U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
NATIONAL EUTROPHICATION SURVEY
WORKING PAPER SERIES
REPORT
ON
HOUGHTON LAKE
COUNTY
EPA REGION V
WORKING PAPER No, 196
PACIFIC NORTHWEST ENVIRONMENTAL RESEARCH LABORATORY
An Associate Laboratory of the
NATIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL RESEARCH CENTER - CORVALLIS, OREGON
and
NATIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL RESEARCH CENTER - LAS VEGAS, NEVADA
-------
REPORT
ON
HOUGHTON LAKE
ROSCOfTO COUNTY
314 • MICHIGAN
EPA REGION V
WORKING PAPER No, 196
WITH THE COOPERATION OF THE
MICHIGAN DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES
AND THE
MICHIGAN NATIONAL GUARD
FEBRUARY, 1975
-------
CONTENTS
Page
Foreword i i
List of Michigan Study Lakes iv
Lake and Drainage Area Map v
Sections
I. Conclusions 1
II. Lake and Drainage Basin Characteristics 3
III. Lake Water Quality Summary 4
IV. Nutrient Loadings 7
V. Literature Reviewed 13
VI. Appendices 14
-------
11
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)j,
and water quality monitoring [§106 and §305(b)] activities mandated
by the Federal Water Pollution Control Act Amendments of 1972.
-------
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
-------
44°25'
Little
Mud Lake
Flooding
Nellsville
HOUGHTON LAKE
® Tributary San.pl ipq Site
x Lake Samplinq Lite
f Direct Drainage Area
•i2J Urban Area
0 1 2
Scale
84 50
3 Mi
84,45
f'ichigan
44 15-
Map Location
84°40'
-------
HOUGHTON LAKE
STORE! NO. 2696
I. CONCLUSIONS
A. Trophic Condition:
Considering only the Survey lake data, it could be concluded
that Houghton Lake is mesotrophic; e.g., of the 35 Michigan lakes
sampled in November when essentially all were well-mixed, four
had less mean dissolved phosphorus, five had less mean total
phosphorus, and only two had less mean inorganic nitrogen*. How-
ever, on the basis of a recently completed 2-year study, personnel
of the Michigan Department of Natural Resources consider the lake
to be eutrophic; although they report that the eutrophic condition
is not typical in that Houghton Lake exhibits few, if any, of the
adverse conditions usually associated with eutrophic water bodies
(Tierney, 1974).
B. Rate-Limiting Nutrient:
There was a significant loss of inorganic nitrogen in the
algal assay sample, and the results are not indicative of con-
ditions in the lake at the time the sample was collected.
The lake data indicate phosphorus limitation in September
and November but possible nitrogen limitation in June.
C. Nutrient Controllability:
1. Point sources—During the sampling year, Houghton Lake
received a total phosphorus load at a rate less than one-half
* See Appendix A.
-------
that proposed by Vollenweider (in press) as "permissible";
i.e., at a rate less than an oligotrophic rate (see page 11).
Despite this low phosphorus loading rate, the lake is
eutrophic, and contributions of phosphorus from both point
and non-point sources should be minimized to prevent develop-
ment of nuisance conditions in the lake.
There are no known municipal or industrial point sources
impacting Houghton Lake; and, although septic tanks were
estimated to have contributed about 32% of the total phosphorus
load, a shoreline survey would be needed to determine the actual
contribution from these sources.
2. Non-point sources (see page ll)--It is calculated that
the non-point sources contributed about 67% of the total phos-
phorus load to Houghton Lake; however, the exports of the Hough-
ton Lake tributaries were quite low as compared to other Michigan
streams sampled.
-------
II. LAKE AND DRAINAGE BASIN CHARACTERISTICS
A. Lake Morphometry :
1. Surface Area: 20,044 acres.
2. Mean depth: 7.6 feet.
3. Maximum depth: 21 feet.
4. Volume: 152,334 acre/feet.
5. Mean hydraulic retention time: 1.3 years.
,B. Tributary and Outlet:
(See Appendix B for flow data)
1. Tributaries -
Name Drainage area* Mean flow*
Backus Creek 90.0 mi2 71.5cfs
Spring Brook 1.3 mi? 0.4 cfs
Denton Creek 47.7 mip 12.9 cfs
Knappen Creek 4.6 mi 3.4 cfs
Minor tributaries & 2
immediate drainage - 47.1 mi 68.5 cfs
Totals 190.7 mi2 156.7 cfs
2. Outlet -
Muskegon River 222.0 mi2** 156.7 cfs
C. Precipitation***:
1. Year of sampling: 28.3 inches.
2. Mean annual: 28.4 inches.
t MI Dept. Cons, lake inventory map (1962).
