U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
NATIONAL EUTROPHICATION SURVEY
WORKING PAPER SERIES
PACIFIC NORTHWEST ENVIRONMENTAL RESEARCH LABORATORY
An Associate Laboratory of the
NATIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL RESEARCH CENTER - CORVALLIS, OREGON
and
NATIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL RESEARCH CENTER - LAS VEGAS, NEVADA
697-O32
-------
REPORT
ON
LAKE JUNAQM
HAYWOD COUNIY
NORTH CAR3LINA
EPA REGION IV
WORKING PAPER No, 384
WITH THE COOPERATION OF THE
NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL AND ECONOMIC RESOURCES
AND THE
NORTH CAROLINA NATIONAL GUARD
JUNE, 1975
-------
CONTENTS
Page
Foreword i i
List of North Carolina 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
-------
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)],
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
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 North Carolina Department
of Natural and Economic Resources for professional involvement
and to the North Carolina National Guard for conducting the
tributary sampling phase of the Survey.
Lewis R. Martin, Director of the Division of Environmental
Management; Darwin L. Coburn, Chief of the Water Quality Section;
and Julian R. Taylor, Supervisor of the Monitoring Program Unit;
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 William M. Buck, formerly Adjutant'General of
North Carolina, and Project Officer Colonel Arthur J. Bouchard,
who directed the volunteer efforts of the North Carolina National
Guardsmen, are also gratefully acknowledged for their assistance
to the Survey.
-------
IV
NATIONAL EUTROPHICATION SURVEY
STUDY LAKES
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
LAKE NAME
Badin
Blewett Falls
Chatuge
Fontana
Hickory
High Rock
Hiwassee
James
John H. Kerr (Nut Bush Creek)
Junaluska
Lookout Shoals
Mountain Island
Norman
Rhodhiss
Santeetlah
Tillery
Waccamaw
Waterville
Wylie
COUNTY
Montgomery, Stanly
Anson, Richmond
Clay, NC; Towns, GA
Graham, Swain
Alexander, Caldwell,
Catawba
Davidson, Rowan
Cherokee
Burke, McDowell
Granville, Vance, Warren,
NC; Halifax, Mecklenburg,
VA
Haywood
Alexander, Catawba, Iredell
Gaston, Mecklenburg
Catawba, Iredell, Lincoln,
Mecklenburg
Burke, Caldwell
Graham
Montgomery, Stanly
Columbus
Haywood
Gaston, Mecklenburg, NC;
York, SC
-------
LAKE JUNALUSKA
® Tributary Sampling Site
X Lake Sampling Site
-------
LAKE JUNALUSKA
STORE! NO. 3709
I. CONCLUSIONS
A. Trophic Condition:
Survey data indicate that Lake Junaluska is eutrophic.
However, because this water body has a mean hydraulic
retention time of only 13 days, it more closely resembles
a slow-moving stream; and the term "over-enriched" may be
a more appropriate description of the lake condition. Lake
Junaluska ranked twelfth in overall trophic quality when
the 16 North Carolina lakes sampled in 1973 were compared
using a combination of six parameters*. Eight of the lakes
had less median total phosphorus, ten had less median dis-
solved phosphorus, 11 had less median inorganic nitrogen, 12
had less mean chlorophyll a_, and eight had greater and one
had the same mean Secchi disc transparency. Marked depression
of dissolved oxygen with depth occurred in July and September.
Survey limnologists did not observe rooted aquatic vege-
tation or algal concentrations; however, a 10-fold increase
in chlorophyll a_ and a significant increase in the number of
phytoplankton occurred in September (see pages 7 and 8).
* See Appendix A.
-------
B. Rate-Limiting Nutrient:
The algal assay results indicate that Lake Junaluska was
phosphorus limited at the time the assay sample was collected
(03/24/73). These results are substantiated by the lake data;
i.e., the mean inorganic nitrogen to orthophosphorus ratios
were 28 to 1 or greater at all sampling times.
C. Nutrient Controllability:
1. Point sources—There were no known point sources con-
tributing phosphorus to Lake Junaluska.during the sampling
year, although the existing phosphorus loading rate of 6.38
g/m2/yr is over 2.5 times that proposed by Vollenweider (Vollen-
weider and Dillon, 1974) as a eutrophic rate (see page 12).
