U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
NATIONAL EUTROPHICATION SURVEY
WORKING PAPER SERIES
REPORT
ON
U\KEPOINSEIT
BREVARD, ORANGE, AND OSCEOLA COUNTIES
FLORIDA
EPA REGION IV
WORKING PAPER No, 271
CORVALLIS ENVIRONMENTAL RESEARCH LABORATORY - CORVALLIS, OREGON
and
ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING & SUPPORT LABORATORY - LAS VEGAS, NEVADA
•5VG.P.O. 699-440
-------
REPORT
ON
LAKEPOINSETT
BREVARD, ORANGE, AND OSCEOLA COUNTIES
FLORIDA
EPA REGION IV
WORKING PAPER No, 271
WITH THE COOPERATION OF THE
FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL REGULATION
AND THE
FLORIDA NATIONAL GUARD
OCTOBER, 1977
-------
CONTENTS
Page
Foreword ii
List of Florida Study Lakes i.v
Lake and Drainage A sea Map y
Sections
I. Introduction 1
II. Conclusions 1
III. Lake and Drainage Basin Characteristics 3
IV. Lake Water Quality Summary 4
V. Literature Reviewed 8
VI. Appendices 9
-------
ii
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)], clean lakes [§314(a,b)J,
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, rnultivariate 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 Eutropfiication 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
LAKL.NAME:
Alligator
Apopka
Banana
Crescent
Doctors
Dora
East Tohopekaliga
Effie
Eloise
George
Gibson
Glenada
Griffin
Raines
Hancock
Horseshoe
Howell
Istokpoga
Jessie
Jessup
Ktssinimee
Lawne
Lulu
Marion
Minnehaha
Minneola
Monroe
Munson
Okeechobee
Poinsett
Reedy
Semi no!e
Seminole
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
Hillsboro
Osceola
Lake
Polk
Lake
-------
h-28'18'
LAKE POINSETT
5 Tributary Sampling Site
X Lake Sampling Site
o i 2 3 Km
I .-• 1 '—, ',
Scale
;.* -fr- '
; *:~*r
•".x •• "••"
,. ± t jff-^-.
T "• ... • >. — -£. • ,i.
-«. .«. — ». t «
jaL* ~ . *-""
. - .*. -.
-28'ie'
-------
LAKE POINSETT
STORE! NO. 1234
I. INTRODUCTION
Lake Poinsett was included in the National Eutrophication Survey as
a water body of interest to the Florida Department of Environmental Regu-
lation. Except for the outlet, tributaries were inaccessible, and nutrient
sources were not sampled. Therefore, this report primarily relates to the
lake sampling data. However, the outlet data (station A-l) are included
in Appendix E for the record.
II. CONCLUSIONS
A. Trophic Condition:
Survey data indicate that Lake Poinsett is eutrophic. It
ranked sixteenth in overall trophic quality when the 41
Florida Lakes sampled in 1973 were compared using a combination
of six water quality parameters*. Seventeen of the lakes had less
and one had the same median total phosphorus, 22 had less median
dissolved orthophosphorus, 15 had less median inorganic nitrogen,
one had less mean chlorophyll a, and 20 had greater mean Secchi
disc transparency.
Survey limnologists noted that the lake had a dark brown
humic color during the sampling. Much submerged vegetation and
patches of water hyacinth were noted at station 1 in November, and
similar conditions were observed at station 2 along with fili-
mentous algae.
* See Appendix A.
-------
2
B. Rate-Limiting Nutrient:
The algal assay results indicate that Lake Poinsett was
limited by nitrogen at the time the sample was collected (03/15/
73). The lake data indicate nitrogen limitation at all sampling
stations and times.
-------
III. LAKE AND DRAINAGE BASIN CHARACTERISTICS1"
A. Lake Morphometry :
1. Surface area: 17.60 kilometers2.
2. Mean depth: 1.5 meters.
3. Maximum depth: 2.5 meters.
4. Volume: 26.400 x 106 m3.
5. Mean hydraulic retention time: 9 days.
B. Tributary and Outlet:
(See Appendix C for flow data)
1. Tributaries -
Drainage Mean flow
Name area (km2)* (m3/sec)*
St. Johns River and minor
tributaries & immediate drainage - 3,429.7 33.05
2. Outlet -
St. Johns River 3,447.3** 33.05
C. Precipitation***:
1. Year of sampling: 124.7 centimeters.
2. Mean annual: 142.1 centimeters.
t Table of metric conversions—Appendix B.
tt Stuart, 1972; depths estimated from soundings (Appendix D).
