U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
NATIONAL EUTROPHICATION SURVEY
WORKING PAPER SERIES
REPORT
ON
LAKE DORA
LAKEOMIY
FLORim
EPA REGION IV
WORKING PAPER No, 248
CORVALLIS ENVIRONMENTAL RESEARCH LABORATORY - CORVALLIS, OREGON
and
ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING & SUPPORT LABORATORY - LAS VEGAS, NEVADA
•&G.P.O. 699-440
-------
REPORT
ON
LAKE DORA
LAKE COUNTY
FLORIEA
EPA REGION IV
WORKING PAPER No, 248
WITH THE COOPERATION OF THE
FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL REGULATION
AND THE
FLORIDA NATIONAL GUARD
OCTOBER, 1977
-------
CONTENTS
Foreword ii
List of Florida 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 9
V. Literature Pxcviewed 14
VI. Appendices 15
-------
F 0 \\ E V 0 R D
The Matlonol CutrGpiii cation Survey was initiated in 1972 in
response to an Administration commitment to investigate the nation--
wide threat of accelerated eutrophication to fresh water lakes arid
reservoirs.
OWIDCTIVRS.
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 eutrophicaticn 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 general i>:c-d model
can be transformed into an operational representation of
a lake, its drainage basin, and related nutrients.
c. With such a transformation, an assessment of the
potential for eutrophication control can be made.
LAKE ANALYSIS
In this report, the first stage of evaluation of lake and water-
shed data collected from the study lake and its drainage basin is
documented. The report is formatted to provide state environmental
agencies with specific information for basin planning [§303(e)], water
quality criteria/standards review [§303(c)]» clean lakes [§314(a,b)j,
and v/ater quality monitoring [§106 and §305(b)] activities mandated
by the Federal Water Pollution Control Act Amendments of 1972.
-------
Beyond the single loke 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 waler lakes. Likewise, milltivariate 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 Eutrcph'Ication 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.
-------
1v
NATIONAL EUTROPHICATION SURVEY
STUDY LAKES
STATE OF FLORIDA
LAKE NAME
Alligator
Apopka
Banana
Crescent
Doctors
Dora
East Tohopekaliga
Effie
Eloise
George
Gibson
Glenada
Griffin
Haines
Hancock
Horseshoe
Howel1
Istokpoga
Jessie
Jessup
Kissimmee
Lawne
Lulu
Marion
Minnehaha
Minneola
Monroe
Munson
Okeechobee
Poinsett
Reedy
Seminole
Semi nole
South
Talquin
Tarpon
Thonotosassa
Tohopekaliga
Trout
Weohyakapka
Yale
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
Gadsden, Leon
Pinellas
Hillsborough
Osceola
Lake
Polk
Lake
-------
Map Location
Oakland
Park
LAKE DORA
<8>Tributary Sampling Site
X Lake Sampling Site
F Sewage Treatment Facility
0 1 2 Km.
Mi.
-------
LAKE DORA
STORE! NO. 1208
CONCLUSIONS
A. Trophic Condition:
Survey data and a report by others (Shannon and Brezonik, 1972)
indicate that Lake Dora is hypereutrophic. Based on a comparison
of six water quality parameters, this lake ranked twentieth in over-
all trophic quality among the 41 Florida lakes sampled in 1973*.
Nineteen of the lakes had less and one had the same median total
phosphorus, 13 had less median dissolved phosphorus, 25 had less
median inorganic nitrogen, 18 had less mean chlorophyll a^, and 33
had greater mean Secchi disc transparency. Depression of dissolved
oxygen was not evident at any of the Survey sampling times; however,
it is reported that Lake Dora has had summer fish kills (Ketelle
and Uttormark, 1971).
High numbers of blue-green algae (page 7), chlorophyll ^con-
centrations of up to 100 yg/1, and Secchi disc transparencies of
0.5 meter or less indicate the enriched condition of the lake.
B. Rate-Limiting Nutrient:
There was a significant loss of inorganic nitrogen in
the sample, and the algal assay results are not representative
of conditions in the lake at the time the sample was collected
(03/12/73).
The lake data indicate phosphorus limitation in March and
nitrogen limitation in September and November.
* See Appendix A.
-------
2
*
C. Nutrient Controllability:
1. Point sources—During the sampling year, Lake Dora
received an estimated total phosphorus loading of 1.83 g/m2,
or more than four times that proposed by Vollenweider (Vollenweider
and Dillon, 1974) as a eutrophic loading. However, over 87% of
the estimated load is attributed to the Apopka-Beauclair Canal,
but because of expected but unquantified phosphorus retention in
intervening Lake Beauclair (see map, page v), the phosphorus
contribution of the Canal must have been less than indicated.