However, the lake has a rather short hydraulic retention time
of 13 days, and Vollenweider's model may not be applicable.
Nonetheless, the trophic condition of the lake is evidence of
excessive nutrient loads.
There was an apparent loss of phosphorus from Lake Junaluska
during the sampling year (see page 10). It is likely that much
of the loss can be attributed to the hydraulic dredging of the
lake in October, 1973 (Cook, 1975), about midway through the
Survey tributary sampling year. It would be expected that
dredging would increase the rate of solubilization of previously
-------
sedimented phosphorus through agitation and resuspension of
the bottom sediments and thus would result in an unmeasured
internal phosphorus load. Also, part of the loss may have
resulted from unmeasured phosphorus contributed directly to
the lake in drainage from the lakeshore urban areas.
The nitrogen loss during the sampling year probably
occurred in the same way as the phosphorus loss.
2. Non-point sources—The phosphorus input from non-point
sources accounted for the entire load impacting Lake Junaluska.
Richland Creek contributed 89.9%, the Unnamed Creek (B-l)
contributed 1.0%, and Factory Branch contributed 8.4& of the
total phosphorus input. Ungaged tributaries were estimated to
have contributed 0.4% of the total.
The phosphorus export rate of Factory Branch, 39 kg/km2/yr,
is somewhat higher than the rates of the other tributaries in
the Lake Junaluska drainage basin (see page 11). This may be
indicative of unsampled point sources in the drainage but could
result from underestimation of the drainage area of the stream.
-------
II. LAKE AND DRAINAGE BASIN CHARACTERISTICS1"
1t,,i.
A. Lake Morphemetry :
1. Surface area: 0.81 kilometers2.
2. Mean depth: 5.6 meters.
3. Maximum depth: >7.0 meters.
4. Volume: 4.5 x 106 m3.
5. Mean hydraulic retention time: 13 days.
B. Tributary and Outlet:
(See Appendix C for flow data)
1. Tributaries -
Drainage Mean flow
Name area (km2)* (m3/sec)*
Richland Creek 150.2 3.7
Unnamed Creek (B-l) 1.8 0.1
Factory Branch 11.2 0.3
Minor tributaries &
immediate drainage - 0.7
-------
III. LAKE WATER QUALITY SUMMARY
Lake Junaluska 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 a single 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 collected for chlorophyll a, analysis. During the
first visit, a single 18.9-liter depth-integrated sample was taken for
algal assays. The maximum depth sampled was 7.0 meters.
The lake sampling results are presented in full in Appendix D and
are summarized in the following table.
-------
A.
OF BHrSICAL 4Mt) CHtMICAL CHAHACTEHISHCS FOH LAKE JUNALUSKA
SHIRET CODE 3709
oiss our (M<-,/L>
CNOCTVY (MC^OMO)
TOT at* (Hr./L)
TOT ° (Mr;/l )
ORTHO D (V^/L >
NO?*M01 ( ^-/l. >
K.lc\, V |Mi;/| )
JMOPr, N t".V| (
TOT'L N C-IP-/I. 1
CuLjoyL Ł (.,r,/L
SFCCH] IvFTtLiq;
70. -
)SI s*"f't_!'Jf"' ( 3/24/73)
1 SIT^S
IMS M.AN MED UN
- It.' <*.' •».•)
- 10.1 0.045 O.C4?
- I . •"• P •» 'j . 0 0 •< t . 0 1 7
- '1. 7" i IJ.fi7-i O.'ilO
- i.i'-.j n.n? :i.i?o
- ,,.in. i.^ft o.ior.
- ,."•>•: .).-,7 C."^
- l.o?.- r..*5.. O.^l.
— i'' . ^ i. . ^ i! . "i
~ l"1.^ J.*l ^l.t
?NO SAMPLING 1 7/
1 SITES
HAWL KEAN
19.1 - ?4.1 21. H
S.^ - rf.d 5.2
105. - 125. 113.
6.7 - 7.3 7.U
IS. - 17. 16.
