U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
NATIONAL EUTROPHICATION SURVEY
WORKING PAPER SERIES
REPORT
ON
LAKEEFIE
POLKCOUNIY
FLORIDA
EPA REGION IV
WORKING PAPER No, 224
CORVALLIS ENVIRONMENTAL RESEARCH LABORATORY - CORVALLIS, OREGON
and
ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING & SUPPORT LABORATORY - LAS VEGAS, NEVADA
699-440
-------
REPORT
ON
LAKEEFFIE
POLK COUNTY
FLORIDA
EPA REGION IV
WORKING PAPER No, 224
WITH THE COOPERATION OF THE
FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL REGULATION
AND THE
FLORIDA NATIONAL GUARD
SEPTEMBER., 1977
-------
CONTENTS
Page.
Foreword i.i
List of Florida Study Lakes i.v
Lake and Drainage Awea Map v
Sections
I. Introduction 1
II. Conclusions 1
III. Lake Characteristics 3
IV. Water Quality Summary 4
V. Literature Reviewed 8
VI. Appendices 9
-------
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 Florida Department of Environ-
mental Regulation for professional involvement and to the Florida
National Guard for conducting the tributary sampling phase of the
Survey.
Joseph W. Landers, Jr., Secretary of the Department of Environ-
mental Regulation; John A Redmond, former Director of the Division
of Planning, Technical Assistance, and Grants; and Dr. Tim S. Stuart,
Chief of the Bureau of Water Quality, provided invaluable lake docu-
mentation and counsel during the survey, reviewed the preliminary
reports, and provided critiques most useful in the preparation of this
Working Paper series.
Major General Henry W. McMillan (Retired), then the Adjutant
General of Florida, and Project Officer Colonel Hugo F. Windham,
who directed the volunteer efforts of the Florida National Guard,
are also gratefully acknowledged for their assistance to the Survey.
-------
iv
LAKE NAME
Alligator
Apopka
Banana
Crescent
Doctors
Dora
East Tohopekaltga
Effie
Eloise
George
Gibson
Glenada
Griffin
Haines
Hancock
Horseshoe
Howel1
Istokpoga
Jessie
Jessup
Ktssimmee
Lawne
Lulu
Marion
Minnehaha
Minneola
Monroe
Munson
Okeechobee
Poinsett
Reedy
Seminole
Semi nole
South
Talquin
Tarpon
Thonotosassa
Tohopekaliga
Trout
Weohyakapka
Yale
NATIONAL EUTROPHICATION SURVEY
STUDY LAKES
STATE OF FLORIDA
COUNTY
Columbia
Lake, Orange
Polk
Flagler, Putnam
Clay
Lake
Osceola
Polk
Polk
Putnam, Volusia
Polk
Highlands
Lake
Polk
Polk
Semi no!e
Orange, Seminole
Highlands
Polk
Seminole
Osceola
Orange
Polk
Polk
Orange
Lake
Seminole, Volusia
Leon
Glades, Hendry, Martin,
Okeechobee, Palm Beach
Brevard, Orange, Osceola
Polk
Jackson, FL; Decatur,
Seminole, GA
Pinellas
Brevard
Gladsden, Leon
Pinellas
Hillsborough
Osceola
Lake
Polk
Lake
-------
X Lake Sampling Site
• Sewage Treatment Facility
1/4 1/2 Km
M 'i
-------
LAKE EFFIE
STORE! NO. 1209
I. INTRODUCTION
Lake Effie was included in the National Eutrophication Survey as a
water body of interest to the Florida Department of Environmental Regu-
lation. The lake receives effluents from two sewage treatment plants
having a combined flow of about 6,800 m3/day*.
Surface water leaves the western side of the lake, enters the Peace
Creek drainage canal, and eventually flows to the Peace River. Lake Effie
was surveyed from 1966 to 1972 by the Florida Game and Fresh Water Fish
Commission (Dingell-Johnson project reports, 1966-1972).