Therefore, the overall Lake Dora phosphorus loading also must
have been less than shown above (e. g., if 40% phosphorus entrap-
ment had occurred in Lake Beauclair, the Lake Dora loading would
have been 1.19 g/m2/yr or 2.7 times the eutrophic level).
It is estimated that 5.5% of the total phosphorus load was
contributed by the Mount Dora wastewater treatment plant during
the sampling year. Phosphorus removal or effluent diversion at
this source probably would not result in an appreciable improve-
ment in the trophic condition of the lake unless phosphorus can be
controlled elsewhere in the drainage.
The municipal, industrial, and agricultural sources in the
upstream Lake Apopka* drainage contributed an estimated 60,990 kg
of phosphorus to that lake during the sampling year. Allowing for
retention in Lake Apopka (54.4%), it is calculated the above sources
Working Paper No. 244.
-------
3
contributed 67.8% of the 35,925 kg phosphorus load measured at
the Apopka-Beauclair Canal outlet station (1202 A-l); i.e., 27,810
kg. Because of the uncertainty as to the degree of phosphorus
retention in Lake Beauclair noted above, the impact of the indirect
phosphorus sources cannot be quantified; however, again assuming
40% retention in Lake Beauclair, those sources could have contributed
nearly 17,000 kg of phosphorus to Lake Dora and thus could have been
significant sources.
Although a critical assessment of the effects of phosphorus
control on the trophic condition of Lake Dora is dependent on a
determination of phosphorus retention in Lake Beauclair, it seems
likely that a high degree of phosphorus removal at all of the
sources in the drainage would result in an appreciable improvement,
particularly since Florida lakes may be able to assimilate phos-
phorus at a higher level than that suggested by Vollenweider (see
page 13).
2. Non-point sources—With municipal, industrial, and agri-
cultural nutrient loads subtracted, the phosphorus and nitrogen
exports of the Apopka-Beauclair Canal were 17 and 465 kg/km2,
respectively, during the sampling year (page 13). These rates are
comparable to the means of the rates of two tributaries of nearby
Lake Griffin* (16 kg P and 412 kg N/km2/yr).
** Working Paper No. 254.
-------
5
III. LAKE WATER QUALITY SUMMARY
Lake Dora was sampled three times during 1973 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
one or more depths at each station (see map, page v). During each
visit, a single depth-integrated (near bottom to surface) sample
was composited from the stations for phytoplankton identification
and enumeration; and during the first visit, a single 18.9-liter
depth-integrated sample was composited for algal assays. Also each
time, a depth-integrated sample was collected from each of the stations
for chlorophyll ^analysis. The maximum depths sampled were 1.8
meters at station 1, 2.4 meters at station 2, and 2.7 meters at
station 3.
The sampling results are presented in full in Appendix D and
are summarized in the following table.
-------
PARAMETER
TEMP (o
DISS OXY (MG/L)
CNUCTVY (MCROMO)
PH (STAND UNITS)
TOT ALK (MG/L)
TOT P (MG/L)
ORTHO P (MG/L)
N02»N03 (MG/L)
AMMONIA (MG/L)
KJEL N (MG/L)
INORG N (MG/L)
TOTAL N (MG/L)
CHLRPYL A
-------
B. Biological characteristics:
1. Phytoplankton -
Sampling
Date
03/12/73
09/06/73
11/05/73
Sampli ng
Date
03/12/73
09/06/73
11/05/73
Dominant
Genera
1. Lyngbya S£.
2. Microcystis sp.
3. Aphanocapsa sp.
4. Merismopedia sp.
5. Scenedesmus sp.
Other genera
Total
1. Lyngbya sp.
2. Aphanocapsa sja.
3. Microcystis sp.
4. Chroococcus sp.
5. Melosira sp.
Other genera
Total
1. Lyngbya sp.
2. Microcystis sp.
3. Chroococcus sp.
4. Merismopedia sp.
5. Anabaena sp.
Other genera
Total
Station
Number
1
2
3
1
2
3
1
2
3
Algal Units
per ml
17,816
3,857
3,061
2,939
979
8,939
37,591
42,201
3,389
3,081
2,464
2,310
7,700
61,145
64,102
13,090
6,352
5,005
1,732
10.391
100,672
Chlorophyll
(yg/1)
36.7
44.8
66.5
69.0
71.8
99.8
31.3
63.9
56.0
-------
8
C. Limiting Nutrient Study:
There was a 60% loss of inorganic nitrogen in the sample
between the time of collection and the beginning of the algal
assay, and the results are not representative of conditions in
the lake at the time the sample was taken (03/12/73).
The lake data indicate phosphorus limitation in March at
all stations but nitrogen limitation at all stations in September
and November.
Following is a tabulation of the mean inorganic nitrogen/
orthophosphorus ratios for each of the stations and sampling
times with the indicated limiting nutrient in parentheses.
