U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
               NATIONAL EUTROPHICATION  SURVEY
                         WORKING PAPER SERIES

                                              REPORT
                                               ON
                                           THOMPSON LAKE
                                          LIVINGSTON COUNTY
                                             MICHIGAN
                                           EPA REGION V
                                        WORKING PAPER No,
           PACIFIC NORTHWEST ENVIRONMENTAL RESEARCH LABORATORY
                         An Associate Laboratory of the
             NATIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL RESEARCH CENTER - CORVALLIS, OREGON
                                  and
       NATIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL RESEARCH CENTER - LAS VEGAS, NEVADA
iJGPO	697.032

-------
                                    REPORT
                                      ON
                                 THOMPSON LAKE
                               LIVINGSTON COUNTY
                                   MICHIGAN
                                 EPA REGION V
                             WORKING PAPER No,
       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                 4
III.   Lake Water Quality Summary                             5
 IV.   Nutrient Loadings                                     10
  V.   Literature Reviewed                                   14
 VI.   Appendices                                            15

-------
                                11
                         EP_R.! W-P-B.2


    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)J, 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.

-------
                                IV
                  NATIONAL EUTROPHICATION SURVEY

                            STUDY LAKES
                         STATE OF MICHIGAN
LAKE NAME

Allegan Res.
Barton
Belleville
Betsie
Brighton
Caro Res.
Charlevoix
Chemung
Constant!'ne 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
Ka lamazoo
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

-------
outlet
    THOMPSON LAKE
 ®  Tributary Sampling  Site
 X  Lake Sampling Site
/  Direct Drainage Area  Boundary
    Indirect Drainage Area
    Urban Area
                    Y2 Mi.
                                                                                   Map Location
                                                                                             42° 37'	.
                                                                                             42"36

-------
                           THOMPSON  LAKE
                          STORE!  NO.  2697

I.   CONCLUSIONS
    A.   Trophic Condition:
            Survey data show that Thompson Lake  is  eutrophic.   Of  the  35
        Michigan lakes sampled in November when  essentially  all were well-
        mixed, 15 had less mean total phosphorus,  17 had less mean dis-
        solved phosphorus, and nine  had less mean  inorganic  nitrogen;  of
        all  41 lakes sampled, 21  had less  mean chlorophyll a^, but  only
        six had greater Secchi disc  transparency*.
            Near depletion of dissolved oxygen at  the 21-foot depth was
        noted at station 1 in September,  1972, and Survey limnologists
        observed a heavy algal bloom at that time.
    B.   Rate-Limiting Nutrient:
                  r
            A significant change  in  nutrients occurred in the algal assay
        sample, and the results are  not representative of conditions  in
        the lake at the time the  sample was collected (09/19/72).
            The lake data indicate marginal nitrogen limitation in June
        and September but phosphorus limitation  in  November.
    C.   Nutrient Controllability:
            1.  Point sources—Other than  septic tanks, there were no
        known point sources contributing phosphorus to Thompson Lake;
        and, during the sampling  year,  the lake  received a total
  See  Appendix  A.

-------
        phosphorus load at a rate somewhat less than that proposed
        by Vollenweider (in press) as "dangerous" but more than his
        suggested "permissible" rate (i.e., a mesotrophic rate; see
        page 13).  However, the existing trophic condition indicates
        that either  the phosphorus loading rate was higher in the past
        or the Survey  sampling did not reveal the actual loading rate.
            In this  regard, it is noted that there was an apparent
        loss of phosphorus during the sampling year; that is, more
        phosphorus was measured leaving the lake than was estimated
        or measured  entering the lake (see page 11).  While it is
        possible that  such a phosphorus wash-out could have occurred,
        it is more likely that the "loss" resulted from unknown and
        unmeasured sources discharging directly to the lake (e.g.,
        urban drainage), underestimation of septic tank contributions,
        or the limits  of accuracy of the flow estimates provided by
        the U.S. Geological Survey (see footnote, page 4).
            2.  Non-point sources (see page 13)--During the sampling
        year, the phosphorus export of the unnamed stream (B-l) was
        somewhat higher than the exports of the tributaries to other
        lakes studied  in Livingston County (e.g., Ore Creek to Brighton
                          2
        Lake* at 32  Ibs/mi /yr and the unnamed tributary to Lake Chemung**
* Working Paper No. 187.
** Working Paper No. 189.

