U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
NATIONAL EUTROPHICATION SURVEY
WORKING PAPER SERIES
REPORT
ON
UNION LAKE
BRANCH COUNTY
MICHIGAN
EPA REGION V
WORKING PAPER No, 216
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-O32
-------
REPORT
ON
UNION LAKE
BRANCH COUNTY
MICHIGAN
EPA REGION V
WORKING PAPER No, 216
211
WITH THE COOPERATION OF THE
MICHIGAN DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES
AND THE
MICHIGAN NATIONAL GUARD
MARCH, 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 4
III. Lake Water Quality Summary 5
IV. Nutrient Loadings 10
V. Literature Reviewed 15
VI. Appendices 16
-------
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)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.
-------
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; Carlos Fetterolf,
Chief Environmental Scientist, Bureau of Water Management; and John
Robinson, Chief, Dennis Tierney, Aquatic Biologist, and Albert Massey,
Aquatic Biologist, Water Quality Appraisal Section, 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 Environmental Health, Michigan Department of
Public Health, and his staff were most helpful in identifying 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 3 RVEY
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
-------
UNION LAKE
Tributary Sampling Site
X Lake Sampling Site
Sewage Treatment Facility
Urban Area
o >6 1
Map Location
-------
UNION LAKE
STORE! NO. 2685
CONCLUSIONS
A. Trophic Condition:
Survey data indicate that Union Lake is eutrophic. Of the
35 Michigan lakes sampled in November when essentially all were
well-mixed, 20 had less mean total phosphorus, 25 had less mean
dissolved phosphorus, and 25 had less mean inorganic nitrogen;
of all 41 lakes sampled, 27 had less mean chlorophyll a_, and 25
had greater mean Secchi disc transparency*.
Survey limnologists indicated that the lake was moderately
turbid and without visible algal blooms during any of the samp-
ling periods.
B. Rate-Limiting Nutrient:
Based on the results of the algal assay, Union Lake was
phosphorus "limited at the time the sample was taken (09/16/72).
The lake data also indicate that phosphorus was limiting (i.e.,
all N/P ratios were 16/1 or greater).
C. Nutrient Controllability:
1. Point sources—During the sampling year, Union Lake
received a total phosphorus load at a rate nearly four times
the rate proposed by Vollenweider (in press) as "dangerous";
See Appendix A.
-------
i.e., a eutrophic rate (see page 14). However, Vollenweider's
model probably does not apply to water bodies with short hy-
draulic retention times, and the mean hydraulic retention time
of Union Lake is a very short two days.
It is estimated that Union City contributed 10% of the
total phosphorus load to Union Lake during the sampling year.
While even complete removal of phosphorus at this source would
still leave a loading rate a little over three times the eutro-
phic rate, in view of the very short hydraulic retention time
of Union Lake, it is likely that a high degree of phosphorus
removal at the Union City wastewater treatment plant would at
least reduce the incidence and severity of nuisance algal blooms.
2. Non-point sources (see page 14)—The phosphorus export
of the St. Joseph River was somewhat high during the sampling
year. However, most of this phosphorus load was contributed by
the Coldwater River.
Based on the phosphorus concentrations measured in the Cold-
water River at station B-l (see map, page v) and the mean U.S.G.S.
flow of ten years of record near Hodunk, MI* (about 3.5 miles
upstream from B-l), it is calculated that the Coldwater River
contributed about 28,400 pounds of phosphorus to the system. This
* U.S.G.S. Water Resources Data for Michigan—Surface Water Records,
1972, pg= 69,
-------
is about 73% of the non-point phosphorus load attributed to the
St. Joseph River at the inlet to Union Lake (station A-2).
It is believed that the high Coldwater River phosphorus
export is largely due to two known point sources beyond the
25-mile limit of the Survey*, and it appears that if a marked
improvement in the trophic condition of Union Lake is to be
achieved, all phosphorus inputs will have to be minimized to
the greatest practicable degree.
See Working Paper No. 1, "Survey Methods, 1972".