Station 03/12/73 09/06/73 11/05/73
1 22/1 (P) 11/1 (N) 6/1 (N)
2 21/1 (P) 8/1 (N) 5/1 (N)
3 20/1 (P) 7/1 (N) 5/1 (N)
-------
IV. NUTRIENT LOADINGS *
(See Appendix E for data)
For the determination of nutrient loadings, the Florida National
Guard collected monthly near-surface grab samples from each of the
tributary sites indicated on the map (page v). Sampling was begun in
March, 1973, and was completed in February, 1974.
Through an interagency agreement, stream flow estimates for the
year of sampling and a "normalized" or average year were provided by
the Florida 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 loads shown are
those measured minus point-source loads, if any.
The flows given for site 1202A-1 (Lake Apopka outlet) were added to
the Lake Dora B-l and II flows to determine the total inflow to the lake
(Anderson, 1974). Also, nutrient loads at the Lake Apopka outlet
station are reported as inlet loads to Lake Dora.
Nutrient loads for station B-l and the unsampled "minor tributaries
and immediate drainage" ("ZZ" of U.S.G.S.) were estimated using the
means of the nutrient loads, in kg/km2/yr, at stations A-l and B-l of
nearby Lake Griffin** and multiplying the means by the ZZ area in km2.
* See Working Paper No. 175.
** Working Paper No. 254.
-------
10
The operator of the Mount Dora wastewater treatment plant provided
only two effluent samples; therefore, nutrient loads were estimated
at 1.134 kg P and 3.401 kg N/capita/year, and the mean flow was esti-
mated at 0.3785 m3/capita/day.
A. Waste Sources:
1. Known municipal -
Pop. Mean Flow Receiving
Name Served Treatment (m3/d) Water
Mount Dora 2,000* trickling 757.0 Unnamed Creek B-l
filter
2. Known industrial - None
* Treatment plant questionnaire.
-------
11
B. Annual Total Phosphorus Loading - Average Year:
1. Inputs -
kg P/ % of
Source yr total
a. Tributaries (non-point load) -
Unnamed Creek B-l 20 <0.1
Apopka-Beauclair Canal 35,925 87.6
b. Minor tributaries & immediate
drainage (non-point load) - 1,760 4.3
c. Known municipal STP's -
Mount Dora 2,270 5.5
d. Indirect municipal - ?
e. Septic tanks* - 55 0.1
f. Indirect industrial &
agricultural ?
g. Direct precipitation** - 985 2.4
Total 41,015 100.0
2. Outputs -
Lake outlet - Dora Canal 12,450
3. Net annual P accumulation - 28,565 kg.
* Estimate based on 202 lakeshore dwellings; see Working Paper No. 175.
** Brezonik and Shannon, 1971.
-------
12
C. Annual Total Nitrogen Loading - Average Year:
1. Inputs -
kg N/ % of
Source yr total
a. Tributaries (non-point load) -
Unnamed Creek B-l 445 0.1
Apopka-Beauclair Canal 354,670 83.7
b. Minor tributaries & immediate
drainage (non-point load) - 46,845 11.0
c. Known municipal STP's -
Mount Dora 6,800 1.6
d. Indirect municipal - ? -
e. Septic tanks* - 2,155 0.5
f. Indirect industrial &
agricultural ?
g. Direct precipitation** - . 12,975 3.1
Total 423,890 100.0
2. Outputs -
Lake outlet - Dora Canal 312,365
3. Net annual N accumulation - 111,525 kg.
* Estimate based on 202 lakeshore dwellings; see Working Paper No. 175.
** Brezonik and Shannon, 1971.
-------
13
D. Non-point Nutrient Export by Subdrainage Area:
Tributary kg P/km2/yr kg N/km2/yr
Apopka-Beauclair Canal* 17 465
E. Yearly Loading Rates:
In the following table, the existing phosphorus loadings
are compared to those proposed by Vollenweider (Vollenweider
and Dillon, 1974). Note, however, that Florida lakes may be
able to assimilate phosphorus at a somewhat higher level than
that suggested by Vollenweider (Shannon and Brezonik, 1972).
Essentially, Vollenweider's "dangerous" loading is one
at which the receiving water would become eutrophic or remain
eutrophic; his "permissible" loading is that which would
result in the receiving water remaining oligotrophic or becoming
oligotrophic if morphometry permitted. A mesotrophic loading
would be considered one between "dangerous" and "permissible".
Vollenweider's model may not be applicable to water bodies
with short hydraulic retention times.
Total Phosphorus Total Nitrogen
Total Accumulated Total Accumulated
grams/mVyr 1.83 1.28 18.9 5.0
Vollenweider phosphorus loadings
(g/m2/yr) based on mean depth and mean
hydraulic retention time of Lake Dora:
"Dangerous" (eutrophic loading) 0.44
"Permissible" (oligotrophic loading) 0.22
* Municipal, industrial, and agricultural loads subtracted.