-------
            2
at 50 Ibs/mi /yr).  Whether the greater export is due to
differences in cultural  practices in the drainages or to
the limits of sampling accuracy is not known.
    In all, it is estimated that non-point sources, including
precipitation, contributed about 87% of the total phosphorus
load to Thompson Lake during the sampling year.

-------
II.   LAKE AND DRAINAGE BASIN CHARACTERISTICS

     A.   Lake Morphometry :

         1.   Surface area:   262 acres.

         2.   Mean depth:   9  feet.

         3.   Maximum depth:   52 feet.

         4.   Volume:  2,358  acre-feet.

         5.   Mean hydraulic  retention  time:   152 days.

     B.   Tributary and Outlet:
         (See Appendix B for flow data)

         1.   Tributaries -

             Name                              Drainage area* Mean  flow*
                                                         p
             Unnamed stream  (B-l)                   7.6  mi       5.0  cfs

             Minor tributaries  &                         2
              immediate drainage -                 3.9  mi       2.8  cfs
                          Totals                  11.5 mi2     7.8 cfs
         2.  Outlet -
             Unnamed stream (A-l)                 11.9 mi2**   7.8 cfs

     C.  Precipitation***:

         1.  Year of sampling:  32.6 inches.

         2.  Mean annual:  33.1 inches.


 t MI Dept. Cons, lake inventory map (1952);  mean depth from Fetterolf  (1973),
 * 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
      Thompson 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
  three stations on the lake and usually 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 phytopiankton identification and enumeration;
  and during the second visit, a single five-gallon depth-integrated
  sample was composited for algal assay.  Also each time,  a depth-
  integrated sample was collected from each  of the stations for  chloro-
  phyll ^analyses.  The maximum depths sampled were 41 feet at  station
  1,  16 feet at station 2, and 4 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 sum-
  mary is based on all  values.
      For differences in the various parameters at the other sampling
  times, refer to Appendix C.

-------
A.  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 + NO- (mg/1)
    Ammonia fmg/1)



    Secchi disc (inches)
(11/15/72)
Minimum
3.0
7.2
520
7.7
175
0.033
0.020
0.200
0.180

42
Mean
4.7
9.1
538
7.8
179
0.043
0.029
0.212
0.224
ALL VALUES
92
Median

  5.2
  9.2
538
  7.8
177
  0.042
  0.027
  0.210
  0.230
 96
Maximum

  5.5
 10.6
560
  7.9
185
  0.052
  0.035
  0.230
  0.240
152

-------
     B.   Biological  characteristics:

         1.   Phytoplankton  -
             Sampli ng
             Date

             06/16/72
             09/19/72
             11/15/72*
Domi
nant
Genera
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.


1.
2.
3.
4.
5.


1.
2.
3.
4. .
5.

Anabaena
Oscillatoria
Asterionella
Characium
Flagellates
Other genera
Total
Cyclotella
Fragilaria
Microcystis
Micractinium
Melosira
Other genera
Total
Fragilaria
Dinobryon
Kirchneriella
Microcystis
Synedra
Other genera
 Number
 per ml

   702
   695
    29
    22
    14
 	7

 1,469

10,540
 4,144
 2,703
 1,718
 1,441
 9.004

29,550

   597
   443
   244
   136
    81
   343
                                               Total
 1,844
* It is likely that these results are not representative; the chloro-
  phyll a_ concentrations on this date (page 8) indicate that phyto-
  plankton were much more numerous.

-------
                             8
    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)	
        06/16/72               01                         6.8
                               02                         3.6
                               03                         0.8
        09/19/72               01                        16.9
                               02                        14.9
                               03                        18.8
        11/15/72               01                         2.6
                               02                        12.9
                               03                        30.4
C.  Limiting Nutrient Study:
        There was an apparent gaiji in nutrients in the assay sample
    from the time of collection to the beginning of the assay.  In-
    organic nitrogen apparently increased by 110% and dissolved
    phosphorus apparently increased by 67%.
        It is not known whether the apparent gain was due to sample
    contamination, analytical error, or decomposition of the large
    numbers of phytoplankton in the sample (see page 7) with a
    resulting release of nutrients.  Whatever the cause, the dif-
    ferential change in the major nutrients resulted in a shift
    from nitrogen limitation in the lake (N/P ratio = 12/1)  to
    phosphorus limitation in the sample (N/P = 17/1).  Consequently,
    the assay results are not representative of conditions in the
    lake at the time the sample was collected.

-------
    The lake data indicate marginal  nitrogen  limitation in
June (N/P = 13/1) but phosphorus  limitation  in  November
(N/P = 15/1).