II. CONCLUSIONS
A. Trophic Condition:
Survey data indicate that Lake Effie is hypereutrophic. It
ranked last in trophic quality when the 41 Florida lakes sampled
in 1973 were compared using an index of six parameters**. Thirty-
eight of the lakes had less median total phosphorus, 36 had less
median orthophosphorus and inorganic nitrogen, all of the others
had less mean chlorophyll
-------
2
assay sample during transport to the laboratory, and the assay
results are not representative of conditions in the lake at the
time the sample was collected (03/14/73).
The lake data indicate nitrogen limitation at all sampling
stations and times.
-------
III. LAKE CHARACTERISTICS1"
A. Lake Morphemetry*:
1. Surface area: 0.41 kilometers2.
2. Mean depth: 1.0 meter.
3. Maximum depth: 1.5 meters.
4. Volume: 0.41 x 106 m3.
B. Precipitation**:
1. Year of sampling: 103.6 centimeters,
2. Mean annual: 130.5 centimeters.
t Table of metric conversions—Appendix B.
* No bathymetric map available (surface area obtained from U.S.G.S.
quadrangle map; depths estimated from soundings reported in Appendix C).
** See Working Paper No. 175, ". ..Survey Methods, 1973-1976''.
-------
4
IV. WATER QUALITY SUMMARY
Lake Effie was sampled three times in 1973 by means of a pontoon-
equipped Huey helicopter. Each time, a near-surface sample for physical
and chemical parameters was collected from one station on the lake
(see map, page v). During each visit, a single depth-integrated
sample (near bottom to surface) was taken for phytoplankton identification
and enumeration; and a similar sample was collected for chlorophyll
a^ analysis. During the first visit, an 18.9-liter depth-integrated
sample was taken for algal assays.
The sampling results are presented in full in Appendix C and
are summarized in the following table.
-------
>A-fAMETEK
'EMP (C)
)I5S OXY (HG/L)
;NDCfVY (MCROMO)
>n (STAND UNITS)
UT ALK (MG/L>
'0( P (MG/D
>KTHO P (MG/L)
J02*N03 (MG/L)
IMMONIA (MG/L)
:j£L N (MG/L)
INORG N (MG/L)
TOTAL N (MG/L)
IHLRPYL A (UG/D
(METE°S>
A. SUMMARY OF =>nYSICAL AMD
1ST SAMPLING ( 3/1^/73)
1 SITES
RANGE MEA--I MEDIAN
»««»«« »««e»tt»«oe»e« »OO«IHHHUK>
0.0 - 0.0 0.0 0.0
300.
9.0
300.
9.0
196. 196.
1.260 1.260
300. - 300.
9.0 - 9.0
196. - 196.
1.260 - 1.260
0.399 - 0.399 0.399 0.399
0.200 - 0.200 0.200 0.200
0.510 - 0.510 0.510 0.510
4.700 - 4.700 4.700 4.700
0.710 - 0.710 0.710 0.710
4.900 - 4.900 4.9UO 4.900
116.7 - 116.7 116.7 116.7
0.1 - 0.1 0.1 0.1
CHEMICAL CHARACTERISTICS FOR LAKE EFFIE
STOrtET CODE 1209
2ND SAMPLING ( 9/ 5/73)
1 SITES
RANGE
28.3 - 20.3
0.0 - 0.0
353. - 353.
7.2 - 7.2
123. - 123.
1.600 - 1.600
0.950 - 0.950
0.210 - 0.210
0.200 - 0.200
5.700 - 5.700
0.410 - 0.410
5.910 - 5.910
595.0 - 595.0
0.3 - 0.3
MEAN
28.3
0.0
353.
7.2
123.
1.600
0.950
0.210
0.200
5.700
0.410
5.910
595.0
0.3
MEDIAN
28.3
0.0
353.
7.2
123.