-------
14
V. LITERATURE REVIEWED
Anderson, Warren, 1974. Personal communication (flow data). U.S.
Geol. Surv., Tallahassee.
Brezonik, Patrick L., and Earl E. Shannon, 1971. Trophic state of
lakes in north central Florida. Publ. No. 13, FL Water
Resources Res. Ctr., U. of FL, Gainesville.
Ketelle, Martha J., and Paul D. Uttormark, 1971. Problem lakes
in the United States. EPA Water Poll. Contr. Res. Ser.,
Proj. #16010 EHR, Wash., DC.
Shannon, Earl E., and Patrick L. Brezonik, 1972. Relationships
between lake trophic state and nitrogen and phosphorus loading
rates. Env. Sci. & Techn. 6_ (8): 719-725.
Vollenweider, R. A., and P. J. Dillon, 1974. The application of
the phosphorus loading concept to eutrophication research.
Natl. Res. Council of Canada Publ. No. 13690, Canada Centre
for Inland Waters, Burlington, Ontario.
-------
VI. APPENDICES
15
APPENDIX A
LAKE RANKINGS
-------
LAKE DATA TO BE USED IN RANKINGS
LAKE
CODE LAKE NAME
1201 ALLIGATOR LAKE
1202 LAKE APOPKA
1203 LAKE BANANA
1206 LAKE CRESCENT
1207 DOCTORS LAKE
1208 LAKE DORA
1209 LAKE EFF1E
1210 LAKE GEORGE
1211 LAKE GIBSON
1212 GLENAOA LAKE
1214 LAKE GRIFFIN
1215 LAKE HAINES
1217 LAKE HANCOCK
1219 LAKH. HORSESHOE
1220 LAKE HOWELL
1221 LAI'S iMOKPUdA
1223 LAKE JESSUP
1224 LAKE KISSIHMEE
1227 LAKE LULU
1226 LAKE MARION
1229 LAKE MINNEHAHA
1230 LAKE MINNEOLA
1231 LAKE MONROE
1232 LAKE OKEECHObEE
123* LAKE POINSETT
1236 LAKE REEDY
1238 LAKE SOUTH
1239 LAKE TALQUIN
MEDIAN
TOTAL P
0.620
0.102
0.660
0.065
0.084
0.102
1.480
0.129
0.167
0.134
0.119
0.063
0.772
0.034
1.260
0,039
0.442
0.034
1.490
0.044
0.038
0.018
0.188
0.063
0.08?
0.033
0.074
0.085
MEDIAN
INORG N
0.260
0.230
0.260
0.130
0.120
0.240
0.410
0.16S
0.115
0.165
0.260
0.115
0.195
0.130
0.285
0.120
0.290
0.145
1.065
0.260
0.380
0.070
0.300
0.1HS
0.150
0.330
0.130
0.290
500-
MEAN SEC
474.000
484.176
482.667
473.889
465.555
482.889
489.000
469.308
470.000
454.167
481.333
462.667
483.500
459.000
464.000
464.222
487.000
463.667
483.000
468.833
435.000
406.333
474.555
472.366
469.000
468.500
4S4.000
462.167
MEAN
CHLORA
87.733
46.611
208.600
10.211
27.100
59.978
261.433
35.000
19.675
27.667
66.855
26.567
97.900
12.06?
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 00
23.100
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
7.4QO
10.800
9.600
10.600
10.600
9.000
14.400
MEDIAN
DISS OHTHO P
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
0.2B8
0.007
1.030
0.016
0.012
C.009
0.128
0.010
0.051
0.008
0.028
0.031
-------
LAKE DATA TO BE USED IN RANKINGS
LAKE
CODE LAKE NAME
!2<>o LAKE THONOTOSASSA
!2<»i LAKE TQHOPEKALIGA
12*2 TROUT LAKE
1243 LAKE NEOHTAKAPKA
1206 LAKE YALE
12<»7 LAKE MUNSON
12*8 LAKE SEMINOLE
1249 LAKE LAWNE
1250 LAKE TARPON
1252 LAKE ELOISE
1250 LAKE JESSIE
1261 EAST LAKE TOHOPEKALICA
1264 PAYNE'S PHAIRIE LAKE (NO
MEDIAN
TOTAL P
0.695
0.246
1.110
0.047
0.027
1.475
0.234
2.560
0.041
0.486
0.051
0.042
1.260
MEDIAN
INOR6 K
0.095
0.200
0.650
0.080
0.160
0.925
0.17S
1.350
0.070
0.170
0.090
0.070
0.140
500-
MEAN SEC
466.167
472.917
472.000
458.667
441.000
486.667
473.833
494.667
400.889
465.333
452.667
440.833
476.000
MEAN
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 30
10.200
10.500
12.90:
8.200
7.600
12.200
8.600
10.400
9.000
12.200
10.800
