U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
               NATIONAL EUTROPHICATION SURVEY
                        WORKING PAPER SERIES
                                                REPORT
                                                 ON
                                              LAKE LULU
                                             POLK COUNTY
                                               FLORIDA
                                             EPA REGION IV
                                          WORKING PAPER No, 263
     CORVALLIS ENVIRONMENTAL RESEARCH LABORATORY - CORVALLIS, OREGON
                                 and
    ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING & SUPPORT LABORATORY - LAS VEGAS, NEVADA
•&G.P.O. 699-440

-------
                                                           REPORT
^                                                          ON
f                                                       LAKE LULU
 i
£                                                      POLK COUNIY
^                                                        FLORIDA
f?                                                     EPA REGION IV
§                                                 WORKING PAPER No, 263
                               WITH THE COOPERATION OF THE
                     FIDRIDA DEPARTNENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL REGULATION
                                        AND THE
                                 FLORIDA NATIONAL GUARD
                                     DECEMBER, 1977

-------
                               CONTENTS
                                                             Page
  Foreword                                                    i i
  List of Florida Lakes                                       iv
  Lake and Drainage Area Map                                   v

  Sections
  I.   Introduction                                             1
 II.   Conclusions                                              1
III.   Lake and Drainage Basin 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 freshwater 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)]5  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
betv/een 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 v/ater 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 Tohopekaliga
Effie
Eloise
George
Gibson
Glenada
Griffin
Haines
Hancock.
Horseshoe
Howe!1
Istokpoga
Jessie
Jessup
Kissimmee
Lawne
Lulu
Marion
liinnehaha
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
                            Cl ay
                            Lake
                            Osceola
                            Polk
                            Pol k
                            Putnam,  Volusia
                            Polk
                            Highlands
                            Lake
                            Pol k
                            Polk
                            Semi no!e
                            Orange,  Seminole
                            Hiohlands
                            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

-------
                                     ® Lake Lulu Outlet
                                        Gaging Station
   Tributary Sampling.Site

X Lake Sampling Site


-------
                                 LAKE LULU
                              STORE! NO.  1227
 I.  INTRODUCTION
     Lake Lulu is one of the Winter Haven chain of lakes.   The hydrology
 of this chain is complex,  and personnel  of the U.S.  Geological  Survey
 question whether realistic analyses of nutrient loadings  to  the lakes
 can be made;  i.e.,  depending on the operation of control  gates, wind
 direction and velocity, and other factors, flows in  the connecting  canals
 may have reversed from one sampling time to the next (Anderson, 1974).
 For example,  during the Survey sampling year, the less-than-normal  pre-
 cipitation probably resulted in a net flow from Lake Lulu to Lake
 Eloise rather than the reverse (Dye, 1976).
     It will be noted in Appendix C that daily flows  could not be pro-
 vided by the U.S. Geological Survey, and it cannot be determined whether
 net flows were to or from Lake Lulu at any of the sampling stations or
 times.  Therefore,  nutrient loads to the lake cannot be calculated;
 however, the canal  sampling data are included in Appendix E  for the
 record.
II.  CONCLUSIONS
     A.  Trophic Condition:
             Survey data indicate that Lake Lulu is very eutrophic.
         It ranked 40th in  overall trophic quality when the 41  Florida
         lakes sampled in 1973 were compared using a  combination of
         six lake parameters*.   Thirty-nine of the lakes had  less median
 * See Appendix A.

-------
                                 2
    total phosphorus, 38 had less median dissolved phosphorus,
    39 had less median inorganic nitrogen,  all of the others had
    less mean chlorophyll a^ and 34 had greater mean Secchi disc
    transparency.
        Survey limnologists reported algal  blooms and observed
    macrophytes, including water hyacinths, along the margins and
    shallows.
B.  Rate-Limiting Nutrient:
        The algal assay results indicate that Lake Lulu was nitrogen
    limited at the time the sample was collected (03/08/73). However,
    the high control  assay yield and high inorganic nitrogen and
    phosphorus level's in the lake at that time (Appendix D) suggest
    in situ primary productivity may have been limited by other fac-
    tors such as light penetration.  The mean inorganic nitrogen to
    orthophosphorus ratios were consistently low (less than 2 to 1)
    and support the conclusion that nitrogen was the potentially limi-
    ting nutrient in Lake Lulu at the time of Survey sampling.