-------
                                  10
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  tribu-
 tary sites indicated on the map (page v), except for the  high runoff
 month of April  when three samples were collected.  Sampling was begun  in
 October, 1972,  and was completed in October,  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" ("ZZ" of  U.S.G.S.) were estimated  by
                                    2
 using the nutrient loads, in Ibs/mi /year, at station B-l  and multipl^y-
                         2
 ing by the ZZ area in mi  .
     There are no known point sources impacting Thompson Lake.
     A.  Waste Sources:
         1.  Known municipal - None
         2.  Known industrial - None
 * See Working Paper No.  1.

-------
                                 11
    B.  Annual  Total  Phosphorus Loading -  Average Year:
        1.   Inputs -
                                              Ibs P/          % of
            Source                            yr	         total
            a.   Tributaries (non-point load)  -
                Unnamed stream (B-l)             520           54.7
            b.   Minor tributaries & immediate
                 drainage (non-point  load) -     270           28.4
            c.   Known municipal STP's - None
            d.   Septic tanks* -                 120           12.6
            e.   Known industrial  - None
            f.   Direct precipitation** -         40            4.2
                         Total                  950          100.0
        2.   Outputs -
            Lake outlet - Unnamed
             stream (A-l)                     1,160
        3.   Net annual P loss - 210 pounds
* Estimated 190 dwellings on lakeshore; see Working Paper No. 1.
** See Working Paper No. 1.

-------
                                 12
    C.  Annual Total Nitrogen Loading - Average Year:
        1.  Inputs -
                                              Ibs N/         % of
            Source                            yr             total
            a.  Tributaries (non-point load) -
                Unnamed stream (B-l)          15,200          50.7
            b.  Minor tributaries & immediate
                 drainage (non-point load) -   7,800          26.0
            c.  Known municipal STP's - None
            d.  Septic tanks* -                4,460          14.9
            e.  Known industrial - None
            f.  Direct precipitation** -       2,520           8.4
                         Total                29,980         100.0
        2.  Outputs -
            Lake outlet - Unnamed
             stream (A-l)                     20,800
        3.  Net annual N accumulation - 9,180 pounds
* Estimated 190 dwellings on lakeshore; see Working Paper No. 1.
** See Working Paper No. 1.

-------
                                 13
    D.  Mean Annual Non-point Nutrient Export by Subdrainage Area:
                                                      2              ?
        Tributary                             Ibs P/mi /yr   Ibs N/mi /yr
        Unnamed stream  (B-l)                        68          2,000
    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              3.6        loss*       114.4       35.0
        grams/m2/yr              0.41         -          12.8        3.9
        Vollenweider loading rates for phosphorus
         (g/m2/yr) based on mean depth and mean
         hydraulic retention time for Thompson Lake:
            "Dangerous"  (eutrophic rate)       0.54
            "Permissible"  (oligotrophic rate)  0.27
* See discussion, page 2.

-------
                                 14
V.  LITERATURE REVIEWED

    Fetterolf, Carlos, 1973.  Personal communication (lake morphometry),
        MI Dept. of Nat. Resources, Lansing.

    Vollenweider, Richard A. (in press).  Input-output models.   Schweiz.
        Z. Hydrol.