9.400
7.400
MEDIAN
DISS ORTHO P
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
-------
PERCENT OF LAKES MITH HIGHER VALUES (NUMBER OF LAKES MITH HIGHER VALUES)
LAKE
CODE LAKE NAME
1201 ALLIGATOR LAKE
1202 LAKE APOPKA
1203 LAKE BANANA
1206 LAKE CRESCENT
1207 DOCTORS LAKE
1203 LAKE DORA
1209 LAKE EFF1E
1210 LAKE GEORGE
1211 LAKE GIBSON
1212 GLENADA LAKE
121* LAKE GRIFFIN
1215 LAKE HAINES
1217 LAKE HANCOCK
1219 LAKt HORSESHOE
1220 LAKE HOtfELL
1P31 LAKE ISTOKPOGA
l?23 LAKE J6SSUP
1224 LAKE KISSIMMEE
1227 LAKE LULU
1228 LAKE MARION
1224 LAKt MINNEHAHA
1230 LAKE MINNEOLA
1231 LAKE MONROE
1232 LAKE OKEECHOaEE
123* LAKE POINSETT
1236 LAKE NEEDY
123d LAKE SOUTH
1239 LAKE TALOUIN
MEDIAN
TOTAL P
25 <
50 (
?3 <
65 (
60 (
53 C
5 (
45 <
40 (
43 (
46 (
70 (
16 (
93 I
11 (
M (
26 (
90 (
3 1
76 (
88 (
100 (
36 (
68 (
58 (
95 1
63 (
55 (
10)
20)
9)
26)
24)
21)
2)
18)
16)
17)
19)
26)
7)
37)
4)
J*»
HI
36)
1)
3D
35)
40)
15)
27)
23)
38)
25)
22)
MEDIAN
INORG N
29 (
30 (
29 (
70 (
76 (
35 (
10 <
54 (
81 (
54 (
29 (
81 (
43 C
70 (
23 (
76 C
16 (,
63 1
3 (
29 <
91 <
96 (
15 <
45 (
60 (
13 (
70 <
20 <
10)
IS)
10)
27)
301
14)
4)
21)
32)
21)
10)
32)
17)
27)
9)
30)
/7>
25)
D
10)
36)
38)
6)
18)
24)
5)
27)
8)
500-
MEAN SEC
30 (
10 <
20 (
33 (
60 (
18 <
3 (
48 I
45 (
85 1
23 (
75 (
13 1
80 (
69 (
6» <
5 (
73 1
IS (
53 (
95 (
98 <
2B <
40 (
50 (
55 t
69 (
78 (
12)
4)
8)
13)
24)
7)
D
19)
18)
34)
9)
30)
5)
32)
27)
26)
21
29)
6)
21)
38)
J9)
ID
16)
20)
22)
27)
3D
MEAN
CHLORA
18
38
5
60
55
33
3
43
70
S3
30
58
13
70
35
93
25
65
0
50
85
100
75
73
95
45
68
«3
1 7)
« 15)
( 2)
( 32)
< 22)
t 13)
( D
« 17)
( 28)
< 21)
I 12)
( 23)
1 5)
( 3D
( 14)
1 37)
( 101
( 26)
I 0)
1 20)
1 34)
1 40)
< 30)
( ?9)
( 38)
( 18)
( 27)
« 33)
15-
MIN 00
10 (
74 (
100 (
48 (
34 1
90 (
0 (
23 (
48 (
3 (
95 (
34 (
98 <
20 (
60 1
69 <
83 (
65 (
8 (
83 1
78 (
90 1
26 (
S3 (
34 (
34 (
60 1
5 I
4)
29)
40)
18)
12)
35)
0)
9)
18)
1)
38)
12)
39)
8)
23)
27)
32)
26)
3)
32)
3D
35)
10)
21)
12)
12)
23)
2)
MEDIAN
OISS ORTHO P
18
70
23
50
56
68
10
43
40
38
48
78
28
65
3
69
25
99
5
73
80
93
33
89
45
95
56
• i
INUE/1
NO
1JO
2BO
200
346
341
2*7
31
256
324
276
273
396
213
006
201
477
16,
435
34
366
517
579
215
368
342
33 /
386
,.. ,
-------
PERCENT or LAKES WITH HIGHER VALUES (NUMBER OF LAKES MITH HIGHER VALUES)
LAKE
CODE LAKE NAME
1240 LAKE THONOTOSASSA
1241 LAKE TOHOPEKALIGA
1242 TROUT LAKE '
1243 LAKE WEOHYAKAPKA
1246 LAKE VALE
12*.7 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 (NO
MEDIAN
TOTAL P
20
33
15
75
98
a
35
0
83
30
73
BO
11
( 8)
4 13)
< 6)
< 30)
( 39)
( 3)
( 14)
( 0)
( 33)
( 12)
( 29)
( 32)
( 4)
MEDIAN
INORG N
85
40
8
91
58
5
48
0
98
50
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
86
93
25
( 23)
( 15)
( 17)
( 33)
( 36)
( 3)
( 14)
( 0)
( 40)
( 25)
( 35)
( 37)
( 10)
MEAN
CHLORA
40
48
23
88
63
8
10
20
90
28
60
98
15
( 16)
( 19)
( 9)
( 35)
( 25)
( 3)
( 4)
( 8)
( 36)
C 11)
( 24)
( 39)
( 61
15-
MIN DO
48
40
13
74
83
16
69
43
60
16
26
55
90
< let
( 16)
< S>
( 29)
( 32)
( 6)
( 27)
( 17)
( 23)
( 6)
( 10)
( 22)
( 35)
MEDIAN
OISS OUT HO P
15
30
a
84
75
13
63
35
60
20
84
99
0
( 6)
( 121
( 3)
1 33)
( 30)
( 5)
( 25)
( 14)
( 24)
( 8)
( 33)
( 39)
( 0)
INDEX
NO
266
229
110
495
467
58
260
98
491
207
419
523
206
-------
LAKES RANKED BY INDEX NOS.
