U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
NATIONAL EUTROPHICATION SURVEY
WORKING PAPER SERIES
REPORT
ON
SANFORDLAKE
MIDLAND COUNTY
MICHIGAN
EPA REGION V
WORKING PAPER No, 210
PACIFIC NORTHWEST ENVIRONMENTAL RESEARCH LABORATORY
An Associate Laboratory of the
NATIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL RESEARCH CENTER - CORVALLIS, OREGON
and
NATIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL RESEARCH CENTER - LAS VEGAS, NEVADA
tJGPO 697-032
-------
REPORT
ON
SANFORDLAKE
MIDLAND COUNTY
MICHIGAN
EPA REGION V
WORKING PAPER No, 210
WITH THE COOPERATION OF THE
MICHIGAN DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES
AND THE
MICHIGAN NATIONAL GUARD
FEBRUARY.. 1975
-------
CONTENTS
Page
Foreword ii
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 . 11
VI. Appendices 12
-------
1i
FOREWORD
The National Eutrophication Survey was Initiated in 1972 in
response to an Administration commitment to investigate the nation-
wide threat of accelerated eutrophlcation 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.
-------
Ill
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.
-------
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
NATIONAL EUTROPHICATION SURVEY
STUDY LAKES
STATE OF MICHIGAN
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
-------
43-50-
_GLADWIN CO.
MIDLAND ^0.
84° 25'
Edenville
^
SANFORD LAKE
® Tributary Sampling Site
x Lake Sampling Site
o
2 Mi .
Scale
Michigan
Map Location
nford
84° 20
43*45'_
43T40'.
-------
SANFORD LAKE
STORE! NO. 2674
I. CONCLUSIONS
A. Trophic Condition:
On the basis of Survey data and observations, it is concluded
that Sanford Lake is eutrophic, although it appears to be in a
better condition when only the data are considered. Of the 35
Michigan lakes sampled in the fall when essentially all were
well-mixed, only four had less mean total and dissolved phos-
phorus, and only eight had less mean inorganic nitrogen*.
However, Sanford Lake has a mean hydraulic retention time of
only nine days, and relatively low nutrient levels are typical
of such "flow-through" impoundments. Of the other parameters
measured, 29 of the study lakes had greater Secchi disc transpar-
ency and 29 had less mean chlorophyll a*.
Survey limnologists reported an algal bloom in progress on
September 20, 1972, and noted that rooted aquatic vegetation was
common in the shallow parts of the lake.
B. Rate-Limiting Nutrient:
Because of a 50% loss of dissolved phosphorus in the algal
assay sample from the time of collection to the beginning of the
assay, the results are not indicative of conditions in the lake
at the time of sampling.
See Appendix A.
-------
The lake data indicate nitrogen limitation in June and Sep-
tember but phosphorus limitation in November.
C. Nutrient Controllability:
There are no known point sources directly impacting Sanford
Lake. Nonetheless, during the sampling year, the lake received
a total phosphorus load at a rate nearly twice that proposed by
Vollenweider (in press) as "dangerous"; i.e., in excess of a
eutrophic rate (see page IQ). Now, Vollenweider's model probably
is not applicable to a water body with such a short hydraulic
retention time, and it is likely that the short retention time
is suppressing the effects of the high nutrient loading rates.
-------
II. LAKE AND DRAINAGE BASIN CHARACTERISTICS
A. Lake Morphometry :
1. Surface area: 1,250 acres.
2. Mean depth: 9.8 feet.
3. Maximum depth: 20+ feet.
4. Volume: 12,250 acre feet.
5. Mean hydraulic retention time: 9 days.
B. Tributary and Outlet:
(See Appendix B for flow data)
1. Tributaries -
Name Drainage area* Mean flow*
Tittabowassee River 1,012.0 mi2 636.3 cfs
Minor tributaries & 2
immediate drainage - 28.0 mi 19.6 cfs
Totals 1,040.0 mi2 655.9 cfs
2. Outlet -
Tittabowassee River 1,042.0 mi2** 655.9 cfs
C. Precipitation***:
1. Year of sampling: 31.1 inches.
2. Mean annual: 29.6 inches.
t MI Dept. Cons, lake inventory map (1951).