* Drainage areas are accurate within ±5%; mean daily flows for 74% of the
sampling sites are accurate within ±25% and the remaining sites up to
±40%; and mean monthly flows, normalized mean monthly flows, and mean
annual flows are slightly more accurate than mean daily flows.
** Includes area of lake.
*** See Working Paper No. 1, "Survey Methods, 1972".
-------
III. LAKE WATER QUALITY SUMMARY
Houghton Lake 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 lake and from two or more depths at each station (see
map, page v). During each visit, a single depth-integrated (near bottom
to surface) sample was composited from the stations for phytoplankton
identification and enumeration; and during the second visit, a single
five-gallon depth-integrated sample was composited for algal assays.
Also each time, a depth-integrated sample was collected from each of
the stations for chlorophyll a_ analyses. The maximum depths sampled
were 16 feet at station 1 and 12 feet at station 2.
The results obtained are presented in full in Appendix e, and the
data for the fall sampling period, when the lake 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 C.
-------
Physical and chemical characteristics:
FALL VALUES
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 t.mg/1)
(11/14/72)
Minimum Mean
2
11
200
8.2
79
0.015
0.006
0.040
0.060
Secchi disc (inches) 48
Biological characteristics:
1. Phytoplankton* -
3.1
12.0
207
8.2
82
0.018
0.008
0.052
0.084
ALL VALUES
79
Sampling
Date
09/20/72
11/14/72
Dominant
Genera
1. Polycystis
2. Lyngbya
3. Achnanthes
4. Synedra
5. Flagellates
Other genera
Total
1. Fragilaria
2. Flagellates
3. Polycystis
4. Dinobryon
5. Achnanthes
Other genera
Total
Median
3.4
12.2
205
8.2
83
0.018
0.007
0.040
0.080
79
Maximum
3.4
12.3
220
8.2
84
0.020
0.010
0.080
0.110
114
Number
per ml
1,401
708
557
407
392
1.595
5,060
8,981
The June sample was lost in shipment.
-------
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 Station Chlorophyll a_
Date Number (yg/1)
06/15/72 01 5.9
02 9.8
09/20/72 01 7.2
02 12.7
11/14/72 01 11.6
02 8.1
C. Limiting Nutrient Study:
A 58% loss of inorganic nitrogen occurred in the assay
sample between the time of collection and the beginning of
the assay, and the assay results are not indicative of con-
ditions in the lake at the time of sampling.
The lake data indicate phosphorus limitation in September
(N/P ratio = 28/1) and November (N/P = 17/1) but a possible
nitrogen limitation in June (N/P = 13/1). Phosphorus limita-
tion would be expected with N/P ratios of 14/1 or greater.
-------
IV. NUTRIENT LOADINGS
(See Appendix D for data)
For the determination of nutrient loadings, the Michigan National
Guard collected monthly near-surface grab samples from each of the
tributary sites indicated on the map (page v), except for the high
runoff months of April and May, when two samples were collected, and
in December when low flows prevented sampling at three sites. Samp-
ling was begun in October, 1972, and was completed in September, 1973.
Through an interagency agreement, stream flow estimates for the year
of sampling and a "normalized" or average year were provided by the Michi-
gan District Office of the U.S. Geological Survey for the tributary sites
nearest the lake.
In this report, nutrient loads for sampled tributaries were determined
by using a modification of a U.S. Geological Survey computer program
for calculating stream loadings*. Nutrient loadings for unsampled "minor
tributaries and immediate drainage" ("II" of U.S.G.S.) were estimated by
2
using the means of the nutrient loads, in Ibs/mi /year, at stations B-l,
2
C-l, D-l, and E-l and multiplying the means by the II area in mi .
There are no known municipal wastewater treatment plants impacting
Houghton Lake. However, the communities of Houghton Lake, The Heights,
and Prudenville are located on the lake shore and are served by septic
tanks. Nutrient loads from these sources were estimated at 0.25 Ibs P
and 9.4 Ibs N/capita/year*.
* See Working Paper No. 1.
