U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
NATIONAL EUTROPHICATION SURVEY
WORKING PAPER SERIES
REPORT
ON
LAKE YALE
LAKECOUN1Y
FLORIDA
EPA REGION IV
WORKING PAPER No, 280
CORVALLIS ENVIRONMENTAL RESEARCH LABORATORY - CORVALLIS, OREGON
and
ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING & SUPPORT LABORATORY - LAS VEGAS, NEVADA
&G.P.O. 699-440
-------
REPORT
ON
LAKE YALE
LAKE COUNTY
FLORIDA
EPA REGION IV
.o
$ WORKING PAPER No, 280
O
WITH THE COOPERATION OF THE
FLJDRIDA DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL REGULATION
AND THE
FLORIDA NATIONAL GUARD
SEPTEMBER, 1977
-------
CONTENTS
Page
Foreword ii
List of Florida Lakes iv
Lake and Drainage Aiea 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
-------
1i
££ B.! HQ.R Jl
The National Eutrophication Survey v/as initiated in 1972 in
response to an Administration commitment to investigate the nation-
v/ide threat of accelerated eutrophication to freshwater lakes and
reservoirs.
OBJECTIVES
The Survey v/as 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.
j'
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 generalised 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 [S314(a,b)],
and water quality monitoring [§106 and 53013(b)] activities mandated
by the Federal Water Pollution Control Act Amendments of 1972.
-------
iii
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 betv/een 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 Eutroplrication 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
Howe!1
Istokpoga
Jessie
Jessup
Kissinimee
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 nole
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
-------
-------
LAKE YALE
STORE! NO. 1246
INTRODUCTION
Lake Yale was included in the National Eutrophication Survey as a
water body of interest to the Florida Department of Environmental Regu-
lation. Tributaries and nutrient sources were not sampled, and this report
relates only to the lake sampling data.
Lake Yale is in the Oklawaha chain of lakes. Surface waters enter
the lake from extensive marsh lands lying to the east and west, and the
outlet flows into Lake Griffin. This lake was studied extensively from
1966 to 1973 by the Florida Game and Freshwater Fish Commission (Dingell-
Johnson reports, 1966-1973).
II. CONCLUSIONS
A. Trophic Condition:
Survey data indicate that Lake Yale is eutrophic. It ranked
seventh when the 41 Florida lakes sampled in 1973 were compared
using a combination of six water quality parameters*. Only one
of the lakes had less median total phosphorus, nine had less and
one had the same median dissolved phosphorus, 17 had less median
inorganic nitrogen, 15 had less mean chlorophyll a^, and four
had greater mean Secchi disc transparency.
Survey limnologists noted algal blooms at both stations in
September and November and emergent vegetation along the shoreline.
* See Appendix A.
-------
2
B. Rate-Limiting Nutrient:
There was a significant change in nutrients in the sample
from the time of collection to the beginning of the assay. There-
fore, the algal assay results are not considered representative
of conditions in the lake at the time of sampling (03/14/73).
The lake data indicate nitrogen limitation in November and
September and phosphorus limitation in March.
-------
III. LAKE CHARACTERISTICS1"
A. Lake Morphemetry*:
1. Surface area: 15.95 kilometers2.
2. Mean depth: 3.7 meters.
3. Maximum depth: 4.6 meters.
4. Volume: 58.290 x 106 m3.
5. Mean hydraulic retention time: 1.5 years**.
B. Precipitation***:
1. Year of sampling: 121.6 centimeters.
2. Mean annual: 132.1 centimeters.
t Table of metric conversions—Appendix B.
* East Central Regional Planning Council (1973).
** Based on a mean discharge of 1.25 m3/sec.
*** See Working Paper No. 175, "...Survey Methods, 1973-1976".
-------
4
IV. WATER QUALITY SUMMARY
Lake Yale was sampled three times in 1973 by means of a pontoon-
equipped Huey helicopter. Each time, samples for physical and chemi-
cal 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 3.4 meters at station 1 and 3.7 meters at station 2.
The sampling results are presented in full in Appendix C and
are summarized in the following table.
-------
PARAMETER
TEMP (C)
DISS OXY (MG/D
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 (UG/D
SECCHI (METEPS)
A.