-------
II. LAKE AND DRAINAGE BASIN CHARACTERISTICS
A. Lake Morphometry :
1. Surface area: 525 acres.
2. Mean depth: 2.8 feet.
3. Maximum depth: 16 feet.
4. Volume: 1,470 acre-feet.
5. Mean hydraulic retention time: 2 days.
B. Tributary and Outlet:
(See Appendix B for flow data)
1. Tributaries -
Name Drainage area* Mean flow*
2
St. Joseph River 530.0 mi 375.1 cfs
Minor tributaries & 2
immediate drainage - 3.2 mi 2.9 cfs
Totals 533.2 mi2 378.0 cfs
2. Outlet -
St. Joseph River 534.0 mi2** 378.0 cfs**
C. Precipitation***:
1. Year of sampling: 37.1 inches.
2. Mean annual: 34.1 inches.
t MI Dept. Cons, lake inventory map (1963); mean depth by random-dot method.
* 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; outflow adjusted to equal sum of inflows.
*** See Working Paper No. 1, "Survey Methods, 1972".
-------
III. LAKE WATER QUALITY SUMMARY
Union 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 a number of depths at each station (see map, page v).
During each visit, a single depth-integrated (near bottom to surface)
sample was composited from the two stations for phytoplankton identifi-
cation 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_ analysis. The maximum depths sampled were 14 feet at station
1 and 12 feet at station 2.
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.
-------
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)
Minimum
N02 + N
Ammonia
s (mg/1)
(mg/1)
6
10
540
7
196
0
0
0
9
0
8
073
053
.940
0.280
(11/12/72)
Mean
6.9
10.0
540
7.9
207
0.083
0.064
0.945
0.307
Median
6.9
10.0
540
7.9
203
0.083
0.061
0.940
0.315
Maximum
7.0
10.0
540
7.9
226
0.095
0.079
0.960
0.320
ALL VALUES
Secchi disc (inches)
30
45
36
72
-------
B. Biological characteristics:
1. Phytoplankton* -
Sampli ng
Date
09/16/72
11/12/72
Dominant
Genera
1. Anabaena
2. Synedra
3. Cyclotella
4. Scenedesmus
5. Microcystis
Other genera
Total
1. Di nobryon
2. Flagellates
3. Fragilaria
4. Cyclotella
5. Kirchneriella
Other genera
Total
Number
per ml
11,114
858
813
452
422
2.124
15,783
6,784
The June sample was lost in shipment.
-------
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
Date
06/14/72
09/16/72
11/12/72
Station
Number
01
02
01
02
01
02
Chlorophyll a
(yg/D
26.7
34.6
3.7
22.6
5.2
1.2
0.004
0.014
0.024
0.054
0.054
0.054
0.004
0.553
0.553
0.553
0.553
5.553
10.553
10.553
2.7
7.1
10.6
11.5
20.9
20.8
2.5
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/l-dry wt.)
Control
0.010 P
0.020 P
0.050 P
0.050 P + 5.0 N
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 Union Lake was moderately high at the time the assay sam-
ple was collected. Also, increasing yields with increasing
increments of orthophosphorus show that the system was lim-
ited by phosphorus at that time. Note that the addition of
-------
nitrogen only resulted in a yield not significantly different
from the control yield.
Phosphorus limitation is further substantiated by the
lake data. At all sampling times, the nitrogen to phosphorus
ratios were 16 to 1 or greater.
-------
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
tributary sites indicated on the map (page v), except for the high
runoff months of April and May when two samples were collected. 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 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*. Since no unimpacted Union
Lake tributaries were sampled, nutrient loadings for unsampled "minor
tributaries and immediate drainage" ("II" of U.S.G.S.) were estimated
2
by using the means of the nutrient loads, in Ibs/mi /year, at station
B-l of Mud Creek, tributary to nearby.Randall Lake**, and multiplying
2
by the II area in mi .
Union City did not participate in the Survey, and nutrient loadings
were estimated at 2.5 Ibs P and 7.5 Ibs N per capita per year.
* See Working Paper No. 1.
** Working Paper No. 207.
-------
11
In the following tables, the loads attributed to the St. Joseph
River are those measured at station A-2 minus the estimated Union City
loads.
A. Waste Sources:
1. Known municipal -
Pop. Mean Receiving
Name Served Treatment Flow (mgd) Water
Union City 1,740* lagoon 0.174** groundwater to
w/seepage St. Joseph River
2. Known industrial - None
t Eyer, 1973.
* 1970 Census.