-------
A. Waste Sources:
1. Communities -
Name
Houghton Lake
The Heights
Prudenville
Pop.
Served
6,067*
1,252*
1,800**
8
Mean Receiving
Treatment Flow (mgd) Water
septic tanks
septic tanks
septic tanks
2. Known industrial - None
Houghton Lake
Houghton Lake
Houghton Lake
* 1970 Census.
** Estimated 450 homes at 4 persons each.
-------
B. Annual Total Phosphorus Loading - Average Year:
1. Inputs -
Ibs P/ % of
Source yr total
a. Tributaries (non -point load) -
Backus Creek 2,520 23.7
Spring Brook 20 0.2
Denton Creek 440 4.1
Knappen Creek 140 1.3
b. Minor tributaries & immediate
drainage (non-point load) - 970 9.1
c. Communities -
Houghton Lake 1,520 14.3
The Heights 310 2.9
Prudenville 450 4.2
d. Septic tanks* - 1,120 10.6
e. Known industrial - None
f. Direct precipitation** - 3,130 29.6
Total 10,620 100.0
2. Outputs -
Lake outlet - Muskegon River 5,140
3. Net annual P accumulation - 5,480 pounds
* Estimated 1,800 seasonal lakeshore dwellings outside of communities;
see Working Paper No. 1.
** See Working Paper No. 1.
-------
10
C. Annual Total Nitrogen Loading - Average Year:
1. Inputs -
Ibs N/ % of
Source yr total
a. Tributaries (non-point load) -
Backus Creek 159,720 28.4
Spring Brook 780 0.1
Denton Creek 22,280 4.0
Knappen Creek 7,140 1.3
b. Minor tributaries & immediate
drainage (non-point load) - 51,740 9.2
c. Communities -
Houghton Lake 57,030 10.1
The Heights 11,770 2.1
Prudenville 16,920 3.0
d. Septic tanks* - 42,300 7.5
e. Known industrial - None
f. Direct precipitation** - 193.100 34.3
Total 562,780 100.0
2. Outputs -
Lake outlet - Muskegon River 214,840
3. Net annual N accumulation - 347,940 pounds
* Estimated 1,800 seasonal lakeshore dwellings outside of communities;
see Working Paper No. 1.
** See Working Paper No. 1.
-------
11
D. Mean Annual Non-point Nutrient Export by Subdrainage Area:
Tributary Ibs P/mi2/yr Ibs N/mi2/yr
Backus Creek 28 1,775
Spring Brook 15 600
Denton Creek 9 467
Knappen Creek 30 1,552
E. Yearly Loading Rates:
In the following table, the existing phosphorus loading
rates are compared to those proposed by Vollenweider (in press).
Essentially, his "dangerous" rate is the rate at which the
receiving waters would become eutrophic or remain eutrophic;
his "permissible" rate is that which would result in the
receiving water remaining oligotrophic or becoming oligo-
trophic if morphometry permitted. A mesotrophic rate would
be considered one between "dangerous" and "permissible".
Total Phosphorus Total Nitrogen
Units
Ibs/acre/yr
grams/m2/yr
Total
0.5
0.06
Accumulated
0.3
0.03
Total
28.1
3.1
Accumulated
17.4
1.9
Vollenweider loading rates for phosphorus
(g/m2/yr) based on mean depth and mean
hydraulic retention time of Houghton Lake:
"Dangerous" (eutrophic rate) 0.26
"Permissible" (oligotrophic rate) 0.13
-------
12
V. LITERATURE REVIEWED
Fetterolf, Carlos, 1972. Personal communication (mean depth of
Houghton Lake). MI Dept. Nat. Resources, Lansing.
Tierney, Dennis, 1974. Personal communication (review of prelimi-
nary report on Houghton Lake). MI Dept. of Nat. Resources,
Lansing.
Vollenweider, Richard A. (in press). Input-output models. Schweiz.
