-
   trol and coordination play a key role in a project's success,
   most projects are initiated  at the local level and  the local
   project is responsible for implementing the project and meet-
   ing the grant objectives. The MPCA evaluates and prioritizes
   grant proposals before submitting them  to the  USEPA,
   Region V office. To date, 48 lakes have been involved in the
   program.
2. Lake classification: About 1200 of Minnesota's approximately
   15,000 lakes have been classified.
3. Routine  monitoring: Thirty-five (35)  lakes are monitored  an-
   nually  for  acid  deposition effects and   about  100  are
   monitored  for water quality.
4. Citizen Lakes Monitoring Program: About 285 Lakes are en-
   rolled in this program. The MPCA has   initiated a pilot
   program to assist lake associations  in the collection and in-
   terpretation of water quality data. Five association are cur-
   rently enrolled.
5. Public education: MCPA staff routinely speak to interested
   public groups about lake protection. The handbook "Citizens
   Guide to Lake Protection" was drafted in conjunction with the
   Gray Freshwater Biological  Institute and is available for dis-
   tribution. The report "Trophic  Status of Minnesota Lakes"
   provides water quality data on over 1,000 lakes.

Grants and grant administrative assistance are available on re-
quest. Technical expertise  and educational materials  are avail-
able to  respond to public requests and complaints. Citizen
Lakes monitoring Program  is available.

Federal  for staff and grants. State for grants.


One position to administer the  Clean Lakes Program.
Public: Extensive interaction with lake associations and other
public groups.
Private:  Consultants dealing with Clean Lakes Program.
Governmental: Federal - USEPA, USDA SCS.
State: DNR, Soil & Water Conservation Board.
Local: Municipalities, etc. managing grants.
Academic: U. Minnesota Limnological Research Center, Gray
Freshwater Institute.
E-18

-------
               MISSOURI
     Department of Natural Resources
      Division of Environmental Quality
      Water Pollution Control Program
               P.O. Box 176
       Jefferson City, Missouri 65102

To project the beneficial uses  listed in the State water quality
standards.

The program  acts as a clearinghouse for lake monitoring and
management activities.

Limited review of monitoring and lake management activities of
publicly owned lakes (50 acres).

There are no  Federal or State funds specifically available for
lakes.

One limnologist/aquatic  biologist available.

Missouri Lakes Association: Gregory W. Knauer (314/421-1476)
Purpose
Emphasis
Program
Elements

Funding
Sources

Staff

Other Lake-
Related
Programs
                                                         E-19

-------
                                MONTANA
                 Montana Department of Fish, Wildlife & Parks
                            1420 East Sixth Avenue
                            Helena, Montana 59620

   Purpose       Management of both coldwater and warmwater fisheries.

   Program       1.  Routine stocking: Trout and salmon are stocked in coldwater
   Elements        lakes. Walleye,  northern  pike,  and largemouth bass are
                    stocked in cool/warm-water lakes.
                  2.  Reproducing populations: Considerable effort is being given
                    to establish reproducing sport fish populations in lakes and
                    reservoirs of all types; from high mountain lakes to lowland
                    lakes and from ranch ponds to large ( 200,000 acre) reser-
                    voirs.
   Assistance/
   Services

   Funding
   Sources

   Staff

   Interactions
              None listed.
              None listed.
              None listed.

              Public: None listed.
              Private: None listed.
              Government:  Federal —  Army Corps of Engineers, Bureau of
              Reclamation.
              State: Department of Natural Resources.

Contacts      Administrator, Fisheries Division (above address).
              George Holton, Asst. Administrator, Fisheries Division (address
              above).
E-20

-------
                            NEW HAMPSHIRE
  Emphasis
  Program
  Elements
             Water Supply and Pollution Central Commission
                             Biology Division
                        6 Hazen Drive, P.O. Box 95
                   Concord, New Hampshire 03301-6528

Purpose       To ensure that lakes and ponds with waters superior to estab-
               lished standards be maintained at their existing high quality and
               to restore those eutrophied lakes which are restorable (technol-
               ogy and funding being considered).

               Programs  primarily  focus on research/monitoring  of both
               specific lake projects and broad topics (acid rain impacts).

               1. Lake surveys: Sampling of 40-50 different lakes and ponds,
                 winter and summer, to provide baseline, long-term trend,
                 and water quality compliance information.
              2. Acid rain studies: Sampling of 20 accessible lake outlets and
                 about 30 inaccessible  ponds  (by helicopter) for acid rain
                 parameters to provide short and long-term trend information
                 on acid rain effects. Precipitation events are analyzed for pH.
              3. Special studies: Intensive lake  studies are being conducted
                 on specific lake problems including (a)  algal suppression
                 using aluminum sulfate (Kezar L);  (b) effects of wetlands
                 manipulation on nutrient removal (Kezar L.);  (c) diagnos-
                tic/feasibility studies (French and Kezar Ponds), and (d) ef-
                fects of causeway construction across Moore Reservoir.
              4. Aquatic nuisances: Investigations are made on  all  citizen
                complaints  of  aquatic  nuisances and fishkills;  corrective
                measures are recommended. If warranted, algaecide-copper
                sulfate can be applied to control algal blooms. The Division
                also administers the Exotic Weed Control Program which
                provides educational materials,  eradication of small, new in-
                festations, and matching grants to manage existing infesta-
                tions.

             5. Public education/assistance:  Division personnel provide
                educational addresses,  lake data and acid rain information,
                and advice and  assistance on  developing lake monitoring
                programs to interested individuals and groups.

             Public education through presentations and written information-
             aquatic nuisance control services and grant funds.

             Staff is mostly State funded. Aquatic nuisance control is funded
             from licensing fees.

             5 (aquatic and fisheries biology backgrounds).
Assistance/
Services

Funding
Sources

Staff
                                                                         E-21

-------
                              NEW JERSEY
                   Department of Environmental Protection
                          Division of Water Resources
                              35 Arctic Parkway
                          Trenton, New Jersey 08638

                 The division uses a grant aid oriented approach to deal with in-
                 dividual lake programs.

                 1. State Grants Aid: Funds provided for Phase I and II type ac-
                    tivities.
                 2. Federal Clean Lakes Program: The Division acts as official
                    applicant and administrator of Federal CLP funds when avail-
                    able.
                 3. Herbicide application: Administration of State funds for an-
                    nual herbicide applications to State  owned  lakes (about
                    $50,000/yr; about 12 lakes/yr).

                 Grant aid for studies,  restoration, and herbiciding.
Emphasis
Program
Elements
Assistance/
Services

Funding
Services

Staff

Other Lake-
Related
Programs
                  Federal CLP (when available) and State budget appropriations
                  for specific lakes.

                  One person with experience in lake issues.

                  New Jersey Division of Coastal Resources.
E-22

-------
                              NEW YORK
 Emphasis
 Program
 Elements
Assistance/
Services

Funding
Sources

Staff
Other Lake-
Related
Programs
 Department of Environmental Conservation
   Bureau of Technical Services and Research
                50 Wolf Road
           Albany, New York 12233

 The program uses a wide variety of methods to address both
 project specific and Statewide  issues (such as acid precipita-
 tion impacts).