* For limits of accuracy, see Working Paper No. 175, "...Survey Methods,
1973-1976".
** Includes area of lake.
*** See Working Paper No. 175.
-------
4
IV. LAKE WATER QUALITY SUMMARY
Lake Poinsett was sampled three times in 1973 by means of a pon-
toon-equipped Huey helicopter. Each time, samples for physical
and chemical parameters were collected from one or more depths
at two stations on the lake (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 a^ analysis. The maximum depths sampled were 1.2
meters at station 1 and 1.5 meters at station 2.
The sampling results are presented in full in Appendix D and
are summarized in the following table.
-------
PARAMETER
TEMP (C)
DISS OXY (MG/L)
CNDCTVY (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
03/15/73
09/05/73
11/05/73
2. Chlorophyll a_ -
Dominant
Genera
1. Flagellates
2. Cyclotella sp.
3. Cryptomonas sp.
4. Spermatozoopsis sp.
5. Nitzschia sp.
Other genera
Total
Algal Units
per ml
3,408
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
Flagellates
Cyclotella sp.
Spermatozoopsis sp.
Microcystis sp.
Scenedesmus S£.
Other genera
951
885
522
133
44
110
Total
2,645
1.
2.
3.
4.
Flagellates
Di no flagellates
Pennate diatoms
Mougeotia(?) sp.
397
82
11
11
Total 501
Sampl i ng
Date
03/15/73
09/05/73
11/05/73
Station
Number
1
2
1
2
1
2
Chlorophyll a
(yg/1)
6.8
4.0
17.1
7.3
1.3
2.5
-------
C. Limiting Nutrient Study:
1. Autoclaved, filtered, and nutrient spiked -
Ortho P
Cone, (mq/1)
Spike (mg/1)
Control
0.050 P
0.050 P + 1.0 N
1.0 N
2. Filtered and nutrient spiked -
Inorganic N Maximum yield
Cone, (mg/1) (mg/1-dry wt.)
0.054
0.104
0.104
0.054
0.251
0.251
1.251
1.251
5.8
6.3
16.0
7.9
Spike (mg/1)
Control
0.050 P '
0.050 P + 1.0 N
1.0 N
Ortho P
Cone, (mg/1)
0.058
0.108
0.108
0.058
Inorganic N Maximum yield
Cone, (mg/1) (mg/1-dry wt.)
0.211
0.211
1.211
1.211
6.2
6.7
17.5
11.8
3. Discussion -
The control yields of the assay alga, Selenastrum capri-
cornutum, indicate that the potential primary productivity
of Lake Poinsett was moderately high at the time the sample
was collected (03/15/73). Also, the lack of growth response
with increasing levels of orthophosphorus until nitrogen was
also added indicates that the lake was nitrogen limited at
that time. Note that the addition of only nitrogen resulted
in a yield significantly greater than that of the control.
The lake data also indicate nitrogen limitation. The
mean inorganic nitrogen to orthophosphorus ratios were 4 to 1
or less at all sampling stations and times, and nitrogen limi-
tation would be expected.
-------
8
V. LITERATURE REVIEWED
Stuart, Tim S., 1972. Personal communication (area of lake). FL
Dept. of Env. Reg., Tallahassee.