* 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
Sanford Lake, an impoundment of the Tittabowassee River, was sampled
four 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 three stations on the lake and from two
or more 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 stations for phytoplankton identification and enumer-
ation; 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 ^analyses.
The maximum depths sampled were 12 feet at station 1, 20 feet at station 2,
and 12 feet at station 3.
The results obtained are presented in full in Appendix C, 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
(11/14/72)
Minimum Mean
Temperature (Cent.)
Dissolved oxygen (mg/1 )
Conductivity (umhos)
pH (units)
Alkalinity (mg/1)
Total P (mg/1)
Dissolved P (mg/1)
N02 + N03 (mg/1)
Ammonia Tmg/1)
Secchi disc (inches)
4.7 4.9
10.2 11.3
410 423
8.0 8.0
161 165
0.013 0.016
0.007 0.008
0.140 0.240
0.060 0.067
ALL VALUES
24 41
Biological characteristics:
1 . Phytoplankton* -
Sampling
Date
09/20/72
11/14/72
Dominant
Genera
1 . Anabaena
2. Dinobryon
3. Flagellates
4. Melosira
5. Cyclotella
Other genera
Total
1. Fragilaria
2. Asterionella
3. Dinobryon
4. Cryptomonas
5 . Synedra
Other genera
Total
Median
Maximum
41
Number
per ml
7,233
909
321
298
68
48
126
1,770
64
* 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 (ug/1)
06/14/72 01 14.7
02 10.8
03 16.8
09/17/72 01 10.6
02 7.8
03
09/20/72 01 39.4
02 28.4
03 16.3
11/14/72 01 3.4
02 1.7
03 1.4
C. Limiting Nutrient Study:
There was a loss of about 50% of the dissolved phosphorus in
the algal assay sample between the time of collection (09/17/72)
and the beginning of the assay. Consequently, the results are
not indicative of conditions in the lake at the time of sampling.
The lake data indicate a narrow nitrogen limitation in June
(N/P ratio = 13/1) and September (N/P = 12/1) and phosphorus
limitation in November (N/P = 38/1).
-------
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 May, June, and July, when two samples were collected.
Sampling began 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 Michigan District Office of the U.S. Geological Survey for the
tributary sites nearest the lake.
In this report, nutrient loads for sampled tributaries were deter-
mined by using a modification of a U.S. Geological Survey computer
program for calculating stream loadings*. Nutrient loadings for unsam-
pled "minor tributaries and immediate drainage" ("II" of U.S.G.S) were
2
estimated by using the nutrient loads, in Ibs/mi /year, at station A-2
2
and multiplying by the II area in mi .
The only known point source of nutrients upstream from Sanford Lake,
and within the 25-mile limit of the Survey*, is the Village of Beaverton
discharging to the Tobacco River. However, the Tobacco River arm of
Wixom Reservoir intervenes and is a nutrient trap. Therefore, the Michigan
Department of Natural Resources does not consider Beaverton to be a point
source impacting Sanford Lake.
* See Working Paper No. 1.
-------
8
A. Waste Sources:
1. Known municipal - None
2. Known industrial - None
B. Annual Total Phosphorus Loading - Average Year:
1. Inputs -
Ibs P/ % of
Source yr total
a. Tributaries (non-point load) -
Tittabowassee River 42,260 96.7
b. Minor tributaries & immediate
drainage (non-point load) - 1,180 2.7
c. Known municipal STP's - None
d. Septic tanks* - 80 0.2
e. Known industrial - None
f. Direct precipitation** - 200 0.4
Total 43,720 100.0
2. Outputs -
Lake outlet - Tittabowassee River 45,510
3. Net annual P loss - 1,790 pounds
* Estimated 120 shoreline dwellings; see Working Paper No. 1.