 1.  Financial assistance: State  appropriations (about $1.5 mil-
    lion) and Federal funds ($100,000) are primarily used on lake
    restoration measures such as dredging and harvesting with
    lesser amounts spent on watershed work, monitoring, and
    research.
 2. Citizens Statewide Lake Assessment Program: The DEC con-
    ducts this  monitoring program using  volunteers to aid
    general Statewide efforts.
 3.  Restoration projects: The program  conducts and monitors
    restoration projects.
 4. Fish hatcheries: The DEC operates hatcheries and conducts
    a fish stocking program.
 5. Public accesses: The Department strives  to improve public
    access through land acquisition for new sites and develop-
    ment of existing facilities  (fish piers, boat ramps, etc.)
 6.  Statewide  surveys: Surveys  conducted  to monitor  acid
   precipitation impacts and general lake water quality.

 Financial and technical assistance.
Federal and State.
6 people in the Central Office (Albany) with backgrounds in en-
vironmental  engineering or aquatic biology. Most  of  the  9
regional offices have a designated Regional Lake Manager.

Local and county Health Departments; County  governments:
May conduct restoration or water quality monitoring programs;
Federation of Lake Associations: Public information and citizen
monitoring  programs  (273 Hollywood Ave., Rochester  NY
14618).
                                                                       E-23

-------
                         NORTH CAROLINA
       Department of Natural Resources and Community Development
                   Division of Environmental Management
                   512 N. Salisbury Street, P.O. Box 27687
                       Raleigh, North Carolina 27611

     Because lake management in  North  Carolina involves  a number of
     programs in various agencies, universities, and companies, the following
     summary focuses on efforts by the  Division of Environmental Manage-
     ment but includes other programs.
  Program
  Elements
   Assistance/
   Services
1.  Lake classification: Surveying and  classification of lakes
   based on multivariate analysis began in 1981 using Federal
   Clean Lakes Program funds. After Federal funds ran out an
   ambient monitoring program began and lake trophic indices
   were developed. Algal Growth Potential tests done by the
   EPA's Ecological  Support  Branch  (Athens,  GA aided in
   classifying lakes and determining limiting nutrients.
2.  Project monitoring: Major sampling  efforts are ongoing on
   two U.S. Army Corps of Engineer's  reservoirs in central
   North Carolina (Falls of the  Neuse and Jordan Lake) to
   evaluate their trophic States and their suitability as raw water
   supplies. The  U.S.G.S.,  Army Corps, and universities also
   have programs on these reservoirs.
3.  Aquatic Weeds Program: This program involves the  iden-
   tification of aquatic plant problems and the initiation of cor-
   rective measures. Hydrilla infestation is a major concern.
4.  Lake assessment modelling: Efforts have focused on nutrient
   loading from  coal fired power plants, and  allocation of
   oxygen demanding  substances to  and  above lakes and
   reservoirs.
5.  Watershed controls:  An  aggressive State/regional/local
   program has  been developed to control  runoff from new
   residential and urban  development.  Agriculture  pollution
   reduction efforts  center on a cost share program to imple-
   ment BMPs.  A water  supply  protection program (under
   NCDEM) exists to provide protection from point and  non-
   point sources. The program  involves  local development of
   NPS controls and State limitations on the permitting of point
   sources.
 6. Public participation: Although no program currently  exists
   targeting lake management, the Stream Watch  Program
    (coordinated  by  the Division of Water Resources) involves
    some groups with lake  management interests. The program
    provides a network of public education and participation in
    environmental programs for groups such as schools, com-
    munity and fish  clubs, Sierra and  Audubon chapters, and
    river basin associations.

 Technical assistance, educational materials.
E-24

-------
Funding
Sources

Staff
                Federal EPA and State legislature.


                80-90 people  in the NCDEM participate in some way in lake
                management,  but  no one person  deals  strictly  with  lake
                management.
                         NORTH DAKOTA
                         Department of Health
                Division of Water Supply & Pollution Control
                     1200 Missouri Avenue, Box 5520
                   Bismark, North Dakota 58502-5520

              The  Department of Health administers  a Lake  Restoration
              Program to provide matching funds for  lake protection and
              rehabilitation projects.

              The program  deals  with projects on natural  and man-made
              lakes with public recreational facilities.

              Under the Lake Restoration Program grants are provided for
              projects designed to reduce lake eutrophication through water-
              shed and/or inlake treatments. Eligible project costs include:
              construction; construction supervision; administration;  equip-
              ment and materials; and preparation of construction drawings,
              specifications, estimates, & contracts.

              State grants of up to 25% of eligible project costs may be made
              when Federal funds are available.

              Currently the program has $150,000 available for 2 years.
 Purpose
 Emphasis
 Program
 Elements
Assistance/
Services

Funding
Sources

Staff
             Part time, as needed.
                                                                      E-25

-------
 Emphasis
 Program
 Elements
  Funding
  Sources

  Staff
	OHIO	.	1

       Environmental Protection Agency
 Division of Water Quality Monitoring & Assessment
             Northeast District Office
             2110 East Aurora Road
             Twinsburg, Ohio 44087

   Efforts  primarily  deal  with water  quality  assessment and
   prioritization. There  is  no defined State lake  management
   program.

   1. Lake monitoring/classification: From 1975-80  a cooperative
     lake monitoring  program with  the  U.S. Geological Survey
     sampled 85 public lakes. Ohio EPA sampled  26  more from
     1980-81 as part of a USEPA classification grant. All of these
     lakes were prioritized for restoration/protection and for pos-
     sible USEPA Clean Lakes Program funding.
   2. Federal Clean Lakes Program: Phase I grant on Summit L
   3. Ohio Lake Questionnaire: Developed  in 1986  to provide the
      USEPA Clean  Lakes Program with  additional information
      about priority lakes.
   4. State Lakes Policy: Adopted to establish effluent limitations
      for point source dischargers to public lakes and reservoirs.
   5. Chemical control: Use of chemicals  for  controlling aquatic
      plants or animals requires prior approval of the Ohio EPA.
   6. Nonpoint source problems: Cooperative efforts with the Ohio
      DNR,  county Soil & Water Conservation Districts, and Soil
      Conservation Service address  using lakes as public drinking
      water supplies.

    Not listed.
    Not listed.
                      Department of Natural Resources
                               Fountain Square
                            Columbus, Ohio 43224

      Authorities for the many water management activities relevant to lake
      management are spread among several  divisions of the ODNR. Each
      division is directed toward  carrying out individual management respon-
      sibilities, particularly involving State-owned lakes. There is no coordinated
      lake program. Information on a few of the divisions is summarized below.
                     Division of Soil & Water Conservation

   Emphasis      Programs  focus on technical  assistance/education  and on
                  watershed management activities for both special lake projects
                  and for  problems that potentially affect all surface impound-
                  ments.
E-26

-------
  Program
  Elements
  Funding
  Sources

  Staff
  1. Land Inventory & Classification: Wayne Channel!  (614/265-
    6678)

  2. Remote Sensing: Gary Schoal (614/256-6769)
  3. Soil & Water Conservation District Assistance: Paul Hoskins
    (614/265-6616)

  4. Agricultural Pollution Abatement and Urban Sediment Con-
    trol: Jerry Wager (614/265-6619)

  State general  revenues  (90%),   income from  soil  surveys,
  remote sensing, stc. (7%), Federal grants (3%).

  57 (varied backgrounds including soils,  agricultural engineer-
  ing, agronomy, planning, etc.)
 Emphasis
 Program
 Elements
 Emphasis
 Program
 Elements
Assistance/
Services

Funding
Sources

Staff

Other Lake-
Related
Programs
              Division of Water

 Activities center on public water supply and flood control is-
 sues. There is no defined lake management program.