-------
                                  15






VI.  APPENDICES
                            APPENDIX A
                           LAKE RANKINGS

-------
LAKE DATA TO BE USED IN RANKINGS
LAKE
CODE  LAKE NAME

26AO  HOLLOWAY RESERVOIR

26A1  CARO RESERVOIR

26A2  BOAROMAN HYDRO POND

2603  ALLEGAN LAKE

2606  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

26*3  KENT LAKE

2648  LAKE MACATAWA

26*9  MANISTEE LAKE

2659  MUSKEGON LAKE

2665  PENTWATER LAKE

2671  RANDALL LAKE

2672  ROGERS PONO

2673  ROSS RESERVOIR

2674  SANFORD LAKE

2683  THORNAPPLE LAKE

2685  UNION LAKE

26B8  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
0.042
0.083
0.027
0.307
0.163
-f ALL VALUti
MEAN
OISS 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
0.017
0.183
0.015
0.021
0.008
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
457.333
435.500
465.333
. 458.750
442.833
455.500
417.778
451.667
418.400
MEAN
CHLORA
10.67U
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
P. 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  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
r ALL VALUE.:
MEAN
DISS P
0.093
0.006
0.005
0.008
0.029
0.024
0.050
MEAN
INURG N
1.227
0.164
0.058
0.136
0.436
0.346
0.567
500-
MEAN SEC
462.667
380.000
268.500
420.833
407.889
446.667
419.800
MEAN
CHLOKA
5.583
2.986
1.043
9.217
11.967
11.833
11.117
15-
MIN oa
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  BOAKDMAN HYDRO POND
2603  ALLEGAN LAKE
2606  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
26*9  MANISTEE LAKE
2659  MUSKEGON LAKE
2665  PENTWATER LAKE
2671  RANOALL LAKE
2672  ROGERS POND
2673  ROSS RESERVOIR
2674  SANFORO 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)
I 32)
( 17)
( 25)
( 12)
( 0)
( 4)
( 20)
( 3)
( 28)
< 13)
< 24)
( 2)
( 26)
I 21)
I 30)
( 19)
( 14)
( 23)
( 1)
( 5)
43
Sft
97
31
20
37
77
23
91
71
83
29
0
11
69
14
74
«.o
63
6
66
57
80
46
26
60
3
9
( 15)
( 19)
I 34)
( 11)
( 7)
( 13)
( 27)
( 8)
I 32)
( 25)
( 29)
( -10)
( '0)
< 4)
( 24)
( 5)
( 26)
( 14)
( 22)
( 2)
( 23)
I 20)
( 28)
I 16)
( 9)
( 21)
( 1)
( 3)
MEAN
INORG N
17
0
69
31
14
20
80
34
83
94
40
11
23
6
63
3
77
54
51
43
86
57
74
9
26
66
37
46
I 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
57 (
3 (
91 (
6 (
29 (
11 (
17 (
34 (
94 I
86 (
29 (
29 (
54 (
69 (
40 (
0 (
46 (
60 (
66 (
23 I
63 (
9 (
20 (
51 (
37 (
80 (
43 (
77 (
SEC
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 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)
( 33)
( 10)
( 5)
( 4)
( 30)
I 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)
( 21
( 31)
( 8)
( 2)
( 0)
I 12)
< 15)
( 16)
( 2)
( 2)
( 30)
( 18)
( 26)
( 25)
( 17)
( 26)
( 11)
( 7)
( 9)
INOEX
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
123
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 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
. «6
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
8V
97
71
83
49
74
( 5)
< 31)
( 34)
( 25)
( 29)
( 17)
( 26)
— ALL VALUtS — — —
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)
( 20)
( 26)
( 2)
( 23)
( 9)
INDEX
NO
2
-------
     APPENDIX B
TRIBUTARY FLOW DATA

-------
                                   TRIBUTARY FLOW INFORMATION FOR MICHIGAN
                                                                       a/3/75
LAKE CODE 2697
THOMPSON LAKE
TOTAL DRAINAGE AREA OF LAKE (SO MI)
TRIBUTARY
2697A1
269781
2697Z2
SUB-DRAINAGE
AREA (SO MI) JAN
11.90
7.60
4.30
6.77
4.35
2.46
FEB
11.00
7.08
4.01
11.90
MAR
12.20
7. 84
4.44
APR
14.60
9.36
5.30
MAY
8.56
5.47
3.10
NORMALIZED FLOWS 
-------
                                   TRIBUTARY FLOW INFORMATION FOR MICHIGAN
                                                                       2/3/75
LAKE CODE 2697
THOMPSON LAKE
                                                                                                         \
     MEAN MONTHLY FLOWS AND DAILY FLOWS(CFS)

TRIBUTARY   MONTH   YEAR    MEAN FLOW  DAY
2697ZZ
10
11
12
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
72
72
72
73
73
73
73
73
73
73
73
73
73
              2.10
              4.40
              4.00
              7.70
              3.90
              9.50
              7.40
              4.20
              3.20
              2.60
              1.40
              0.80
              1.60
                                FLOW  DAY
FLOW  DAY
FLOW

-------
        APPENDIX C
PHYSICAL and CHEMICAL DATA

-------
STORET RETRIEVAL DATE 75/02/04
                      00010
  DATE   TIME DEPTH  WATER
  FROM    OF          TEMP
   TO    DAY  FEET    CENT

72/06/16 15 55 0000     22.5
         15 55 0020      9.9
72/09/19 16 35 0000
         16 35 0004
         16 35 0015
         16 35 0021
72/11/15 10 35 0000
         10 35 0004      5.5
         10 35 0015      5.5
         10 35 0025      5.4
         10 35 0041      5.2
                      32217
  DATE   TIME DEPTH CHLRPHfL
  FROM    OF           A
   TO    DAY  FEET    UG/L