1.600
0.950
0.210
0.200
5.700
0.410
5.910
595.0
0.3
3RD SAMPLING <11/ 7/73)
1 SITES
RANGE . MEAN MEDIAN
"DC £. _ OC. ** 3Q *t 3C A
£ 3 • O CD•O C J • O CJ•O
4.0 - 4.0 4.0 4.0
368. - 368. 368. 368.
7.6 - 7.6 7.6 7.6
134. - 134. 134. 134.
1.480 - 1.480 1.480 1.480
1.100 - 1.100 1.100 1.100
O.lttO - 0.180 0.180 0.180
0.070 - 0.070 0.070 0.070
4.000 - 4.000 4.000 4.000
0.250 - 0.250 0.250 0.250
4.180 - <*.180 4.180 4.180
72.6 - 72.6 72.6 72.6
0.5 - 0.5 0.5 0.5
-------
B. Biological Characteristics:
1. Phytoplankton -
Sampling
Date
03/14/73
09/05/73
11/07/73
2. Chlorophyll a^ -
Sampl i ng
Date
03/14/73
09/05/73
11/07/73
Dominant
Genera
1. Selenastrum sp.
2. Kirchneriella sp.
3. Schroederia sp.
4. Raphidiopsis sp.
5. Lyngbya sp.
Other genera
Total
1. Scenedesmus sp.
2. Cyclotella sp.
3. Flagellates
4. Pediastrum sp.
5. Kirchneriella sp.
Other genera
Total
1. Cyclotella sp.
2. Merismopedia sp.
3. Scenedesmus sp.
4. Flagellates
5. Oscillatoria sp.
Other genera
Total
Station
Number
1
1
1
Algal Units
per ml
41,532
2,343
2,162
1,441
1,261
2,342
51,081
36,977
36,383
12,320
9,049
8,855
47.153
150,737
18,883
17,046
12,093
11,733
8,063
22,914
90,732
Chlorophyll a
(ug/1)
116.7
595.0
72.6
-------
7
C. Limiting Nutrient Study:
A 65% loss of inorganic nitrogen occurred in the algal assay
sample during shipment to the laboratory, and the assay results
are not considered representative of conditions in the lake at
the time the sample was taken (03/14/73). However, the lake
data indicate nitrogen limitation at all sampling times (the mean
inorganic nitrogen to orthophosphorus ratios were 2 to 1 or less
at all sampling times).
-------
8
V. LITERATURE REVIEWED
Anonymous, 1971. Inventory of municipal waste facilities. EPA Publ.
OWP-1, vol. 4, Wash., DC.
Florida Game & Fresh Water Fish Commission, 1966-1967. Final com-
pletion report, Dingell-Johnson project F-21-R-1. Tallahassee.
., 1967-1968. Final completion report, Dingell-Johnson
project F-21-R-2. Tallahassee.
, 1969-1970. Final completion report, Dingell-Johnson
project F-21-4. Tallahassee.
_, 1971-1972. Final completion report, Dingell-Johnson
project F-21-6. Tallahassee.