 1. Dam safety: Oversees the construction of dam and lakes and
    inspects them periodically after completion for public safety.
 2. Water resources development: Lake  management as it re-
    lates to public water supply, whether from surface impound-
    ments, streams, or underground aquifers.
 3. Flood  control: Coordination of activities with  Federal agen-
   cies to construct flood control lakes. Other activities are
   aimed at reducing flood damages.

             Division of Wildlife

 Programs are designed on a species management basis but the
 methods often benefit lakes.

 1.  Resource management: Methods used  include: harvest
   regulations, stocking fish, aquatic vegetation control, dredg-
   ing, water level manipulation,  lake renovation, fish species
   rehabilitation, fertilization, and environmental assessment.
 2. Resource utilization: Development of angler access/facilities
   (parking, ramps, docks, piers,  etc.) and public communica-
   tion about fishing opportunities.
 3. Public communication: Advise the public using public meet-
   ings, correspondence, publications, news media, and per-
   sonal contact.

 Technical and educational  assistance to support  angler ac-
 tivities.

 Primarily funded from the sale of State fishing licenses; some
 Federal aid funds (Dingell-Johnson).

About 100 (backgrounds mainly in fisheries science).

ODNR, Division of Parks and Recreation; ODNR,  Division of
Watercraft; Ohio  Lake  Management  Society,  Elizabeth L
Buchanan (216/673-8272)
                                                                        E-27

-------
                               OREGON
  Emphasis
  Program
  Elements
  Assistance/
  Services
  Funding
  Sources

  Staff
   Department of Environmental Quality
            Executive Building
           811 SW Sixth Avenue
          Portland, Oregon 97204

The State's program  is fairly small and tailored towards the
Federal Clean Lakes Program. Projects are aimed at problems
in specific lakes.

Specific projects are managed according to the Federal Clean
Lakes Program guidelines. They seek solutions  for long-term
control of weeds, nutrient inputs, and improving flow and water-
shed management.
Currently there are two projects. Devils Lake in Lincoln City has
a nuisance aquatic weed problem and Sturgeon  Lake in N.
Portland has an excessive sedimentation problem.

Coordination  and  management  of  Federal   Clean  Lakes
Program grants; sampling and technical guidance to local com-
munities.

Primarily Federal Clean Lakes Program funds.
 1 part-time (limnology/environmental assessment background).
E-28

-------
           PENNSYLVANIA
  Department of Environmental Resources
    Bureau of Water Quality Management
              P.O. Box 2063
       Harrisburg, Pennsylvania 17120

To provide for a consistent and effective Statewide approach to
controlling nutrients (phosphorus) to impounded waters so as
to maintain an acceptable trophic level which will not adversely
impact on designated water uses.

The program focuses on regulatory issues as they affect in-
dividual priority lakes. Some technical  input  and funding  are
provided for broader issues  (nonpoint source control and acid
deposition).

1. Regulation of phosphorus discharges to lakes, ponds, and
   impoundments:  The  regulations  provide  a  systematic
   method for protecting lakes and impoundments that are  un-
   dergoing eutrophication. It relies on empirical lake models to
   estimate phosphorus loadings  and  to  determine the  ap-
   propriate  level of protection or water quality improvement,
   considering both point and nonpoint sources.
2. Data acquisition: Conduct lake surveys to obtain data which
   support the imposition of phosphorus controls on  waste-
  water discharges.
3. Federal Clean Lakes Program: Coordinate the CLP with inter-
   ested and qualified lake watershed management districts or
   organizations within the State.

Technical guidance on request
Purpose
Emphasis
Program
Elements
Assistance/
Services

Funding
Source

Staff

Other Lake-
Related
Programs
Combination of Federal and State.
8 (backgrounds in water pollution biology/ecology).

DER, Bureau of State Parks: Lake treatment program for State
park lakes.
                                                         E-29

-------
                         SOUTH CAROLINA
             Department of Health and Environmental Control
                     Bureau of Water Pollution Control
                             2600 Bull Street
                      Columbia, South Carolina 29201

    The Department (SCDHEC) has no particular agency or staff responsible
    solely for lake management. Issues relating to lake quality and manage-
    ment are dealt with as part of program areas which have a larger overall
    function.
  Program
  Elements
   Other Lake-
   Related
   Programs
1. Water quality sampling: Extensive sampling is conducted on
  the major lakes and special intensive surveys are conducted
  to evaluate specific water bodies.
2. Classification: All of the State's lakes are actually reservoirs
  created for electrical power. They are classified for primary
  recreation  (highest  freshwater  category  excluding  trout
  habitat) and management strategies are developed based on
  that classification.
3. Other elements involve wastewater discharge permits, water
   quality standards, and general water quality  management
   strategies.
4. Reservoir management: Management of the major reservoirs
   is by the organization which holds the license for its opera-
   tion.
      a. Duke Power Co. (P.O. Box 33189, Charlotte, NC 28242)
   L Socasse, L.  Keowee, L. Wylie, L Greenwood, L Wateree,
   L. Robinson.
      b. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (P.O.  Box 899, Savan-
   nah, GA 31402) Hartwell R., Clark Hill R.
      c. S.C. Electric & Gas (Palmetto Center, 1420 Main St.,
   Columbia, CS 29201) L. Murray, Montecello R.
      d. Public Service Authority (P.O. Box 398, Moncks Corner,
   SC 29461) L Marion, L Moultrie.

 Dept of Wildlife  & Marine Resources: Manages  lake fisheries;
 Water Resources Commission: Manages resource quantity.
E-30

-------
 	TENNESSEE	

                 Department of Health and Environment
                    Division of Water Pollution Control
                           1605 Prosser Road
                    Knoxville, Tennessee 37914-3434

 Emphasis      The program is primarily focused at regulatory issues of water
               quality management including numerous TVA impoundments
               (i.e., Statewide scope). Research efforts are toward program
               support and enforcement.

 Program       1. Water quality regulation.
 Elements      2. Implementation  and enforcement of the Tennessee Water
                 Quality Control Act.
               3. NPDES primacy for State and Federal facilities and coal min-
                 ing.
               4. Certifying agency for the  404 process.
               5. Permitting: Wetlands, non-coal mining, and habitat alteration.

Assistance/    Technical cooperation with other agencies.
Services
Funding
Sources

Staff
Mainly Federal with some State appropriations.
About 130 (backgrounds in engineering, biology, geology, and
water quality).
                                                                     E-31

-------
 I                                UTAH    	1

                    Department of Natural Resources
                       Division of Wildlife Resources
                         1596 West North Temple
                        Salt Lake City, Utah 84116

 Emphasis     The program focuses on solving individual lake problems, but
               some work is done on problems of a broader scope (acid
               deposition). Some research is also done.

 Program       1. Fisheries management: Aspects of this program deal with:
 Elements        predator-prey relations; exploitation; trout strain evaluations;
                  recovery of  native trout  populations; recovery or develop-
                  ment of black bass  populations; studies to determine trout
                  stocking  rates,  times,  and sizes;  chemical  renovation;
                  population monitoring; and development of management
                  plans.
                2. Acid deposition: Management of 650 soft water lakes in the
                   High Uintas region which could be affected by acid deposi-
                   tion.
                3. Trout research: Limited study of sterile and hybrid trout.

  Funding       Mainly funded  from fishing  license sales and Federal aid (Wai-
  Sources       lup-Breaux).

