U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
NATIONAL EUTROPHICATION SURVEY
WORKING PAPER SERIES
REPORT
ON
JAPES U\KE
KOSCIUSKQ COUNTY
INDIANA
EPA REGION V
WORKING PAPER No, 330
CORVALLIS ENVIRONMENTAL RESEARCH LABORATORY - CORVALLIS, OREGON
and
ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING & SUPPORT LABORATORY - LAS VEGAS, NEVADA
699-440
-------
c
REPORT
ON
JAESLAKE
KOSCIUSKD COUNTY
n, INDIANA
> EPA REGION V
,v
o • WORKING PAPER No, 330
o
WITH THE COOPERATION OF THE
INDIANA STATE BOARD OF HEALTH
AND THE
INDIANA NATIONAL GUARD
JULY, 1976
-------
CONTENTS
Page
Foreword i i
List of Indiana 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 Reviewed 13
VI. Appendices 14
-------
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)K water
quality criteria/standards review {§303(c)>, clean lakes {§314(a,b)>,
and water quality monitoring {§106 and §305(b)} activities mandated
by the Federal Water Pollution Control Act Amendments of 1972.
-------
m
Beyond the single lake analysis, broader based correlations
between nutrient concentrations (and loading) and trophic condi-
tion are being made to advance the rationale and data base for
refinement of nutrient water quality criteria for the Nation's
fresh water lakes. Likewise, multivariate evaluations for the
relationships between land use, nutrient export, and trophic
condition, by lake class or use, are being developed to assist
in the formulation of planning guidelines and policies by EPA
and to augment plans implementation by the states.
ACKNOWLEDGMENT
The staff of the National Eutrophication Survey (Office of
Research & Development, U. S. Environmental Protection Agency)
expresses sincere appreciation to the Indiana State Board of
Health for professional involvement, to the Indiana National
Guard for conducting the tributary sampling phase of the Survey,
and to those Indiana wastewater treatment plant operators who
provided effluent samples and flow data.
The staff of the Division of Water Pollution Control, Indiana
State Board of Health, provided invaluable lake documentation and
counsel during the Survey, reviewed the preliminary reports, and
provided critiques most useful in the preparation of this Working
Paper series.
Major General Alfred F. Ahner, Adjutant General of Indiana,
and Project Officers Lt. Colonel Charles B. Roberts (Retired)
and Colonel Robert L. Sharp, who directed the volunteer efforts
of the Indiana National Guardsmen, are also gratefully acknowledged
for their assistance to the Survey.
-------
IV
NATIONAL EUTROPHICATION SURVEY
STUDY LAKES
STATE OF INDIANA
LAKE NAME
Bass
Cataract
Crooked
Dallas
Geist
Hamilton
Hovey
James
James
Long
Marsh
Mississinewa
Maxinkuckee
Monroe
Morse
01 in
Oliver
Pigeon
Sylvan
Tippecanoe
Versailles
Wawassee
Webster
Westler
Whitewater
Winona
Witmer
COUNTY
Starke
Owen, Putnam
Steuben
LaGrange
Hamilton, Marion
Steuben
Posey
Kosciusko
Steuben
Steuben
Steuben
Grant, Miami, Wabash
Marshal 1
Brown, Monroe
Hami1 ton
LaGrange
LaGrange
Steuben
Noble
Kosciusko
Ripley
Kosciusko
Kosciusko
LaGrange
Union
Kosciusko
LaGrange
-------
-------
JAMES LAKE
STORE! NO. 1817
I. CONCLUSIONS
A. Trophic Condition:
Survey data indicate that James Lake is eutrophic. It
ranked eleventh in overall trophic condition when the 27 Indiana
lakes sampled in 1973 were compared using a combination of six
parameters*. Seven of the lakes had less median total phosphorus,
nine had less median dissolved phosphorus, 15 had less median
inorganic nitrogen, 13 had less mean chlorophyll a^ and 11 had
greater mean Secchi disc transparency. Hypolimnetic dissolved
oxygen was depleted in August and October.
Survey limnologists noted macrophytes along the shorelines
in August and October.
B. Rate-Limiting -Nutrient:
The algal assay results indicate that James Lake was phos-
phorus limited at the time the sample was collected (05/03/73).
The lake data indicate phosphorus limitation at all sampling
times.