0.020 - U.031 0.034
O.U07 - 0.0 1 1 t.OO1)
0.3?0 - 0 . lfr»J J.,740
D.t'40 ' O.P80 O.lrt^
u.-;.4oo 0..15U
0.4^0 - O.dOJ U.S2?
il.'^U - 0.^0 0.^0
^.j - ^.o ?.o
1.1 - 1.1 1.1
5/73)
MEOIAN
21.6
4.5
110.
6. SI
17.
0.023
O.OOS,
0.340
0.1*0
0.400
0.535
0.73b
2.0
1.1
3RD SAMPLING (
14.6
o.n
10?.
6.3
la.
0.02S
0.012
0.110
0.040
0.800
0.190
o.vio
H.2
1.2
1
RANGE
- 21.2
2.0
- 110.
6.5
22.
- 0.047
- O.Olfi
- 0.140
- 0.390
- i.ooo
- 0.500
- 1.110
- H.2
1.2
SITES
MEAN
20.5
1.5
106.
6.4
ao.
0.035
0.013
0.120
0.250
0.900
0.370
1.020
19.2
1.2
9/20/73)
MEDIAN
20.6
1.8
107.
6.4
21.
0.029
0.012
0.110
0.280
0.900
0.420
1.040
19.2
1.2
-------
B. Biological characteristics:
1. Phytoplankton -
Sampling
Date
03/24/73
07/05/73
09/20/73
Dominant
Genera,
1. Flagellates
2. Lyngbya
3. Cymbella
4. Nitzschia
5. Achnanthes
Other genera
Total
1. Gloeocystis
2. Dinobryon
3. Unidentified cysts
4. Pennate diatoms
5. Synedra
Other genera
Total
1. Gloeocystis
2. Aphanizomenon
3. Flagellates
4. Cryptomonas
5. Hicrocystis
Other genera
Algal units
per ml
850
50
36
23
14
62
1,035
408
82
82
72
63
153
860
Total
6,019
-------
8
2. Chlorophyll a_ -
Sampling Station Chlorophyll a_
Date Number (yg/1)
03/24/73 01 0.5
07/05/73 01 2.0
09/20/73 01 19.2
C. Limiting Nutrient Study:
1. Autoclaved, filtered, and nutrient spiked -
Ortho P Inorganic N Maximum yield
Spike (mg/1) Cone, (mg/1) Cone, (mg/1) (mq/1-dry wt.)
Control
0.050 P
0.050 P + 1.0 N
1.0 N
2. Discussion -
The control yield of the assay alga, Selenastrum capri-
corn uturn, indicates that the potential primary productivity
of Lake Junaluska was moderately high at the time the sample
was taken (03/24/73). Also, the six-fold increase in yield
with the addition of phosphorus indicates that the lake was
limited by phosphrous at that time. Note that the addition
of only nitrogen produced a yield not significantly different
than the control yield.
The lake data further substantiate phosphorus limitation;
i.e., the mean inorganic nitrogen to orthophosphorus ratios
were 28 to 1 or greater at all sampling times.
0.016
0.066
0.066
0.016
0.824
0.824
1.824
1.824
3.4
19.7
24.9
3.9
-------
IV. NUTRIENT LOADINGS
(See Appendix E for data)
For the determination of nutrient loadings, the North Carolina
National Guard collected monthly near-surface grab samples from each
of the tributary sites indicated on the map (page v), except for high
runoff months when two samples were collected. Sampling was begun in
March, 1973, and was completed in February, 1974.
Through an interagency agreement, stream flow estimates for the
year of sampling and a "normalized" or average year were provided by
the North Carolina District Office of the U.S. Geological Survey for
the tributary sites nearest the lake.
In this report, nutrient loads for sampled tributaries were deter-
mined by using a modification of a U.S. Geological Survey computer
program for calculating stream loadings*. Nutrient loads shown are
those measured minus point-source loads, if any.
Nutrient loads for unsampled "minor tributaries and inmediate
drainage" ("ZZ" of U.S.G.S.) were estimated using the means of the
nutrient loads, in kg/km2/year, at station B-l and multiplying the
means by the ZZ area in km2.
* See Working Paper No. 175.