Z. Hydrol.
-------
VI. APPENDICES
APPENDIX A
LAKE RANKINGS
-------
LAKE DATA TO BE USED IN RANKINGS
LAKE
CODE LAKE NAME
2&AO HOLLOWAY RESERVOIR
2&Ai CARO RESERVOIR
26A2 BOAHDMAN HYDRO POND
2603 ALLEGAN LAKE
2606 BARTON LAKE
2609 BELLEVILLE LAKE
2610 BETSIE LAKE
2613 BRIGHTON LAKE
2617 LAKE CHARLEVOIX
2618 LAKE CHEMUNQ
2621 CONSTANT INE RESERVOIR
2629 FORD LAKE
2631 FREMONT LAKE
2640 JORDAN LAKE
2643 KENT LAKE
26<
-------
LAKE DATA TO BE USED IN RANKINGS
LAKE
CODE LAKE NAME
2693 ST LOUIS RESERVOIR
2694 CRYSTAL LAKE
2695 MIGGINS LAKE
2696 HOUGHTON LAKE
2697 THOMPSON LAKE
2698 PERE MAROUETTE LAKE
2699 STRAWBERRY LAKE
MEAN
TOTAL P
0.134
0.009
0.007
0.018
0.043
0.032
0.069
-r ALL VALUtS-
MEAN
CUSS P
0.093
0.006
0.005
0.008
0.029
0.024
O.ObO
MEAN
INURG N
1.227
0.164
0.058
0.136
0.436
0.346
O.S67
500-
MEAN SEC
462.667
380.000
268.500
420.833
407.889
448.667
419.800
MEAN
CHLOHA
5.583
2.986
1.043
9.217
11.967
11.833
11.117
15-
MIN DO1
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
26A1 CARO RESERVOIR
26A2 BOARDMAN HYDRO POND
3603 ALLEGAN LAKE
2606 BAKTON LAKE
2609 BtLLEVILLE LAKE
2610 BETSIE LAKE
2613 BRIGHTON LAKE
2617 LAKE CHAHLEVOIX
2618 LAKE CHEHUNG
2621 CONSTANTINE RESERVOIR
2629 FORO LAKE
2631 FREMONT LAKE
2640 JORDAN LANE
2643 KENT LAKE
2648 LAKE MACATAWA
2649 MANISTEE LAKE
26S9 MUSKEGON LAKE
2665 PENTWATER 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 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
I 16)
( 10)
( 34)
( 7)
( 8)
I 9)
( 27)
( 11)
( 32)
( 17)
< 25)
< 12)
( 0)
< 4)
I 20)
< 3)
( 28)
< 13)
( 24)
( 2)
( 26)
I 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)
( 34)
I 11)
( 7)
( 13)
( 27)
( 8)
( 32)
( 25)
( 29)
( 10)
( 0)
( 4)
I 24)
( 5)
( 26)
( 14)
( 22)
( 21
( 23)
( 20)
( 28)
( 16)
( 9)
I 21)
( 11
( 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)
I 24)
( 11)
( 5)
( 7)
( 28)
I 12)
( 29)
( 33)
( 14)
( 4)
( 8)
( 2)
I 22)
( 1)
< 27)
( 19)
1 18)
( 151 .
( 30)
( 20)
( 26)
( 3)
I 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
I 20)
( 1)
( 32)
( 2)
( 9)
( 4)
I 6)
( 12)
( 33)
( 30)
I 9)
( 9)
( 19)
I 24)
( 14)
( 0)
1 16)
( 21)
< 23)
( 8)
I 22)
( 3)
( 7)
( 18)
< 13)
I 28)
( 15)
( 27)
MEAN 15-
CHLOHA MIN 00
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)
I 33)
I 10)
( 5)
( 4)
( 30)
( 0)
( 31)
( 16)
I 1)
( 13)
( 3)
( 9)
( 2)
( 8)
I 28)
I 24)
I 11)
< 7)
( 27)
I 22)
( 151
< 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)
I 34)
( 14)
( 1)
( "261
< 33)
( 31)
< 21)
( 2)
( 31)
I 8)
< 2)
( 0)
( 12)
( IS)
< 16)
( 2)
( 2)
( 30)
( 18)
( 26)
( 25)
( 17)
t 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
2694 CRYSTAL LAKE
2695 HIGGINS LAKE
2696 HOUGHTON LAKE
2697 THOMPSON LAKE
2698 PERE MAROUETTE LAKE
2699 STRAWBERRY LAKE
MEAN MEAN
TOTAL P OISS P
17
89
94
83
51
63
43
( 6)
( 3D
( 33)
( 29)
( 18)
( 22)
< 15)
17
89
94
86
49
51
34
( 6)
( 31)
( 33)
( 30)
( 17)
( 18)
< 12)
MEAN
INORG N
29
89
97
91
60
71
49
( 10)
( 31)
( 34)
( 32)
( 21)
( 25)
( 17)
500-
MtAN SEC
14
89
97
71
83
49
74
( 5)
( 3D
( 34)
( 25)
( 29)
( 17)
( 26)
MEAN 15-
CHLOKA MIN DO
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
TRIBUTARY FLOW DATA
-------
TRIBUTARY FLOW INFORMATION FOR MICHIGAN
2/3/75
LAKE CODE 2696
HOUGHTOiM LAKE
TOTAL DRAINAGE AREA OF LAKE(SQ Ml)
SUB-DRAINAGE
TRIBUTARY AREAtSQ MI)
JAN
FEB
222.00
MAR
APR
MAY
NORMALIZED FLOWS(CFS)
JUN JUL AUG
SEP
OCT
NOV
DEC
MEAN
2696A1
2696B1
2696C1
269601
2696E1
2696ZZ
222.00
90.00
1.31
47.70
4.60
78.40
134.00
59.00
0.25
7.60
2.10
65. Ou
131. CO
b«. 00
0.22
7.40.