C. Nutrient Controllability:
1. Point sources—During the sampling year, James Lake
received a total phosphorus loading just in excess of that
proposed by Vollenweider (Vollenweider and Dillon, 1974) as a
* See Appendix A.
-------
2
eutrophic loading (see page 12). It is estimated that lake-
shore septic tanks contributed less than 1% of that load, but
a shoreline survey would be necessary to determine the sig-
nificance of those sources.
Following termination of the Survey sampling, personnel of
the Kosciusko County Health Department reported to the Indiana
Stream Pollution Control Agency the existence of two outfalls dis-
charging municipal wastes to the Tippecanoe River below the Web-
ster Lake dam (BonHomme, 1976). At the time of preparation of
this report, the nutrient significance of these discharges was
not known. However, the nutrient contributions of these sources
were included in the loads measured at station 17 A-2 during
the sampling year (see map, page v).
Sewage treatment facilities are planned for the Town of North
Webster which also will treat wastes from the community on the
northeast corner of Webster Lake*, including the wastes from the
Epworth Forest Church Camp (BonHomme, op. cit.). The collection
system will intercept the outfalls noted above. The effluent of
the new plant will be discharged to the Tippecanoe River upstream
from James Lake.
When completed, the treatment facilities will reduce the indirect
point-source load presently reaching James Lake via the Webster Lake
outlet and will eliminate the two discharges noted above. However,
* Working Paper No. 345.
-------
3
the treatment plant will contribute an unknown amount of nutrients
to James Lake via the Tippecanoe River, and it will be necessary
to evaluate the significance of this new phosphorus source once
the plant is put in operation.
There was an apparent loss of phosphorus from the lake during
the sampling year. This may have been due to unknown and unmeasured
point sources discharging directly to the lake, insufficient sam-
pling, underestimation of the phosphorus load from septic tanks,
or actual phosphorus wash-out following the Indiana phosphate deter-
gent ban which became effective in January, 1972.
2. Non-point sources—The phosphorus exports of non-point
sources apparently accounted for over 99% of the phosphorus
reaching the lake during the sampling year. The Tippecanoe River
contributed over 90% of the total at a rate of 10 kg/km2/yr. This
rate is relatively low and compares well to the rates of other
streams in the area.
-------
II. LAKE AND DRAINAGE BASIN CHARACTERISTICS1"
A. Lake Morphometry :
1. Surface area: 1.14 kilometers2.
2. Mean depth: 8.2 meters.
3. Maximum depth: 19.2 meters.
4. Volume: 9.348 x 106 m3.
5. Mean hydraulic retention time: 80 days.
B. Tributary and Outlet:
(See Appendix C for flow data)
1. Tributaries -
Drainage Mean flow
Name area (km2)* (m3/sec)*
Tippecanoe River 137.0 1.30
Minor tributaries &
immediate drainage - 6.7 0.06
Totals 143.7 1.36
2. Outlet - -
Tippecanoe River 144.8** 1.36
C. Precipitation***:
1. Year of sampling: 79.7 centimeters.
2. Mean annual: 88.5 centimeters.
t Table of metric conversions—Appendix B.
tt Winters, 1975.
* For limits of accuracy, see Working Paper No. 175, "...Survey Methods,
1973-1976".
** Includes area of lake.
*** See Working Paper No. 175.
-------
5
III. LAKE WATER QUALITY SUMMARY
James Lake was sampled three times during the open-water
season of 1973 by means of a pontoon-equipped Huey helicopter.
Each time, samples for physical and chemical parameters were collected
from a number of depths at one station on the lake (see map, page
v). During each visit, a single depth-integrated (4.6 m to surface)
sample was collected for phytoplankton identification and enumeration;
and a similar sample was taken for chlorophyll ^analysis. During
the first visit, a single 18.9-liter depth-integrated sample was
collected for algal assays. The maximum depth sampled was 16.8
meters.
The sampling results are presented in full in Appendix D and
are summarized in the following table.
-------
A. SUMMARY OF PHYSICAL AND
PARAMETER
TEMP 1C)
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 (UG/L)
SECCHI (METERS)
1ST SAMPLING ( 5/
1 SIT£S
RANGE MEAN
9.3 - 13.7 13.1
7.0 - 9.4 8.3
500. - 520. 504.
H.O - 8.3 8.?
200. - 202. 200.
