U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
NATIONAL EUTROPHICATION SURVEY
WORKING PAPER SERIES
REPORT
ON
BOARDMAN HYDRO POND
GRAND TRAVERSE COUNTY
MICHIGAN
EPA REGION V
WORKING PAPER No, 186
PACIFIC NORTHWEST ENVIRONMENTAL RESEARCH LABORATORY
An Associate Laboratory of the
NATIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL RESEARCH CENTER - CORVALLIS, OREGON
and
NATIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL RESEARCH CENTER - LAS VEGAS, NEVADA
ttGPO 697.032
-------
REPORT
ON
BOARDMAN HYDRO POND
GRAND TKAVERSE COUNTY
MICHIGAN
EPA REGION V
WORKING PAPER No, 186
WITH THE COOPERATION OF THE
MICHIGAN DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES
AND THE
MICHIGAN NATIONAL GUARD
FEBRUARY, 1975
-------
CONTENTS
Page
Forward ii
List of Michigan Study Lakes iv
Lake and Drainage Area Map v
Sections
I. Introduction 1
II. Conclusions 1
III. Lake Characteristics 2
IV. Lake Water Quality Summary 3
V. Literature Reviewed 8
VI. Appendices 9
-------
FOREWORD
The National Eutrophication Survey was initiated in 1972 in
response to an Administration commitment to investigate the nation-
wide threat of accelerated eutrophication to fresh water lakes and
reservoirs.
OBJECTIVES
The Survey was designed to develop, in conjunction with state
environmental agencies, information on nutrient sources, concentrations,
and impact on selected freshwater lakes as a basis for formulating
comprehensive and coordinated national, regional, and state management
practices relating to point-source discharge reduction and non-point
source pollution abatement in lake watersheds.
ANALYTIC APPROACH
The mathematical and statistical procedures selected for the
Survey's eutrophication analysis are based on related concepts that:
a. A generalized representation or model relating
sources, concentrations, and impacts can be constructed.
b. By applying measurements of relevant parameters
associated with lake degradation, the generalized model
can be transformed into an operational representation of
a lake, its drainage basin, and related nutrients.
c. With such a transformation, an assessment of the
potential for eutrophication control can be made.
LAKE ANALYSIS*
In this report, the first stage of evaluation of lake and water-
shed data collected from the study lake and its drainage basin is
documented. The report is formatted to provide state environmental
agencies with specific information for basin planning [§303(e)], water
quality criteria/standards review [§303(c)], clean lakes [§314(a,b)],
and water quality monitoring [§106 and §305(b)] activities mandated
by the Federal Water Pollution Control Act Amendments of 1972.
* The lake discussed in this report was included in the National
eutrophication Survey as a water body of interest to the Michigan
Department of Natural Resources. Tributaries and nutrient sources
were not sampled, and this report relates only to the data obtained
from lake sampling.
-------
m
Beyond the single lake analysis, broader based correlations
between nutrient concentrations (and loading) and trophic condi-
tion are being made to advance the rationale and data base for
refinement of nutrient water quality criteria for the Nation's
fresh water lakes. Likewise, multivariate evaluations for the
relationships between land use, nutrient export, and trophic
condition, by lake class or use, are being developed to assist
in the formulation of planning guidelines and policies by EPA
and to augment plans implementation by the states.
ACKNOWLEDGMENT
The staff of the National Eutrophication Survey (Office of
Research & Development, U. S. Environmental Protection Agency)
expresses sincere appreciation to the Michigan Department of
Natural Resources for professional involvement and to the
Michigan National Guard for conducting the tributary sampling
phase of the Survey.
A. Gene Gazlay, former Director, and David H. Jenkins, Acting
Director, Michigan Department of Natural Resources; and Carlos
Fetterolf, Chief Environmental Scientist, and Dennis Tierney,
Aquatic Biologist, Bureau of Water Management, Department of Natural
Resources, provided invaluable lake documentation and counsel during
the course of the Survey. John Vogt, Chief of the Bureau of Environ-
mental Health, Michigan Department of Public Health, and his staff
were most helpful in identfying point sources and soliciting municipal
participation in the Survey.