-------
                                       3
III.   LAKE AND DRAINAGE BASIN CHARACTERISTICS1"
      A.   Morphometry  :
          1.   Surface area:   1.22 kilometers2.
          2.   Mean depth:   1.5 meters.
          3.   Maximum depth:   2.7 meters.
          4.   Volume:  1.830 x 106 m3.
          5.   Mean hydraulic retention  time:   235 days.
      B.   Tributary and Outlet:
          (See Appendix C  for flow data)
          1.   Tributaries  -
                                                Drainage       Mean flow
              Name                              area (km2)*    (m3/sec)**
              Unnamed Canal  B-l                      1.6          0.01
              Unnamed Canal  C-l                     14.6          0.05
              Minor tributaries &
               immediate drainage -                  2.7          0.03
                             Totals                 18.9          0.09
          2.   Outlet -
              Unnamed Canal  A-l                   -,  9n liei(it       0.00
              Lake Lulu Outlet                    '  *"''           0.09
      C.   Precipitation****:
          1.   Year of sampling:  120.3  centimeters.
          2.   Mean annual:   136.7 centimeters.
  t  Table of metric  conversions—Appendix B.
  tt Anonymous,  1971;  depths  estimated from soundings  reported  in  Appendix D.
  *  For  limits of accuracy, see Working Paper No.  175,  "...Survey  Methods,
    1973-1976".
  ** Based on net effect of factors  affecting flows  in  connecting  canals  during
     the period  of October, 1960,  through September, 1968  (Anderson,  1974).
  *** Includes area  of lake;  outflow assumed  to  equal  sum  of inflows.
  **** see Working Paper No.  175.

-------
                                      4
IV.   WATER QUALITY SUMMARY
     Lake Lulu 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 two or more depths at
 one station on the lake (see map,  page v).   During each visit, a
 single depth-integrated (near bottom to surface) sample was collected
 for phytoplankton identification and enumeration, and a similar
 sample was collected for chlorophyll ^analysis.  During the first
 visit,  a single 18.9-liter depth-integrated sample was taken for algal
 assays.  The maximum depth sampled was 2.1  meters.
     The sampling results are presented in full  in Appendix D and are
 summarized in the following table.

-------
PARAMETER




TEMP (C)




DISS OXY (MG/L)




CNOCTVY  (MCROMO)




PH (STAND UNITS)




TOT ALK  (MG/D




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/D




CHLRPYL  A (UG/D




SECCHI  (METERS)
     RANGE




 21.6  -  23.0




  0.7  -   0.7




 375.  -  375.




  8.7  -   9.4




 113.  -  115.




1.400  - 2.040




0.880  - 1.220




0.610  - 0.660




0.2<+0  - 0.620




2.800  - 3.200




0.900  - 1.23U




3.460  - 3.810




256.7  - 256.7




  0.6  -   0.6
OF PHYSICAL ANO CHEMICAL CHARACTERISTICS FOR
STORET CODE 1327
NG ( 3/
TES
MEAN
22.3
0.7
375.
9.0
114.
1.720
1.050
0.635
0.430
3.000
1.065
3.635
266.7
O.o
8/73)

MEDIAN
22.3
U.7
375.
9.0
114.
1.720
1.050
0.635
0.430
3.000
1.065
3.635
256.7
0.6
2ND SAMPLING ( 9/

1
RANGE
28.4
7.2
327.
9.4
72.
1.040
0.570
0.190
0.150
7.100
0.340
7.290
456.6
0.2
- 28.7
7.2
- 329.
9.6
73.
- 1.200
- 0.610
- 0.190
- 0.190
- 7.200
- 0.380
- 7.390
- <*56.6
0.2
SITES
MEAN
28.5
7.2
328.
9.5
73.
1.120
0.590
0.190
0.170
7.150
0.360
7.340
456.6
0.2
LAKE LULU
6/73)