0.022 - 0.033 0.025
0.002 - 0.006 0.003
0.980 - 1.000 0.994
0.050 - 0.210 0.100
0.800 - 1.000 0.860
1.030 - 1.210 1.094
1.780 - 2.000 1.854
5.8 - 5.8 5.8
1.5 - 1.5 1.5
3/73)
CHEMICAL CHARACTERISTICS FOH JAMES LAKE
STORET CODE 1817
2ND SAMPLING ( 8/ 4/73)
1 SITES
3RD SAMPLING (10/13/73)
1 SITES
MEDIAN
13.*
8.5
500.
8.2
200.
0.023
0.002
l.OOb
0.060
0.800
1.060
1.800
5.8
1 .5
RANGE
9.6
0.0
358.
7.4
172.
0.015
0.003
0.050
0.050
0.700
0.100
0.850
11.7
- 24 .fl
^.3
- 434.
8.4
- 220.
- 0.081
- 0.062
- 0.860
- 0.990
- 1.600
- 1.130
- 1.740
- 11.7
MEAN
18.8
2.«
406.
7.9
189.
0.031
0.018
0.260
0.252
0.940
0.512
1.200
11.7
MEDIAN
22.6
1.5
424.
7.8
178.
0.019
0.004
0.140
0.070
0.800
0.260
0.990
11.7
RANGE
10.8
0.0
365.
7.4
166.
0.022
0.008
0.030
0.040
0.800
0.070
0.840
17.1
1.8
- 19.8
8.4
- 388.
8.4
- 232.
- 0.179
- 0.099
- O.ObO
- 2.220
- 3.600
- 2.280
- 3.660
- 17.1
1.8
MEAN
15. 5
2.6
377.
7.8
193.
0.062
0.037
0.047
0.846
1.843
0.893
1.890
17.1
1.8
MEDIAN
15.8
0.0
382.
7.6
193.
0.030
0.015
0.050
0.410
1.300
0.470
1.360
17.1
1*8
-------
B. Biological Characteristics:
1. Phytoplankton -
Sampling
Date
05/03/73
08/04/73
10/13/73
2. Chlorophyll a^ -
Sampling
Date
05/03/73
08/04/73
10/13/73
Dominant
Genera
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
Flagellates
Asterionella sp.
Dinobryon sp.
Chroococcus sj).
Synedra SJD.
Other genera
Total
Aphanizomenon sp.
Microcystis SJK
Scenedesmus sp.
Cyclotella SJK
Lynqbya sp.
Other genera
Total
Flagellates-
Lyngbya sp.
Dinobryon s£.
Oscillatoria sp.
Melosira s^.
Other genera
Algal Units
per ml
Total
6,024
Station
Number^
1
1
1
4,319
984
414
259
155
121
604
2,537
Chlorophyll
(yg/D
5.8
11.7
17.1
-------
8
C. Limiting Nutrient Study:
1. Autoclaved, filtered, and nutrient spiked -
Ortho P Inorganic N Maximum yield
Spike (mg/lj Cone, (mg/1) Cone, (mg/1) jmg/1-dry wt.)
Control <0.005 1.108 0.1
0.050 P 0.055 1.108 11.1
0.050 P + 1.0 N 0.055 2.108 13.1
1.0 N <0.005 2.108 0.1
2. Discussion -
The control yield of the assay alga, S_ej_en_astrum capri-
cornutum, indicates that the potential primary productivity
of James Lake, was low at the time the sample was collected.
Thjere was, a significant increase in yield when the level of
orthophosphorus was increased, but there was no change in
yield when nitrogen alone was added. Based on these results,
phosphorus limitation is indicated.
The lake data also indicate phosphorus limitation; i.e.,
the mean inorganic nitrogen/orthophosphorus ratios were 24/1
or greater at all sampling times, and phosphorus limitation
would be expected.
-------
IV. NUTRIENT LOADINGS
(See Appendix E for data)
For the determination of nutrient loadings, the Indiana National
Guard collected monthly near-surface grab samples from each of the
tributary sites indicated on the map (page v), except for the high
runoff month of March when two samples were collected. Sampling was
begun in June, 1973, and was completed in May, 1974.
Through an interagency agreement, stream flow estimates for the
year of sampling and a "normalized" or average year were provided by
the Indiana 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 for unsampled "minor tributaries and immediate
drainage" ("ZZ" of U.S.G.S.) were estimated using the nutrient loads
at station A-2 of nearby Webster Lake**, in kg/km2/year, and multi-
plying by the ZZ area of James Lake in km2.