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
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 EFFIE
1210 LAKE GEORGE
1211 LAKE GIdSON
1212 GLEMADA LAKE
121"» LAKE GRIFFIN
1215 LAKE HAINES
1217 LAKE HANCOCK
1219 LAKE HORSESHOE
1220 LAKE HOWELL
1221 LAKE ISTOKPOGA
122J LAKE JESSUP
1224 LAKE KISSIMMEt
1227 LAKE LULU
1228 LAKE MARION
1229 LAKE MINNEHAHA
1230 LAKE MJNNEOLA
1231 LAKE MONROE
1232 LAKE OKEECHOdEE
i23<» LAKE POINSETT
1236 LAKE PFEOY
1238 LAKE SOUTH
1239 LAKE TALOUIN
MEDIAN
TOTAL P
0.b2C
0.103
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
0.038
0.018
0.138
0.063
0.085
0.033
0.074
0.085
MEDIAN
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
0.290
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
484. 1 76
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
464.000
462.167
MEAN
CHLO^A
87.733
4(3.611
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
MED I AN
DISS OrfTHO
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. 12M
0.010
O.Obl
0.008
0.028
0.031
-------
LAKE DATA TO BE USED IN RANKINGS
LAKE
COOE LAKE NAME
12*0 LAKE THONOTOSASSA
12*1 LAKE TOHOPEKALIGA
12*2 TROUT LAKE
12*3 LAKE WEOHYAKAPKA
12*6 LAKE YALE
1247 LAKE MUNSON
12*8 LAKE SEMINOLE
12*9 LAKE LAWNE
1250 LAKE TARPON
1252 LAKE ELOISE
1258 LAKE JESSIE
1261 EAST LAKE TOHOPEKALIGA
126* PAYNE'S PRAIRIE LAKE (NO
MEDIAN
TOTAL P
0.695
0.2*6
1.110
0.0*7
0.027
l.*75
0.23*
2.560
0.0*1
0.*86
0.051
0.0*2
1.260
MtDIAN
INORG 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
0.1*0
500-
MEAN SEC
*66.167
*72.917
*72.000
*58.667
**1.000
*86.667
*73.833
*9*.667
*00.889
*65.333
*52.667
**0.833
*76.000
MEAN
CHLOHA
37.700
30.633
76.967
7.767
25.367
1*0.317
102.000
8*. 900
6.867
70.233
26.300
5.167
38.200
15-
MIN 00
10.200
10.500
12.900
8.200
7.600
12.200
6.600
10. tOO
9.000
12.200
10.800
9.*00
7.*00
MEDIAN
OISS 0«THO P
0.565
0.152
0.970
0.011
0.01*
0.852
0.026
0.117
0.1)27
0.339
0.011
0.007
1.210
-------
Of LAKES KITH HIGHER VALUES (NUMBER OF LAKES WITH HIGHER VALUES)
LAKE
CODE LAKE NAME
1201 ALLIGATOR LAKE
1202 LAKE APOPKA
1203 LAKE BANANA
1206 LAKE CRESCENT
1207 DOCTORS LAKE
1208 LAKE DORA
1209 LAKE EFFIE
1213 LAKE GEORGE
1211 LAKE GIBSON
1212 GLENADA LAKE
1214 LAKE GRIFFIN
1215 LAKE HAINES
1217 LAKE HANCOCK
1219 LAKE HORSESHOE
1220 LAKE HOWELL
1221 LAKE ISTOKPOGA
1223 LAKE JESSUP
1224 LAKE KISS1MMEE
1227 LAKE LULU
1228 LAKE MARION
1229 LAKt MINNEHAHA
1230 LAKE MINNEOLA
1231 LAKE MONROE
1232 LAKE OKEECHOdEE
123* LAKE POINSETT
1236 LAKE WEEDr
1238 LAKE SOUTH
1239 LAKE TALOUIN
MEDIAN .