72/06/lb 15 55 0000      6.8J
72/09/19 16 35 0000     16.9J
72/11/15 10 35 0000      2.6J
                                                                  269701
                                                                 42 37 00.0 083 55 00.0
                                                                 THOMPSON LAKE
                                                                 26      MICHIGAN
11EPALES

00300
DO

MG/L
5.4
10.2

9.1
6.6
0.2

9.2
9.2
8.8
7.2

00077
TRANSP
SECCHI
INCHES
152

72



121





00094
CNDUCTVY
FIELD
MICROMHO
410
440
480
460
460
480
560
530
530
520
530
4
00400
PH

SU
7.87
8.20
8.60
8.60
8.28
7.61
7.70
7.70
7.70
7.70
7.70

00410
T ALK
CAC03
MG/L
160
185
165
165
165
168
185
176
175
177
175
2111202
0026
00630
N026.N03
N-TOTAL
MG/L
0.020
0.010
0.040
0.050
0.040
0.030
0.210
0.230
0.220
0.200
0.210
FEET DEPTH
00610
NH3-N
TOTAL
MG/L
0.420
0.010K
0.080
0.070
0.070
0.470
0.240
0.230
0.230
0.240
0.240
V 00665
PHOS-TOT

MG/L P
0.046
0.028
0.023
0.021
0.024
0.019
0.042
0.052
0.051
0.051
0.039
00666
PHOS-DIS

MG/L P
0.042
0.010
0*014
0.014
0.013
0.009
0.035
0.034
0.034
0.035
0.030
          VALUE KNOWN TO BE LESS
          THAN INDICATED
       J  VALUE KNOWN TO BE IN ERROR

-------
STORET RETRIEVAL DATE 75/02/04
                      U0010
  DATE   TIME DEPTH  WATER
  FROM    OF          TEMP
   TO    DAY  FEET    CENT

72/06/16 16 30 0000     22.3
         16 30 0010     20.0
72/09/19 16 25 0000
         16 25 0004     22.1
72/11/15 11 00 0000
         11 00 0004      4.3
         11 00 0016      4.3
                      32217
  DATE   TIME DEPTH CHLKPHYL
  FROM    OF           A
   TO    DAY  FEET    UG/L

72/06/16 16 30 0000      3.6J
72/09/19 16 25 0000     14.9J
72/11/lb 11 00 0000     12.9J
00300     00077     00094
 DO      TRANSP   CNDUCTVY
         SECCHI   FIELD
MG/L     INCHES   MICROMHO
   4.8
   4.0

   9.5

   9.5
   9.0
120

 48

118
420
425
475
475
540
540
535
                                                                  269702
                                                                 42 36 30.0 083 55 00.0
                                                                 THOMPSON LAKE
                                                                 26      MICHIGAN.
11EPALES
ft
00400
PH

SU
7.70
7.58
8.65
8.65
7.90
7.9U
7.90

00410
T ALK
CAC03
MG/L
164
164
166
165
179
176
177
2111202
0010
00630
N02&N03
N-TOTAL
MG/L
0.030
0.660
0.060
0.050
0.210
0.210
0.200
V

FEET DEPTH
00610
NH3-N
TOTAL
MG/L
0.530
0.800
0.070
0.080
0.230
0.230
0.230
00665
PHOS-TOT

M6/L P
0.066
0.073
0.023
0.027
0.036
0.048
0.041
00666
PHOS-OIS
1
MG/L P
0.058
0.073
0.014
0.019
.0.025
'0.024
0.029
    J  VALUE  KNOWN TO  BE  IN  £

-------
STORE! RETRIEVAL DATE 75/02/04
                                                                  269703
                                                                 42 36 00.0 083 54 30.0
                                                                 THOMPSON LAKE
                                                                 26      MICHIGAN
11EPALES


DATE
FROM
TO
72/06/16
72/09/19

72/11/15



TIME DEPTH
OF
DAY FEET
16 55 0000
16 00 0000
16 00 0004
11 20 0000
11 20 0004

00010
WATER
TEMP
CENT
22.5

21.8

3.0

00300
DO

MG/L
5.6

9.1

10.6

00077
TRANSP
SECCHI
INCHES
96
42

60


00094
CNDUCTVY
FIELD
MICROMHO
415
480
470
550
540
4
00400
PH

SU
7.80
8.55
8.55
7.90
7.90

00410
T ALK
CAC03
MG/L
161
170
167
184
182
2111202
0008
00630
N02&N03
N-TOTAL
MG/L
0.030
0.060
0.050
0.220
0.210
FEET DEPTH
00610
NH3-N
TOTAL
MG/L
0.470
0.100
0.090
0.190
0.160
00665
PHOS-TOT