Note that the estimated phosphorus load from septic tanks was
reduced by 50% to adjust for the phosphate detergent ban in effect in
Indiana since January, 1972.
* See Working Paper No. 175.
** Working Paper No. 345.
-------
10
A. Waste Sources:
1. Municipal - Unknown
2. Known industrial - None
B. Annual Total Phosphorus Loading - Average Year:
1. Inputs -
kg P/ % of
Source yr total
a. Tributaries (non-point load) -
Tippecanqe River 1,345 90.6
b. Minor tributaries & immediate
drainage (non-point load) - 115 7.7
c. Municipal - Unknown ?
d. Septic tanks* - 5 0.3
e. Known industrial - None
f, Direct precipitation** - 20^ 1.4
- Total 1,485 100.0
2. Outputs -
Lake outlet - Tippecanoe River 1,535
3. Net annual P loss - 50 kg.
* Estimate based on three lakeshore camps and one park; see Working Paper
No. 175.
** See Working Paper No. 175.
-------
11
C. Annual Total Nitrogen Loading - Average Year:
1. Inputs -
kg N/ % of
Source yr total
a. Tributaries (non-point load) -
Tippecanoe River 93,620 92.3
b. Minor tributaries & immediate
drainage (non-point load) - 6,285 6.2
c. Municipal - Unknown ?
d. Septic tanks* - 250 0.3
e. Known industrial - None
f. Direct precipitation** - 1,230 1.2
Total 101,385 100.0
2. Outputs -
Lake outlet - Tippecanoe River 97,490
3. Net annual N accumulation - 3,895 kg.
D. Mean Annual Non-point Nutrient Export by Subdrainage Area:
Tributary kg P/km2/yr kg N/km2/yr
Tippecanoe River 10 683
* Estimate based on three lakeshore camps and one park; see Working
Paper No. 175.
** See Working Paper No. 175.
-------
12
E. Yearly Loads:
In the following table, the existing phosphorus loadings
are compared to those proposed by Vollenweider (Vollenweider
and Dillon, 1974). Essentially, his "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 meso-
trophic loading would be considered one between "dangerous"
and "permissible".
Note that Vollenweider's model may not be applicable to
water bodies with short hydraulic retention times.
Total Phosphorus Total Nitrogen
TotaX^Accumulated _ Total Accumulated
grams/m2/yr . 1.30 loss* 88.8 3.2
Vollenweider phosphorus loadings
(g/m2/yr) based on mean depth and mean
hydraulic retention time of James Lake:
"Dangerous" (eutrophic loading) 1.16
"Permissible" (oligotrophic loading) 0.58
See page 3.
-------
13
V. LITERATURE REVIEWED
BonHomme, Harold L., 1976. Personal communication (planned waste
treatment facilities at North Webster; sewage outfalls in drain-
age). IN Div. of Water Poll. Contr., Indianapolis.
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.
Winters, John, 1975. Personal communication (lake morphometry).
IN Div. of Water Poll. Contr., Indianapolis.
-------
VI. APPENDICES
APPENDIX A
LAKE RANKINGS
-------
LAKE DATA TO BE USED IN RANKINGS
LAKE
CODE
1805
1811
1817
1837
182r)
1829
1836
1837
1839
1840
1841
1842
1H43
1844
1845
1846
1847
1848
1849
1850
1851
1852
1853
1H54
1855
1856
1857
LAKE NAME
CATARACT LAKE
GEIST RESERVOIR
JAMES LAKE
MISSISSIN£*A RESERVOIR
MONROE RESERVOIR
MORSE RESERVOIR
HAWASEE LAKE
WE8STER LAKE
WHITEWATER LAKE
WINONA LAKE
WESTLER LAKE
WITHER LAKE
LAKE MAXINKUCKEE
TIPPECANOE LAKE
DALLAS LAKE
OLIN LAKE
OLIVER LAKE
STLVAN LAKE
HOVEY LAKE
VERSAILLES LAKE
BASS LAKE
CROOKED LAKE
.LAKE JAMES
LONG LAKE
PIGEON LAKE
MARSH LAKH
HAMILTON LAKE
MEUUN
TOTAL P
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
.05,
.074
.034
.107
.035
.084
.013
.035
.084
.035
.035
.035
.030
.019
.039
.012
.009
.170
.062
.139
.040
.019
.016
.204
.058
.093
.033
MEDIAN
1.660
1.080
1.030
2.400
0.325
3.335
0.310
0.790
1.63C
1.250
0.860
0.900
0.330
0.195
0.830
1.460
0.930
0.130
1.050
1.090
0.350
0.130
0.190
1.920
1.445
0.270
0.720
500-
MEAN SEC
466.