Major General Clarence A. Schnipke (Retired), then the Adjutant
General of Michigan, and Project Officer Colonel Albert W. Lesky,
who directed the volunteer efforts of the Michigan National Guardsmen,
are also gratefully acknowledged for their assistance to the Survey.
-------
IV
NATIONAL EUTROPHICATION SURVEY
STUDY LAKES
STATE OF MICHIGAN
LAKE NAME
Allegan Res.
Barton
Belleville
Betsie
Brighton
Caro Res.
Charlevoix
Chemung
Constantine Res,
Crystal
Deer
Ford
Fremont
Higgins
Holloway Res.
Houghton
Jordon
Kent
Long
Macatawa
Manistee
Mona
Muskegon
Pentwater
Pere Marquette
Portage
Randall
Rogers Pond
Ross
St. Louis Res,
Sanford
Strawberry
Thompson
Thornapple
Union
White
COUNTY
Allegan
Kalamazoo
Wayne
Benzie
Livingston
Tuscola
Charlevoix
Livingston
St. Joseph
Montcalm
Marquette
Washtenaw
Newago
Roscommon
Genesee, Lapeer
Roscommon
Ionia, Barry
Oakland
St. Joseph
Ottawa
Manistee
Muskegon
Muskegon
Oceana
Mason
Houghton
Branch
Mecosta
Gladwin
Gratiot
Midland
Livingston
Livingston
Barry
Branch
Muskegon
-------
BOARDMAN HVbRO f>OND
X lake samplina site.
? £ ' rni/c
fioarolman
Hydro Pond
-------
BOARDMAN HYDRO POND
STORE! NO. 26A2
I. INTRODUCTION
Boardman Hydro Pond was included in the National Eutrophication
Survey as a water body of interest to the Michigan Department of
Natural Resources. Tributaries and nutrient sources were not sam-
pled, and this report relates only to the data from lake sampling.
II. CONCLUSIONS
A. Trophic Condition:
Survey data indicate that Boardman Hydro Pond is oligo-
trophic. Of the 35 Michigan lakes sampled in the fall of
1972 when essentially all were well-mixed, none had less
mean total and mean dissolved phosphorus, and ten had less
mean inorganic nitrogen; of all 41 lakes sampled, only one
had less mean chlorophyll a_, and only two had a greater
mean Secchi disc transparency*.
B. Rate-Limiting Nutrient:
The algal assay results indicate that phosphorus was the
limiting nutrient at the time the sample was collected. The
lake data also indicate phosphorus limitation at the other
sampling times as well; i.e., N/P ratios were greater than
60/1 on both occasions.
See Appendix A.
-------
III. LAKE CHARACTERISTICS
A. Lake Morphometry*:
1. Surface area: 77 acres.
2. Mean depth: 24.8 feet.
3. Maximum depth: >27 feet.
4. Volume: 1,910 acre-feet.
B. Precipitation**:
1. Year of sampling: 36.8 inches
2. Mean annual: 37.8 inches.
* Fetterolf, 1973.
** See Working Paper No. 1, "Survey Methods, 1972".
-------
IV. LAKE WATER QUALITY SUMMARY
Boardman Hydro Pond was sampled three times during the open-water
season of 1972 by means of a pontoon-equipped Huey helicopter. Each
time, samples for physical and chemical parameters were collected
from two stations on the pond and from a number of depths at each
station (see map, page v). During each visit, a single depth-integrated
(15 feet or near bottom to surface) sample was composited from the sta-
tions for phytoplankton identification and enumeration; and during the
second visit, a single 18.9-liter depth-integrated sample was composited
for algal assays. Also each time, a depth-integrated sample was col-
lected from each of the stations for chlorophyll a_ analysis. The maximum
depths sampled were 15 feet at station 1 and 27 feet at station 2.
The results obtained are presented in full in Appendix B, and the
data for the fall sampling period, when the pond essentially was well-
mixed, are summarized below. Note, however, the Secchi disc summary is
based on all values.