RANK LAKE CODE LAKE NAME INDEX NO
I 1230 LAKE MINNEOLA 579
2 1261 EAST LAKE TOHOPEKALIGA 523
3 1229 LAKE MINNEHAHA 517
4 1243 LAKE WEOHYAKAPKA 495
5 1250 LAKE TARPON 491
6 1221 LAKE ISTOKPOGA 477
7 1246 LAKE YALE 467
8 1224 LAKE KISSIMHEE 455
9 1258 LAKE JESSIE 419
10 1219 LAKE HORSESHOE 406
II 1215 LAKE HA1NES 396
12 1238 LAKE SOUTH 366
13 1232 LAKE OKEECHOBEE 368
14 1220 LAKE MARION 366
15 1206 LAKE CRESCENT 346
t& tgj* LAKE POlNSeiT 342
17 1207 DOCTORS LAKE 341
18 1236 LAKE REEDY 337
19 1211 LAKE GIBSON 324
20 120(4 LAKE DORA 297
21 1239 LAKE TALOUIN 294
22 1202 LAKE APOPKA 280
23 1212 GLENADA LAKE 276
24 1214 LAKE GRIFFIN 273
25 1240 LAKE THONOTOSASSA 266
26 1248 LAKE SEMINOLE 260
27 1210 LAKE GEORGE 256
'8 ' fit', I «KF irriHl"iPFK,»f "fin •>'<)
-------
LAKES RANKED av INDEX NOS.
RANK LAKE CODE LAKE NAME INDEX NO
29
30
31
32
33
3*
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
1231
1217
1252
1264
1220
1203
1223
1201
1242
1249
12*7
1227
1209
LAKE MONROE
LAKE HANCOCK
LAKE ELOISE
PAYNE'S PRAIRIE LAKE
-------
APPENDIX B
CONVERSION FACTORS
-------
CONVERSION FACTORS
Hectares x 2.471 = acres
Kilometers x 0.6214 = miles
Meters x 3.281 = feet
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
TRIBUTARY FLOW DATA
-------
TRIBUTARY FLOW INFORMATION FOR FLORIDA
8/25/75
LAKE CODE 1208
DORA LAKE
TOTAL DRAINAGE AREA OF LAKE(SO KM)
b!3.8
SUB-DRAINAGE
TRIBUTARY AREA(SQ KM)
1208A1
120881
1208ZZ
613.8
1.1
118.2
JAN
3.37
0.02
0.31
FEB
3.65
0.02
0.40
MAR
4.70
O.u3
0.65
APR
4.76
0.03
0.45
TOTAL DRAINAGE AREA OF LAKE =
SUM UF SUB-DRAINAGE AREAS =
MEAN MONTHLY FLOWS AND DAILY FLOWS(CMS)
TRI6UTARY MONTH YEAR MEAN FLOW DAY
1208A1
120881
1208ZZ
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
1
2
73
73
73
73
73
73
73
73
73
73
74
74
73
73
73
73
73
73
73
73
73
73
74
74
73
73
73
73
73
73
73
73
73
73
74
74
3.11
1.19
0.85
0.40
1.36
1.53
1.22
2.97
2.38
0.93
0.34
0.79
0.02
0.02
0.01
0.02
0.02
0.02
0.03
0.02
0.01
0.01
0.02
0.01
0.25
0.34
0.02
0.08
0.07
0.22
0.37
0.28
0.05
0.10
0.12
0.03
17
8
20
18
15
4
9
6
3
17
8
20
18
15
4
9
6
3
17
8
20
18
15
4
9
6
3
MAY
2.32