** See Working Paper No. 1.
-------
C. Annual Total Nitrogen Loading - Average Year:
1. Inputs -
Ibs N/ % of
Source yr total
a. Tributaries (non-point load) -
Tittabowassee River 1,519,520 96.4
b. Minor tributaries & immediate
drainage (non-point load) - 42,060 2.7
c. Known municipal STP's - None
d. Septic tanks* - 2,820 0.2
e. Known industrial - None
f. Direct precipitation** - 12.040 0.7
Total 1,576,440 100.0
2. Outputs -
Lake outlet - Tittabowassee
River 1,569,040
3. Net annual N accumulation - 7,400 pounds
* Estimated 120 shoreline dwellings; see Working Paper No. 1.
** See Working Paper No. 1.
-------
10
D. Mean Annual Non-point Nutrient Export by Subdrainage Area:
'2 2
Tributary Ibs P/mi /yr Ibs N/mi /yr
Tittabowassee River 42 1,502
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".
Note that Vollenweider's model may not be applicable to
water bodies with very short hydraulic retention times.
Total Phosphorus Total Nitrogen
Uni ts Total Accumulated Total Accumulated
Ibs/acre/yr 35.0 loss* 1,261.2 5.9
grams/m2/yr 3.92 - 141.4 0.7
Vollenweider loading rates for phosphorus
(g/m2/yr) based on mean depth and mean
hydraulic retention time of Sanford Lake:
"Dangerous" (eutrophic rate) 2.00
"Permissible" (oligotrophic rate) 1.00
The apparent loss of phosphorus during the sampling year is probably
the result of too few samples in relation to the very short hydraulic
retention time.
-------
11
V. LITERATURE REVIEWED
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
26AO 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 CHEMUNG
2621 CONSIANTINE RESERVOIR
2629 FORD LAKE
2631 FREMONT LAKE
26
-------
LAKE DATA TO BE USEO IN RANKINGS
LAKE
CODE LAKE NAME
2693 ST LOUIS RESERVOIR
2694 CRYSTAL LAKE
2695 HIGGINS LAKE
2696 HOUGHTON LAKE
2697 THOMPSON LAKE
2698 PERE MARQUETTE LAKE
2699 STRAWBERRY LAKE
MEAN
TOTAL P
0.134
0.009
0.007
0.018
0.043
0.032
0.069
-rALL VALUtS-
MEAN
DISS P
0.093
0.006
0.005
0.008
0.029
0.024
O.ObO
MEAN
INORG N
1.227
0.164
O.OS8
0.136
0.436
0.346
0.567
500-
MEAN SEC
462.667
380.000
268.500
420.833
407.889
448.667
419.800
MEAN
CHLOHA
5.5B3
2.986
1.043
9.217
11.967
11.833
11.117
15-
MIN 00'
8.420
13.000
9.400
8.200
14.800
8.600
13.600
-------
PERCENT OF LAKES WITH HIGHER VALUES (NUMBER OF LAKES KITH HIGHER VALUES)
LAKE
CODE LAKE NAME
26AO HOLLOWAY RESERVOIR
26A1 CARO RESERVOIR
26A2 BOAROMAN HYDRO POND
2603 ALLEGAN LAKE
2606 BARTON LAKE
2609 BtLLEVILLE LAKE
2610 BETSIE LAKE
?613 BRIGHTON LAKE
2617 LAKE CHAHLEVOIX
2618 LAKE CHEHUNG
2621 CONSTANTINE RESERVOIR
2629 FORD LAKE
2631 FREMONT LAKE
2640 JORDAN LAKE
2643 KENT LAKE
2648 LAKE MACATAWA
26*9 MANISTEE LAKE
2659 MUSKEGON LAKE