MG/L P
0.048
0.034
0.060
0.033
0.042
00666
PHOS-DlS

MG/L P
0.044
0.018
0.018
0.020
0..0Z5
                      32217
  DATE   TIME DEPTH CHLRPHYL
  FROM    OF           A
   TO    DAY  FEET    UG/L

72/06/16 16 55 0000      0.8J
72/09/19 16 00 0000     18.8J
72/11/15 11 20 0000     30.4J
     J VALUE KNOWN TO HE IN ERROR

-------
  APPENDIX D
TRIBUTARY DATA

-------
STORET RETRIEVAL DATE 75/02/04
                                                                                  LS2697A1
                                                                 42 37 30.0 083 55 30.0
                                                                 UNNAMED OUTLET CHEEK
                                                                 26      7.5 HOWELL
                                                                 0/TnOMPSON LAKE
                                                                 ST Hfcir 59 BRDG Nrt CORNER OF LAKE
                                                                 11EPALES             2111204
                                                                 4                   0000 FEET  DEPTH
DATE
FROM
TO
72/10/29
72/12/02
73/01/07
73/02/04
73/03/04
73/04/06
73/04/21
73/0*/22
73/06/0?
73/07/07
73/08/04
73/09/08
73/10/13
00630 00625
TIME DEPTH N02MMOJ TOT KJEL
OF N-TOTAL N
DAY FEET
09
09
07
08
08
08
12
10
12
11
14
13
08
45
55
40
15
30
00
10
50
45
30
30
00
30
MG/L
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
.610
.010K
.294
.20U
.336
.100
.410
.079
.500
.070
.069
.190
.315
MG/L
4.
0.
1.
1.
0.
C.
1.
1.
1.
0.
1.
1.
1.
550
930
J50
050
H30
750
ISO
153
470
940
200
?00
750
00610 00671 00665
MH3-N PHOS-OIS HhOS-TOT
TOTAL ORThO
MG/L
0.
0.
0.
0.
\j m
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
310
016
138
105
i>9o
025
176
058
270
044
040
168
375
MG/L P
0
G
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
.040
.022
.022
.013
.025
.007
.023
.011
.054
.013
.017
.018
.008
MG/L P
0.1 2b
0.047
0.056
0.055
0.035
0.035
O.U65
0.065
0.115
0.050
0.085
0.055
0.180
  K VALUE KNOWN TO BE
  LESS THAN INDICATED

-------
STORE! RETRIEVAL DATE 75/02/04
                                                                  269781          LS2697B1
                                                                 42 36 30.0 083 53 30.0
                                                                 UNNAMED  INLET CHEEK
                                                                 26      7.5 HOWELL
                                                                 I/THOMPSON LAKE
                                                                 EAGER HO dRDG N OF EARL LAKE
                                                                 11EPALES             3111204
                                                                 4                   0000 FEET
DATE
FROM
TO
72/10/29
72/12/02
73/01/07
73/02/04
73/03/04
73/04/06
73/04/21
73/04/22
73/05/20
73/06/02
73/07/07
73/08/04
73/09/08
73/10/13
00630 00625
TIME DEPTH N02&N03 TOT KJEL
OF N-TOTAL N
DAY FEET
10
10
08
08
08
08
12
10
14
12
11
13
12
08
20
00
00
30
45
30
00
00
20
30
40
50
45
40
MG/L
0
0
0
0
C
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
.180
.180
.176
.200
.390
.110
.020
.073
.010K
.023
.048
.060
.034
.031
MG/L
2.
0.
0.
1.
0.
1.
2.
1.
1.
1.
1.
1.
1.
1.
600
965
940
500
990
100
000
300
260
760
550
680
150
050
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.
0.
147
014
030
063
154
036
042
026
027
054
077
070
042
085
MG/L
0.
P
009
0.005K
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
005K
007
015
005
009
007
008
010
018
025
021
006
MG/L P
0.040
0.038
0.046
0.035
0.055
0.030
0.050
0.050
0.050
0.045
0.055
0.060
0.105
0.070
DEPTH
  K VALUE KNOWN TO BE
  LESS THAN INDICATED

-------