-------
VI. APPENDICES
APPENDIX A
LAKE RANKINGS
-------
AKE DATA TO BE USED IN RANKINGS
.AKE
:OOE LAKE NAME
240 CAKE THONOTOSASSA
241 LAKE TOHOPEKALIGA
242 TROUT LAKE
243 LAKE WEOHYAKAPKA
2<»6 LAKE YALE
247 LAKE MUNSON
248 LAKE SEMINOLE
249 LAKE LArfNE
250 LAKE TARPON
252 LAKE ELOISE
258 LAKE JESSIE
261 EAST LAKE TOHOPEKALIGA
264 PAYNE'S PHAIRIE LAKE (NO
MEDIAN
TOTAL P
0.6V5
0.246
1.110
0.047
0.027
1.475
0.234
?.560
0.041
0.486
0.051
0.042
1.260
MEDIAN
INOPG N
0.095
0.200
0.650
0.080
0.160
0.925
0.175
1.350
0.070
0.170
0.090
0.070
0.140
500-
MEAN 5EC
466.167
472.917
472.000
456.667
441.000
486.667
473.833
494.667
400.889
465.333
452.667
440.833
476.000
MEAN
CHLOWA
37.700
30.633
76.967
7.767
25.367
140.317
102.000
84.900
6.867
70.233
26.300
5.167
88.200
15-
MIN DO
10.200
10.500
12.900
8.200
7.600
12.200
8.600
10.400
9.000
12.200
10.800
9.400
7.400
MEDIi
DISS ORTi
0.565
0.152
0.970
0.011
0.014
0.852
0.026
0.117
O.U27
0.339
0.011
0.007
1.210
-------
LAKE DATA TO 3E USED IN RANKINGS
LAKE
CODE LAKE NAME
1201 ALLIGATOR LAKE
1302 LAKE APOPKA
1203 LAKE dANANA
1206 LAKE CRESCENT
1207 DOCTORS LAKE
1208 LAKE DORA
1209 LAKE EFFIE
1210 LAKE GEORGE
1211 LAKE GIdSON
1212 GLENAOA LAKE
121<« LAKE GPIFFIN
1215 LAKE HAINES
1217 LAKE HANCOCK
1219 LAKE HORSESHOE
1220 LAKE HOWELL
1221 LAKE ISTOKPOGA
122J LAKE JF.SSUP
1224 LAKE KISSIMMtt
1227 LAKE LHLU
1228 LAKE MAWION
1229 LAKE MJNNEHAHA
1230 LAKE MJNNEOLA
1231 LAKE MONROE
1232 LAKE OKEECHOdEE
123«» LAKE ^
1236 LAKE PF
1238 LAKE SOUTH
1239 LAKE TALOUIN
MEDIAN
TOTAL P
0.62C
0.10?
0.660
0.065
0.084
0.102
1.483
0.129
0.167
0.134
0.119
0.063
0.772
0.034
1.260
0.039
0.49?
0.034
1.490
0.044
0.03R
0.018
0.138
0.063
C.O&3
0.033
0.074
0.085
MEDIAN
INO^G N
0.260
0.230
0.260
0.130
0.120
0.240
0.410
0.165
0.115
0.165
0.260
0.115
0.195
0.130
0.285
0.120
0.390
0.145
1.065
0.260
0.080
0.070
0.300
0.185
0.150
0.330
0.130
0.290
500-
MEAN StC
47<«.000
484.1 76
482.667
473.889
465.555
482.889
489.000
464.308
470.000
454.167
481.333
462.667
483.500
459.000
464.000
464.222
487.000
463.667
483.000
468.833
43b.OOO
406.333
474.555
472.366
••69.000
468.500
464.000
462.167
MEAN
ClLOWA
67.733
46.611
208.600
10.211
27.100
59.978
261.433
35.000
19.675
27.667
66.855
26.567
97.900
12.067
54.117
6.594
76.550
24.142
276.566
29.967
8.733
3.333
14.225
14.524
6.500
34.837
23.167
9.483
15-
MIN DO
13.100
8.200
3.600
10.200
10.600
7.400
15.000
11.000
10.200
14.700
6.600
10.600
5.600
11.500
9.000
8.600
7.600
8.800
14.300
7.600
7.700
7.400
10.800
9.800
10.600
10.600
9.000
14.400
MEDIAN
DISS Or^TrtO
0.386
0.019
0,293
0.033
0.028
0.022
0.950
0.063
0.069
0.072
0.038
0.014
0.158
0.023
1.175
0.010
0.288
0.007
1.030
0.016
0.012
0.009
0.12*
0.010
O.Obl
0.008
0.028
0.031
-------
PERCENT OF LAKES *ITH HIGHER VALUES (NUMBED or LAKES *ITH HIGHEH VALUES)
LAKE .