MEDIAN
28.5
7.2
328.
9.5
73.
1.120
0.590
0.190
0.170
7.150
0.360
7.340
456.6
0.2



3RD SAMPLING ( ll/

1
RANGE
24.3
8.8
342.
8.8
73.
1.580
1.180
1.680
0.100
4.000
1.810
5.680
116.4
0.5
- 24.3
9.0
- 343.
9.0
74.
- 1.640
- 1.200
- 1.740
- 0.130
- 4.000
- 1.840
- 5.740
- 116.4
0.5
SITES
MEAN
24.3
8.9
342.
8.9
74.
1.610
1.190
1.710
0.115
4.000
1.825
5.710
116.4
0.5

6/73)

MEDIAN
24.3
8.9
342.
8.9
74.
1.610
1.190
1.710
0.115
4.000
1.825
5.710
116.4
0.5

-------
B.  Biological characteristics:
    1.  Phytoplankton -

        Sampling
        Date

        03/08/73
        09/06/73
        11/06/73
    2.   Chlorophyll a^ -

        Sampli ng
        Date

        03/08/73

        09/06/73

        11/06/73
Dominant
Genera
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
Scenedesmus sp_.
Phacus sp.
Lyngbya sp_.
Cyclotella sp_.
Merismopedia sp.
Other genera

        Total

Microcystis sp.
Scenedesmus sp.
Chroococcus sp.
Dactylococcopsis sp.
Raphidiopsis sp.
Other genera

        Total
1.  Flagellates
2.  Fragilaria sp.
3.  Scenedesmus sp.
4.  Cyclotella sp_.
5.  Cryptomonas sp.
    Other genera

            Total
Station
Number

  1

  1

  1
Algal Units
per ml	

   8,163
                                                               5,
                                                               2,
                                                               1,
     151
     530
     988
   1,747
   7.258

  26,837
  15,690
   2,615
    ,889
    ,598
    ,453
                                                               1
                                                               1,-
                                                               1
                                                               4.068

                                                              27,313
                             3,114
                                                               1,
                                                               1,
                                                               1,
                                                               1,
                               779
                               602
                               602
                               602
                                                               9,787

                                                              19,486
                      Chlorophyll a
                      (ug/D

                          256.7

                          456.6

                          116.4

-------
                                7
C.   Limiting Nutrient Study:
    1.   Autoclaved,  filtered,  and nutrient spiked -
                         Ortho P          Inorganic N    Maximum yield
        Spike (mg/1)     Cone, (mg/1)      Cone,  (rng/1)    (mg/1-dry wt.)
        Control              0.600             0.444         25.2
        0.050 P              0.650             0.444         25.6
        0.050 P  + 1.0 N     0.650             1.444         44.0
        1.0 N               0.600             1.444         43.5
    2.   Discussion -
            The  control yield  of the assay alga,  Selenastrum capri-
        cornutum, indicates that the potential  primary  productivity
        of Lake  Lulu was very  high at  the time the sample was col-
        lected (03/08/73).   Nitrogen alone and in combination with
        orthophosphorus resulted in increased algal yields,  but
        orthophosphorus alone  did not,  indicating that  the lake  was
        nitrogen limited when  sampled.
            This conclusion is supported by the mean inorganic nitro-
        gen/orthophosphorus ratios in  the lake.   At the time the assay
        sample was collected,  the mean  N/P ratio was 1/1.   However,
        it is noted that both  nitrogen  and phosphorus levels remained
        high on  all  three sampling dates, and primary productivity in
        Lake Lulu does not appear to be limited by availability  of
        major nutrients.

-------
V.  LITERATURE REVIEWED

    Anderson, Warren, 1974.  Personal communication (hydrology of Winter
        Haven chain of lakes).  U.S. Geol.  Surv., Winter Park.

    Anonymous, 1972.  Water resources data for Florida, Part 1:  Surface
        water records.  Vol 1: Streams of northern and central Florida.
        U.S. Geol. Surv., Tallahassee.