1ST
RANGE
23.8 -
8.8 -
290. -
8.4 -
103. -
0.011 - 0
0.004 - 0
0.140 - 0
0.110 - 0
0.900 - 2
0.270 - 0
1.040 - 2
5.0 -
2.1 -
SUMMARY OF PHYSICAL AND CHEMICAL CHARACTERISTICS FOR
STORET CODE 1246
SAMPLING < 3/14/73)
2
25.2
9.0
300.
8.6
106.
.042
.008
.160
.150
.300
.310
.460
6.3
2.7
SITES
MEAN
24.3
8.9
294.
8.5
105.
0.019
0.005
0.155
0.132
1.233
0.287
1.388
5.6
2.4
MEDIAN
24.1
8.9
295.
8.5
105.
0.015
0.005
0.160
0.135
1.050
0.280
1.205
5.6
2.4
2ND
RANGE
28.4 -
7.4 -
325. -
8.5 -
107. -
0.018 - 0
0.013 - 0
0.060 - 0
0.050 - 0
1.200 - 1
0.110 - 0
1.260 - 1
21.9 -
1.0 -
SAMPLING ( 9/
2
29.8
8.6
330.
8.7
110.
.035
.026
.070
.060
.600
.120
.660
90.5
1.1
SITES
MEAN
29.1
8.2
328.
8.6
108.
0.029
0.018
0.062
0.054
1.380
0.116
1.442
56.2
1.0
LAKE YALE
6/73)
MEDIAN
29.3
8.4
327.
8.6
108.
0.030
0.017
0.060
0.050
1.400
0.120
1.470
56.2
1.0
3RD SAMPLING (ll/ 5/73)
2 SITES
RANGE MEAN MEDIAN
22.2 - 22.8 22.5 22.S
9.0 - 9.4 9.2 9.2
280. - 265. 263. 283.
8.8 - 8.9 8.8 8.8
114. - 118. 117. 118.
0.022 - 0.061 0.036 0.032
0.016 - 0.032 0.024 0.026
0.070 - 0.080 0.076 0.080
0.070 - 0.100 0.082 0.080
1.000 - 1.400 1.200 1.200
0.140 - 0.170 0.158 0.160
1.070 - 1.480 1.276 1.280
13.5 - 15.0 14.3 14.3
1.0 - 1.1 1.0 1.0
-------
B. Biological Characteristics:
1. Phytoplankton* -
C.
Sampl i ng
Date
09/06/73
11/05/73
Dominant Algal Units
Genera per ml
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
Lyngbya sp.
Synedra sp.
Raphidiopsis sp.
Cosmarium sp.
Rhizosolenia sp.
Other genera
Total
Lyngbya s£.
Synedra sp.
Blue-green filaments
Aphanocapsa sp.
Aphanothece sp.
Other genera
19,967
17,498
2,515
1,729
1,101
5,498
48,308
55,809
10,587
3,573
2,056
1,371
2,840
2. Chlorophyll a^ -
Total 76,236
Chlorophyll a
(ug/D
6.3
5.0
90.5
21.9
15.0
13.5
Limiting Nutrient Study:
There was a significant change in nutrients in the sample from
the time of collection to the beginning of the assay. Therefore,
Sampl i ng
Date
03/14/73
09/06/73
11/05/73
Station
Number
1
2
1
2
1
2
* The March phytoplankton sample was lost in shipment.
-------
7
the assay results are not considered representative of conditions
in the lake at the time of sampling.
The lake data indicate nitrogen limitation in November and
September; i.e., the mean inorganic nitrogen to orthophosphorus
ratios were 6 to 1 and 7 to 1, respectively. The mean N to P
ratio in March was 57 to 1, and phosphorus limitation would be
expected.
-------
8
V. LITERATURE REVIEWED
East Central Regional Planning Council, 1973. Upper Oklawaha River
Basin Water quality management plan. Winter Park.
Florida Game & Fresh Water Fish Commission, 1966-1967. Final com-
pletion report, Dingell-Johnson project F-21-R-1. Tallahassee.
, 1967-1968. Final com-
pletion report, Dingell-Johnson project F-21-R-2. Tallahassee.
, 1968-1969. Final com-
pletion report, Dingell-Johnson project F-21-3. Tallahassee.
, 1970-1971. Final com-
pletion report, Dingell-Johnson project F-21-5. Tallahassee.
, 1972-1973. Final com-
pletion report, Dingell-Johnson project F-21-7. Tallahassee.