2.60
63.00
182.00
80.00
0.41
14.00
5.40
82.00
365.00
16$. 00
1.40
54.00
12.00
133.00
264.00
137.00
0.83
28.00
5.60
93.00
160.00
71.00
0.42
11.00
2.60
75.00
108.00
51.00
0.26
5.80
1.50
49.00
80.00
34.00
0.19
2.90
1.20
42.00
63.00
36.00
0.22
3.10
1.20
42.00
102.00
46.00
0.25
4.80
1.90
49.00
132.00
58.00
0.39
7.40
2.80
63.00
140.00
63.00
0.30
8. 40
1.70
67.00
156.65
71.49
0.43
12.85
3.38
68.52
SUMMARY
TOTAL DRAINAGE AREA OF LAKE =
SUM UF bUB-DRAlNAGE AREAS =
222.00
222.01
TOTAL FLOW IN
TOTAL FLO* OUT
MEAN MONTHLY FLOWS AND DAILY FLOWS(CFS)
TRIBUTARY MONTH YEAR MEAN FLOW DAY
2696A1
FLOW DAY
FLOW DAY
FLOW
2696B1
10
11
12
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
72
72
72
73
73
73
73
7J
73
73
73
73
72
72
72
73
73
73
73
73
73
73
73
73
118.00
176.00
136.00
273.00
217.1)0
372.00
337.00
223.00
126.00
98.01)
108.00
103.00
54.00
78.00
61.00
119.00
97.00
162.00
154.00
116.00
57.00
47.00
46.00
45.00
28
22
19
20
24
24
7
5
23
21
23
23
28
22
19
20
24
24
7
5
23
21
23
28
230.00
158.00
142.00
355.00
158.00
3U4.0J
367.00 21
263.00 19
91. 00
96.00
90.00
111.00
105.00
70.00
64.00
155.00
70.00
168.00
168.00 21
137.00 19
41.00
46.00
38.00
49.00
343.00
207.00
157.00
108.00
1881.14
1881.00
-------
TRIBUTARY FLOrt INFORMATION FOk MICHIGAN
2/3/75
LAKE COUE 2696
HOUGM10N LAKE
MEAN MONTHLr FLOWS AMD UAILY FLOWS
-------
APPENDIX C
PHYSICAL and CHEMICAL DATA
-------
STO«ET RETRIEVAL DATE 75/02/04
269601
44 19 00.0 084 4
HOUGHTON LAKE
26 MICHIGAN
00.0
uOOlO
DATE TIHE DEPTH *ATEK
FROM OF TEMP
TO DAY FEET CENT
72/06/15
72/09/20
72/11/14
09
09
07
07
07
II
II
11
30
30
05
05
05
25
25
25
0000
0016
0000
0004
0008
0000
0004
0011
18.7
18.0
18. 1
18.J
3.H
3.H
11EPALES
003CO
DO
MG/L
1.1
7.6
6.9
7.8
12.3
11.6
OU077
TKuNSP
btCCHI
iNCMEb
114
91
48
00094
ClNDUCTVY
FIELD
MICKOMriO
205
210
290
285
250
210
205
200
5
00400
HH
SU
7.70
7.68
7.75
7.8U
7.85
8.20
8.20
8.20
OOnlU
T ALK
CACU3
MG/L
98
100
89
03
83
83
84
83
2111202
001B
00630
N02&N03
N-TOTAL
MG/L
0.030
0.030
0.130
0.080
0.100
0.040
0.040
0.060
FEET DEPTH
00610
NH3-N
TOTAL
MG/L
0.020
0.020
0.180
0.110
0.140
0.080
0.080
0.110
00665
PHOS-TOT