-------
10
A. Waste Sources:
1. Known municipal - None
2. Industrial - Unknown
B. Annual Total Phosphorus Loading - Average Year:
1. Inputs -
kg P/ % of
Source ^r total
a. Tributaries (non-point load) -
Richland Creek 4,645 89.9
Unnamed Creek (B-l) 50 1.0
Factory Branch 435 8.4
b. Minor tributaries & immediate
drainage (non-point load) - 20 0.4
c. Known municipal STP's - None
d. Septic tanks - None
e. Industrial - Unknown
f. Direct precipitation* - 15. 0.3
Total 5,165 100.0
2. Outputs -
Lake outlet - Richland Creek 5,740
3. Net annual P loss - 575 kg.
* See Working Paper No. 175.
-------
11
C. Annual Total Nitrogen Loading - Average Year:
1. Inputs -
kg N/ % of
Source yj; total
a. Tributaries (non-point load) -
Richland Creek 105,460 86.0
Unnamed Creek (B-l) 2,535 2.1
Factory Branch 12,800 10.4
b. Minor tributaries & immediate
drainage (non-point load) - 985 0.8
c. Known municipal STP's - None
d. Septic tanks - None
e. Industrial - Unknown
f. Direct precipitation* - 875 0.7
Total 122,655 100.0
2. Outputs -
Lake outlet - Richland Creek 140,225
3. Net annual N loss - 17,570 kg.
D. Mean Annual Non-point Nutrient Export by Subdrainage Area:
Tributary kg P/km2/yr kg N/km2/yr
Richland Creek 31 702
Unnamed Creek (B-l) 28 1,408
Factory Branch 39 1,143
* See Working Paper No. 175.
-------
12
E. Yearly Loading Rates:
In the following table, the existing phosphorus loading
rates are compared to those proposed by Vollenweider (Vollen-
weider and Dillon, 1974). Essentially, his "dangerous" rate
is the rate at which the receiving water would become eutrophic
or remain eutrophic; his "permissible" rate is that which would
result in the receiving water remaining oligotrophic or becoming
oligotrophic if morphometry permitted. A mesotrophic rate 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
Total Accumulated Total Accumulated
grams/m2/yr 6.38 loss* 151.4 loss*
Vollenweider loading rates for phosphorus
(g/m2/yr) based on mean depth and mean
hydraulic retention time of Lake Junaluska:
"Dangerous" {eutrophic rate) 2.40
"Permissible" (oligotrophic rate) 1.20
* There appeared to be significant losses of both nitrogen and phosphorus
from Lake Junaluska. This would not be expected to occur (particularly
in the case of the phosphorus loss) even in a lake with a hydraulic
retention time of only 13 days. It is likely that these losses were the
result of dredging of the lake and unmeasured nutrient inputs in urban
drainage {see pages 2 and 3).
-------
13
V. LITERATURE REVIEWED
Cook, Grover, 1975. Personal conmunication (dredging and urban
drainage). NC Dept. of Nat. and Econ. Resources, Raleigh.
Park, David, 1974. Personal communication (lake morphometry).
NC Dept. of Nat. and Econ. Resources, Raleigh.
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
-------
LAKES RANKED BY INDEX NOS.