472.
434.
473.
43b.
473.
364.
431.
470.
444.
427.
440.
400.
391.
413.
403.
392.
469.
489.
482.
471.
410.
353.
443.
442.
451.
413.
667
500
000
444
033
332
500
000
167
667
135
333
400
500
333
333
000
833
333
000
375
111
444
667
067
333
167
MEAN
ClLOiA
10
45
11
15
6
56
5
11
33
11
10
11
5
6
10
4
3
47
84
25
29
5
4
16
11
J4
17
.744
.950
.533
.77tf
.447
.167
.000
.500
.083
.311
.712
.917
.483
.050
.067
.867
.767
.480
.267
.076
.367
.578
.856
.100
.900
.467
.4SU
15-
MIN UO
15.
11.
15.
15.
15.
15.
14.
15.
15.
15.
15.
15.
15.
15.
IS.
14.
14.
14.
7.
14.
7.
15.
15.
15.
15.
15.
15.
GOG
60C
OOG
000
000
000
600
ooo
000
000
ooo
000
000
000
000
900
800
80C
600
500
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
Mti;l«
ClISS 'J.RTr
0.01 j
O.G04
O.OOtl
O.U29
o.oo/
0.00')
O.OOJ
0.005
0.012
0.011
O.G13
0.011
0.003
0.005
0.014
0.003
0.004
0.017
0.024
0.019
0.012
0.005
0.005
0.150
O.U15
0.055
0.018
-------
PERCENT OF LAKES WITH HIGHER VALUES (NUMBEK OF LAKES WITH HIGHE* VALUES)
LAKE
CODE
1H05
IBM
1817
1827
1628
1829
1836
1837
Ifl39
18<>0
1B<>1
1842
1843
1844
18<.S
1846
1847
1848
1849
1850
1851
1852
1853
1854
1855
1856
1857
LAKE NAME
CATARACT LAf-E
GEIST RESERVOIrt
JAMES LAKE
MISSISSINErfA KESEXVOIK
MONROE RESEHVOIW
MORSE RESERVOIR
WAWASEE LAKE
WEBSTER LAKE
WHITEWATER LAKE
WINONA LAKE
WESTLER LAKE
WITHER LAKE
LAKE MAXINKUCKEE
TIPPECANOE LAKE
DALLAS LAKE
OLIN LAKE
OLIVER LAKE
SYLVAN LAKE
HOVEY LAKE
VERSAILLES LAKE
BASS LAKE
CROOKED LAKE
LAKE JAMES
LONG LAKE
PIGEON LAKE
MAKSM LAKE
HAMILTON LAKE
MEDIAN
TUTAL P
37
27
73
12
67
23
9<»
67
19
50
50
50
77
85
62
94
100
6
31
e
42
81
88
0
37
15
58
( 9)
( 7)
I 19)
( 3)
( 17)
( 6)
( 24)
( 17)
( 5)
( 12)
( 12)
( 12)
( 20)
( 22)
( 16)
( 24)
( 261
1 1)
( 8)
< 2)
( 11)
< 21)
( 23)
( 0)
( 9)
( 4)
I 15)
MEDIAN
INO^G N
15
35
42
4
b9
0
85
62
19
27
54
50
61
68
58
23
46
9ft
38
31
77
100
92
12
8
73
65
I 41
( 9)
1 11)
( 1)
I 18)
( 0)
( 22)
( 16)
I 5)
( 7)
( 14)
( 13)
< 21)
( 23)
( IS)
( 6)
( 12)
( 25)
( 10)
( 8)
( 20)
I 26)
( 24)
( 3)
( 2)
( 19)
( 17)
500-
MEAN 5EC
31
15
S8
a
54
12
96
62
23
38
65
50
65
92
69
81
88
27
0
4
19
77
100
44
44
35
73
( 6)
( 4)
< IS)
( 2)
( 14)
( 3)
( 25)
( 16)
( 6)
( 10)
( 17)
( 13)
( 22)
( 24)
( 18)
( 21)
( 23)
( 7)
I 0)
( 1)
t 5)
( 20)
( 26)
( ID
( 11)
( 9)
( 19)
MEAN
CHLORA
62
12
50
38
/3
4
88
54
19
58
65
42
85
77
69
92
100
8
0
27
23
81
96
35
46
15
31