** Estimated at 100 gal/capita/day.
-------
12
B. Annual Total Phosphorus Loading - Average Year:
1 . Inputs -
Ibs P/ % of
Source yr total
a. Tributaries (non-point load) -
St. Joseph River 38,820 89.4
b. Minor tributaries & immediate
drainage (non-point load) - 120 0.3
c. Known municipal STP's -
Union City 4,350 10.0
d. Septic tanks* - 40 0.1
e. Industrial - Unknown
f. Direct precipitation** - 8p_ 0.2
Total 43,410 100.0
2. Outputs -
Lake outlet - St. Joseph River 38,900
3. Net annual P accumulation - 4,510 pounds
* Estimate based on 61 shoreline dwellings; see Working Paper No. 1.
** See Working Paper No. 1.
-------
13
C. Annual Total Nitrogen Loading - Average Year:
1. Inputs -
Ibs N/ % of
Source y_r total
a. Tributaries (non-point load) -
St. Joseph River 1,401,290 97.6
b. Minor tributaries & immediate
drainage (non-point load) - 14,310 1.0
c. Known municipal STP's -
Union City 13,050 0.9
d. Septic tanks* - 1,430 0.1
e. Industrial - Unknown
f. Direct precipitation** - 5,060 0.4
Total 1,435,140 100.0
2. Outputs -
Lake outlet - St. Joseph River 1,419,340
3. Net annual N accumulation - 15,800 pounds
* Estimate based on 61 shoreline dwellings; see Working Paper No. 1.
** See Working Paper No. 1.
-------
14
D. Mean Annual Non-point Nutrient Export by Subdrainage Area:
2 2
Tributary Ibs P/mi /yr IDS N/mi /yr
St. Joseph River 73 2,644
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
Units
Ibs/acre/yr
grams/m2/yr
Total
82.7
9.27
Accumulated
8.6
0.96
Total
2,733.6
306.4
Accumulated
30.1
3.4
Vollenweider loading rates for phosphorus
(g/m2/yr) based on mean depth and mean
hydraulic retention time of Union Lake:
"Dangerous" (eutrophic rate) 2.40
"Permissible" (oligotrophic rate) 1.20
-------
15
V. LITERATURE REVIEWED
Eyer, Frederick T., 1973. Treatment plant questionnaire (Union
City STP). MI Dept. Nat. Resources, Lansing.
Vollenweider, Richard A. (in press). Input-output models. Schweiz.
Z. Hydro!.
-------
VI. APPENDICES
APPENDIX A
LAKE RANKINGS
-------
LAKE DATA TO BE USED IN RANKINGS
LAKE
CODE LAKE NAME
26AO HOLLOWAt RESERVOIR
26Ai CARO RESERVOIR
26A2 80ARDMAN HYDRO POND
2603 ALLEGAN LAKE
2606 BARTON LAKE
2609 BELLEVILLE LAKE
2610 8ETSIE LAKE
2613 BRIGHTON LAKE
2617 LAKE CHAHLEVOIX
2618 LAKE CHEHUNG
2621 CONSTANTINE RESERVOIR
2629 FORD LAKE
2631 FREMONT LAKE
2640 JORDAN LAKE
2643 KENT LAKE
26<>8 LAKE MACATAWA
2649 MANISTEE LAKE
2659 MUSKEGON LAKE
2665 PENTKATER LAKE
2671 RANDALL LAKE
2672 ROGERS POND
2673 ROSS RESERVOIR
2674 SANFORD LAKE
2683 TMORNAPPLE 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
0.1BO
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
-r-ALL VAUUIS-
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
o.ooa
0.032
0.064
0.019
U.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
0.618
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
MEAN
CHLORA
10.678
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
11.360
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
THUI. VHt.ue.3-
MEAN
01SS P
0.093
0.006
0.005
0.008
0.029
0.024
0.050
MEAN
INORG 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
448.667
419.800
MEAN
CHLORA
5.583
2.986