    Dye, Craig W., 1976.  Personal communication (review of preliminary report).
        FL Dept. Env. Reg., Tallahassee.

-------
VI.  APPENDICES
                                   APPENDIX A
                                  LAKE RANKINGS

-------
LAKE DATA TO BE USED IN RANKINGS
LAKE
COOE
1201
1202
1203
1206
1207
1208
1209
1210
121 1
1212
1214
1215
1217
1219
1220
1221
122J
122*
1227
1228
1229
1230
1231
1232
123"
1230
123b
1239
LAKE
NAME
ALLIGATOR LAKE
LAKE
LAKE
LAKE
APOPKA
dANANA
CRESCENT
DOCTORS LAKE
LAKE
LAKE
LAKE
LAKE
DOHA
EFFIE
GEORGE
GIdSON
GLENADA LAKE
LAKE
LAKE
LAKE
LAKt
LAKE
LAKE
LAKE
LAKE
LAKE
LAKE
LAKE
LAKE
LAKE
LAKE
L2KC
LAKE
LAKE
LAKE
GRIFFIN
HSINES
HANCOCK
HORSESHOE
HO*ELL
ISTOKPOGA
JESSUP
KISSIMMLE
LULU
MARION
MINNEHAHA
"INNEOLA
MONROE
OKEECHOdEE
POINSETT
PFEDY
SOUTH
TALQUIN
MEOUN
TOTAL P
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
.o2C
.10?
.660
.065
.084
.102
.'.SO
.129
.167
.13*
.119
.063
.772
.03*.
.260
.039
.49?
.034
.490
.044
.03K
.018
.138
.063
.065
.033
.074
.085
MEDIAN
INOPG 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
o.?9o
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
474.000
444. 1 76
482.667
473.889
465.555
482.889
489.000
469. 30B
470.000
454.167
481.333
462.667
483.500
459.000
464.000
464.222
487.000
463.667
483.000
468.833
43:3.000
406.333
474.555
472.366
"69.000
468.500
4*14.000
462.167
MEAN
ClLOWA
87
40
208
10
27
59
261
35
19
27
66
26
97
12
54
6
7b
24
276
29
a
3
14
14
6
34
23
9
.733
.611
.600
.211
.100
.978
.433
.000
.675
.667
.855
.567
.900
.067
.117
.594
.550
.142
.566
.967
.733
.333
.225
.524
.500
.837
.167
.483
15-
MIN DO
13
8
3
10
10
7
IS
11
10
14
6
10
5
11
9
8
7
8
14
7
7
7
10
9
10
10
9
14
.100
.200
.600
.200
.600
.400
.000
.000
.200
.700
.600
.600
.600
.500
.000
.600
.600
.800
.300
.600
.700
.400
.800
.800
.600
.600
.000
.400
MEDIAN
DliS Orll rlO P
0.3io
0.019
0.293
0.033
0.028
0.022
0.950
0.063
0.069
0.072
0.03d
0.014
o.isa
0.023
1.175
0.010
0.288
0.007
1.030
0.016
O.Oli
0.009
0.12c
0.010
O.Oal
O.OOa
0.028
O.OJ1

-------
LAKE DATA TO 8E USED IN RANKINGS
LAKE
CODE
1240
1241
1242
1243
12*6
1247
1248
12*9
1250
12S2
125B
1261
126*
LAKE
LAKE
LAKE
TROUT
LAKE
LAKE
LAKE
LAKE
LAKE
LAKE
LAKE
LAKE
EAST
NAME
THONOTOSASSA
TOHOPEKALIGA
LAKE
WEOHYAKAPKA
YALE
MUNSON
SEMINOLE
LAWNE
TARPON
ELOISE
JESSIE
LAKE TOHOPEKALIGA
PAYNE'S PHAIRIE LAKE INO
MEDIAN
TOTAL P
0.6Y5
0.246
1.110
0.047
0.027
1.475
0.234
?.560
0.041
0.486
0.051
0.042
1.260
MEDIAN
INORG N
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
.095
.200
.650
.080
.160
.925
.175
.350
.070
.170
.090
.070
.140
500-
MEAN SEC
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
CrILOBA
37
30
76
7
25
140
102
84
6
70
26
5
88
.700
.633
.967
.767
.367
.317
.000
.900
.867
.233
.300
.167
.200
15-
MIN DO
10
10
12
8
7
12
6
10
9
12
10
9
7
.200
.500
.900
.200
.600
.200
.600
.400
.000
• 200
.800
.400
.400
MEDIAN
DISS OHTrlO P
0.565
0.152
0.470
0.011
0.014
0.852
0.026
0.117
O.U27
0.339
0.011
0.007
1.210