-------
VI. APPENDICES
APPENDIX A
LAKE RANKINGS
-------
LAKE DATA TO 9C 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 GIBSON
1212 GLENADA LAKE
1214 LAKE GRIFFIN
1215 LAKE HAINES
1217 LAKE HANCOCK
1219 LAKE HORSESHOE
1220 LAKE HOWELL
1221 LAKE ISTOKPOGA
1223 LAKE JtSSUP
122* LAKE KISSIMMEE
1227 LAKE LULU
1226 LAKE MARION
1229 LAKE MINNEHAHA
1230 LAKE MINNEOLA
1231 LAKE MONROE
1232 LAKE OKEECHOBEE
1234 LAKE POINSETT
J236 LAKE REEDY
1238 LAKE SOUTH
1239 LAKE TALOUIN
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
0.773
0.034
1.260
0.039
0.493
0.034
1.490
C.044
0.038
o.oie
0.183
0.063
0.085
0.333
0.074
0.08S
MEDIAN
INORG N
0.260
0.230
0.260
0.130
0.120
0.240
0.410
0.165
0.1IS
0.165
0.260
0.115
0.195
0.130
0.285
0.120
0.2.90
0.145
1.065
0.260
0.080
0.070
0.300
0.185
O.lSO
0.330
0.130
0.290
500-
MEAN SEC
474.000
484.176
482.667
473.889
465.555
482.889
489.000
469. 3C8 '
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
CHLOSA
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
12.067
54.U7
6.594
76.550
24.143
276.566
29.967
8.733
3.333
14.225
14.524
6.500
34.837
23.167
9.483
' 15-
MIN 00
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
OISS OWTHO 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
0.288
0.007
1.030
0.016
0.012
0.009
0.128
0.010
0.051
0.008
0.028
0.031
-------
LAKE DATA TO BE USED IN RANKINGS
LAKE
CODE LAKE NAME
12*0 LAKE THONOTOSASSA
12*1 LAKE TOHOPEKALIGA
12*2 TROUT LAKE
12*3 LAKE WEOHYAKAPKA
12.667
400.889
*65.333
*52.667
**0.633
476.000
MEAN
CHLORA
37.700
30.633
76.967
7.767
25.367
1*0.317
102.000
6*.900
6.867
70.233
26.300
5.167
86.200
15-
HIN DO
10.200
10.500
13.900
8.200
7.600
12.200
8.600
10.*00
9.000
12.200
10.800
9.*00
7.*00
MEDIAN
OISS ORTHO P
0.565
0.152
0.970
0.011
0.01*
0.852
0.026
0.117
0.027
0.339
0.011
0.007
1.210
-------
PERCENT OF LAKES WITH HIGHER VALUES (NUMBER or LAKES WITH HIGHER VALUES)
LAKE
CODE L«KE NAME
1201 ALLIGATOR LAKE
1302 LAKE APOPKA
1303 LAKE BANANA
1306 LAKE CRESCENT
1207 DOCTORS LAKE
1208 LAKE OORA
1209 LAKE ErriE
1210 LAKE GEORGE
1211 LAKE GIBSON
1212 GLENAOA LAKE
121<» LAKE GRIFFIN
1215 LAKE HAINES
1217 LAKE HANCOCK
1219 LAKE HORSESHOE
1220 LAKE HOWELL
/
1221 LAKE ISTOXPOGA
1223 LAKE JESSUP
1224 LAKE KISSIMMEE
1227 LAKE LULU
1228 LAKE MARION
'1229 LAKE MINNEHAHA
1230 LAKE MINNEOLA
1231 LAKE MONROE
1232 LAKE OKEECH08EE
1234 LAKE POINSETT
1236 LAKE REEDY
1238 LAKE SOUTH
1239 LAKE TALOUIN
MEDIAN
TOTAL P
25 ( 10)
50 < 20)
23 < 9)
65 ( 26)
60 ( 24)
53 ( 21)
5 < 2)
45 < 18)
40 ( 16)
43 < 17)
48 < 19)
70 ( 28)
18 ( 7)
93 ( 37)
11 < 4)
85 ( 34)
28 ( 11)
90 ( 36)
3 < 1)
78 < 31)
88 ( 35)
100 ( 40)
38 ( 15)
68 ( 27)
58 ( 23)
95 ( 38)
63 ( 25)
55 ( 22)
MEDIAN 500-