0.02
0.11
613.8
119.3
NORMALIZED FLOWS(CMS)
JUN JUL AUG
2.63
0.02
0.11
2.89
0.02
0.34
4.47
0.03
0.59
SEP
5.47
0.04
0.85
OCT
3.37
0.03
0.65
NOV
2.b5
0.02
0.40
DEC
1.95
0.02
0.25
MEAN
3.51
0.03
0.43
SUMMARY
TOTAL FLOW IN
TOTAL FLOW OUT
5.43
42.14
FLOW DAY
2.01
3.88
•0.54
•1.16
2.92
4.05
-0.51
0.28
•1.13
0.02
0.03
0.01
0.01
0.02
0.01
0.01
0.02
0.01
0.18
0.59
0.01
0.01
0.28
0.06
0.04
0.18
0.04
FLOW DAY
FLOW
-------
APPENDIX D
PHYSICAL and CHEMICAL DATA
-------
STORE! RETRIEVAL DATE 75/08/?5
120801
28 47 20.0 081 42 45.0
LAKE DORA
12069 FLORIDA
DATE
FROM
TO
73/03/12
73/09/06
73/11/05
DATE
FROM
TO
73/03/12
73/09/06
73/11/05
TIME DEPTH
OF
DAY FEET
15 50 0000
15 50 0006
14 45 0000
16 20 0000
16 20 0001
16 20 0006
TIME DEPTH
OF
DAY FEET
15 50 0000
15 50 0006
14 45 0000
16 20 0000
16 20 0006
00010
WATER
TEMP
CENT
25.8
24.6
29.8
23.3
23.3
23.2
00665
PHOS-TOT
MG/L P
0.138
0.085
0.065
0.072
0.078
00300
DO
MG/L
10.6
9.8
10.4
10.6
32217
CHLRPHYL
A
UG/L
36.7
69.0
31.3
00077 00094
TRANSP CNDUCTVY
SECCHI FIELD
INCHES MICROMHO
25
12
18
310
300
357
310
310
311
11EPALES
3
00400
PH
SU
9.70
9.60
9.10
9.20
00410
T ALK
CAC03
MG/L
105
105
99
103
2111202
0010 FEET DEPTH
00610
NH3-N
TOTAL
MG/L
0.100
0.140
0.090
0.090
00625
TOT KJEL
N
MG/L
2.500
2.500
2.500
3.200
00630
N02&N03
N-TOTAL
MG/L
0.140
0.190
0.130
0.090
00671
PHOS-DIS
ORTHO
MG/L P
0.011
0.014
0.020
0.030
9.30
104
0.110
3.200
0.130
0.038
-------
STORET RETRIEVAL DATE 75/CB/25
130802
2B <*7 05.0 081
LAKE DORA
12069 FLORIDA
53.0
DATE
FROM
TO
73/03/12
73/09/06
73/11/05
DATE
FROM
TO
73/03/12
73/09/06
73/11/05
TIME DEPTH
OF
DAY FEET
16 20 0000
16 20 0006
14 55 0000
14 55 0008
16 32 0000
16 32 0001
16 32 0005
TIME DEPTH
OF
DAY FEET
16 20 0000
16 20 0006
14 55 0000
14 55 0008
16 32 0000
16 32 0005
00010
WATER
TEMP
CENT
24.0
23.5
29.2
28.3
22.6
22.6
22.6
00665
PHOS-TOT
MG/L P
0.093
0.100
0.074
0.118
0.099
0.108
11EPALES 2111202
3 0009 FEET DEPTH
00300 00077 00094 00400 00410 00610 00625 00630 00671
DO TRANSP CNDUCTVY PH T ALK NH3-N TOT KJEL N02&N03 PHOS-DIS
SECCHI FIELD CAC03 TOTAL N N-TOTAL ORTrtO
MG/L INCHES MICROMHO SU
11.1 .