TOTAL P
25
50
23
65
60
53
5
45
40
43
4P
70
18
93
11
85
28
90
3
78
88
100
38
68
58
95
63
55
( 10)
< 20)
( 9)
( 26)
( 24)
( 21)
( 2)
( 16)
< 16)
( 17)
( 19)
( 28)
( 7)
( 37)
( 4)
< 34)
( 11)
< 36)
( 1)
( 31)
( 35)
( 40)
< 15)
< 27)
( 23)
( 36)
( 25)
< 22)
MEDIAN
lNOr?G N
29
36
29
70
76
35
10
54
61
54
29
81
43
70
23
76
1*
63
3
29
91
98
15
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)
( IB)
( 24)
< 5)
( 27>
( 8)
500-
MEAN SEC
30 (
10 (
20 (
33 (
60 (
18 (
3 (
48 (
45 (
85 <
23 (
75 (
13 (
00 (
6V (
65 <
5 (
73 (
15 (
53 <
95 <
98 (
2tt (
40 (
50 (
55 (
69 (
78 (
12)
4)
8)
13)
24)
7)
1)
19)
18)
34)
9)
30)
5)
32)
27)
26)
2)
29)
6)
21)
38)
J9>
11)
16)
20)
22)
27)
3D
MEAN
CHLOHA
18 (
38 (
5 (
80 (
55 <
33 (
3 (
43 (
7C (
53 (
30 (
58 (
13 <
78 1
35 (
93 (
25 (
e>5 (
0 (
bO (
85 (
100 (
/5 (
73 <
95 (
4S (
68 (
83 (
7)
15)
2)
32)
22)
13)
1)
17)
28)
21)
12)
23)
5)
3D
14)
37)
10)
26)
0)
20)
34)
40)
30)
29)
38)
It*)
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)
( 18)
( 1>
( 38)
( 12)
< 39)
( 8)
( 23)
( 27)
( 32)
( 26)
( 3)
( 32)
< 31)
( 35)
( 10)
( 21)
( 12)
< 12)
< 23)
( 2)
MEOIAN
OISS OtfTHO H
18
70
23
50
56
68
10
43
40
38
48
78
26
65
3
89
25
99
5
73
80
93
33
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)
( 18)
( 3U)
( 22)
( 21)
INDEX
NO
1JO
260
200
346
341
297
31
256
324
276
273
396
213
t06
201
477
184
4a5
34
366
517
579
215
368
342
33 1
3d 6
294
-------
PERCENT OF LAKES WITH HIGHER VALUES (NUMBED OF LAKES WITH HIGHEW VALUES)
LAKE
CODE LAKE NAME
1240 LAKE THONOTOSASSA
LAKE TOHOPEKALIGA
TROUT LAKE
12*3 LAKE KEOHYAKAPKA
12*6 LAKE YALE
1247 LAKE MUNSON
12*8 LAKE SEMINOLE
12*9 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
9B
a
35
0
83
30
73
80
11
( 8)
( 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
68
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
40
48
23
88
63
8
10
20
90
28
60
98
15
( 16)
( 19)
( 9)
( 35)
( 25)
( 3)
( 4)
( 8)
( 36)
( 11)
( 24)
( 39)
< 6)
15-
MIN 00
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)
MEOUN
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)
NO
26t>
229
110
495
467
58
260
98
491
207
419
523
206
-------
LAKES RANKED Br INDEX'NOS.
RANK LAKE CODE LAKE NAME INDEX NO
i ia30 LAKE MINNEOLA 579
2 1261 EAST LAKE TOriOPEKALIGA 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 KISSIMMEE 455
9 1258 LAKE JESSIE 419
10 1219 LAKE HORSESHOE 406
11 1215 LAKE HAINES 396
12 1238 LAKE SOUTH 386
13 1232 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 «EED» 337
19 1211 LAKE GIBSON 3?4
20 1208 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
28 1241 LAKE TOHOPEKALIGA 229
-------
LAKES RANKED BY INOEA NOS.
RANK LAKE CODE LAKE NAME INDEX NO
29 1331 LAKE MONROE 215
30 1217 LAKE HANCOCK ^l^
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 2.205 p pounds
Kilograms/square kilometer x 5.711 = Ibs/square mile
-------
APPENDIX C
TRIBUTARY FLOW DATA
-------
TRIBUTARY FLOW INFORMATION FOR FLORIDA
8/2S/75
LA
-------
APPENDIX D
PHYSICAL and CHEMICAL DATA
-------
STOKET HETRIEVAL DATE "75/08/25
123401
28 21 00.0 080 51
LAKE POINSETT
1200Y FLORIDA
11EPALES 2111202
3 0004 FEET
DATE
FROM
TO
73/03/15
73/09/05
73/11/05
DATE
FROM
TO
73/03/15
73/09/05
73/11/05
TIME DEPTH
OF
DAY FEET
09 30 0000
09 30 0002
09 50 0000
14 45 0000
14 45 0004
TIME DEPTH
OF
DAY FEET
09 30 0000
09 30 0002
09 50 0000
14 45 0000
14 45 0004
00010
WATER
TEMP
CENT
25.0
29.0
23.9
23.8
00665
PHOS-TOT
MG/L P
0.090
0.084
0.097
0.051
0.071
00300
DO
MG/L
6.