-------
PERCENT OF  LAKES  *ITH HIGHER VALUES (NUMBER OF LAKES HUH HIGHER VALUESI
LA
( 15)
( 27)
< 23)
( 3S)
< 25)
( 22)
MEDIAN
INO^G N
29
38
29
70
76
35
10
54
61
t>4
29
81
43
/H
23
76
1"
63
3
29
91
98
IS
45
60
13
70
20
( 101
( 151
( 10)
( 27)
( 30)
( 14)
( 4)
( 21)
( 32)
< 21)
( 10)
( 32)
( 17)
( 27)
( 9)
( 301
( 7)
( 25)
( 1)
( 10)
( 36)
( 38)
( 61
( 1H>
( 24)
( SI
( 27)
( 81
500-
MtAN SEC
30
10
20
33
60
IB
3
4H
4S
85
23
75
13
aO
69
65
5
73
15
S3
95
98
28
40
50
55
69
7b
( 12)
( 4)
I 81
( 13)
( 24)
( 71
( 1)
! 19)
< 18)
( 34)
I 9)
( 30)
1 5)
I 32)
( 27)
( 26)
( 2)
( 2V)
< 6)
( 211
( 38)
( J9>
( 11)
( 16)
( 20)
( 22)
( 27)
( 31)
MEAN
CHLOHA
18 (
38 <
5 (
80 (
55 I
33 (
3 1
43 (
70 (
53 (
30 (
58 (
13 (
78 (
35 (
93 (
25 (
oS (
0 <
bO (
85 <
100 (
l*> <
73 <
95 I
45 (
68 (
03 (
7)
15)
21
321
22)
13)
1)
17)
28)
21)
12)
23)
5)
31)
!•»)
371
10)
26)
0)
20)
34)
40)
30)
291
38)
10)
27)
33)
15-
MIN 00
10
74
100
48
34
90
0
23
48
3
95
34
98
20
60
69
b3
65
8
83
78
90
26
S3
34
34
60
5
( 4)
( 291
( 40)
I 18)
( 12)
( 35)
( 0)
1 9)
( IB)
I D
( 38)
( 12)
( 39)
( 8)
( 23)
( 27)
( 32)
( 261
( 3)
( 32)
( 31)
( 35)
( 10)
1 21)
< 12)
( 12)
( 23)
I 2)
MEDIAN
OISS OKTHO f
IB
70
23
50
56
68
10
43
40
38
48
78
Z'i
65
3
89
25
99
5
73
80
93
3J
89
45
95
56
53
( 7)
( 26)
I 9)
I 20)
1 22)
( 271
( 4)
I 17)
( 16)
( 15)
( 19)
( 31)
I 11)
( 26)
( 11
( 35)
( 10)
I 39)
( 2)
( 291
( 32)
I 37)
( 13)
( 3bl
( 18)
( 3S)
( 22)
( 211
INLlE*
NO
130
2oo
200
346
341
297
31
256
324
276
273
396
213
406
201
477
1B4
435
34
366
517
379
215
36*
3»2
3J/
3d6
294