RANK LAKE CODE LAKE NAME
INDEX NO
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
1*
IS
16
3719
3716
3711
3707
3704
3713
3708
3710
3715
3705
3717
3709
3702
3718
3701
3706
LAKE WACCAMAW
SANTEELAH LAKE
MOUNTAIN ISLAND LAKE
HIWASSEE LAKE
FONTANA LAKE
LAKE NORMAN
LAKE JAMES
LOOKOUT SHOALS
RHOOHISS LAKE
LAKE HICKORY
LAKE TILLERY
LAKE JUNALUSKA
BLEWETT FALLS LAKE
WATERVILLE RESERVOIR
BADIN LAKE
HIGH ROCK LAKE
534
446
419
414
392
346
334
327
296
283
246
220
200
140
124
76
-------
PERCENT OF LAKES WITH HIGHER VALUES (NUMBER OF LAKES WITH HIGHER VALUES)
LAKE
CODE LAKE NAME
3701 BAOIN LAKE
3702 BLEWETT FALLS LAKE
370* FONTANA LAKE
3705 LAKE HICKORY
3706 HIGH ROCK LAKE
3707 HIWASSEE LAKE
3708 LAKE JAMES
3709 LAKE JUNALUSKA
3710 LOOKOUT SHOALS
3711 MOUNTAIN ISLAND LAKE
3713 LAKE NORMAN
3715 RHOOHISS LAKE
3716 SANTEELAH LAKE
3717 LAKE TILLERY
3718 WATERVILLE RESERVOIR
3719 LAKE UACCAMAW
MEDIAN
TOTAL P
33
7
100
27
13
87
60
47
S3
73
67
20
93
40
0
80
< 5>
< H
( 15)
( 4)
( 2)
( 13)
( 9)
( 7)
( ft)
( ID
< 10)
( 3)
( 14)
( 6)
( 0)
( 12>
MEDIAN
INORG N
7 <
13 (
33 <
60 I
20 1
80 (
87 (
27 1
47 (
73 <
53 1
67 1
93 1
40 1
0 1
100 I
; i)
: 2)
: 5)
! 9)
: 3)
: 12>
; 13)
; 4>
I 7)
! 11)
! 8)
I 10)
! 14)
1 6)
! 0)
1 15)
SCO-
MEAN SEC
27
7
93
53
0
87
80
43
60
43
73
33
100
13
20
67
( 4)
( 1)
( 14)
( 8)
( 0)
( 13)
( 12)
( 6)
( 9)
( 6)
( 11)
( 5)
( IS)
( 2)
( 3)
( 10)
MEAN
CHLORA
27
73
100
13
0
47
7
20
67
53
40
93
60
33
80
87
( 4)
( 11)
( 15)
( 2)
( 0)
( 7)
( 1)
( 3)
t 10)
( 8)
( 6)
< 14)
( 9)
( 5)
( 12)
( 13)
15-
MIN 00
3
93
3
80
23
SO
23
50
60
87
23
70
23
70
40
100
< 0)
( 14)
( 0)
( 12)
( 2)
( 7)
( 2)
( 7)
( 9)
t 13)
( 2)
( 10)
( 2)
( 10)
< 6)
( 15)
MEDIAN
DISS ORTHO P
27 <
7 <
63 1
SO 1
20 <
63 (
77 <
33 1
40 1
90 (
90 1
13 I
77 1
50 <
0 I
100 I
[ 4)
; n
: 9)
: 7)
; 3)
: 9>
: ID
; 5>
I 6)
I 13)
! 13)
! 2)
I 11)
1 7)
1 0)
I 15)
INDEX
NO
124
200
392
283
76
414
334
220
327
419
346
296
446
246
140
534
-------
LAKE DATA TO BE USED IN RANKINGS
CAKE
CODE LAKE NAME
3701 BADIN LAKE
3702 BLEWETT FALLS LAKE
3704 FONTANA LAKE
3705 LAKE HICKORY
3706 HIGH ROCK LAKE
3707 HIWASSEE LAKE
3708 LAKE JAMES
3709 LAKE JUNALUSKA
3710 LOOKOUT SHOALS
3711 MOUNTAIN ISLAND LAKE
3713 LAKE NORMAN
3715 RHODHISS LAKE
3716 SANTEELAH LAKE
3717 LAKE TILLERY
3718 WATERVILLE RESERVOIR
3719 LAKE WACCAMAW
MEDIAN
TOTAL P
0.042
0.090
0.011
0.047
0.090
0.015
0.020
0.031
0,036
0.018
0.019
0.061
0.011
0.040
0.103
0.018
MEDIAN
INORG N
0.680
0.655
0.550
0.320
0.580
0.240
0.160
0.560
0.370
0.270