MG/L P
0.009
0.010
0.016
0.025
0.014
0.018
0.018
0.020
00666
PHOS-DIS
MG/L P
0.004
0.005
0.008
0.010
0.010
0.008
0.007
0.007
DATE TIME DEPTH
FrtOM OF
TO DAY FEET
72/06/15 09 30 0000
72/09/20 07 05 0000
72/11/14 11 25 0000
32217
A
UG/L
5.9J
7.2J
1 1.6J
J VALUt
TU -it. 1 > c -
-------
DAIE
4<» 21 3o.O 084 45 00.0
HOUbrirO"* LAKE
2b MICHIGAN
DATE TIME DEPTH
FHOM OK
TO UAY FEET
72/Ob/lb U9 5b 0000
09 Sb 0012
72/09/20 07 30 0000
07 30 0004
07 30 OOJ8
72/11/1'* 11 40 OOOC
11 40 0004
v U 0 i 0
walfc'R
TEMP
CENT
18.3
18.1
17.7
1 /.6
2.6
00300
DO
MG/L
8.1
6.8
7.8
v.ct
12.2
0 (.1 u / 7
TK/..NSP
bECChl
luCHEb
1 OB
ob
4f
JOu'-*^
C'^DuCTVY
KIELO
UlCriOMHU
210
205
285
280
2so
220
200
00<*00
HM
bU
8.2/
0.28
7 p 85
7.85
7.90
8.20
8.20
11EPALES
b
00<*00
HM
bU
8.2/
0.28
7.85
7.85
7.90
8.20
8.20
00410
j ALI<,
CACOj
MG/L
98
98
83
84
83
79
79
2111202
0015
00630
N02S.N03
N-TOTAL
MG/L
0.030
0.030
0.150
0.150
0.140
0.040
0.080
FEET OEPTH
00610
NH3-N
TOTAL
MG/L
0.040
0.060
0.180
0.190
0.160
0.060
0.090
00665
PHOS-TOT
MG/L P
0.011
0.009
0.016
0.017
0.01?
O.Olb
00666
PHOS-DIS
MG/L P
0.009
0.004
0.008
0.010
0.012
0.006
0.010
DATE
TO
TIME
Of
DEPTH
FEtT
72/Ob/lb 09 56 0000
72/09/20 07 30 uOOO
72/11/U 11 40 0000
3221 7
ChLrtHHYL
A
UO/L
V.-iJ
1 2. 7 J
». 1J
J V£LU£
-------
APPENDIX D
TRIBUTARY DATA
-------
STOHET ^EFtflEVAL DATE 7I5/OP/0-+
2696A1 LS2696A1
44 24 30.U 084 4/ 30.0
HUSKEGON klVEK
26143 ib HOUGHfON LANE
U/hOUGnTON LAKE
US 27 HKUG £ OF MtAUS LANDING
HE^ALtS 2111204
4 0000 FEET DEPTH
DATE
FROM
TO
72/10/28
72/11/22
72/12/19
73/01/20
73/02/24
73/03/24
73/04/0?
73/04/21
73/Ob/05
73/05/19
73/06/23
73/07/21
73/OH/23
73/1/9/28
OJ630 00625
TIME DEPTH NU2NN03 TOT KJ£L
OF N-TUTAL N
uAY FEET
09
09
09
09
08
08
09
09
09
08
14
09
14
13
00
?b
30
30
55
30
?0
00
?0
40
00
35
00
45
MG
•j
U
9
0
e
v
f.
0
f
j
u
j
j
0
/L
,03<3
.01CK
.0 luK
.030
.027
.0?7
.023
,01u-\
.0^3
. 0 1 0 •<
.0 1'Jrv
.046
.ol OK
.OiO-v
MG/L
0
0
0
0
1
0
2
0
u
0
0
u
0
D
.550
. ^4U
.580
.5:^0
.6yo
. .) 1 0
.94U
. Mu
• * 3 U
• r^ 1^ o
. 75o
^ ^ li
.4e>0
. 4 l) u
OublO . 00671 006b5
NH3-N HhOS-Ulb HHUS-TOI
TOTAL UtVlrio
M,i/L
u
0
J
.')