  Staff          About 27 full-time in fisheries management (backgrounds  in
                fisheries science). Most spend 2% of their time on lake manage-
                ment.

  Other Lake-   Utah Department  of  Health: Richard  Denton;  Bureau  of
  Related       Reclamation:  Jerry Miller;  Utah  State Cooperative Fisheries
  Programs     Unit: Tim Modde; Utah State University: Wayne Wurtsbaugh
E-32

-------
                             VERMONT
      Department of Water Resources & Environmental Engineering
                          Water Quality Division
                          103 South Main Street
                       Waterbury, Vermont 05676

Purpose      The Lakes and Ponds Program is responsible for planning and
              managing in the best public interest all activities dealing with
              Vermont's lakes.

Emphasis     The primary objective  is to assure the maximum sensible
              recreational potential of lakes  through sound  water  quality
              management practices.

Program      1. Monitoring and surveillance: The Department keeps abreast
Elements        of existing lake water quality conditions and detects changes
                 in lake quality conditions through the following four data col-
                 lection programs.
                    a. Spring Phosphorus Program: Sampling once a year in
                 the spring to monitor a large number of lakes for trends in
                 total phosphorus which  may indicate  impending  water
                 quality problems.
                    b. Acid Deposition Program: This program collects chemi-
                 cal  and  biological data on lakes located in low alkalinity
                 (acid-sensitive) regions of the State to determine the effects
                 of acid deposition.
                    c. Lay monitoring  Program:  Equipment and training are
                 provided under this program so that local residents may col-
                 lect lake water quality data during the summer. Secchi disk
                 transparency, chlorophyll-a and total phosphorus (on Lake
                 Champlain only 4) data obtained from these collections allow
                 the Department to follow trends in the water quality of Ver-
                 mont lakes.
                    d. Summer Lakes  Program:  Basic water quality informa-
                 tion  (shoreline  bacterial  samples,  dissolved  oxygen and
                 temperature profiles,  and  Secchi  disk transparency)  is col-
                 lected monthly on 25-30 lakes during the summer. Detailed
                 aquatic plant surveys are conducted on a limited number of
                 lakes.
              2. Studies: For various reasons a specific lake may be chosen
                 for detailed water quality study.  Lake studies may involve
                 long-term extensive data collection or limited data collection
                 and sophisticated lake modelling techniques. Studies have
                 been funded through the Federal Clean  Lakes Program
                 and/or State funds.
              3. Management/restoration activities: Lakes with water quality
                 problems may undergo either maintenance activities or res-
                 toration  activities.   Maintenance  activities   are  control
                 measures to manage aquatic nuisances on a yearly  basis.
                 Restoration activities are aimed at eliminating causes to lake
                 problems in order to achieve long-term  benefits.  Main-
                 tenance  efforts  currently  underway include  the  Lake
                 Champlain Aquatic Nuisance Control Program (harvesting of
                                                                         E-33

-------
   Assistance/
   Services

   Funding
   Sources
   Staff
   water chestnut and  Eurasian  milfoil)  and the  Aquatic
   Nuisance Control Program (nuisance control in other lakes).
   Restoration projects have been dealt with through the CLP
   (both studies and implementation) and the U.S. Soil Conser-
   vation Service (agricultural best management practices).
4.  Lake  Protection Program:  Lake  protection is  promoted
   through  (a) monitoring and surveillance  (described above),
   (b) educational activities (a slide show has been completed;
   brochures and  short  workshops are  planned), and (c)
   regulation.
   The Management of Lakes and Ponds Statute (permitting of
   encroachment into waters), the Phosphate Detergent Ban,
   the Water Quality Standards, and the Land Use Control Law
   provide regulatory protection mechanisms.

Technical and educational assistance; grant aid for restoration
and maintenance projects.

Federal funds are provided for grants through  the EPA (Clean
Lakes Program) and Army Corps of Engineers (Lake Champlain
Aquatic Nuisance Control). The State legislature provides other
funds.

4 full-time (backgrounds in limnology, biology/botany, and en-
vironmental education), 2 part-time (statistics and administra-
tion), and 5 seasonal.
E-34

-------
                               VIRGINIA
 Emphasis
 Program
 Elements
            Water Control Board
     2111 Hamilton Street, P.O. Box 11143
        Richmond, Virginia 23230-1143

 The Program centers on  monitoring publicly owned  lakes to
 determine lake trophic States and accelerated eutrophication
 problems.

 1. Lake Monitoring Program: 15 to 20 publicly owned lakes are
   tested each year for general water quality  parameters. Data
   are used to update trophic status information which was
   originally obtained under an EPA Clean Lakes Program clas-
   sification grant.

 2. Federal Clean  Lakes Program: Three lakes (L Accotink, L.
   Chesdin, and Rivanna R.) and receiving Phase II funding.
 3. Lay monitoring: The VWCB assists volunteer sampling efforts
   by identifying algal samples.

 Technical assistance on sampling methods and algal identifica-
 tion; educational materials.

 Primarily Federal (106) with minor State appropriations.
Assistance/
Services

Funding
Sources

Staff
Other Lake-
Related
Programs
One person  (environmental  specialist)  oversees the  Lake
Monitoring Program which is carried out by 1-2 people in each
of 6 regional offices. They have biology, chemistry, and environ-
mental analysis backgrounds.

Occoquan Watershed Monitoring Laboratory: Water quality as-
sessment in the suburban Washington, D.C. area.
                                                                       E-35

-------
                           WASHINGTON
 Purpose
  Emphasis
          Department of Ecology
             Mail Stop PV-11
      Olympia, Washington 98504-8711

The Department's lake restoration program endeavors to re-
store to lakes those beneficial uses that have been lost or im-
paired in the recent past (i.e., 50 years).

The program is primarily grant-aid oriented toward individual
problem lakes with public access. Some amount of applied re-
search is accomplished indirectly from grant projects and some
of the developments of these projects can be applied to other
lakes with similar projects.

1. Diagnostic/Feasibility  Studies (Phase I): Develops a water
   and  nutrient budget,  identifies water quality problems and
   their causes, and recommends restoration alternatives. Cost
   estimates for the proposed Phase II project are developed
   and an environmental assessment may be prepared.
2. Implementation Projects (Phase II): Implements the findings
   and  recommendations of Phase I.

Grants  of up to 75% of total  project costs to public entities;
technical  assistance on  limnological questions, study require-
 ments,  lake associations, organizational  assistance, aquatic
 macrophyte control, etc.

 Primarily State funds matched by local resources.
  Program
  Elements
  Assistance/
  Services
  Funding
  Sources

  Staff
 1 full-time and 2 half-time people.
  Other Lake-    Washington Department of Game (600 N. Capitol Way, Olym-
  Related        pia, WA 98504).
  Programs
E-36

-------
                            WISCONSIN
Purpose
Emphasis
Program
Elements
Assistance/
Services
Funding
Sources

Staff
Other Lake-
Related
Programs
     Department of Natural Resources
               P.O. Box 7921
       Madison, Wisconsin 53707-7921

To protect and maintain Wisconsin's lake resources for our own
and future generations; to help carry out measures that protect
and maintain lakes; and to strive for active coordination be-
tween the many government programs and personnel that work
on lakes.

The  program  guides  local  lake management organizations
across the State in planning and carrying out a variety of lake
protection measures including soil and water conservation, lake
user education and advocacy for local protective regulations.