9.2
7.6
9.8
9.6
32217
CHLRPHYL
A
UG/L
44.8
71.8
63.9
15 320 9.70
320 9.70
18 358 9.00
515 8.80
18 311 9.30
311
311 9.30
MG/L MG/L MG/L MG/L MG/L P
109 0.130 2.500 0.160 0.012
112 0.150 2.800 0.200 0.018
100 0.090 3.900 0.120 0.022
99 0.120 4.400 0.140 0.034
108 0.110 3.900 0.110 0.038
108 0.180 3.800 0.170 0.076
-------
STORE! RETRIEVAL DATE 75/08/25
120803
28 47 45.0 081 39 37.0
LAKE DORA
12069 FLORIDA
DATE
FROM
TO
73/03/12
73/09/06
73/11/05
TIME DEPTH
OF
DAY FEET
16 55 0000
Ib 55 0006
15 10 0000
15 10 0009
16 42 0000
16 42 0001
16 42 0006
00010
MATER
TEMP
CENT
25.0
23.6
29.1
28.4
23.0
23.0
23.0
00300 00077
DO TRANSP O
SECCHI FIELD
MG/L INCHES Ml
10.0
10.2
11.2
11.2
15
16
17
11EPALES
3
2111202
0010 FEET
DEPTH
194
:TVY
i
IMHO
325
310
363
960
323
323
323
00400
PH
SU
9.70
9.60
9.1U
9.40
9.40
00410
T ALK
CAC03
MG/L
110
115
102
105
00610
NH3-N
TOTAL
MG/L
0.100
0.140
0.080
0.100
00625
TOT KJEL
N
MG/L
2.600
3.000
4.400
3.500
3.800
00630
N02&N03
N-TOTAL
MG/L
0.140
0.190
0.100
0.130
00671
PHOS-DIS
ORTHO
MG/L P
0.011
0.016
0.026
0.045
00665 32217
DATE TIME DEPTH PHOS-TOT CHLRPHYL
FROM OF A
TO DAY FEET MG/L P UG/L
73/03/12 16 55 0000 0.104 66.5
16 55 0006 0.137
73/09/06 15 10 0000 U.115 99.8
73/11/05 16 42 0000 0.106 56.0
16 42 0006 0.117
-------
APPENDIX E
TRIBUTARY and WASTEWATER
TREATMENT PLANT DATA
-------
bTORET RETRIEVAL DATE 75/OS/25
1208A1
26 48 00.0 081 44 30.0
DORA CANAL
1201V 7.5 EUSTIS
T/DORA LAKE
DUNCAN LW BrtDG W OF TAVAKtES
11EPALES 2111204
4 0000 FEET
DEPTH
DATE
FROM
TO
73/OJ/17
73/04/08
73/05/20
73/06/18
73/09/15
73/11/04
TIME DEPTH
OF
DAY
11
11
10
11
08
13
00630 00625
N02*N03 TOT KJEL
N-TOTAL
FEET
43
10
10
00
30
45
MG/L
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
010K
010K
016
010K
010*
Olb
N
MG/L
2.
3.
2.
3.
2.
1.
900
200
310
580
720
750
00610
NH3-N
TOTAL
MG/L
0.019
0.042
0.060
0.050
0.015
0.840
00&71
PriOS-DIS
00665
PHOS-TOT
ORTHO
MG/L
0.
C.
C.
0.
0.
0.
p
022
022
030
020
021
012
MG/L
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
p
130
135
150
030
085
080
K VALUE KNOWN TO BE
LESS THAN INDICATED
-------
*ETf6NOJ
FHOM OF
TO DAY FEET
73/03/17 11 ?1
73/04/OH 11 00
73/05/20 09 ?5
73/06/ltJ 11 15
73/09/15 08 15
73/12/0^ 10 ?0
7*/01/06 10 40
74/02/03 13 45
120841
23 4tt 00.0 081 40 30.0
UNNAMEU CHEEK
12 7.S EOSTIS
T/OORA LAKE
ST H«Y *»52 dROo bELO OAKLAND PARK
HEPALES
STP
211120^
0000 FEET
DEPTH
0630
6N03
OTAL
G/L
0.013
O.Obd
0.084
0.017
0.015
0.012
O.OS2
0.0^8
00625
TOT KJEL
N
MG/L
7.800
3.400
6.300
19.900
4.600
9.500
11.000
00610
NH3-N
TOTAL
MG/L
4.800
1.500
3.000
6.720
o.lSO
3.700
5.600
7.200
00671
PHOS-DIS
OkTHO
MG/L P
0.069
0.220
0.132
0.170
0.550
0.176
0.164
0.120
00665
PHOS-TOT
MG/L P
0.390
0.480
0.560
3.400
1.350
0.470
3.500
0.990
-------
RETRIEVAL DATE 75/08/^5
1208tJA TF120Q800
26 48 30.0 081 40 30.0
MOUNT DOHA
12019 7.5 EUSTIS
D/LAKE DOHA
LAKE OORA
HEP ALES
DATE
FROM
TO
73/05/02
CP(T)-
73/05/02
73/11/21
TIME DEPTH
OF
DAY FEET
11 00
16 00
15 00
N02&N03
N-TOTAL
MG/L
0.081
0.340
00625
TOT KJEL
N
5.610
12.500
00610
NM3-N
TOTAL
MG/L
2.000
9.500
00671
PHOS-DIS
ORTHO
MG/L P
0.232
0.110
00665
PHOS-TOT
MG/L P
0.620
0.550
50051
FLOW
RATE
INST MGO
0.297
0.450
2141
0000 H
50053
CONDUIT
FLOw-MGO
MONTHLY
0.323
0.412
------- |