I 16)
( 3)
I 13)
( 10)
( 19)
( 1)
( 231
I 14)
( 5)
( 15)
( 17)
< 11)
I 22)
( 20)
I 18)
( 24)
I 26)
1 2)
( 0)
( 7)
I 6)
( 21)
( 25)
I 9)
( 12)
( 4)
( SI
15-
MIN DO
35
92
35
35
35
35
65
35
35
35
35
35
35
35
35
73
79
79
96
88
100
35
35
35
35
35
35
I 0)
( 24)
( 0)
( 0)
1 0)
( 0)
( 22)
( 0)
( 0)
( 0)
I 0)
I 0)
( 0)
< 0)
I 0)
( 19)
( 20)
( 20)
< 25)
( 23)
I 26)
I 0)
< 0)
( 0)
( 0)
I 0)
( 0)
MEDIAN
OISS ORTHO P
37
62
65
a
69
58
98
81
42
52
37
52
98
85
31
92
88
23
12
15
46
75
75
0
27
4
19
( 9)
( 16)
( 17)
( 2)
( 18)
( 15)
I 25)
( 21)
1 11)
( 13)
( 9)
( 13)
I 25)
( 22)
( 8)
I 24)
( 23)
( 6)
1 3)
( 4)
( 12)
( 19)
( 19)
( 0)
1 7)
I 1)
( 5)
INJEX
NO
-------
LAKES RANKED at INDEX NOS.
RANK LAKE CODE LAKE NAME INDEX NO
i 1836 HAWASEE LAKE 5*6
2 1847 OLIVER LAKE 501
3 1853 LAKE JAMES 486
4 1844 TIPPECANOE LAKE 462
5 1843 LAKE MAXINKUCKEE 461
6 1846 OLIN LAKE 455
7 1852 CROOKED LAKE 449
8 1828 MONROE RESERVOIR 367
9 1837 WEBSTER LAKE 361
10 1845 DALLAS LAKE 324
11 1817 JAMES LAKE 323
12 1851 BASS LAKE 307
13 1841 HESTLER LAKE 306
14 1857 HAMILTON LAKE 281
15 1842 KITMER LAKE 279
16 1840 WINONA LAKE 260
17 1811 GEIST RESERVOIR 243
18 1848 SYLVAN LAKE 237
19 1805 CATARACT LAKE 217
20 1855 PIGEON LAKE 197
21 1856 MARSH LAKE 177
22 1849 HOVE* LAi\E 177
23 1850 VERSAILLES LAKE 173
24 1839 *HITE"ATER LAKE 157
25 1829 MORSE RESERVOIR 132
26 1854 LONG LAKE 126
27 1827 MISSISSINEWA RESERVOIR 105
-------
APPENDIX B
CONVERSION FACTORS
-------
CONVERSION FACTORS
Hectares x 2.471 = acres
Kilometers x 0.6214 = miles
Meters x 3.281 = feet
-4
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
-------
TRIbJTARf FLOW INFORMATION FOR IiMOlANA
LAKE CODE 1817 JAMES LAKE AT OSWEGO
TOTAL DRAINAGE AREA OF LAKE(SO KM) 144.ft
03/39/76
SUh-ORAINAGE
TRIbUTARY AREA(SQ KM»
1817A1
1817A2
1817ZZ
144.d
137.0
6.5
JAN
1.81
1.73
0.071
FE8
2.10
1.98
0.091
MAR
2.92
2.78
0.136
NORMALIZED FLOWS(CMb)
APR
2.75
2.61
0.125
MAY
1.78
1.70
0.079
JUN
1.36
1.27
0.062
JUL
0.82
0.79
0.037
AUG
0.31
0.31
0.010
SEP
0.28
0.27
0.010
OCT
0.31
0.31
0.010
NOV
0.71
0.68
0.031
OEC
1.27
1.22
0.062
MEAN
1.36
1.30
0.060
SUMMARY
TOTAL DRAINAGE AREA OF LAKE =
SUM OF SUB-DRAINAGE AREAS =
143.5
TOTAL FLO* IN =
TOTAL FLO* OUT =
16.38
16.42
MEAN MONTHLY FLOWS AND DAILY FLOWS
TRIBUTARY MONTH YEAR
1817A1
1817A2
1817ZZ
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
1
?