1. Outreach and technical assistance: Day-to-day guidance to
   lake property owners on how to identify needs, find and in-
   terpret lake/watershed information,  and evaluate manage-
   ment alternatives. Each year local actions are  promoted on
   "key lakes" that need special protection.
2. Self-help monitoring: Volunteers are trained to measure water
   clarity and lake levels. Each  year the volunteers receive an
   interpretation of their lake data and a Statewide summary
   report. Their data provide the DNR with long term data on a
   larger number of lakes than it could survey.
3. Education activities:  In conjunction with the University of Wis-
   consin-Extension the DNR provides water quality informa-
   tion to help  lake property owners.  Assistance is available
   through conventions, workshops, field days,  and publica-
   tions (such as: "The Lake in Your Community;" "Lake Tides,"
   a newsletter; and "A Guide to Lake Management Law.")
4. Trend  monitoring: Fifty (50) representative lakes across the
   State are  monitored for physical, chemical, biological, and
   watershed changes. Analyses of these data are used as an
   evaluation tool to compare lakes Statewide and to provide
   policy directions.
5. Research and demonstration projects: The intent of this ele-
   ment is to develop, test, and demonstrate  lake protection
   and management techniques which can be used by local or-
   ganizations.

Technical guidance for public requests on lake problems. Train-
ing in water quality monitoring for the self-help program. Educa-
tional materials.

State.
10 (6 lake management coordinators in 6 DNR district offices; 4
staff members in the Central Office with expertise in organiza-
tion/planning, engineering, limnology, and hydrogeology).

None listed.
                                                                         E-37

-------
                              WYOMING
                    Department of Environmental Quality
                           Water Quality Division
                       Herschler Building/4th Floor W.
                         Cheyenne, Wyoming 82002

      Due to the lack of Federal Clean Lakes Program funds for new projects
      Wyoming's lake program is currently inactive. There are, however, several
      problem lakes which need attention.
   Canadian  Provinces
                               ALBERTA
                    Alberta Forestry, Lands and Wildlife
                           Fish & Wildlife Division
                        North Tower, Petroleum Plaza
                             9945-108 Street
                         Edmonton, Alberta T5K 2G6

   Purpose       The program is oriented toward the management and produc-
                 tion of fish populations in individual lakes.

   Program       1. Lake habitat inventories: Surveys provide data on basic mor-
   Elements        phometry, water chemistry and existing fish populations to
                   determine fish populations using regulations and fish stock-
                   ing programs.
                 2. Management of fish populations using regulations and fish
                   stocking programs.

   Assistance/    Providing information on  lake  characteristics,  critical  fish
   Services       habitats, fish populations, fish production and fisheries utiliza-
                 tion to anglers, consultants and government agencies.

   Funding       Funds are mainly from the provincial government. Part of Angler
   Sources       License fees go to a habitat development program.

   Staff          26 people (mainly fisheries background; some  with wildlife
                 management experience).

   Other Lake-    Alberta  Environment: Water resources  management, water
   Related       quality  control,  environmental impact assessment;  Alberta
   Programs     Forestry, Lands and Wildlife-Land Division: Shorelands and ac-
                 cess; Forestry:  Public access  and recreation facilities  (public
                 land); Wildlife: Fisheries and wildlife matters; Alberta Municipal
                 Affairs: Shoreland and access (non-public lands).
E-38

-------
                              MANITOBA
 Emphasis
      Department of Natural Resources
              Fisheries Branch
      1495 St. James Street, P.O. Box 40
        Winnipeg, Manitoba R3H OW9

 The program is  primarily management (regulation/rehabilita-
 tion) oriented; dealing with both point (industrial pollutants and
 feedlot runoff) and nonpoint source (agriculture and forest ac-
 tivities) pollution. Some small grants are provided for aeration
 assistance and experimental design of aeration techniques.

 1. Winter oxygen monitoring  and aeration.
 2. Riparian land use control

 3. Consultative role on environmental assessments of develop-
   ments causing point and nonpoint pollution.
 4. Chemical algae control.

 5. Recommendations on instream flows and lake/reservoir level
   strategies.

 6. Controlling instream  alteration  (channelization)  affecting
   sediment loading.

 Consultative services; grants  and technical assistance for aera-
 tion installations.

 Provincial.
 Program
 Elements
Assistance/
Services

Funding
Sources

Staff
Other Lake-
Related
Programs
9 fisheries biologists spend a portion (5-40%) of their time on
lake management issues.

Manitoba  Environment,  Workplace  Safety and Health (139
Tuxedo Blvd., Winnipeg, Manitoba R3N OH6).
                                                                       E-39

-------
                          NEW BRUNSWICK
  Emphasis
  Program
  Elements
  Assistance/
  Services

  Funding
  Sources

  Staff
   Other Lake-
   Related
   Programs
Department of Natural Resources & Energy
          Fish and Wildlife Branch
              P.O. BoxGOOO
    Federicton, New Brunswick E3B 5H1

The Department's lake program is management oriented; deal-
ing with broad  management problems, but characterizing lakes
as to specific species management.

1. Data acquisition and storage: Lakes with public access are
   surveyed on a priority basis. Once a lake has been surveyed,
   the data is entered into a computer database (Fish Lake) for
   storage and retrieval. Computer programs are also available
   on fish age, growth and populations, and lake productivity.
2. Management  determinations: Lake and associated stream
   data are used to determine limiting factors and lake manage-
   ment options.  Lakes  are also  characterized  into target
   species lakes (brook trout,  landlocked salmon, lake trout,
   small mouth bass, and pickerel).
3. Stocking program: Lakes are stocked based on management
   determinations.

 Public  information  on angling, size location, depths, water
 quality, and species compositions.

 Provincial general revenues are administered through the Fish
 & Wildlife Branch and 5 forest regions.

 Chief Fisheries Biologist, Hatchery Biologist, Habitat Biologist,
 Cold Water Biologist, and 5 regional fisheries biologists along
 with field support staff.

 Provincial Department  of  Municipal Affairs &  Environment;
 Federal Department of Fisheries & Oceans; Federal Department
 of Environment
E-40

-------
                         NEWFOUNDLAND
                      Department of Environment
                     Water Resources Management
                        St. Johns, Newfoundland

   The department has expertise and policies dealing with problems regard-
   ing issues as water quality and water pollution.
               No other information available at this time.
               Contact: Wasi Ullah, Director
Other Lake-
Related
Programs
Department of Fisheries & Oceans; Department of Environment
Canada
                           NOVA SCOTIA
                    Department of Fisheries Division
                             P.O. Box 700
                      Pictou, Nova Scotia BOK 1 HO

Purpose      As a result of the  1982 Federal-Provincial Agreement on Trout,
              the Division has been provided with the responsibility for aug-
              mentation and restoration of the recreational trout fishery.

Emphasis     The Management Plan focuses on management and enhance-
              ment of the recreational trout fishery so as to provide maximum
              benefit to trout anglers, present and future.