6.
5.
32217
3
0
0
00077 00094
TRANSP CNDUCTVY
SECCHI FIELO
INCHES MICROMHO
32 580
550
20 460
48 343
342
00400 00410 00610
PH T ALK NHJ-N
CAC03 TOTAL
SO MG/L MG/L
8.10 36 0.060
8.50 38 0.060
7.20 50 0.110
7.30 30 0.090
8.20 33 0.070
DEPTH
00625
TOT
N
KJEL
MG/L
1
1
2
1
1
.900
.600
.400
.600
.300
00630
N02&N03
N-TOTAL
MG/L
0.090
0.090
0.210
0.060
0.050
00671
PHOS-DIS
ORTMO
MG/L
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
P
050
051
074
040
052
CHLRPHYL
A
UG/L
6.
17.
1.
8
1
3
-------
STJRET KETSIEVAL DATE 75/08/25
123*02
28 20 01.0 060 49 23.0
LAKE FOINSETT
1200* FLORIDA
DAlt
FrtOM
10
73/03/15
73/09/05
73/11/05
DATE
FrtOM
TO
73/03/15
73/09/05
73/11/05
TIME DEPTH
OF
DAY FEET
10 00 0000
10 00 0004
09 50 0000
15 00 0000
15 00 0005
TIME DEPTH
OF
DAY FEET
10 00 0000
10 00 0004
09 50 0000
15 00 0000
15 00 0005
00010
WATER
TEMP
CtNT
2b.O
25.0
29.2
23.8
23.7
00665
PHOS-TOT
MG/L P
0.086
0.086
0.120
0.050
0.052
11EPALES 2111202
3 0006 FEET DEPTH
00300 00077 00094 00400 00410 00610 00625 00630 00671
DO TKANSP CNOUCTVY PH T ALK NH3-N TOT KJEL N02&N03 PHOS-[)IS
SECCHI FIELD CAC03 TOTAL N N-TOTAL OKTHO
MG/L INCHES MICHOMHO SU MG/L MG/L MG/L MG/L MG/L .P
6.0
5.6
4.4
32217
CHLRPHYL
A
UG/L
• 4.0
7.3
2.5
34 520 a. 00 38 0.110 1.500 0.090 0.060
520 7.90 36 0.080 1.400 0.080 0.059
20 680 7.20 52 0.100 2.200 0.170 0.094
32 331 H.10 30 0.090 1.700 0.040 0.033
335 7.90 33 0.080 0.800 0.040 0.040
-?
-------
APPENDIX E
TRIBUTARY DATA
-------
STORET RETRIEVAL OATE 75/08/35
1234A1
28 22 00.0 080 52 30.0
ST JOHNS RIVE*
12093 7.5 LK POINSETT
0/LAKE POINSETT
ST H«1 530 .5 MI N OF MULBERRY MOUND
11EPALES 2111204
4 0000 FEET DEPTH
DATE TIME OtPTl-
FROM OF
TO DAY FEET
73/03/17
73/04/1*
73/05/17
73/06/18
73/07/15
73/08/20
73/10/20
73/11/18
73/12/15
74/01/17
74/02/17
15 45
08 50
11 00
12 15
07 15
15 20
09 30
10 30
08 30
09 00
09 00
00630
2&N03
TOTAL
MG/L
0.066
0.034
0.021
0.012
0.040
0.024
0.068
0.028
0.088
0.140
0.040
0062S
Tor KJEL
M
MG/L
1.400
1.500
3.990
1.760
2.400
0.500
1.750
1.2SO
1.300
1.000
1.600
00610
NH3-N
TUTAL
MG/L
0.038
0.029
0.168
0.050
0.126
0.283
0.092
C.076
0.12fa
0.058
0.060
00671
PhOS-OIS
UHThO
MG/L P
0.048
0.055
0.046
0.046
0.015
0.069
0.060
0.036
0.036
0.032
0.030
00665
PHOS-TOT
MG/L P
0.080
0.080
0.075
0.075
0.070
0.115
0.085
0.045
0.040
0.050
0.080
------- |