For differences in the various parameters at the other sampling
times, refer to Appendix B.
-------
A. Physical and chemical characteristics:
Parameter
Temperature (Cent.)
Dissolved oxygen (mg/1)
Conductivity (ymhos)
pH (units)
Alkalinity (mg/1)
Total P (mg/1)
Dissolved P (mg/1)
N02 + N03 (mg/1)
Ammonia fmg/1)
Minimum
6.4
10.6
315
7.8
144
0.005
,004
,310
040
0,
0,
0,
FALL VALUES
(11/12/72)
Mean Median
Maximum
6.5
10.7
319
7.8
150
0.006
0.005
0.318
0.040
6.5
10.7
320
7.8
149
0.006
0.004
0.310
0.040
6.5
10.8
320
7.8
153
0.009
0.007
0.340
0.040
ALL VALUES
Secchi disc (inches)
96
137
138
169
-------
B. Biological characteristics:
1. Phytoplankton -
Sampling
Date
06/17/72
09/15/72
11/12/72
Dominant
Genera
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
Di nobryon
Cocconeis
Achnanthes
Navicula
Synedra
Other genera
Total
Di nobryon
Achnanthes
Navicula
Fragilaria
Cymbella
Other genera
Total
Achnanthes
Navicula
Cymbella
Cocconeis
Synedra
Other genera
Number
per ml
157'
132
103
52
49
118
611
177
170
112
90
69
293
911
80
65
38
29
29
53
Total
294
-------
2. Chlorophyll a^ -
(Because of instrumentation problems during the 1972 sampling,
the following values may be in error by plus or minus 20 percent.)
Sampling
Date
06/17/72
09/15/72
11/12/72
Station
Number
01
02
01
02
01
02
Chlorophyll a
(yg/1)
3.9
1.0
0.4
1.1
0.4
0.8
0.001
o.on
0.021
0.051
0.051
0.001
0.278
0.278
0.278
0.278
10.278
10.278
0.1
3.5
7.4
8.0
27.4
0.1
Limiting Nutrient Study:
1. Autoclaved, filtered, and nutrient spiked -
Ortho P Inorganic N Maximum yield
Spike (mg/1) Cone, (mg/1) Cone, (mg/1) (mg/1-dry wt.)
Control
0.010 P
0.020 P
0.050 P
0.050 P + 10.0 N
10.0 N
2. Discussion -
The control yield of the assay alga, Selenastrum capri-
cornutum, indicates that the potential primary productivity
of Boardman Hydro Pond was quite low at the time the assay
sample was taken (09/15/72). Also, the increased yields
with increased levels of orthophosphate show that the pond
was phosphorus limited (note the lack of yield response
when only nitrogen was added).
-------
The lake data indicate phosphorus limitation in June
(N/P = 64/1) and November (N/P = 72/1) as well.
-------
8
V. LITERATURE REVIEWED
Fetterolf, Carlos, 1973. Personal communication (lake morphometry)
MI Dept. of Nat. Resources, Lansing.