-------
PERCENT OF LAKES *ITH HIGHER VALUES INUMBER OF LAKES KITH HIGHER VALUESI
LAKE
CODE
1240
1241
1242
1243
1246
1247
1248
1249
1250
1252
1258
1261
126-.
LAKE NAME
LAKE THONOTOSASSA
LAKE TOHOPEKALIGA
TROUT LAKE
LAKE WEOHYAKAPKA
LAKE VALE
LAKE HUNSON
LAKE SEMINOLE
LAKE LAWNE
LAKE TARPON
LAKE ELOISE
LAKE JESSIE
EAST LAKE TOHOPEKALIGA
PAYNE'S PRAIRIE LAKE (NO
MEDIAN
TOTAL P
20
33
15
75
9P
8
35
0
83
30
73
80
11
( 8)
( 13)
( 6)
< 30)
1 39)
( 3)
I 141
< 0)
( 33)
1 12)
( 29)
( 32)
( 4>
MEDIAN
INORG N
85
40
8
91
58
5
48
0
98
SO
tie
98
65
I 34)
( 16)
( 3)
I 36)
< 23)
( 2)
( 19)
I 0)
( 38)
I 20)
< 351
I 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)
I 0)
I 40)
( 25)
( 35)
( 37)
( 10)
MEAN
CHLOKA
40
48
23
88
63
8
10
20
90
28
60
98
15
( 16)
( 19)
( 9)
( 35)
( 25)
( 3)
( 4)
I 8)
( 36)
I 11)
( 24)
I 39)
( 6)
15-
MIN 00
48
40
13
74
83
16
69
43
60
16
26
55
90
I 18)
( 16)
( 5)
( 29)
( 32)
( 6)
( 27)
< 17)
I 23)
( 6)
I 10)
( 22>
( 35)
MEDIAN
OISS OHTHO P
15 (
30 (
8 I
84 t
75 (
13 (
63 I
35 (
60 <
20 (
84 (
99 (
0 I
6)
12)
3)
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.
WANK  LAKE CODE  LAKE NAME                INDEX  NO

   i  1330       LAKE MINNEOLA              579
   2  1261       EAST LAKE  TOriOPEKALIGA      523
   3  1229       LAKE MINNEHAMA             517
   4  1243       LAKE WEOHYAKAPHA           495
   5  1250       LAKE TARPON                491
   6  1221       LAKE ISTOKPOGA             477
   7  1346       LAKE YALE                   467
   8  1224       LAKE KISSIMMEE             455
   9  1358       LAKE JESSIE                4|9
  10  1219       LAKE HORSESHOE             406
  11  1215       LAKE MAINES                396
  12  1238       LAKE SOUTH                 386
  13  1332       LAKE OKEECHOBEE            368
  14  1228       LAKE MARION                366
  15  1206       LAKE CRESCENT              346
  16  1234       LAKE POINSETT              342
  17  1207       DOCTORS LAKE               341
  18  1236       LAKE REEDY                 337
  19  1211       LAKE GIBSON                3?4
  20  1208       LAKE DORA                   297
  21  1239       LAKE TALQUIN               294
  22  1202       LAKE APOPKA                280
  23  1212       GLENAOA LAKE               276
  24  1214       LAKE GRIFFIN               273
  25  1240       LAKE THONOTOSASSA          266
  26  1248       LAKE SEMINOLE              260
  27  1210       LAKE GEORGE                256
  28  1241       LAKE TOHQPEKALIGA          229

-------
LAKES RANKED BY INDEX NOS.



RANK  LAKE CODE  LAKE NAME               INDEX NO






  29  1231       LAKE MONROE                215



  30  1217       LAKE HANCOCK               213




  31  1252       LAKE ELOISE                207



  32  1264       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 2.2.05 = pounds