0
;)
•j
u
0
u
o
u
u
ij
.Ob7
.Clo
.UlV
.032
. j60
.009
.064
.016
.u i 1
. out
. u 33
.UUSlN
.017
.03C
MG/L
0 .
0.
0.
J.
u .
0.
ft.
o .
0.
•j .
\J .
0 .
0.
\j •
H
005K
OObK
OOaK
u05K
UO^K
OubK
005K
OOb
OUbK
OOSK
OOfr
OO^IN
00 H
Gob
MG/L H
0.017
0.012
0 . 0 1 J
O.OOoK
U . 'J 1 0
0 .0 li,
0.020
0 .020
0 . 0 2o
0.020
O.Oi!'/
0 .020
0.02.0
U .u 15
K VALUE KNOWM TO BE
LESS THAN INDlCATc.0
-------
STCHET KETRIEVAi. DATE 75/02/j*
<+* 22 00.0
L:>26*6ril
41 00.0
?.6 7.3 PKUDtr\i\/ILLE
1/HUUGHTuiM LAKE
NOrtTh SriOKc. Or* bKOG NE SIDE HOUGHTON LK
HEP ALES 2111204
4 oooo Fter DEPTH
DATE
F«OM
TO
72/10/2b
72/11/2?
73/01/20
73/02/2*
73/0 J/ 24
73/04/07
73/04/21
73/Ob/OS
73/05/19
73/06/2.3
73/07/21
73/OH/23
73/Qy/2P
TIME DEPTH
OF
DAY
10
11
09
13
10
10
11
11
11
10
11
10
15
15
00630
N0?\l«i03 1
rj-ToTAL
FEET
40
00
00
00
?0
IS
oo
00
3b
4U
•30
20
20
00
Mu
0
0
0
u
..'
>'•
(J
1 1
„
r,
v/
u
•J
\J
/L
.015
.020
.060
.067
.02*
.Ol'j
.0.3J
.021
.0.1J
.0 1 1
.021
.0 l-,r\
.0 Ifj
.or5.
0062S
ro r KJEL
M
•Ar,/
0 .
2.
•J .
1.
'? 9
0.
?.
0.
1.
0 .
1 .
u .
u .
•J .
SOO
\. 0 0
b'ib
Cr"J
JOu
5^0
700
^H j
76y
*«J
/ o ;j
i j • '-
'+-+0
.'i 7 0
i--iri.<-N
i-U;VL
', .044
-.,•. 0 6 U
... . 1 32
v . o 4 r.
1. . 0 1 7
'.: . 'J 1 1
Oi;o71
HMOS-U1S
i-lG/L H
0 . o 0 b
J . OODrt
u .OO^K
u . J 0 7
u . 0 1 *
'j . OG5K
ii . 0 2 d
j . o 0 6
U.l/GsK
il . vOiJK
0 .007
w . J05K
J.G09
j .OOo
OJbbb
HHOb-TO!
MG/L r>
O.OlJ
0.009
u.O 1 :>
0 .0 lb
O.Olb
O.uiu
O.obO
0.0 Jo
U .0 Ib
0 .u io
0 .0^0
0 . vJ IT
0.0 £^\J
o .u 10
K VALOE KNOWN TO dE
LESS THAN INDICATED
-------
STORE! RETRIEVAL DATE 75/02/04
2696C1 LS2696C1
44 16 30.0 084 38 00.0
SPRING BROOK
26 7.5 PRUDENVILLE
T/HOUGHTON LAKE
ST HWY 18 BRDG NE OF PRUDENVILLE
11EPALES 2111204
4 0000 FEET DEPTH
DATE
FROM
TO
72/10/28
72/11/22
73/01/20
73/02/24
73/03/24
73/04/07
73/04/21
73/05/05
73/05/19
73/06/23
73/07/21
73/08/23
73/09/28
00630 00625
TIME DEPTH N02&N03 TOT KJEL
OF U-TOTAL N
DAY FEET,
10
10
11
09
09
10
10
11
10
11
10
15
14
15
40
00
45
35
45
40
00
20
00
10
00
30
MG/L
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
.024
.074
.095
.154
.065
.066
.039
.046
.027
.096
.098
.039
.046
MG/L
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
3.