2665 PENTHATER LAKE
2671 RANDALL LAKE
2672 ROGERS POND
2673 ROSS RESERVOIR
2674 SANFORO LAKE
2683 TMORNAPPLE LAKE
26HS UNION LAKE
26BB WHITE LAKE
2691 MONA LAKE
2692 LONG LAKE
MEAN MEAN
TOTAL P OISS 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)
I 34)
1 7)
I 8)
( 9)
( 27)
( 11)
( 32)
( 17)
( 25)
( 12)
( 0)
( 4)
I 20)
( 3)
( 28)
( 13)
( 24)
( 2>
( 26)
( 21)
I 30)
( 19)
I 14)
( 23)
( 1)
( 5)
43
S4
97
31
20
37
77
23
91
71
83
29
0
11
69
14
74
10
63
6
66
57
80
46
26
60
3
9
( 151
< 19)
( 34)
( 11)
( 7)
I 13)
< 27)
( 8)
( 32)
( 25)
( 29)
( 10)
( 0)
( 4)
( 24)
( 5)
( 26)
( 14)
I 22)
( 2)
( 23)
( 20)
( 28)
( 16)
I 9)
( 21)
< 1)
I 3)
MEAN
INOR& N
17
0
69
31
14
20
80
34
83
94
40
11
23
6
63
3
77
54
51
43
86
57
Tt
9
26
66
37
46
I 6)
( 0)
( 24)
( 11)
I 5)
< 7)
( 28)
( 12)
( 29)
( 33)
( 14)
( 4)
< 8)
I 2)
( 22)
( 1)
( 27)
( 19)
I 18)
( 15)
( 30)
I 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
I 20)
( 1)
(32)
1 2)
I 9)
( 4)
( 61
( 12)
( 33)
I 30)
I 9)
( 9)
1 19)
( 24)
( 14)
1 0)
( 16)
I 21)
< 23)
( 8)
1 22)
( 3)
( 7)
I 18)
1 13)
I 28)
I 15)
< 27)
— ALL VALUES
MEAN 15-
CHLORA MIN DO
60 I
49 I
94 (
29 (
14 (
11 (
86 I
0 <
89 (
46 (
3 <
37 (
9 (
26 (
6 (
23 <
80 (
69 (
31 (
20 (
77 (
63 I
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
I 22)
( 19)
( 34)
( 14)
( 1)
C*6)
( 33)
( 31)
( 21)
( 2)
( 3D
( 8)
( 2)
( 0)
( 12)
( 15)
( 16)
( 2)
( 2)
( 30)
( 18)
I 26)
( 25)
( 17)
( 26)
( 11)
( 7)
( 9)
INDEX
NO
2B6
189
545
157
103
184
431
212
SOB
357
316
163
97
123 •
271
92
403
271
291
184
417
325
374
249
242
377
1
-------
PERCENT OF LAKES WITH HIGHER VALUES (NUMBER OF LAKES WITH HIGHER VALUES)
LAKE
CODE LAKE NAME
3693 ST LOUIS RESERVOIR
2694 CRYSTAL LAKE
2695 HIGGINS LAKE
3696 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)
(. 31)
( 33)
( 29)
( 18)
( 22)
( 15)
17
89
94
06
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)
bOO-
MtAN SEC
14
89
97
71
83
49
74
( b)
( 31)
( 34)
( 25)
( 29)
( 17)
( 26)
MEAN 15-
CHLORA 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)
I 20)
( 26)
( 2)
( 23)
< 9)
INDEX
NO
2
-------
APPENDIX B
TRIBUTARY FLOW DATA
-------
TKIdUTAKY FLOW INFORMATION FOK MIChlljAN
2/3/75
LAKE CODE 2674
bANFORD LAKE
TOTAL DRAIM4GE A*EA Of LAKtISCI --1
SUH-DRAINAGL
TRIBUTARY AREA ISO HI)
JAN
FEd
1042.00
MAR
267fAl 1042.00 515.00 641.00 1571.00
2674A2 1012.00 500.00 622.00 1524.00
2674ZZ 30.00 15.00 19.00 47.uu
TOTAL DRAINAGE AHEA UF LAKE =
SUM UF SUri-DHAINAGE AREAS
MEAN MONTHLY FLOWS AND UAILY FLOWS(CFS)
TRIBUTARY MONTH YEAR MtAN FLOW CAY
2674A1
APR
1475.
1431.
44.
00
00
00
MAY
893.00
866.00
27.00
NORMAL
JUN
600.00
582.00
18.00
1ZEO FLOWS(CFS)
JUL AUb
304.00
295.00
9.00
229.