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
1
2
3
<•
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
1
2
3
4
5
73
73
73
73
73
73
73
74
74
74
74
74
73
73
73
73
73
73
73
74
74
74
74
74
73
73
73
73
73
73
73
74
74
74
74
74
MEAN FLO* OAY
2.747
0.878
0.850
0.269
0.263
0.623
1.303
3.058
3.596
4.5U2
2.605
2.067
2.605
0.821
0.793
0.255
0.249
0.595
1.246
2.888
3.398
4.248
2.464
1.954
0.123
0.039
0.037
0.012
0.01.?
0.028
0.059
0.136
0.161
0.201
0.116
0.09?
9
14
11
9
13
10
15
19
2
2
13
19
9
14
11
9
13
10
15
19
2
2
13
19
9
14
11
9
13
10
15
19
2
2
13
19
FLO* DAY
6.683
0.566
0.623
0.227
0.170
0.311
1.161
1.586
4.474
3.285
2.633
2.492
6.343
0.538
0.595
0.215
0.161
0.233
1.104
1.501
4.243
3.115
2.492
2.350
0.283
0.025
0.028
0.010
0.008
0.013
0.0b2
0.071
0.2G1
0.147
0.118
0.071
lt>
16
16
16
16
16
16
lo
KLOW OAY
0.311
2.322
4.559
FLO*
2.209
4.304
0.013
0.104
0.203
-------
APPENDIX D
PHYSICAL and CHEMICAL DATA
-------
STORET RETRIEVAL DATE 76/03/30
181701
41 19 02.0 085 43 36.0 3
JAMES LAKE
18085 INDIANA
051792
DATE
FROM
TO
73/05/03
73/08/04
73/10/13
DATE
FROM
TO
73/05/03
73/08/04
73/10/13
TIME DEPTH
OF
DAY FEET
15 15 0000
15 15 0004
15 15 0021
15 15 0035
IS 15 0052
11 SO 0000
11 50 0005
11 50 0015
11 50 0025
11 50 0046
15 20 0000
15 20 0005
15 20 0015
15 20 0025
15 20 0035
15 20 0045
15 20 0055
TIME DEPTH
OK
DAY FEET
15 15 0000
15 15 0004
15 15 0021
15 15 0035
15 15 0052
11 50 0000
11 50 0005
11 50 0015
11 50 0025
11 50 0046
15 20 0000
15 ?0 0005
15 20 0015
15 ?0 0025
15 ?0 0035
15 20 0045
15 20 0055
00010
WATER
TEMP
CENT
13.7
13.7
13.6
10.3
9.3
24.8
23.8
22.6
13.4
9.6
19.8
19.8
19.4
15.8
11.9
11.1
10.8
00665
PHOS-TOT
MG/L P
0.023
0.024
0.022
0.023
0.033
U.Old
0.019
0.020
0.015
0.031
0.022
0.027
0.02s)
0.030
0.042
0.103
0.179
00300
00
MG/L
9.4
9.4
7.6
7.0
8.3
3.0
0.1
0.0
8.4
7.4
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
32217
ChLRPHYL
A
UG/L
5.8
11.7
17.1
00077 00094
TRANSP CNDUCTVY
SECCHI FIELD
INCHES MICHOrtHO
60 500
500
500
500
520
434
424
427
386
358
72 385
382
382
388
367
365
367
11EPALES 2111202
0056 FEET DEPTH CLASS 00
00400 00410 00610 00625
PH T ALK NH3-N TOT KJEL
SU
8.30
8.20
8.20
8.10
8.00
8.40
8.30
7.80
7.40
7.40
8.40
8.40
8.20
7.60
7.50
7.40
7.40
CAC03
MG/L
200
200
200
200
202
173
172
178
200
220
168
166
166
193
201
232
228
TOTAL
MG/L
0.060
0.060
0.050
0.120
0.210
0.060
0.050
0.070
0.090
6.990
0.060
0.050
0.040
0.410
1.100
2.040
2.220
N
MG/L
0.900
0.800
0.800
0.800
1.000
0.800
0.800
0.800
0.700
1.600
1.000
0.800
0.900
1.300
2.100
3.200
3.600
00630
N02SN03
N-TOTAL
MG/L
1.000
0.990
0.980
1.000
1.000
0.060
0.050
0.190
0.860
0.140
0.030
0.040
0.030
0.060
0.060
0.050
0.060
00671
PHOS-DIS
OHTrlO
MG/L P
0.002
0.002
0.002
0.003
0.006
0.003
0.004
0.004
0.015
0.062
0.008
0.013
0.014
0.015
0.040
0.073
0.099
-------
STORET RETRIEVAL OATE 76/04/07
1817A1 and 1844A2
4l 19 50.0 085 44 02.0 4
TIPPECANOE RIVER
18 7.5 N WEBSTER
0/JAMES LAKE 051792
BANK OFF PENINSULA IN BETWEEN THE LAKES
11EPALES 211120*
0000 FEET DEPTH CLASS 00
DATE
FROM
TO
73/06/09
73/07/14
73/08/11
73/09/09
73/10/13
73/11/10
73/11/16
73/12/15
74/02/02
74/02/16
74/03/0?