Program      1. Habitat:  In cooperation with the Nova Scotia Department of
Elements        Environment and the Federal Department of Fisheries and
                 Ocean's fish  habitats  are assessed,  monitored,  and
                 protected through (a) close cooperation and review of inter-
                 nal activities and programs with potential impacts on habitat,
                 (b)  active  survey and  assessment programs for  better
                 delineation of  usable habitat, (c) implementation of long-
                 term habitat  improvement  programs  (stream  clearing,
                 stream  stabilization  devices,  erosion/sediment  control,
                 flowage stabilization devices, etc.).
              2. Production: Hatchery production  of trout fall fingerlings and
                 yearlings has been greatly accelerated at three departmental
                 hatcheries.
              3. Research: To maximize the effectiveness of both artificial and
                 natural  productions,  research will be conducted in the fol-
                 lowing areas.
                   a. Improved  broodstock genetics (long-term survivorship,
                 diseases resistance, fish quality, etc.).
                   b.  Post-distribution impact assessments  of hatchery
                 stocked  fish on natural populations (disease susceptibility,
                 genetic   pollution, behavior, long-term  wild   population
                 dynamics, etc.).
                                                                        E-41

-------
                       c. Effect of predator fish species on natural and stocked
                    fish populations and how to ameliorate predator imbalances
                    (chemical poisoning, habitat manipulation, stock manipula-
                    tion, angling, physical removal, etc.).
                       d. Identifying environmental limitations for natural recruit-
                    ment and stock introductions.
                       e. Developing criteria for the creation of specific angler op-
                    portunities.
                       f. Developing mechanisms and  criteria for the enhance-
                    ment of sea-run  fisheries to  create  better Province-wide
                    fisheries opportunities, specifically inland waters with iden-
                    tified natural limitations.
                  4. Management: Development of a long-term Management Plan
                    to include (a) zonation of the  Province based on environ-
                    mental, stock, and  user group consideration, (b) regulatory
                    management through joint initiatives of user groups and the
                    Department, (c) identification and  conservation of unique
                    sustainable wild trout populations, and d) establishment of
                    zone  committees  whose responsibilities  would  include
                    recommendation and assessment of special  management
                    initiatives.
                  5. Enforcement: Work  closely with enforcement agencies (DFO
                    and Dept.  of Lands & Forests) to ensure that  management
                    initiatives are monitored and enforced in each zone.
                  6. Education: To ensure that the public is fully informed and in-
                    volved in the wise stewardship of its inland  fisheries, the
                    Department will (a)  prepare brochures, films, videos, techni-
                    cal/scientific reports, etc. on fishery related topics, (b) ensure
                    attendance at meetings to provide exchange of information,
                    and (c) involve public groups in enhancement projects (con-
                    structing of artificial reeds and streamside incubators).
E-42

-------
                               ONTARIO
 Emphasis
 Program
 Elements
        Ministry of Natural Resources
               Fisheries Branch
         Whitney Block, Queen's Park
          Toronto, Ontario M7A 1W3

 Most programs and projects are geared towards management,
 although there  are some research  and assessment projects.
 Some grant aid  is available for public involvement programs. In-
 dividual problem lakes are addressed as well as large numbers
 of lakes where broader problems are perceived.

 1. Fisheries management: Methods  include: habitat inventory,
    habitat rehabilitation, habitat enhancement, and fisheries re-
    search and assessment.
 2. Water quality monitoring: Extensive water chemistry surveys
    have been done on thousands of lakes and  integrated  into
   databases.  Numerous programs for lake  research  and
   monitoring have developed from the acid rain problem.
 3. Self-help programs: The public can receive information and
   assistance through local  Ministry of  Natural Resources
   (MNR) and Ministry of Environment offices. Typical services
   include: drinking water potability testing, septic tank inspec-
   tions, and fish management information.
 4. Public participation: Programs developed toward public par-
   ticipation include (a) the Community Fisheries Involvement
   Program (CFIP)  which stresses  habitat improvement and
   conservation  of  fish stocks and (b)  the  newly initiated
   Shoreline  Restoration  Program  whereby the MNR  has
   cooperated with lake associations in running their own nur-
   series and revegetating lake shorelines to form natural buffer
   strips.

 Self-help and public participation programs; technical assis-
 tance; educational information; grant  aid for CFIP.

 Regular provincial budget funds.
Assistance/
Services

Funding
Sources

Other Lake
Related
Programs
Ministry of Environment, Acid Rain Program: Wayne G. Scott
(416/965-2214); Ministry of Environment, Acid Precipitation Of-
fice, 6th  Floor, 4-St.  Clair  Avenue  W.,  Toronto,  Ontario
M4V1M2); Federation of Ontario Cottagers Association (FOCA)
Albert O.  Shingler (416/284-2305; FOCA, 215 Morrish Road
#105, Scarborough, Ontario M1C 1E9)
                                                                       E-43

-------
                                QUEBEC
  Purpose
  Emphasis
  Program
  Elements
   Assistance/
   Services

   Funding
   Sources

   Staff
   Other Lake
   Related
   Programs
Ministere du Losir, de la Chasse et la Peche
        Direction generale de la faune
         150est, boul. Saint-Cyrille
           Quebec, QCG1R4V1

The objectives of the Ministry of Leisure, Hunting, and Fishing
are resource  conservation  and optimization  of  social  and
economic benefits of fish exploitation (native, sport, and com-
mercial).

The program is oriented toward management of fisheries. In-
dividual lake problems are dealt with at the regional offices and
the central office (Quebec City) works on broader issues. A
small portion of the program deals with short-term (1 -3 yrs) re-
search on "applied" problems.

1. Exploitation control zone (ZEC): Sport fishing  control and
   management are delegated to public associations in special
   areas (ZECs). Assistance (expertise and money) is provided
   through the regional  offices to sport fishing associations (in
   the ZECs of in  non-organized territories).
2. Stocking program: Fish  are  stocked  in areas of demand
   (mostly brook trout).
3. Habitat conversation: This occurs through analysis of impact
   assessment study  reports and cooperation with the Ministry
   of Environment.
4. Broad scope problem studies are done on areas such as:
   acidification effects on walleye, lake trout exploitation,  and
   interspecific competition  between brook  trout and  other
   species.

Technical  assistance; grants for developing sport fishing or
 managing fish habitat.

 Provincial.
 About 30 biologists and 70 natural resources technicians are
 spread among 10 regional offices. Ten biologists and 5 tech-
 nicians work at the central office (Quebec City).

 Ministry of Environment: Pollution control,  environmental im-
 pact studies, acid  precipitation,  etc;  Ministry of  Energy  &
 Resources:  Forest  exploitation,  recreational development  of
 public lands around lakes; Ministry of Agriculture, Fisheries, and
 Alimentation: Inland  commercial fisheries; Hydro  Quebec-
 Development and  operation  of  hydroelectric projects  and
 development of fisheries resources in reservoirs.
E-44

-------
                          SASKATCHEWAN
 Purpose
 Emphasis
 Program
 Elements
Assistance/
Services

Funding
Sources

Staff
Other Lake
Related
Programs
Saskatchewan Parks and Renewable Resources
               Fisheries Branch
                  Box 3003
      Prince Albert, Saskatchewan S6V 6G1

  To maintain and  enhance fish supplies, ensure an adequate
  supple and variety of fish which will meet the needs of the major
  user groups, and maximize the contribution of the fisheries sec-
  tor to the provincial economy.

  The  program focuses on fisheries management using a broad
  issue approach (e.g., there are 3 management zones for sport
  fish conservation measures). Regulations and activities can be
  lake specific.

  1. Sport fish stocking:  Stocking is used to maintain, enhance
    and diversify sport  fisheries  in the southern half of the
    Province. In the  north, conservation measures are relied
    upon to maintain fish populations.
 2. Fisheries enhancement: Conservation  and enhancement
    measures are used to maintain and rebuild fisheries. Fish en-
    hancement  projects  include: rearing ponds, lake aeration,
    fishways, and habitat improvement. Funds are available to
    help conservation groups in these activities.