1.043
9.217
11.967
11.833
11.117
15-
MIN t>0
8.420
13.000
9.400
8.200
14.800
8.600
13.600
-------
PERCENT OF LAKES WITH HIGHER VALUES (NUMBER OF LAKES «(ITH HIGHER VALUES)
LAKE
CODE LAKE NAME
26AO HOLLOWAY RESERVOIR
26A1 CARO RESERVOIR
26A2 BOARDMAN 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
2610 JORDAN LAKE
26*3 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
26H8 WHITE LAKE
2691 MONA LAKE
2692 LONG LAKE
MEAN MEAN
TOTAL P DISS 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)
I 20)
( 3)
( 28)
( 13)
( 24)
( 2)
( 26)
( 21)
I 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
61)
3
9
< 15)
( 19)
t 34)
( ID
( 7)
( 13)
( 27)
( B)
( 32)
( 25)
( 29)
( 10)
( 0)
( 4)
( 24)
( 5)
( 26)
( 14)
( 22)
( 2)
( 23)
( 20)
( 28)
( 16)
I 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
( 6)
( 0)
( 24)
( 11)
I 5)
( 7)
( 28)
I 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)
I 9)
( 4)
( 6)
( 12)
I 33)
( 30)
( 9)
( 9)
( 19)
( 24)
( 14)
( 0)
I 16)
( 21)
( 23)
< 8)
( 22)
( 3)
( 7)
( 18)
( 13)
( 2t)>
( 15)
( 27)
MEAN
CHLORA
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)
I 30)
( 0)
( 31)
t 16)
( 1)
( 13)
( 3)
( 9)
( 2)
( 8)
( 28)
( 24)
( 11)
( 7)
( 27)
( 22)
( 15)
( 14)
( 12)
( 26)
( 6)
( 23)
15-
MIN DO
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)
I 8)
( 2)
( 0)
( 12)
( 15)
( 16)
( 2)
( 2)
( 30)
( 18)
1 26)
< 25)
( 17)
I 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
3
-------
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 DISS P
17
89
94
83
51
63
43
( 6)
( 31)
( 33)
( 29)
< 18)
( 22)
( 15)
17
89
94
86
49
51
34
( 6)
( 31)
( 33)
( 30)
( 17)
( 18)
< 12)
MEAN
INORG N
29 1
89 1
97 1
91 1
60 1
71 1
49 1
I 10)
; 3D
! 34)
I 32)
! 21)
I 25)
1 17)
500-
MEAN SEC
14
89
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
229
483
536
481
305
354
284
-------
APPENDIX B
TRIBUTARY FLOW DATA
-------
TRIBUTARY FLO* INFORMATION FOR MICHIGAN
2/3/75
LAKE CODE 2685
UNION LAKE
TOTAL DRAINAGE AREA OF LAKE (SO Ml) 534.00
SUB-DRAINAGE
TRIBUTARY AREAtSQ Ml)
JAN
FEB
2685A1
26B5A2
2685ZZ
534.00
530.00
4.00
419.OU 543.00
416.00 539.00
3.20 4.10
MAK
598.00
593.00
4.50
APR
760.00
754.00
5.70
MAY
489.00
485.00
3.70
NORMALIZED FLOWS0
2.10
2.10
0.90
29
26
17
21
20
25
15
13
24
28
28
28
29
26
17
21
20
25
15
13
24
28
28
28
354.00
654.00
1010.00
755.00
485.00
1240.00
839.00 29
512.00 27
405.00
261. OU
173.00
113.00
351.00
649.00
1000.00
74*. 00
481.00
1230.00
832.00 29
508.00 27
402.00
259.00
172.00
112.00
868.00
906.00
861.00
899.00
-------
APPENDIX C
PHYSICAL and CHEMICAL DATA
-------
STORET RETRIEVAL DATE 75/02/04
268501
42 03 00.0 085 12 00.0
UNION LAKE
26 MICHIGAN
DATE
FROM
TO
72/06/14
72/09/16
72/11/12
TIME DEPTH
OF
DAY FEET
10 49 0000
10 49 0014
12 25 0000
12 25 0004
09 30 0000
09 30 0004
09 30 0008
09 50 0000
00010
WATER
TEMP
CENT
21.0
19.8
18.0
6.9
6.9
11EPALES
00300
DO
MG/L
8.4
6.8
6.4
10. 0
1C.O
00u77
1RANSP
SECCHI
INCHES
33
60
72
00094
CNDUCTVY
FIELD
M1CROMHO
530
480
500
50U
540
540
540
5
00400
PH
su
6.28
7.98
7.98
a. oo
7.90
7.90
7.90
00410
T ALK
CAC03
MG/L
208
216
167
Ib7
196
202
226
204
2111202
0014
00630
N02&N03
N-TOTAL
MG/L
0.240
0.320
0.650
0.630