Kilograms/square kilometer x 5.711 = Ibs/square mile

-------
    JIPPENDIX C
TRIBUTARY FLOW DATA

-------
                                   TRIBUTARY FLOW INFORMATION FOR FLORIDA
                                                                            8/25/75
LAKE CODE 1227
     LAKE LULU
     TOTAL DRAINAGE AREA OF LAKE(SO KM>
                              58.8
          SUB-DRAINAGE
TRIBUTARY  AREAtSQ KM)
1227A1
122781
1227C1
1227ZZ
38.6
 1.6
14.6
 2.7
            JAN
                    FES
MAR
                                    APR
MAY
NORMALIZED FLOWS(CMS)
  JUN     JUL     AUG
SEP
OCT
                                                                NOV
DEC
NOTE ««* SEE WRITE UP ON WINTER HAVEN CHAIN OF LAKES
MEAN
-0.01 -0.01 0.07 -0.14
0.01 0.01 0.02 0.02
O.Ob 0.11 0.02 0.10
0.02 0.03 0.05 0.03
-0
0
0
0
.10
.01
.06
.01
0.39
-0.01
-0.28
0.01
0.14
0.01
-0.04
0.02
0.09
0.02
-0.01
0.04
-0.07
0.03
0.08
0.06
-0.10
0.03
0.22
0.05
-0.
0.
0.
0.
20
02
16
03
-0.08
0.01
0.09
0.02
-0.00
0.01
0.05
0.03
SUMMARY
TOTAL DRAINAGE AREA OF LAKE =
SUM OF SUB-DRAINAGE AREAS =


58.8
57.5




TOTAL FLOW
TOTAL FLOW
IN =
OUT =
1
0
.05
.0






                   NO DAILY FLOW DATA ON FILE

-------
        APPENDIX D





PHYSICAL and CHEMICAL DATA

-------
STORE! RETRIEVAL DATE 75/03/25
                                                                  122701
                                                                 27 59 45.0 081 43 17.0
                                                                 LAKE LULU
                                                                 12105   FLORIDA
DATE
FROM
TO
73/03/08

73/09/06

73/11/06



DATE
FROM
TO
73/03/08

73/09/06

73/11/06

TIME DEPTH
OF
DAY FEET
11 15 0000
11 15 0005
11 35 0000
11 35 0007
13 28 0000
13 28 0001
13 28 0005

TIME DEPTH
OF
DAY FEET
11 15 0000
11 15 0005
11 35 0000
11 35 0007
13 28 0000
13 28 0005
00010
WATER
TEMP
CENT
23.0
21.6
28.7
28.4
24.3
24.3
24.3
00665
PHOS-TOT

MG/L p
1.400
2.040
1.200
1.040
1.640
1.580
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 ORTHO
MG/L INCHES MICROMHO SU

0.7

1.2

9.0
8.8
32217
CHLRPHYL
A
UG/L
256.7

456.6

116.4

24 375 9.40
375 8.70
9 329 9.60
327 9.40
18 342 9.00
342
343 8.80










MG/L MG/L MG/L MG/L MG/L P
113 0.240 2.800 0.660 1.220
115 0.620 3.200 0.610 0.880
72 0.150 7.200 0.190 0.570
73 0.190 7.100 0.190 0.610
74 0.100 4.000 1.740 1.200

73 0.130 4.000 1.680 1.180











-------
  APPENDIX E
TRIBUTARY DATA

-------
STORET RETRIEVAL DATE 75/08/25
                                                                  I227A1
                                                                 28 00 00.0 081 44 30.0
                                                                 UNNAMED STREAM
                                                                 12097   7.5 ELOISE
                                                                 T/LAKE LULU
                                                                 BRDG ON US 17 NE OF ELOISE
                                                                 -11EPALES             2111204
                                                                 4                   0000 FEET  DEPTH
  DATE   TIME DEPTH N02^N03
  FROM    OF
   TO    DAY  FEET
73/03/18
73/04/15
73/05/18
73/06/17
73/OT/14
73/08/17
73/09/16
73/10/13
73/11/18
73/12/16
74/01/20
74/02/02
10 25
16 10
12 50
14 35
12 00
14 29
10 20
11 23
11 52
15 30
15 20
15 12
0630
I&N03
OTAL
IG/L
0.010K
0.630
0.460
0.570
0.010K
0.011
0.078
2.700
0.008
0.480
3.600
0.016
00625
TOT KJEL
N
MG/L
2.200
4.100
2.730
9. BOO
1.400
1.470
2.650
10.500
2.700
3.700
ll.SOO
1.900
00610
NH3-N
TOTAL
MG/L
0.052
0.890
0.540
2.000
0.050
0.011
0.012
7.200
0.016
0.480