-------
APPENDIX A
LAKE RANKINGS
-------
LAKE DATA TO BE USED IN RANKINGS
LAKE
CODE LAKE NAME
26AO HOLLOWAY RESERVOIR
26Ai CARO RESERVOIR
26A2 BOARDMAN HYDRO POND
3603 ALLEGAN LAKE
2606 BARTON LAKE
2609 BELLEVILLE LAKE
2610 BETSIE LAKE
2613 BRIGHTON LAKE
2617 LAKE CHARLEVOIX
2618 LAKE CHEHUNG
2621 CONSTANTINE RESERVOIR
2629 FORD LAKE
2631 FREMONT LAKE
2640 JORDAN LAKE
2643 KENT LAKE
2648 LAKE MACATAWA
2649 MANISTEE LAKE
2659 MUSKEGON LAKE
2665 PENTKATER LAKE
2671 RANDALL LAKE
2672 ROGERS POND
2673 ROSS RESERVOIR
2674 SANFORD LAKE
2683 THORNAPPLE LAKE
2685 UNION LAKE
2688 WHITE LAKE
2691 MONA LAKE
2692 LONG LAKE
MEAN
TOTAL P
0.062
0.117
0.006
0.123
0.121
0.118
0.025
0.109
0.007
0.044
0.027
0.105
0.372
0.180
0.040
0.197
0.018
0.087
0.027
0.246
0.026
0.034
0.016
0.048
0.083
0.027
0.307
0.163
-r ALL VALUtS-
MEAN
01SS P
0.043
0.022
0.005
0.057
0.086
0.048
0.008
0.073
0.006
0.014
0.008
0.058
0.342
0.144
0.015
0.120
0.010
0.043
U.017
0.183
0.015
0.021
c.ooa
0.032
0.064
0.019
0.241
0.148
MEAN
INORG N
1.461
3.835
0.358
1.168
1.489
1.420
0.273
1.015
0.230
0.132
0.910
1.536
1.406
1.998
0.417
2.358
0.304
0.469
0.496
0.816
0.183
0.460
0.307
1.737
1.252
0.367
0.963
0.749
500-
MEAN SEC
439.375
473..000
363.500
470.222
456.167
465.250
461.667
456.000
351.250
404.333
456.167
456.167
441.667
427.667
455.000
477.600
451.333
436.444
430.667
4S7.333
435.500
465.333
458.750
442.833
455.500
417.778
451.667
418.400
— ALL VALUES--
MEAN
CHLORA
10.676
11.967
1.267
20.311
27.800
28.262
4.567
44.233
3.008
13.483
39.317
14.733
28.500
20.517
33.944
25.600
6.317
9.511
16.083
• 27.217-
8.133
10.383
13.791
14.650
15.667
9.211
27.783
10.067
15-
MIN DO
9.200
9.500
6.600
12.600
14.850
8.200
7.400
7.500
9.240
14.800
7.500
14.000
14.800
14.900
13.000
12.200
11.380
14.800
14.800
8.020
9.600
8.200
8.300
10.800
8.200
13.400
14.100
13.600
-------
LAKE DATA TO BE USED IN RANKINGS
LAKE
CODE LAKt NAME
2693 ST LOUIS
2b9<» CWYSTAL LAKE
269b nIGGINS LAKE
2b96 HJUGHTQN LAKE
2697 THOMPSON LAKE
2698 PEKt MARQUETTE LAKE
2699 STtfArtriKRRr LAKE
MEAN
TOTAL P
0.134
0.009
0.007
o.uia
0.043
0.032
0.069
-r HLL V«LUC.3-
MtAN
UiSS P
0.093
0.006
0.005
0.008
0.029
0.024
O.ObO
MEAN
INOKG N
1.227
°0. 164
o.use
0. 13n
0.436
0.346
O.b67
b'OO-
MEwN SLC
462.667
380.000
268.500
420.833
407.889
448.667
419.800