222.
7.
00
00
00
SEH
277.
269.
8.
00
00
00
ocr
372.00
361.00
11.00
NOV DEC
510.00 490.00
495.00 475.00
15.00 15.00
MEAN
655.90
636.33
19.57
SUMMARY
LAKE
EAS
=
1042.00
1042.00
TOTAL
TOTAL
FLOW IN =
FLOW OUT =
7877.
7877.
00
00
267<.A2
FLOW DAY
FLOW
10
11
12
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
1
2
3
4
5
ft
7
8
9
10
11
12
1
?
3
<»
5
6
7
8
9
72
72
72
73
73
73
73
73
73
73
73
73
72
72
72
73
73
73
73
73
73
73
73
73
72
72
Id
73
73
73
73
73
7J
73
73
73
606.UO
79H.CO
573.00
1970.00
768.00
2720.00
1500.00
1520. CO
1080. 00
316.00
334.00
214.00
588.00
775.00
b56.00
1910.00
/46.00
2640.00
l^bft.OC
1479.00
1048.00
307.00
324.00
208.00
18. CO
23.^0
17.00
oG. i' u
22.00
80.00
44. UO
41. OJ
32.00
9.00
10.00
6.30
29
2
6
2
3
7
2
4
23
2ft
28
29
2
b
2
3
7
2
i>
23
23
28
860.00
t4o.OO
1750.00
1230.00
768.00
1753.00
2397.00 10
2072.00 18
245.00 28
228.00
267.00
835.00
427.00
1700.00
1190.00
746.00
1702.00
2327.00 lu
2012.00 18
238.00 28
221.00
260.00
2281.00
551.00
391.00
2215.00
535.00
380.00
-------
APPENDIX C
PHYSICAL and CHEMICAL DATA
-------
STORET RETRIEVAL DATE
2674U1
43 41 00.0 084 22 30.0
SANFORU LAKE
26 MICHIGAN
DATE TIME DEPTH
FROM OF
TO DAY FEET
72/06/14 15
15
72/09/17 15
15
15
72/09/20 11
11
11
72/11/14 16
16
16
55 0000
55 0010
22 0000
22 0004
22 0012
00 0000
00 0004
00 0012
30 0000
30 0004
30 0011
000 10
WATER
TEMP
CENT
21.4
20.5
21.4
20.4
20.2
20.1
5.1
5.1
11EPALES
OOJOO
DO
MG/L
3.0
7.9
12.2
9.3
8.2
7.7
11.2
11.2
001)77
TKftNSP
SECCHI
INCHES
64
24
40
44
OOO^t
CNDUCTVY
FIELO
MICROMHO
390
390
326
330
34u
420
420
420
420
420
420
5
00400
Pri
SO
8.15
8.10
6.88
8.80
8.55
8.15
8.10
8.03
8.00
8.10
3.10
00410
T ALK
CAC03
MG/L
138
138
143
136
136
131
130
131
Ibl
161
161
2111202
0015
00630
N02&N03
N-TOTAL
MG/L
0.090
0.100
0.040
0.040
0.050
0.030
0.040
0.030
0.280
0.280
0.280
FEET DEPTH
00610
NH3-N
TOTAL
MG/L
0.050
0.160
0.060
0.050
0.060
0.060
0.060
0.060
0.070
0.060
0.060
00665
PHOS-TOT
MG/L P
0.022
0.017
0.022
0.041
0.022
0.021
0.033
0.021
0.018
0.018
0.013
0066»
PHOS-OIS
MG/L P
0.014
0.010
0.009
0.014
0.010
0.011
0.012
0.010
0.008
0.008
0.007
32217
DATE TIME DEPTH CHLRPHYU
FROM OF A
TO DAY FEET UG/L
72/06/14 15 55 0000 14.7J
72/09/17 15 22 0000 10.oJ
72/09/20 11 00 0000 39.4J
72/11/14 16 30 0000 3.4J
J VALUE KNOWN TO BE IN ERROR
-------
STOREf KtFklbVAL LtAfE 7-j/C?/j4
207402
43 42 00.0 084 23 00.0
bA'MI-OKij LAI\E
.26 MICHIGAN
DATE
FROM
TO
72/06/14
72/09/17
72/09/20
72/11/14
OGolu
TIME DEPTH WATER
OF TEMP
DAY FEET
16
16
15
15
15
10
10
10
10
16
16
16
16
25
25
40
40
40
40
40
40
40
15
15
15
15
0000
0010
oojo
0004
0010
0000
0004
0015
0020
0000
0004
0015
0020
CE'MT
20.