CODE LAKE NAME
1240 LAKE THONOTOSASSA
1241 LAKE TOHOPEKALIGA
1242 TROUT LAKE
12*3 LAKE WEOHYAKAPKA
1246 LAKE YALE
1247 LAKE MUNSON
1248 LAKE SEMINOLE
1249 LAKE LAWNE
1250 LAKE TARPON
1252 LAKE ELOISE
1258 LAKE JESSIE
1261 EAST LAKE TOHOPEKALIGA
126<» PAYNE«S PRAIRIE LAKE
MEDIAN
TOTAL P
20
33
15
75
98
8
35
0
83
30
73
80
11
( 8)
< 13)
< 6)
( 30)
( 39)
( 3)
( 14)
( 0)
( 33)
( 12)
( 29)
( 32)
( 4>
MEDIAN
!NOr?G N
85
40
8
91
58
5
48
0
98
SO
88
98
65
( 34)
( 16)
( 3)
( 36)
< 23)
( 2)
( 19)
< 0)
( 38)
( 20)
( 35)
( 38)
( 26)
500-
MEAN SEC
58
38
43
83
90
8
35
0
100
63
88
93
25
( 23)
( 15)
< 17)
( 33)
( 36)
( 3)
( 14)
( 0)
( 40)
( 25)
( 35)
( 37)
( 10)
MEAN
CHLO*A
40
48
23
88
63
8
1°
20
90
28
60
98
15
( 16)
( 19)
( 9)
( 35)
( 25)
( 3)
( 4)
( 8)
( 36)
( 11)
( 24)
< 39)
( 6)
15-
MIN DO
48
40
13
74
83
16
69
43
60
16
26
55
90
( 18)
( 16)
( 5)
( 29)
( 32)
( 6)
( 27)
( 17)
( 23)
( 6)
( 10>
( 22)
( 35)
MEDIAN
OISS OHTHO P
15
30
8
84
75
13
63
35
60
20
84
99
0
( 6)
( 12)
( 3)
( 33)
( 30)
( 5)
( 25)
< 14)
( 24)
( 8)
( 33)
( 39)
( 0)
INDEX
NO
26b
229
110
495
467
58
260
V8
491
207
419
523
206
-------
OF LAKES dITH HIGHER VALUES
35)
25)
22)
MEDIAN
!NOr?G N
29
38
29
70
76
35
n
54
81
54
29
81
43
to
23
76
IK
63
3
29
91
98
IS
45
60
13
70
20
< 10)
( 15)
( 10)
( 27)
( 30)
( 14)
( 4)
( 21)
( 32)
( 21)
< 10)
( 32)
< 17)
< 27)
( 9)
( 30)
( 7)
( 25)
< 1)
( 10)
( 36)
( 38)
( 6)
( 18)
( 24)
( 5)
< 27)
( 8)
500-
MEAN SEC
30 (
10 (
20 (
33 (
GO (
18 (
3 (
4fc (
45 (
85 (
23 (
75 (
13 (
60 (
bSI (
65 (
5 (
73 (
15 (
53 <
95 (
98 (
2» «
40 (
50 <
55 (
69 <
78 (
12)
4)
8)
13)
24)
7)
1)
19)
id)
34)
9)
30)
5)
32)
27)
26)
2)
29)
6)
21)
38)
J9>
11)
16)
20)
22)
27)
3D
MEAN
CHLORA
18
38
5
80
55
33
3
43
70
53
30
58
13
78
35
93
25
t>5
0
50
85
100
fj
73
95
45
68
83
( 7)
< 15)
( 2)
( 32)
( 22)
( 13)
( 1)
( 17)
( 28)
( 21)
( 12)
( 23)
( 5)
( 3D
( 14)
( 37)
( 10)
( 26)
I 0)
< 20)
( 34)
( 40)
( 30)
( 29)
( 38)
( 16)
( 27)
( 33)
15-
MIN 00
10
74
100
48
34
90
0
23
48
3
95
34
98
20
60
69
83
65
8
83
78
90
26
53
34
34
60
5
( 4)
( 29)
( 40)
( 18)
( 12)
< 35)
( 0)
( 9)
( IB)
( 1)
( 38)
( 12)
( 39)
( 8>
< 23)
( 27)
( 32)
( 26)
( 3)
( 32)
( 31)
( 35)
( 10)
( 21)
( 12)
< 12)
( 23)
( 2)
MEDIAN
OISS OnTHO P
18
70
23
50
56
68
10
43
40
38
48
78
2d
65
3
89
25
99
5
73
80
93
3J
89
45
95
56
53
( 7)
( 28)
( 9)
( 20)
( 22)
( 27)
( 4)
( 17)
( 16)
( 15)
( 19)
< 31)
< 11)
( 26)
( 1)
( 35)
( 10)
( 39)
( 2)
( 29)
( 32)
( 37)
( 13)
( 35)
I 18)
( 38)
( 22)
< 21)
INJEA
NO
UO
280
200
346
341
297
31
256
324
276
273
396
213
*»06
201
477
I**
435
34
366
517
579
215
368
3*2
33/
3d6
294
-------
LAKES RANKED BY INOEA NOS.