 Funds for fish enhancement; stocking.


 Primarily  government funded except the Fish  Enhancement
 Fund which is from angling license fees.

 42 permanent (mostly with  background in fisheries biology)-18
 casual/part time.

 Department of Environment: Environmental impact studies pol-
 lution control, etc; Saskatchewan Water Corporation: Oversees
 all  aspects  of water management; Resource  Lands Branch
 (Saskatchewan  Parks and  Renewable Resources):  Oversees
 man's development  around water  (e.g.,  recreational  sub-
 divisions) and on Crown land.
                                                                      E-45

-------
Appendix F
   Editor's Note:
   These forms and documents are to be considered as examples ONLY!
   Any person or organization who is considering contracting for services
   should have an attorney draft the proper contracts within a given jurisdic-
   tion.
Safety
Safety  and protection  of workers,  lake property  owners  and observers is
paramount. The following example of contract document is included to give the
reader  some background  on what should be specified in contracts as well as
citations to work hours and safety standards. Individual contracts will have to be
developed locally by the sponsoring agency, local government offices  and
property owners with exact work specifications written out to insure compliance
and orderly progression of the  implementation of the lake restoration project.
The following example was taken from a lake restoration project in the State of
Washington.

• PROTECTION OF  WORK, PROPERTY, AND PERSONS. The CONTRAC-
TOR will  be  responsible for initiating,  maintaining  and supervising all safety
precautions and programs in connection with the WORK and all materials or
equipment to be incorporated therein, whether in storage on or off the site, and
other property at the site or adjacent thereto,  including trees,  shrubs,  lawns,
walks, pavements, roadways, structures and utilities not designated for removal,
relocation or replacement in the course of construction.
  The  CONTRACTOR will comply with all  applicable laws,  ordinances, rules,
regulations, and  orders of any public body having jurisdiction. He will erect and
maintain, required by the conditions and progress of the WORK, all necessary
safeguards for safety and  protection. He will notify owners of adjacent utilities
when prosecution  of the WORK may affect them. The CONTRACTOR will
remedy all damage,  injury or loss to any property caused, directly or indirectly,
in whole or in part, by the CONTRACTOR, any SUBCONTRACTOR or anyone
directly or indirectly  employed by any of them or anyone for whose acts any of
them be liable, except damage or loss attributable to  the fault of the CONTRACT
DOCUMENTS or to the acts or omissions of the OWNER or the ENGINEER or
anyone employed by either of them or anyone for whose acts either of them may
be liable, and not attributable, directly or indirectly,  in whole or in part, to the
fault or negligence of the CONTRACTOR.
  In emergencies affecting the safety of persons or the WORK or property at the
site or adjacent thereto,  the CONTRACTOR,  without special instruction or
authorization from the  ENGINEER or OWNER, shall act to prevent threatened
damage, injury or loss.  He will give the ENGINEER prompt WRITTEN NOTICE of
any significant changes in the WORK or deviations from the CONTRACT DOCU-
MENTS caused  thereby, and a CHANGE ORDER shall thereupon be  issued
covering the changes and deviations involved.

• SUPERVISION BY  CONTRACTOR. The CONTRACTOR will supervise and
direct the WORK. He will be solely responsible for the means, methods, techni-
ques, sequences and procedures of  construction. The CONTRACTOR will
                                                                      F-1

-------
  employ and maintain on the WORK a qualified supervisor or superintendent who
  shall  have  been designated  in  writing  by the  CONTRACTOR  as the
  CONTRACTOR'S representative  at the site.  The  supervisor shall have full
  authority to act on behalf of the CONTRACTOR and all communications given to
  the supervisor shall be as binding as if given to the CONTRACTOR. The super-
  visor shall be present on the site at all times as required to perform adequate su-
  pervision and coordination of the WORK.

  • CHANGES IN THE WORK. The OWNER may at any time, as the need arises,
  order changes within the scope  of the WORK without invalidating the Agree-
  ment.  If such changes increase or decrease the amount due under the CON-
  TRACT DOCUMENTS or  the time required for performance of the WORK, an
  equitable adjustment shall be authorized by CHANGE ORDER.
    The ENGINEER, also,  may at any time, by issuing a FIELD ORDER, make
  changes in the details of the WORK. The CONTRACTOR shall proceed with the
  performance of any changes in the WORK so ordered by the ENGINEER unless
  the CONTRACTOR believes that such FIELD ORDER entitles him to change in
  CONTRACT PRICE or TIME, or both, in which event he shall give the ENGINEER
  WRITTEN NOTICE thereof within seven (7) days after the receipts of the ordered
  change. Thereafter the CONTRACTOR shall document the basis for the change
  in CONTRACT PRICE or  TIME within thirty (30) days. The CONTRACTOR shall
  not execute such changes pending the receipt of an executed CHANGE ORDER
  or further instruction from the OWNER.

  • CHANGE IN CONTRACT PRICE. The CONTRACT PRICE may be changed
  only by a CHANGE ORDER. The value of any WORK covered  by a CHANGE
  ORDER or of any claim for increase or decrease in the CONTRACT PRICE shall
  be determined  by one  or  more of the following methods in the  order of
  precedence listed below:
     (a) Unit prices previously approved.
     (b) An agreed lump sum.
     (c) The actual cost for labor, direct overhead, materials supplied, equipment,
   and other services necessary to complete the work. In addition, there shall be
   added an amount to be agreed upon but not to exceed fifteen (15) percent of the
   actual cost of the WORK to cover the cost of general overhead and profit.

   • TIME  FOR  COMPLETION  AND  LIQUIDATED DAMAGES. The date of
   beginning and the time for completion of the WORK are essential conditions for
   the CONTRACT DOCUMENTS and the WORK embraced shall be commenced
   on a date specified in the NOTICE TO PROCEED.
     The CONTRACTOR will proceed with the WORK at such rate of progress to
   insure full completion within the CONTRACT TIME. It is expressly understood
   and agreed, by and between the CONTRACTOR and the OWNER, that the CON-
   TRACT TIME for the completion of the WORK described herein is a reasonable
   time, taking into consideration the average climatic and economic conditions
   and other factors prevailing in the locality of the WORK.
      If the CONTRACTOR  shall fail to complete the WORK within the CONTRACT
   TIME, or extension of time granted by the OWNER, then the CONTRACTOR will
    pay to the OWNER the amount for liquidated damages as specified in the BID for
    each calendar day that the CONTRACTOR shall be in default after the time stipu-
    lated in the CONTRACT  DOCUMENTS.
      The CONTRACTOR shall not be charged with the liquidated damages or any
    excess costs when the delay in completion of the WORK is due to the following
    and the CONTRACTOR  has promptly given WRITTEN NOTICE of such delay to
    the OWNER or ENGINEER.
F-2

-------
• CONTRACT WORK HOURS AND SAFETY STANDARDS ACT - SAFETY
AND HEALTH. The CONTRACTOR shall not require any laborer or mechanic
employed in the performance of the contract to work in surroundings or under
working conditions which are unsanitary, hazardous or dangerous to his health
or safety, as determined under construction safety and health standards promul-
gated by regulations of the Secretary of Labor.
  The CONTRACTOR shall comply with the Department of Labor, Safety and
Health Regulations for Construction promulgated under section 107 of the Con-
tract Work Hours Safety Standards Act (40 U.S.C. 327 et seq.).
                             BID BOND
KNOW ALL MEN BY THESE PRESENTS, that we, the undersigned, 	

	as Principals,

and	as Surety, are hereby held and

firmly bound  unto 	  as OWNER in the

penal sum of	for the payment of which,

well and truly to be made, we hereby jointly and severally bind ourselves succes-

sors and assigns.