0.
0.
0.
1.
0.
2.
0.
450
290
330
720
290
360
690
220
400
260
330
100
riOO
00610 00671 00665
NH3-N PHOS-DIS PHOS-TOT
TOTAL ORTHO
MG/L
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
037
026
016
048
Oil
105
033
018
Oil
080
058
231
060
MG/L
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
6.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
.0.
p
005K
005K
005K
008
005K
037
006
005K
005K
014
017
058
024
MG/L P
0.014
0.011
0.005K
0.030
0.005K
0.080
0.020
0.010 .
0.010
0.050
0.045
6.077
K VALUE KNOWN TO BE
LESS THAN INDICATED
-------
. OATK
DATE
FROM
TO
72/10/2H
72/11/22
72/12/1^
73/01/20
73/02/2*
73/03/24
73/04/07
73/04/21
73/05/14
73/06/23
73/07/21
73/OH/23
T i MF.
01-
UAY
10 10
10 30
10 ^*0
10 20
Osi 35
09 30
10 35
10 00
10 40
0945
10 45
10 Ob
14 45
14 15
FEET
M-TOTAL
MO/L
C.143
J.027
Lf.O'JO
•J .037
0.0? 7
0.012
J . 0 2 1
I'. 147
•J.I 76
TOT KJEL
N
•VJ/L
C. 7So
C-.970
1.3HO
L>. ni)G
0 . '"'HO
0.310
4.SOD
0 • ^ .*^ vJ
O.b-o
•J.dOJ
o u 61 0
•Jn l-N
••I'7/L
..lib
i, . o btt
•j. 0 1 fa
•„ . 1 JB
Lb2b96t)l
44 IB 00.0 064 3B 30.0
CKtEK/LK. JAHES/HOUGHTON C
7.b P^UDENVILLE
LAKE
bb SKOG IN PKUUtNy/lLLE
do
H*r
,. 1 7b
-.1 /o
OL.fa71
nOb-DlS
Nb/L P
O.OObK
0 .oo.bK
J • 0 U5K
0.00 5K
0 .OObK
j . OobK
0 .OObK
0 . oObK
u . o 0 bK
i> . d 0 /
u.uObK
lit OUc
U .0 10
u .006
ilrlPALEb
4
oObbo
Pt-iOb-TOl
hu/L P
O.Olb
0.012
0.0 id
0 .u 1 j
0 .0 lb
0.010
0 . C 1 S
O.U2S
•J . 0 1 b
o .020
0 . J 2 0
0 .030
o .030
u . 0 2 b
2111204
0000 FEET
DEPTH
K VALUE KNOWN TO yt
LESS THAN IMOIOTEQ
-------
STORET RETRIEVAL DATE 75/02/04
2696E1 LS2696E1
44 18 00.0 084 39 00.0
KiMAPPEN CREEK
26 7.5 PRUDENVILLE
T/HOUGHTOlM LAKE
ST Hi«r 55 BRDG IN PRUDENVILLE
HEP ALES 2111204
4 0000 FEET DEPTH
DATE
FROM
TO
72/10/28
72/11/2?
73/01/20
73/02/24
73/03/24
73/04/07
73/04/21
73/05/05
73/05/19
73/06/23
73/07/21
73/08/23
73/09/28
00630 U0625
TIME DEPTH N02&N03 TOT KJEL
OF • N-TOTAL N
DAY FEET
10
10
10
09
09
10
09
10
09
10
10
14
14
00
30
00
25
25
30
50
30
35
30
00
30
00
MG/L
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
.117
.023
.084
.054
.033
.037
.034
.034
.016
.066
.154
.210
.16b
MG/L
0.
1.
0.
0.
0.
2.
1.
0.
0.
1.
0.
0.
0.
550
400
440
840
810
310
990
500
560
200
940
900
600
00610 00671 00665
NH3-N PhOS-DIS PHOS-TOT
TOTAL ORTHO
MG/L
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0 .
0 •
0.
0.
105
042
oie
076
033
092
070
026
016
138
073
138
Ob4
MG/L
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
.0.
p
005K
005K
005K
005K
005K
036
010
005K
005K
006
006
017
006
MG/L P
0.013
0.007
0.01U
0.025
0.010
U.060
0.020
0.010
0.015
0.030
0.025
0.020
K VALUE KNOWN TO BE
LESS THAN INDICATED
------- |