0.010
00671
PHOS-DIS
ORTHO
MG/L P
0.035
0.043
0.030
1.370
0.021
0.020
0.021
0.052
0.072
0.128
0.550
0.070
00665
PHOS-TOT

MG/L P
0.175
0.360
0.230
1.950
0.125
0.113
0.145
0.295
0.300
0.400
1.400
0.250
 K  VALUE KNOWN) TO BE
 LESS THAN INDICATED

-------
 STORET RETRIEVAL DATE 75/08/25
                                                                   122781
                                                                  27 59 30.0 081 42 30.0
                                                                  UNNAMED STREAM
                                                                  12      7.5 ELOISE
                                                                  T/LAKE LULU
                                                                  BRDG ON RT 540A
                                                                  11EPALES             2111204
                                                                  4                   0000 FEET
                                                                                       DEPTH
   DATE   TIME  DEPTH N02S.N03
   FROM    OF
    TO    DAY   FEET
 73/03/18
 73/04/15
 73/05/18
 73/06/17
 73/07/14
 73/08/17
 73/10/13
 73/11/18
 73/12/16
 74/01/20
 74/02/02
10 56
16 42
13 20
15 00
12 25
15 00
11 45
12 25
15 45
15 49
15 30
0630
!S.N03
OTAL
IG/L
0.320
0.138
0.011
0.010K
0.010K
0.022
0.570
1.180
1.090
0.970
0.320
00625
TOT KJEL
N
MG/L
4.600
4.900
5.460
7.800
4.800
5.000
4.000
2.100
3.900
2.900
2.500
00610
NH3-N
TOTAL
MG/L
0.043
0.039
0.065
0.045
0.032
0.200
0.450
0.084
0.108
0.065
0.015
00671
PHOS-DIS
ORTHO
MG/L P
0.760
1.440
0.760
0.440
0.640
0.640
0.960
1.600

2.100
1.900
00665
PHOS-TOT

MG/L P
1.610
2.100
1.400
1.300
0.990
0.930
1.150
1.880
1.880
2.600
2.400
K VALUE KNOWN TO BE
LESS THAN INDICATED

-------
STORET RETRIEVAL DATE 75/08/25
                                                                  1227C1
                                                                 27 59 30oO 081 42 30oO
                                                                 UNNAMED STREAM
                                                                 12      7o5 ELOISE
                                                                 I/LAKE LULU
                                                                 SECONDARY RD 8RDG 8TWN LKS LULU 6, ELOISE
                                                                 UEPALES             211120*
                                                                 to                   0000 FEET  DEPTH
DATE
FROM
TO
73/03/18
73/04/15
73/05/18
73/06/17
73/07/14
73/08/17
73/09/16
73/10/13
73/11/18
73/12/16
74/01/20
74/02/02
00630 00625
TIME DEPTH N02&N03 TOT KJEL
OF N-FOTAL N
DAY FEET
10
16
13
14
12
14
10
11
12
15
15
15
43
25
15
45
15
53
35
39
10
38
34
24
MG/L
Co
Oo
C 0
Oo
Oo
Oo
Oo
Oo
lo
lo
Oo
Oo
476
189
010K
012
010K
033
750
019
400
180
500
380
MG/L
3olOO
5o040
4o800
2o800
30990
!o980
6o500
2o700
3oOOO
3oOOO
2ol50
2o500
00610 00671 00665
NH3°N PHOS-DIS PHOS°TOT
TOTAL ORTKO
MG/L
Oo
Oo
Oo
Oo
Oo
Oo
Oo
Oo
Oo
Oo
Oo
Oo
520
032
065
025
050
140
023
023
028
044
025
015
MG/L
Oo
lo
Oo
Oo
Oo
Oo
Oo
Oo
Jo
lo
lo
lo
P
770
^t70
^ i 0
360
590
730
650
315
500
650
100
950
MG/L
lo
2o
lo
Oo
1 0
lo
lo
Oo
lo
lo
lo
2o
P
720
200
300
50C
000
05C
000
490
950
800
450
400
 K  VALUE  KNOWN  TO  BE
 LESS  THAN  INDICATED

-------