Signed, this	day of	,  19	.
The Condition of the above obligation is such that whereas the Principal has

submitted to 	 a  certain  BID,  attached
hereto and  hereby made  a part hereof to enter into a contract in writing, for

the
NOW, THEREFORE,
   (a) If said BID shall be rejected, or
   (b) If said BID shall be accepted and the Principal shall execute and deliver a
contract in the Form of Contract attached hereto (properly completed in accord-
ance with said BID) and shall furnish a BOND for his faithful performance of said
contract, and for the payment of all persons performing  labor or furnishing
materials in connection therewith, and shall in all other respects perform the
agreement created by the acceptance of said BID,
   then this obligation shall be void, otherwise the same shall remain in force
and effect; it being expressly understood and  agreed  that the liability of the
Surety for any and all claims hereunder shall, in  no event, exceed the  penal
amount of this obligation as herein stated.
   The Surety, for value received, hereby stipulates and  agrees that the obliga-
tions of said Surety and its BOND shall be in no way impaired  or affected  by an
extension of the time within which the OWNER may accept such BID; and said
Surety does hereby waive notice of any such extension.
   IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Principal and the Surety  have hereunto set their
hands and seals, and such of them as are corporations  have caused their cor-
porate seals to be hereto affixed and these presents to be signed by their proper
officers, the day and year first set forth above.
                                                                        F-3

-------
      	(LS.)
      Principal
      Surety

      By:	

      PROVIDED, FURTHER, that the said Surety for value received hereby stipu-
    lates and agrees that no change, extension of time, alteration or addition to the
    terms of the contract or to  the WORK to  be performed thereunder of the
    SPECIFICATIONS accompanying the same shall in anywise affect its obligation
    on this BOND, and it does hereby waive notice of any such change, extension of
    time, alteration or addition to the terms of the contract or to the WORK or to the
    SPECIFICATIONS.
      PROVIDED, FURTHER, that no final settlement between the OWNER and the
    CONTRACTOR shall abridge the right of any beneficiary hereunder, whose claim
    may be unsatisfied.

    IN WITNESS WHEREOF, this instrument is  executed in	counter-

    parts,   each one  of   which   shall  be  deemed  an  original,  this  the

    	day of	, 19	.

    ATTEST:
                                       Principal
    (Principal) Secretary
           (SEAL)                      By	(s)
                                       (Address)
      Witness as to Principal

      (Address)
                                       Surety

    ATTEST                            by	(s)
    Witness as to Surety                  (Address)
    (Address)
      NOTE: Date of BOND must not be prior to date of Contract. If CONTRACTOR
    is Partnership, all partners should execute BOND.
      IMPORTANT:  Surety companies executing BONDS must  appear  on the
    Treasury Department's most current list (Circular  570 as  amended) and  be
    authorized to transact business in the State where the PROJECT is located.
F-4

-------
                         PAYMENT BOND
KNOW ALL MEN BY THESE PRESENT: that
(Name of Contractor)
(Address of Contractor)
                            _, hereinafter called Principal, and
(Corporation, partnership or individual)
(Name of Surety)
(Address of Surety)
hereinafter called Surety, are held and firmly bound unto
(Name of Owner)
(Address of Owner)

hereinafter called OWNER, in the penal sum of	Dollars,
$(    ) in lawful money of the United States, for the payment of which sum well
and truly to be made, we bind ourselves, successors, and assigned, jointly and
severally, firmly by these present.
   THE CONDITION OF THIS OBLIGATION is such that whereas, the Principal
entered  into  a   certain   contract   with   the   OWNER,   dated   the
	day of	19	, a
copy of which is hereto attached and made a part hereof for the construction of:
   NOW, THEREFORE, if the Principal shall promptly make payment to all per-
sons, firms, SUBCONTRACTORS, and corporations furnishing materials for or
performing labor in the prosecution of the WORK provided for in such contract,
and any authorized extension or modification thereof, including all amounts due
for materials,  lubricants, oil, gasoline, coal and coke, repairs on machinery,
equipment and tools, consumed or used in connection with the construction of
such WORK, and all insurance premiums on said WORK, and for all labor per-
formed in such WORK whether by SUBCONTRACTOR or otherwise, then this
obligation shall be void; otherwise to remain in full force and effect.
                                                                        F-5

-------
      PROVIDED, FURTHER, that the said Surety for value received hereby stipu-
    lates and agrees that no change, extension of time, alteration or addition to the
    terms of the contract or to  the WORK to  be performed  thereunder of the
    SPECIFICATIONS accompanying the same shall in anywise  affect its obligation
    on this BOND, and it does hereby waive notice of any such change, extension of
    time, alteration or addition to the terms of the contract or to the WORK or to the
    SPECIFICATIONS.
      PROVIDED, FURTHER, that no final settlement between the OWNER and the
    CONTRACTOR shall abridge the right of any beneficiary hereunder, whose claim
    may be unsatisfied.
      IN WITNESS WHEREOF, this instrument is executed in	counter-
    parts,   each one of  which  shall  be  deemed  an  original,  this  the
    	day  of	, 19	.

    ATTEST:
    (Principal) Secretary
         (SEAL)
                                       Principal
                                       By	(s)
    (Witness as to Principal)               (Address)
    (Address)
    ATTEST:
    (Surety) Secretary
        (SEAL)
    Witness as to Surety                  Attorney-in-Fact
    (Address)                           (Address)

      NOTE: Date of BOND must not be prior to date of Contract. If CONTRACTOR
    is Partnership, all partners should execute BOND.
      IMPORTANT: Surety companies executing BONDS must appear  on the
    Treasury Department's most current list (Circular  570 as  amended) and  be
    authorized to transact business in the State where the PROJECT is located.
F-6

-------
                       PERFORMANCE BOND
  KNOW ALL MEN BY THESE PRESENT: that
  (Name of Contractor)
  (Address of Contractor)
  (Corporation, Partnership, or Individual)
                              , hereinafter called Principal, and
  (Name of Surety)
  (Address of Surety)

  hereinafter called Surety, are held and firmly bound unto
 (Name of Owner)
 (Address of Owner)

 hereinafter called OWNER, in the penal sum of	Dollars,
 $(      ) in lawful money of the United States, for the payment of which sum
 well and truly to be made, we bind ourselves, successors, and assigned, jointly
 and severally, firmly by these present.

   THE CONDITION OF THIS OBLIGATION is such that whereas, the Principal
 entered   into   a  certain   contract  with   the   OWNER,   dated   the
 		day of	19	t  a
 copy of which is hereto attached and made a part hereof for the construction of:
   NOW, THEREFORE, if the Principal shall promptly make payment to all per-
sons, firms, SUBCONTRACTORS, and corporations furnishing materials for or
performing labor in the prosecution of the WORK provided for in such contract,
and any authorized extension or modification thereof, including all amounts due
for materials,  lubricants, oil, gasoline, coal and coke,  repairs on  machinery,
equipment and tools, consumed or used in connection with the construction of
such WORK, and all insurance premiums on said WORK, and for all labor per-
formed in such WORK whether by SUBCONTRACTOR  or otherwise,  then this
obligation shall be void; otherwise to remain in full force and effect.
                                                                       F-7

-------