0.330
0.305
0.160
0.470
0.860
0.120
500-
MEAN SEC
466.750
476.889
392.650
461.000
477.454
420.555
428.866
462.000
459.167
462.000
446.667
462.111
366.400
468,600
468.333
455.667
MEAN
CHLORA
7.190
4.167
3.438
7.275
14.283
5.678
7.660
7.233
4.200
5.580
5.807
3.578
5*360
6.827
3.817
3.583
15-
MIN DO
14.900
10.800
14.900
13.400
14.800
14.200
14.800
14.200
13.800
12.800
14.600
13.600
14.800
13.600
14.400
9.800
MEDIAN
OISS ORTHO P
0.012
0.034
0.007
0.008
0.017
0.007
0.006
0.009
0.008
0.005
0.005
0.019
0.006
0.008
0.041
0.004
-------
APPENDIX B
CONVERSIONS FACTORS
-------
CONVERSION FACTORS
Hectares x 2.471 = acres
Kilometers x 0.6214 = miles
Meters x 3.281 = feet
Cubic meters x 8.107 x 10~4 = acre/feet
Square kilometers x 0.3861 = square miles
Cubic meters/sec x 35.315 = cubic feet/sec
Centimeters x 0.3937 = inches
Kilograms x 2.205 = pounds
Kilograms/square kilometer x 5.711 - Ibs/square mile
-------
APPENDIX C
TRIBUTARY FLOW DATA
-------
TRIBUTARY FLOW INFORMATION FOK NORTH CAROLINA
1/10/75
LAKE CODE 3709
LAKE JUNALUSKA
TOTAL DRAINAGE A«EA OF LAKEfSQ KM)
SUB-DRAINAGE
TRIBUTARY AREA(50 KM)
3709A]
3709A2
3709B1
3709C1
3709ZZ
JAN
FES
164.7
MAR
APR
MAY
NORMALIZED FLOWS(CMS)
JON JUL AUG
SEP
OCT
NOV
DEC
MEAN
164.7
ISO. 2
l.B
11.2
1.5
5.3fl
4.90
0.06
0.37
0.05
6.57
5.97
0.07
0.45
0.06
7.08
6.46
0.08
0.46
0.06
6.29
5.73
0.07
0.42
0.06
4.30
3.91
0.05
0.28
0.04
3.34
3.03
0.04
0.22
0.03
2.58
2.35
0.03
0.13
0.02
2.44
2.21
0.03
0.16
0.02
2.10
1.90
0.02
0.14
0.02
2.49
2.27
0.03
0.17
0.02
2.80
2. 55
0.03
0.19
0.03
4.13
3.77
0.05
0.28
0.04
4.11
3.74
0.05
0.2B
0.04
TOTAL DRAINAGE AREA OF LAKE =
SU4 OF SUB-DRAINAGE AREAS =
MEAN MONTHLY FLOWS AND DAILY FLOHS(CMS)
TRIBUTARY MONTH YEAR
3709A1
3709A?
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
1
?
3
4
5
6
7
ft
9
10
1L
12
1
?
73
73
73
73
73
73
73
73
73
73
74
74
73
73
73
73
73
73
73
73
73
73
74
74
MEAN FLOW DAY
12.46
5.95
6.65
4.67
2.69
2.12
1.42
1.27
2.55
7.22
11.04
9.34
11.47
5.52
6.23
4.39
B. 55
1.9fl
1.4?
1.27
2.41
6.10
10. I1*
H.78
25
15
13
1
12
14
10
9
6
10
25
15
13
1
1?
14
to
9
6
10
164.7
164.7
FLOW DAY
8.07
4.53
5.10
3.11
3.26
1.36
1.19
4.25
13.03
7.50
7.65
4.25
4.81
2.97
2.27
1.13
1.08
3.96
11.89
fa. 80
27
89
20
24
27
29
20
24
SUMMARY
TOTAL FLOW IN
TOTAL FLOW OUT
49.37
49.50
FLOW DAY
4.67
2.BO
5.38
10.76
4.53
2.38
4.96
9.91
FLOH
-------
TRIBUTARY FLO* INFORMATION FOK NOKTH CAROLINA
1/10/75
LAKE CODE 3709
LAKE JUNALUSKA
MEAN MONTHLY FLO*?. AND OAILY
TRIBUTARY
3709BJ
3709C1
3709Z/
MONTH YF.V?