0.940
0.940
0.960
0.940
FEET DEPTH
00610
NH3-N
TOTAL
MG/L
0.060
0.120
0.080
0.080
0.320
0.320
0.310
0.280
00665
PHOS-TOT
MG/L P
0.038
0.059
0.054
0.047
0.078
0.073
0.088
0.095
00666
PHOS-DIS
MG/L P
0.022
0.031
0.023
0.022
0.053
0.056
0.067
0.079
32217
DATE TIME DEPTH CHLWPHYL
FROM OF n
TO DAY FEET Uo/L
72/06/14 10 49 0000 26.7j
72/09/16 12 25 0000 3.7J
72/11/12 09 30 0000 5.2J
J VALUE KNOWN TO BE IN ERROR
-------
STORET RETRIEVAL DATE 75/02/04
268502
42 03 30.0 085 10 00.0
UNION LAKE
26 MICHIGAN
DATE
FROM
' TO
72/06/14
72/09/16
72/11/12
TIME DEPTH
OF
DAY FEET
11 13 0000
11 13 0006
13 25 0000
13 25 0004
13 25 0012
09 50 0000
00010
WATER
TEMP
CENT
22. d
22.5
19.2
19.2
7.0
00300 00077
DO TKANSP
SECCHI
MG/L INCHES
11.2
10.8
9.0
8.2
10.0
11EPALES
b
2111202
0006 FEET
DEPTH
7
P
II
S
30
36
36
00094
CNDUCTVY
FIELO
MICROMHO
480
560
480
460
480
540
00400
PH
SU
8.33
8.29
8.45
8.43
8.35
7.80
00410
T ALK
CAC03
MG/L
208
206
163
168
166
00630
N02«>N03
N-TOTAL
MG/L
0.320
0.290
0.050
0.080
0.080
00610
NH3-N
TOTAL
MG/L
0.040
0.030
0.060
0.070
0.080
00665'
PHOS-TOT
MG/L P
0.036
0.038
0.041
0.033
0.037
00666
PHOS-DIS
MG/L P
0.017
0.017
0.014
0.012
0.012
32217
DATE TIME DEPTH CHLKPHYL
FROM OF A
TO DAY FEET UC3/L
72/06/14 11 13 0000 34.oJ
72/09/16 13 ?5 0000 22.6J
72/11/12 09 50 0000 1.2J
J VALUE KNOWN TO BE IN ERROR
-------
APPENDIX D
TRIBUTARY DATA
-------
STOKET RETRIEVAL DATE 75/02/U4
2o83Al LS2b85Al
42 02 30.0 085 12 30.0
5f JOSEPH KIVEK
2b 15 UNION CITY
O/UNION LAKE
dhiOG CONNECTING DUNES *D ANU BLOSSOM
11EHALES 2111204
4 0000 FEET DEPTH
DATE
FROM
TO
72/10/29
72/11/26
72/12/17
73/01/21
73/02/20
73/03/25
73/04/15
73/04/29
73/05/13
73/05/27
73/06/24
73/07/28
73/08/28
73/09/28
00630 00625
TIME DEPTH N02&N03 TOT KJEL
OF N-TOTAL N
DAY FEET
15
13
13
11
20
12
13
14
12
09
12
10
20
21
40
50
50
50
?0
50
10
20
30
20
00
30
20
20
MG/L
0
1
1
1
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
.810
.010
.220
.060
.220
.740
.820
.530
.560
.620
.490
.15**
.315
.560
MG/L
2.
0.
2.
1.
0.
0.
0.
1.
u.
0.
1.
0.
0.
0.
350
630
940
150
630
720
750
760
930
920
030
940
690
570
00610 00671 00665
NH3-N PMOS-OIS PHOS-TJT
TOTAL ORTHO
MG/L
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
.196
.138
.147
.07<+
.021
.006
.024
.042
.016
.030
.080
.038
.037
.026
MG/L P
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
.029
.058
.019
.012
.006
.005K
.005K
.009
.014
.013
.021
.013
.005K
.008
MG/L P
0.092
0.086
0.044
0.025
0.040
0.035
0.030
0.055
0.050
O.ObO
0.065
0.060
0.045
0.030
K VALUE KNOWN TO BE
LESS THAN INDICATED
-------
STORE! RETRIEVAL DATE 75/02/04
26-15A2 US2685A2
42 04 00.0 oa5 09 30.0
i>T JOSEPh KlVER
26 15 UNION CITY
i/UNIUN LAKt
ArtbOKGAST KL) 1 Ml vK UNION CITY BELOW STP
11EPALES 2111204
4 0000 FEET DEPTH
DATE
FROM
TO
72/10/29
72/11/26
72/12/17
73/01/21
73/02/20
73/03/25
73/04/15
73/U4/29
73/05/13
73/05/27
73/06/24
73/07/28
73/08/28
73/09/28
00630 00625
TIME OEPTri N02&N03 TOT KJtL
OF iM-TOTAL N
DAY FEET
15
13
13
11
20
12
12
13
12
08
11
10
19
20
30
25
20
20
50
30
40
50
00
30
40
05
50
45
MG/L
0
0
0
1
1
0
0
0
u
0
0
0
0
0
.840
.yjo
.660
.120
.240
.760
.780
.560
.t>90
.6bO
.740
.840
.670
.880
MG/L
0.