RANK LAKE CODE LAKE NAME INOEX NO
29 1231 LAKE MONRCL 215
30 1217 LAKE HANCOCK 213
31 1252 LAKE EL01SE 207
32 1264 PAYNE'S PRAIRIE LAKE (MO 206
33 1220 LAKE HOWELL 201
3* 1203 LAKE bANANA 200
35 1223 LAKE JESSUP 184
36 1201 ALLIGATOR LAKE 136
37 1242 TROUT LAKE 110
38 1249 LAKE LAWNE 98
39 1247 LAKE MUNSON 58
40 1227 LAKE LULU 34
41 1209 LAKE EFFIE 31
-------
LA
-------
APPENDIX B
CONVERSION FACTORS
-------
CONVERSION FACTORS
Hectares x 2.471 « acres
Kilometers x 0.6214 = miles
Meters x 3.281 » feet
-A
Cubic meters x 8.107 x 10 » acre/feet
SqUare kilometers x 0.3861 = square miles
Cubic meters/sec x 35.315 = cubic feet/sec
Centimeters x 0.3937 « Inches
•
<
Kilograms x 2.205 * pounds
Kilograms/square kilometer x 5.711 * Ibs/square mile
-------
APPENDIX C
PHYSICAL and CHEMICAL DATA
-------
D-tTt
F-.JM
r j
73/J3/1*
73/uVOS
73/i t/0?
1 !ME DEPTH
'Jf
<-'Ai FEET
11 30 0000
i/" 50 0000
1? 45 0000
12 4S 0001
00010
KATES
TEMP
CENT
28.3
25.6
25.6
00300
DO
0.0
0.0
120*01
27 54 33.0 081 36 22.0 3
LAKE EFFIE
12105 FLORIDA
032542
11EPALES 2111202
0005 FEET DEPTh CLASS 00
00077
TRANS-;
SECChi
I MCHt '-
3
!?
] ;-
000-^4
OD'iJCT VY
FIELD
Hir-^OMHo
300
353
366
366
00400
PH.
so
9.00
7.20
7.60
00410
T ALK
CAC03
MG/L
196
123
134
00610
NH3-N
TUTAL
MG/L
0 . b 1 0
0.200
0.070
00625
TOT KJEL
N
MG/L
4.7QO
5.700
4.000
00630
N020N03
N-FOTAL
MG/L
0.200
0.210
0.180
00671
PHOS-DIS
OHTHO
MG/L P
0.399
0.950
1.100
FROM
10
OF
DAY
DEPTH PHOS-TOT
FEET
73/UJ/14 U 30 COOO
73/09/05 09 50 0000
73/11/07 12 45 0000
MG/L P
1.260
1.600
1.480
32217
CHLRPHYL
A
UG/L
116.7
595.0
72.6
------- |