3
-------
APPENDIX D
PHYSICAL and CHEMICAL DATA
-------
370^01
35 31 33.0 Ofl? 57 5K.O
LfiKF JUNALUSKA
37DS7 NORTH CAROLINA
04TF
FPOM
TO
73/n
73/07/0^
3<">0
OF
DAY
1? T3
1 ? TO
1? 30
1? TO
13 00
13 on
13 CO
13 PC
13 10
13 JO
13 10
FFFT
r o o .1
0 1) 0 '-(
00 IS
0"?3
oooo
f; J n It
o n 1 1
<1 0 1 T
C 1 •''• ;1
0 ') 1 j
Oi.r^n
no
Mf-,/1,
'I.-
» ^'
4.S
3 .^
1 .-'
J.o
i>0.)77
it COM I
INCHES
CNHucrvr
FIFLD
MIT40MHO
70
70
70
75
112
10K
107
1 10
HF.^ALES
3
00400
PH
SO
7.50
r • O "f
7.S>1
7 . 30
7.3u
7.10
6.'iO
f.,70
b.4->
6.3C
6.60
00410
T ALK
CAC03
MG/L
12
12
11
11
IS
16
17
17
IP
21
2?
211
0023
00610
NH3-N
TOTAL
MG/L
0.110
U.120
0.120
0.180
0.160
0.090
0.200
0.280
0.080
0.280
0.390
1202
FEET DEPTH
00625
TOT KJEL
N
MG/L
0.300
0.20 OK
0.300
0.300
0.400
0.200K
0.400
0.400
0.800
0.900
1.000
00630
N02&N03
N-TOTAL
MG/L
0.700
0.680
0.680
0.640
0.350
0.330
0.360
0.320
0.110
0.140
0.110
00671
PHOS-D1S
ORTHO
MG/L P
0.009
0.007
0.008
0.007
0.011
0.010
0.007
0.009
0.012
0.016
0.012
K VALUE KNOWN TO BE
LESS THAN INDICATED
-------
STOPET PETRIfTVftL. OaTE 75/01/'J7
r>aTE
FROM
TO
OE°TH
OF
HAY FFFT
I?
I?
1?
13
13
13
13
13
13
13
30
30
30
00
00
09
00
10
10
10
0000
no'js
C0?3
0000
000
-------
APPENDIX E
TRIBUTARY DATA
-------
37'JQAl Lb3709Ai
35 31 30.0 083 58 00.0
KlCHLANO Ot'EK
37033 7.S CLYDE
0/LAKE JUNALUSKfl
^D HrtOG 400 FT BELO DAM-LAKE JUNALU5KA
11EPALES 2111204
4 0000 FEET DEPTH
OfiTF
I "i
H--^
if
'iAY
10 1 i
1 1 7r>
!>"* IS
71/07/07 !:) PS
KJKL
- T
7VIG/I" ', •> •'>••
73/11/10 U 00
7V1 ?/•*}'> J9 ^J
74/v 1 /06 i)^ 15
74/,H/^,j 0» a5
'::.?/10 OQ in
•'fl/l.
u
31
..7.:.-
C.110
1 . ** 7 Ci
0.4SO
o .too
I ."(!•>
HH3-M
TOTftL
•'• .04]
o.?n
A j; pC
•:-. 11 j
0.112
O.Hu
'. .1:60
00665
HHUS-TOT
00671
PnOS-OlS
UP HO
MG/L P MG/L
0.006
0.007
0.00ft
G .0 14
0.006
C.306
O.OOR
0.035K
0.016
o.oo?
0.010
0.01C
0.035
0.060
0.030
0 . 0 30
O.O?1^
0.045
0.035
0.035
0.077
0.065
0.030
0.070
K VALUE KNOWN TO BE
LESS THAN INDICATED
-------
OATF rr-'.r Or^
TO ') fi Y F F1
11 ro
=i I? 1^
73/05/13 09 ^5
71/OS/?7 O'3 -5
73/07/Ct t 1? M
7/^ 1 1 'if.
0 / 1 -. 1 0 <: 'J
l/ir. n '•>?
73/1 ^/0-> 11 ^r-
1 i 1H
?^/C?/]j J'-> 10
74/0
J-T'UAL
L . i. u "
K VALUE KNOWN TO BE
LESS THAN INDICATED
TOT KJFL
N
0.'