1.
?.
4.
0.
0.
1.
1.
0.
0 .
1.
0.
0.
c.
900
260
200
500
7?0
750
600
BOO
720
9^5
50U
66J
44u
briu
00610 00671 00665
NH3-N PHOb-OlS PHOS-TOf
TOTAL oRTriO
MG/L
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
J.
0.
0.
(If
0.
0.
290
138
072
290
072
006
072
078
024
037
073
034
Oil
Osb
MG/L
u.
0.
0.
-------
STORET RETRIEVAL DATE /5/02/U4
LS2665AJ
085 08 30.0
2685AJ
42 04 00.0
bT JOSEPH
26 15 UNION CITY
I/UNION LAKE
w 8RDG IN ONION CITY AdOV STP
11EPALES 2111204
4 0000 FEET DEPTH
DATE
FROM
TO
72/10/29
72/11/26
72/12/17
73/01/21
73/02/20
73/03/25
73/04/15
73/04/29
73/05/13
73/05/27
73/06/24
73/07/28
73/08/28
73/09/28
00630 00625
TIME DEPTH N02NN03 TOT KJEL
OF N-TOTAL N
DAY FEET
15
12
12
11
20
12
12
13
11
07
11
09
19
20
15
50
40
00
20
10
10
30
30
00
10
45
30
15
MG/L
0
0
1
1
1
0
0
0
U
0
0
0
0
0
.770
.990
. 160
.100
.220
.760
.770
.560
.690
. 6bU
.730
.«40
.690
.790
MG/L
0.
1.
0.
0.
0.
0.
2.
0.
0.
1.
0.
0.
1.
0.
750
400
840
5^0
630
710
310 .
760
720
050
970
990
200
500
00610 00671 00665
NH3-N PHOS-DIS PHOS-TJT
TOTAL ORTHO
MG/L
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
u.
0.
231
126
040
056
035
005l\
092
050
032
036
05u
030
008
058
MG/L
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
b.
0.
0.
p
075
Ob8
019
015
010
007
009
016
021
025
032
029
015
012
MG/L P
0.105
0.084
0.04
-------
STORET RETRIEVAL DATE 75/02/04
268581 LS268SB1
42 (i<* GO.0 085 03 00.0
COLOWATEK RIVER
26 15 UNION CITY
[/UNION LAKE
EAST BRD(j IN UNION CITY
UEPALES 2111204
4 0000 FEET
DEPTH
DATE
FROM
TO
72/10/29
72/11/26
72/12/17
73/01/21
73/02/20
73/03/25
73/04/15
73/04/29
73/05/13
73/06/27
73/06/24
73/07/28
73/08/28
73/09/28
00630 00625
TIME DEPTH N02&N03 TOT KJEL
OF N-TOTAL N
DAY FEET
15
12
11
10
19
11
11
13
11
08
10
09
19
19
05
00
40 -
45
50
50
40
10
00
00
40
10
10
45
MG/L
0.
0.
1.
1.
1.
u.
J.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
760
9bO •
OHO
140
180
820
890
670
690
bbO
590
710
610
780
MG/L
1.
0.
1.
0.
0.
0.
2.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
1.
650
BOO
7oO
920
580
880
310
920
700
920
940
910
540
050
00610 00671 00t>65
NHJ-iM PHOS-DIS PHOS-TOT
TOTAL OrtTHO
MG/L
0.
0.
0.
0.
0 •
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
u.
0.
u.
450
210
084
086
030
013
094
053
046
042
065
035
016
084
MG/L
0.
0.
0 •
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0»
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
p
126
096
023
019
007
007
008
015
019
020
027
019
008
009
MG/L P
0.1 bo
0.120
0.054
0.03'j
O.U40
0.045
0.030
0.060
0.045
0.045
0.075
O.Oob
0.045
O.U35
------- |