MEAN
CHLOKA
5.583
2.986
1.043
9.217
11.967
11.833
11.117
15-
M1N DO
8.420
13.000
9.400
8.200
14.800
8.600
13.600
-------
PERCENT OF LAKES WITH HIGHER VALUES (NUMBER OF LAKES WITH HIGHER VALUES)
LAKE
CODE LAKE NAME
26AO HOLLOWAY RESERVOIR
26Ai CARO RESERVOIR
26A2 BOARDMAN HYDRO POND
2603 ALLEGAN LAKE
260b BARTON LAKE
2609 BELLEVILLE LAKE
2610 BETSIE LAKE
2613 BRIGHTON LAKE
2617 LAKE CHARLEVOIX
2618 LAKE CHEMUNG
2621 CONSTANTINE RESERVOIR
2629 FORD LAKE
2631 FREMONT LAKE
2640 JORDAN LAKE
2643 KENT LAKE
2648 LAKE MACATAWA
2649 MANISTEE LAKE
2659 MUSKEGON LAKE
2665 PENTWATER LAKE
2671 RANDALL LAKE
2672 ROGERS POND
2673 ROSS RESERVOIR
2674 SANFORD LAKE
2683 THORNAPPLE LAKE
2685 UNION LAKE
26B8 WHITE LAKE
2691 MONA LAKE
2692 LONG LAKE
MEAN MEAN
TOTAL P UISS P
46
29
97
20
23
26
77
31
91
49
71
34
0
11
57
9
80
37
69
6
74
60
86
54
40
66
3
14
( 16)
( 10)
( 34)
( 7)
( 8)
( 9)
( 27)
( 11)
( 32)
( 17)
( 25)
( 12)
( 0)
( 4)
( 20)
( 3)
( 28)
( 13)
( 24)
( 2)
( 26)
( 21)
( 30)
( 19)
( 14)
( 23)
( 1)
( 5)
43
54
97
31
20
37
77
23
91
71
83
29
0
11
69
14
74
40
63
6
66
57
80
46
26
60
3
9
( 15)
( 19)
I 34)
( 11)
( 7)
( 13)
( 27)
( 8)
< 32)
( 25)
( 29)
( 10)
( 0)
( 4)
( 24)
( 5)
( 26)
( 14)
( 22)
( 2)
( 23)
( 20)
( 28)
( 16)
( 9)
( 21)
( 1)
( 3)
MEAN
INORG N
17
0
69
Jl
14
20
80
34
83
94
40
11
23
6
63
3
77
54
51
43
86
57
74
9
26
66
37
46
( 6)
( 0)
( 24)
( 11)
( 5)
( 7)
( 28)
( 12)
( 29)
( 33)
( 14)
( 4)
( 8)
( 2)
( 22)
( 1)
( 27)
( 19)
( 18)
( 15)
( 30)
( 20)
( 26)
( 3)
( 9)
( 23)
( 13)
( 16)
500-
MEAN SEC
57
3
91
6
29
11
17
34
94
86
29
29
54
69
40
0
46
60
66
23
63
9
20
51
37
80
43
77
( 20)
( 1)
( 32)
( 2)
( 9)
( 4)
( 6)
( 12)
( 33)
( 30)
( 9)
( 9)
( 19)
( 24)
( 14)
( 0)
( 16)
( 21)
( 23)
( 8)
( 22)
( 3)
( 7)
( 18)
( 13)
( 28)
( 15)
( 27)
MEAN 15-
CHLORA MIN DO
60
49
94
29
14
11
86
0
89
46
3
37
9
26
6
23
80
69
31
20
77
63
43
40
34
74
17
66
( 21)
< 17)
< 33)
( 10)
( 5)
( 4)
( 30)
( 0)
( 31)
( 16)
( 1)
( 13)
( 3)
( 9)
( 2)
( 8)
( 28)
( 24)
( 11)
< 7)
( 27)
( 22)
( 15)
( 14)
< 12)
( 26)
( 6)
( 23)
63
54
97
40
3
79
94
90
60
11
90
23
11
0
36
43
46
11
11
86
51
79
71
49
79
31
20
27
( 22)
( 19)
( 34)
( 14)
( 1)
( 26)
( 33)
( 31)
( 21)
( 2)
( 31)
( 8)
( 2)
( 0)
( 12)
( 15)
( 16)
( 2)
< 2)
( 30)
( 18)
( 26)
( 25)
( 17)
( 26)
( 11)
( 7)
( 9)
INDEX
NO
286
189
545
157
103
184 .