.?o .
21.
20.
20.
19.
19.
4.
4.
4.
ti
1
t>
4
J
9
9
9
9
9
•Ji)300
no
Mb/L
8.4
7.2
9.3
v.O
7.9
7.3
6.7
11.4
1 j .2
12.4
o 0077
SECCHI
INCHES
51
34
41
CiMDUCl VY
FIELD
MlCKOMnO
34u
390
340
34u
340
425
420
420
420
410
420
430
420
lltPALtb
5
00400
HH
su
6.05
B. Ib
8.t>0
8.50
8.50
/.95
7.9o
7.95
7.65
e.OO
8.00
8.00
6.00
00410
T ALK
CAC03
MG/L
143
143
130
129
131
134
132
132
131
163
165
167
167
2111202
0014
00630
N02&N03
N-TOTAL
MG/L
0.090
0.080
0.060
0.060
0.080
0.050
0.050
0.060
0.060
0.260
0.260
0.260
0.260
FEET DEPTH
00610
NH3-N
TOTAL
MG/L
0.060
0.080
0.070
0.060
0.100
0.070
0.060
0.080
0.070
0.070
0.080
0.070
0.070
00665
PHOS-TOT
MG/L P
0.014
0.022
0.015
0.019
0.012
0.023
0.027
0.023
0.022
0.014
0.018
0.016
0.016
00666
PHOS-DIS
MG/L P
0.012
0.014
0.010
0.011
0.009
0.011
0.013
0.010
0.010
0.009
0.007
0.008
0.007
32217
DATE TIME Dt^TH CHLKPHYL
FROM OF A
TO DAY FEET JG/L
72/1,6/14 16 VS 0000 IC.^J
72/09/17 15 40 0000 7.8J
72/09/20 10 40 0000 38.rfj
72/11/14 16 15 0000 1.7j
J VALUE KNOWN TO BE IN ERROR
-------
STORE! RETRIEVAL DATt 7b/02/j4
267403
43 43 42.0 084 23 30.0
:> AFFORDLAKE
do MICHIGAN
DATE TIME DEPTH
FROM Oh
TO DAY FEET
72/06/14 16 55 0000
72/09/17 16 05 0000
16 05 0004
16 05 0009
72/09/20 10 20 0000
10 20 0004
10 20 0012
72/11/14 16 00 0000
16 00 0004
TEMP
CENT
20.8
21. j
20 . 3
20.1
20.0
4.7
OC30u Oo077 00094
DO IKANSP CiNiDucrvr
bECCHI fiELO
MG/L luCHtb MiC^OMHO
8.4
8.0
40
11.4
J60
360
440
43U
44'J
430
11EPALES
3
0040U
PH
bU
tt.lo
b.3u
6.30
8. 27
7.90
7.90
7.65
8.00
B.OO
00410
T ALK
CAC03
Mu/L
155
144
144
141
144
142
143
172
172
2111202
0007
00630
N02&N03
N-TOTAL
MG/L
0.050
0.110
0.110
0.120
0.100
0.100
0.090
0.140
0.140
FEET DEPTH
00610
NH3-N
TOTAL
MG/L
0.050
0.070
0.060
0.070
0.070
0.060
0.060
0.060
0.060
00665
PHOS-TOT
MG/L P
0.018
0.016
0.014
0.017
0.021
0.025
0.023
0.015
0.014
00666
PHOS-DIS
MG/L P
0.009
0.010
0.009
0.010
0.011
0.011
0.012
0.007
0.009
DATE TIME DEPTH
FROM OF'
TO DAf FEET
72/06/14 lb 55 0000
72/09/20 10 20 0000
72/11/14 16 00 0000
32217
A
U'j/L
16. «J
16. JJ
1.4.J
J VALUE KNOWN TO HE IN ER*OR
-------
APPENDIX D
TRIBUTARY DATA
-------
bTORET RETRIEVAL DATE 75/02/04
2674A1
43 40 30.0 OH4
T IT TAHOWASSEE
2b is SANI-OKU