0.170
C."
f). lODi
1.10?
fi. I 'iC
0 J "> 1 0
TOTAL
0.03?
'") .014
fl.075
O.iiPS
00671
OPTHO
MR/L P
LS3709A2
35 31 00.0 083 SB 00.0
HIGHLAND
37 7.5
I/LAKE JUNALUSKA
US IS* Blf-P AMO 23 BY-P BHDG.5 SW OF TOWN
lltPALES 2111204
4 0000 FEET DEPTH
(J066S
MG/L. P
0.005K
0 .0 1 U
O.P05K
0.005K
0 . 0 0 B
0.01 1
o.oi?
O.U16
0 . 0 u f
0.012
0.008
0.015
l/.OOSK
0.030
0.0 it?
O.U2S
ft .04(1
0.030
0.055
O.U60
0.0^0
0.030
0.040
C.0?0
O.OSO
0.035
-------
OAT1
3709B1 LS3709B1
35 31 00.0 083 5H 30.0
UNNAMED STREAM
37 7.5 CLYDE
I/LAKE JUNALUSKA
^0 H*DG SE EOGF GOLF COURSEFAIRWAY HILLS
11EPALES 2111204
4 0000 FEET DEPTH
OATF
T)
OK
FF~T
1C sn
\'J 10
10 f>"
10 CO
71/07/0 1 HOC
7 VI 0/14 o-i GC
71/ll/l'i 10 10
7i/1?/0! 0-* 10
01/?0 10 ;>
10 0
fq 1
'. >K'3-.> 006?T
?sNO i TOT KJf L
TOTAL N
I'G/L -'^/\.
.310 0.330
. ?40 O.PllJ
. 14--.I 1.100
. 1 J0 0 . ~JH§
. ??C t'.^^O
. ??c c.?^o
L . 1 0 •>
l.l?j C.I. 00*
1.400 j . 1 '} •') K
1 . 7 iSO O.SOO
. 340 .1 . ! OOK
1 ,Sr; ) ] . IG'J
l.b?f) (?.?!)!.:
(: 0 6 1 0
MH'j-N
TOTAL
MG/L
0.1 ?i)
'j.i oo
0 .048
O.OSft
0 .044
0.070
(1 .OM^
J.!)?0
0. J44
0 . 0 64
0.044
» . 1 fj S
0.040
00^71
PHOS-DIS
OPTHO
MG/L P
0.007
0.017
0.014
0.011
0.010
0.01*
0.017
3.01?
0.01?
0.01?
0.00«
0 . 01 C
U.010
006ftS
PHOS-TOT
MG/L P
O.OSO
0.040
0.030
0.04?
0.0 ?5
0.050
0.01?
o.o?s
U.035
0.01?
0.030
0.04S
K VALUE KNOWN TO BE
LESS THAN INDICATED
-------
OATF
Ft?OM
TO
73/03/PS
73/04/15
73/07/01
73/10/1^
73/1 1/10
7V 1 ?/0'J
74/0?/?'*
OF
OAY
10
n
10
10
11
10
0^
10
10
•J 9
0.700
:. 7.?j
"*.<•) ?i+
1 . ?60
•^.G^C-
! .010
1.010
0062S
rn[ KjtL
M
-•1G/L
O.?<)0
0.3SO
0.3?0
0.330
I. "00
0 . r-J 1 0
I.45U
0.300
0.10')
v.POO
0.400
l.^'J'J
O.'Ofi
00610
NH3-N
TOTAL
MG/L
0.063
J.078
0.063
•J . 0 64
0.1 OS
O.U83
0.1 M()
(i.'ibH
J.05?
0.055
O.OS?
o.ins
u. 030
00671
PHOS-OIS
OWTHO
Mfi/L P
0.007
0.011
0.01S
0.009
0.03?
0.015
0.017
0.015
C.01?
0.010
0.00ft
J.010
0.005K
00665
PHOS-TOT
MG/L r>
0.04S
0.0^5
0.06S
o.oss
o.iao
0.07Q
0.055
0.040
U.04Q
0.045
0.030
0 . U 50
0.050
------- |