431
212
508
357
316
163
97
123
271
92
403
271
291
184
417
325
374
249
242
377
U3
239
-------
PERCENT OF LAKES WITH HIGHER VALUES (NUMBER OF LAKES WITH HIGHER VALUES)
LAKE
CODE LAKE NAME
2693 ST LOUIS RESERVOIR
26*** CRYSTAL LAKE
2695 HIGGINS LAKE
2696 HOUGHTON LAKE
2697 THOMPSON LAKE
2698 PERE MARQUETTE LAKE
2699 STRAWBERRY LAKE
MEAN MEAN
TOTAL P OISS P
17
89
94
83
51
63
A3
( 6)
( 3D
( 33)
( 29)
< 18)
( 22)
( 15)
17
89
94
b6
49
51
34
( 6)
( 31)
( 33)
( 30)
( 17)
( 18)
( 12)
MEAN
INORG N
29
89
97
91
60
71
<»9
( 10)
( 31)
( 34)
( 32)
( 21)
( 25)
( 17)
bOO-
MtAN SEC
14
89
97
71
83
49
74
( 5)
( 31)
( 34)
( 25)
( 29)
( 17)
( 26)
MEAN 15-
CHLORA MIN 00
83
91
97
71
51
54
57
( 29)
( 32)
( 34)
( 25)
( 18)
( 19)
( 20)
69
36
57
79
11
66
27
( 24)
( 12)
( 20)
( 26)
( 2)
( 23)
( 9)
INDEX
NO
229
483
536
481
305
354
284
-------
APPENDIX B
PHYSICAL and CHEMICAL DATA
-------
STORET RETRIEVAL DATE 75/02/0'*
26A2U1
44 <+0 OO.o (tub 25 OU.O
DOARUMAN HYURO HONu
26u5b "1ICHIGAN
DATE
FROM
TO
TIME UEPTri
OF
DAY FEET
72/06/17 14 1U 0000
!<• 1U 0015
72/09/15 10 02 0000
10 02 0004
10 02 0015
72/11/12 09 15 0000
09 15 0004
09 15 0011
OoOl J
* AT EK
TEMP
CENT
18. *
12.0
13.0
b.ti
DO
MG/L
9.3
9.0
lu.6
10.7
11EPALES
0 b 0 7 7
I^MNbK
SECCnl
INCHES
12o
lt>9
Io9
00094
CiNiLHJCTv/Y
FIELD
M1CROMHO
2bo
2faO
30rt
305
305
320
315
320
6
00400
HH
bU
8.23
8.02
8.05
8.1o
8.00
7.8u
7.80
7.80
OOtlO
T ALK
CAC03
MG/L
145
147
158
156
158
149
149
144
2111202
0022
00630
IM02&N03
N- TOTAL
MG/L
0. 160
0.190
0.240
0.230
0.230
0.310
0.310
0.310
FEET DEPTH
00610
NH3-N
TOTAL
MG/L
0.030
0.030
0.050
0.040
0.050
0.040
0.040
0.040
00665
PHOS-TOT
Mb/L P
0.008
0.005
0.009
0.008
O.Olt
0.005
0.006
0.009
00666
PHOS-DIS
MG/L P
0.003
0.004
0.005
0.005
0.005
0.004
0.005
0.007
3221 7
DATE TIME DEPTH CMLriPHrL
FrlOM OF' a
IU UAV FEET UG/L
72/06/17 14 10 0000
72/09/15 10 02 0000
72/11/12 09 15 0000
0.4j
J VALUt KNOWN TO BE 11\ LKRUH!
-------
STOftET RETRIEVAL DATE 75/02/04
26A202
44 40 00.0 085 25 00.0
tfOArtUMAN HYDKO POND
26055 MICHIGAN
DATE
FtfOM
TO
72/06/17
72/09/15
72/11/12
1 IM£ DEPTH
OF
DAY FEET
14 35 0000
14 35 0007
09 24 0000
09 24 0004
09 24 0015
09 24 0021
09 24 0027
09 35 0000
09 35 0006
00010
wATEK
TEMP
CENT'
18.4
13.5
14.8
14.6
13. 6
13.0
6.3
11EHALES
U0300
00
MG/L
10.2
12.2
9.4
9.4
9.2
8.4
10.6
OOU77
TKANSP
StCCHl
INCHES
96
156
109
0009t
CNOUCTtf 1
FIELD
MICrtOMHO
260
255
315
30M
308
310
310
320
320
b
00400
PH
su
8.23
8.40
8.08
8.10
8.10
8.00
7.9'J
7.80
7.8U
00410
T ALK
CAC03
MG/L
144
146
155
1S5
155
154
155
153
153
2111202
0008
00630
N02
------- |