0/SANFOKU LAKE
US 10
llhPALES
LS2674A1
23 30.0
2111204
0000 FEET
DEPTH
DATE
FKOM
TO
72/12/02
73/01/06
73/02/02
73/03/03
73/04/07
73/05/02
73/05/10
73/06/04
73/06/18
73/07/23
73/07/28
73/0«/2ti
73/09/2H
00630 0062b
TIME DEPTH N02&N03 TOT KJEL
OF N-TOTAL N
UAV FEET
u6
09
16
09
09
16
17
14
U9
16
U9
U9
09
00
00
30
30
00
10
40
00
20
40
00
00
00
MG/L
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
\J
0
a
0
.270
.460
.380
.290
.273
.340
.176
.336
.011
.010*
.Ul4
.010K
.010K
MG/L
0
0
2
0
2
1
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
.630
.570
.100
.«40
.000
.150
.720
.bBO
.900
.670
.760
.520
.580
v,v;6jO 00671 00665
UM3-N PriOS-uiS PhOS-IOF
TOT^L OKTHO
MG/L
0.
(j .
J .
0 .
0.
0.
0.
J.
u .
U.
(1.
•J.
0.
015
042
135
063
072
023
012
094
07'J
020
014
012
039
MG/i_
0.
0.
0.
0.
u.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
p
005*
010
u!3
012
009
016
005K
020
006
OOSK
OU5K
005K
OOH
MG/L P
O.U21
0.028
U.040
0.025
0.030
0.055
u.035
u.055
O.u35
0 .035
0.035
0.030
0.030
K VALUL *MOWN TO BE
LESS THAN INDICATED
-------
STOKET RETRIEVAL DATL 75/G2/U4
2674A2 LS2674A2
43 4b 00.0 084 23 30.0
TITTAdOWASSEE RIVEK
26 MIDLAND CO
I/SANFortD LAKE (KESVK)
COrtTiS KO brtOG
HLPALtS 2111204
H 0000 FEET DEPTH
DATE
FROM
TO
72/10/29
72/12/02
7J/01/06
73/02/02
73/03/03
73/04/07
73/05/02
73/05/10
73/00/04
73/06/18
73/07/23
73/07/28
73/08/28
73/09/28
U0630 00625
TIME DbPTri N02t*N03 TOT KJUL
OF N-TOTAL N
DAY FEET
09
09
09
17
10
09
16
17
12
09
17
09
09
09
2b
30
30
00
00
30
35
30
00
05
10
30
30
30
MO/L
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
.220
.238
.460
.330
.340
.231
.340
.440
.357
.011
.010K
.012
.010K
.010*
MG/L
1.
1.
1.
1.
0.
0.
1.
0.
0.
(j.
1.
0.
0.
0.
400
000
130
?60
560
960
700
600
t>9U
830
050
750
480
480
00610 00671 00665
NH3-N PHOS-OIS PHOi-101
IOIAL ORTHO
MG/L
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0 .
u.
u.
C.
u.
0 .
u .
0.
0.
160
046
132
096
072
048
031
024
060
033
020
012
007
060
MG/L
0.
0 .
0.
0.
0.
0.
u.
0.
0.
0.
0 .
0.
0.
0.
p
009
007
017
013
012
006
017
005K
019
007
005K
OOSK
005K
008
MG/L P
0.031
0.020
0.038
0.035
0.025
0.025
0.070
0.030
0.045
0.03-5
0.040
0.025
0.025
0.025
K VALUE KNOWN TO ue
LESS THAN INDICATED
------- |