INORG N MEAN SEC
29 (
38 (
29 (
70 (
76 <
35 (
10 (
54 (
81 (
54 <
29 (
81 (
43 «
70 <
23 (
76 (
18 <
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)
18)
24)
5)
27)
8)
30 (
10 (
20 t
33 <
60 (
18 (
3 (
48 (
45 <
85 (
23 (
75 (
13 (
80 (
69 (
65 <
5 (
73 (
15 <
53 (
95 (
98 (
28 (
40 (
50 <
55 (
69 (
78 (
12)
4)
8)
13)
24 >
7)
1)
19)
18)
34)
9)
201
5)
32)
27)
26)
2)
29)
6)
21)
38)
39)
11)
16)
20)
22)
27)
31)
MEAN
CHLORA
18
38
5
80
55
33
3
43
70
53
30
58
13
78
35
93
25
65
0
50
85
100
75
73
95
45
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)
( 18)
( 27)
( 33)
15- MEDIAN
MIN DO OISS OrtTHO P
10 (
74 {
100 (
48 <
34 <
90 <
0 (
23 (
48 (
3 <
95 (
34 (
98 (
20 <
60 (
69 (
63 (
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)
18 (
70 <
23 <
50 (
56 (
68 (
10 (
43 (
40 (
38 (
48 (
78 (
28 (
65 (
3 (
89 (
25 (
99 (
5 <
73 (
80 <
93 (
33 (
89 I
45 (
95 i
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)
38)
22)
21)
INDEX
NO
130
280
200
346
341
297
31
256
324
276
273
396
213
406
201
477
184
*5S
34
366
517
579
215
368
342
337
386
294
-------
PERCENT Or LAKES WITH HIGHER VALUES (NUMBER OF LAKES WITH HIGHER VALUES)
'LAKE
CODE LAKE NAME
1240 LAKE THONOTOSASSA
1241 LAKE TOHOPEKALIGA
1243 TROUT LAKE
1343 LAKE WEOHYAKAPKA
1246 LAKE YALE
1247 LAKE HUNSOKi
1243 LAKE SEMINOLE
1249 LAKE LAWNE
1250 LAKE TARPON
1252 LAKE ELOISE
1258 LAKE JESSIE
1261 EAST LAKE TOHOPEKALIGA
1264 PAYNE'S PRAIRIE LAKE (NO
MEDIAN
TOTAL P
20
33
15
75
98
8
35
0
83
30
73
80
11
(
(
I
(
(
(
(
(
(
(
(
(
(
8)
13)
6)
30)
39)
3)
14)
0>
33)
12)
29)
32)
4)
MEDIAN
INORG N
85 1
40 <
8 1
91 1
58 1
5 1
48 1
0 i
98 i
50 i
68 •
98 <
65
; 34)
; 16)
: 3)
: 36)
1 23)
I 2)
[ 19)
1 0)
( 38)
t 20)
t 35)
( 38)
( 26)
SCO-
MEAN SEC
58 1
38 <
43 (
83 (
90 1
8 1
35 1
0 i
100 i
63 i
88 <
93 i
25
23)
15)
! 17)
[ 33)
I 36)
! 3)
[ 14)
t 0)
t 40)
I 25)
1 35)
( 37)
( 10)
MEAN
CHLORA
40 (
48 1
23 1
88 1
63 <
8 i
10 i
20 i
90 i
28 i
60 *
98
IS
16)
1 19)
I 9)
I 35)
! 25)
t 3)
! 4)
1 8)
I 36)
1 11)
I 24)
( 39)
( 6)
15-
MIN 00
48 '.
40 (
13 (
74 (
83 (
16 (
69 (
43 (
60 (
16 (
26 (
55 (
90 (
181
16)
5>
29)
32)
6) .
27)
17)
23)
6)
10)
22)
35)
MEDIAN
OISS ORTHO P
15 (
30 <
a i
84 1
75 1
13 *
63 I
35 i
60 i
20 i
84 i
99 <
0
1 6)
: i2>
[ 3)
1 33)
1 30)
I S>
1 25)
I 14)
! 24)
t 8)
1 33)
( 39)
I 0)
INOEX
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
1 1330 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 KISS1MMEE 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 REEDT 337
19 1211 LAKE GIBSON 324
20 1208 LAKE DORA 297
2i 1239 LAKE TALGUIN 294
22 1202 LAKE APOPKA 280
23 1212 GLENAOA L'AKE 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
-------
-t^—>-yT
LAKES RANKED BY INDEX NOS.