74/03/16
74/04/13
74/05/19
00630 00625
TIME DEPTH N02NN03 TOT KJEL
OF N-TOTAL N
DAY FEET
13
07
11
13
10
12
12
09
11
10
09
09
09
14
50
45
30
50
40
30
54
30
00
40
05
00
?7
30
MG/L
0
0
0
0
0
i)
0
0
1
1
0
1
1
1
.520
.013
.010K
.022
.011
.270
.034
.156
.260
.900
.460
.430
.260
.660
MG/L
2.
1.
0.
1.
0.
1.
0.
0.
1.
1.
1.
3.
2.
1.
100
380
960
050
900
250
950
900
100
700
900
300
200
100
00610 00671 00665
HH3-N PHOS-DIS PHOS-TOT
TOTAL ORTHO
MG/L
0.
0.
0.
0.
a.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
052
016
021
040
028
168
231
168
060
050
230
060
060
040
MG/L P
U.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
005
005K
005K
007
005
007
008
010
015
015
005K
005
010
MG/L P
0.020
0.020
0.015
0.025
0.030
0.040
0.026
0.025
0.060
0.095
0.055
0.030
0.025
0.030
K VALUE KNOWN TO BE
LESS THAN INDICATED
-------
STORET RETRIEVAL DATE 76/03/30
1817A2
41 IB 55.0 085 42 55.0 4
TIPPECANOE RIVER
18 7.5 N WEbSTER
I/JAMES LAKE 051792
E RO BRDG .3 MI UPSTREAM FROM LAKE
11EPALES 2111204
0000 FEET DEPTH CLASS 00
DATE
FROM
TO
73/06/09
73/07/14
73/08/11
73/09/09
73/10/13
73/11/10
73/12/15
74/01/19
74/C2/02
74/02/16
74/03/02
74/03/16
74/04/13
74/05/19
TIME DEPTH
OF
DAY FEET
12 35
07 30
10 20
13 ?0
10 25
12 54
10 10
14 35
10 40
10 05
08 40
08 50
08 50
14 15
00630
N02«.N03
N-TOTAL
MG/L
0.376
0.105
0.320
0.180
0.560
0.036
0.310
0.810
2.300
2.100
2.000
1.520
1.300
0.600
00625
TOT KJEL
N
MG/L
2.100
1.700
3.700
0.960
0.770
1.100
0.600
0.800
0.800 .
1.100
1.200
1.200
1.100
1.200
00610
NH3-N
TOTAL
MG/L
0.082
0.044
0.160
0.044
0.072
0.230
0.048
0.148
0.055
0.063
0.085
0.025
0.017
0.045
00671
PHOS-DIS
ORTHO
MG/L P
0.007
0.006
0.007
0.007
0.010
0.005K
0.008
0.008
0.010
0.005
0.020
0.005K
0.007
0.010
00665
PHOS-TOT
MG/L P
0.025
0.045
0.045
0.025
0.040
0.030
0.020
0.025
0.045
0.030
0.050
0.035
0.007
0.035
K VALUE KNOWN TO Bt
LESS THAN INDICATED
------- |