RAM* 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
1247
1227
1209
LAKE MONROE
LAKE HANCOCK
LAKE ELOISE
PAYNE'S PRAIRIE LAKE
-------
APPENDIX B
CONVERSION FACTORS
-------
APPENDIX C
PHYSICAL and CHEMICAL DATA
-------
STOftET RETRIEVAL DATE 76/06/01
DATE
FROM
TO
73/03/14
73/09/06
73/11/05
TIME DEPTH
OF
DAY FEET
11 25 0000
11 25 0006
11 25 0011
14 25 0000
14 25 0010
14 25 0000
14 25 0002
14 25 0007
00010
WATER
TEMP
CENT
24.5
25.2
24.4
29.8
29.3
22.8
22.8
22.8
00300
DO
MG/L
9.0
9.0
8.6
8.6
9.0
9.4
124601
28 55 34.0 081 45 14.0 3
LAKE YALE
12069 FLORIDA
032091
HEP ALES
2111202
0015 FEET DEPTH CLASS
00300
DO
MG/L
9.0
9.0
8.6
8.6
9.0
9.4
00077
TRANSP
SECCHI
INCHES
84
38
42
00094
CNDUCTVY
FIELD
MICROMHO
295
290
290
330
327
285
285
285
00400
PH
SU
8.60
8.60
8.60
8.70
8.60
8.90
8.80
00410
T ALK
CAC03
MG/L
103
105
105
108
107
118
•*
118
00610
NH3-N
TOTAL
MG/L
0.150
0.110
0.120
0.060
---0.050
0.080
0.080
00
00625
TOT KJEL
N
MG/L
2.300
1.100
1.200
1.500
1.200
1.400
1.300
00630
N02&N03
N-TOTAL
MG/L
0.160
0.160
0.160
0.060
0.060
0.080
0.080
00671
PHOS-DIS
ORTHO
MG/L P
0.008
0.005
0.005
0.013
0.017
0.032
0.027
DATE
FROM
TO
73/0 3/l<.
73/09/06
73/11/05
TIME DEPTH
OF
DAY FEET
11 25 0000
11 25 0006
11 25 0011
14 25 0000
14 25 0010
14 25 0000
14 25 0007
00665
PHOS-TOT
MG/L P
0.042
0.019
0.015
0.018
0.025
0.031
0.033
32217
CHLRPHYL
A
UG/L
6.3
90.5
15.0
-------
STORET RETRIEVAL DATE 76/06/01
12*602
28 54 24.0 081 43 15.0 3
LAKE YALE
12069 FLORIDA
032091
11EPALES 2111202
0046 FEET DEPTH CLASS 00
DATE
FROM
TO
73/03/14
73/09/06
73/11/05
DATE
FROM
TO
73/03/14
73/09/06
-
73/1 1/05
TIME DEPTH
OF
DAY FEET
13 00
13 00
13 00
14 05
14 05
14 05
14 42
14 42
14 42
0000
0006
0012
0000
0005
0012
0000
0005
0010
TIME DEPTH
OF
DAY FEET
13 00
13 00
13 00
14 05
14 05
14 05
14 42
14 42
14 42
0000
0006
0012
0000
0005
0012
0000
0005
0010
00010
WATER
TEMP
CENT
23.9
23.9
23.8
29.3
28.8
28.4
22.3
22.3
22.2
00665
PHOS-TOT
MG/L P
0.011
0.013
0.015
0.035
0.030
0.035
0.022
0.032
0.061
00300 00077 00094
DO TRANSP CNDUCTVY
SECCHI FIELD
MG/L INCHES MICROMHO
108
8.8
8.8
42
8.2
7.4
40
9.2
9.2
32217
CHLRPHYL
A
UG/L
5.0
21.9
13.5
300
295
295
330
327
325
280
280
280
00400 00410
PH T ALK
CAC03
SU MG/L
8.40
8.40
8.40
8.60
8.60
8.50
8.80
8.90
8.80
106
105
105
110
107
108
117
114
118
00610 00625 00630 00671
NH3-N TOT KJEL N02&N03 PHOS-DIS
TOTAL N N-TOTAL ORTHO
MG/L MG/L MG/L MG/L P
0.140
0.140
0.130
0.060
0.050
0.050
0.080
0.100
0.070
0.900
0.900
1.000
1.600
1.200
1.400
1.200
1.000
1.100
0.140
0.160
0.150
0.060
0.060
0.070
0.080
0.070
0.070
0.004
0.005
0.005
0.013
0.023
0.026
0.020
0.026
0.016
------- |