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
•&GPO 697.032
-------
REPORT
ON
LAKESHAWNE
GREENE COUMY
OHIO
EPA REGION V
WORKING PAPER No, 410
WlTH THE COOPERATION OF THE
OHIO ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
AND THE
OHIO NATIONAL GUARD
JUNE, 1975
-------
CONTENTS
Page
Foreword i i
List of Ohio Study Lakes iv
Lake and Drainage Area Map v
Sections
I. Conclusions 1
II. Lake and Drainage Basin Characteristics 3
III. Lake Water Quality Summary 4
IV. Nutrient Loadings 8
V. Literature Reviewed 12
VI. Appendices 13
-------
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)]f 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.
-------
111
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 Ohio Environmental Protection
Agency for professional involvement, to the Ohio National Guard
for conducting the tributary sampling phase of the Survey, and to
those Ohio wastewater treatment plant operators who provided
effluent samples and flow data.
Ned Williams, Director, and Tom Birch, Ken Carr, Larry
Dietrick, Ron Havlice, Larry Korecko, Rod Mehlhop, Terry Wheeler,
and John Youger, Ohio Environmental Protection Agency, 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 Dana L. Stewart, then the Adjutant General
of Ohio, and Project Officer Lt. Colonel Robert C. Tlmmons,
who directed the volunteer efforts of the Ohio National Guards-
men, are also gratefully acknowledged for their assistance to
the Survey.
-------
IV
LAKE NAME
Atwood
Beach City
Berlin
Buckeye
Charles Mill
Deer Creek
Delaware
Dillon
Grand Lake of St.
Grant
Holiday
Hoover
Indian
Loramie
Mosquito Creek
O'Shaughnessy
Pymatuning
Pleasant Hill
Rocky Fork
Shawnee
Tappan
NATIONAL EUTROPHICATION SURVEY
STUDY LAKES
STATE OF OHIO
COUNTY
Marys
Carroll, Tuscarawas
Stark, Tuscarawas
Mahoning, Portage, Stark
Fairfield, Licking, Perry
Ashland, Richland
Fayette, Pickaway
Delaware
Muskingum
Auglaize, Mercer
Brown
Huron
Delaware
Logan
Auglaize
Trumbull
Delaware
Ashtabula, OH; Crawford, PA
Ashland,
Highland
Greene
Harrison
Franklin
Shelby
OH; Crawford,
Richland
-------
LAKE SHAWNEE
® Tributary Sampling Site
x Lake Sampling Site
f Sewage Treatment Plant
./
f
39-40<-
f, B3M6'
83*44'
83'42'
-------
LAKE SHAWNEE
STORE! NO. 3933
I. CONCLUSIONS
A. Trophic Condition:
Survey data indicate that Lake Shawnee 1s eutrophic. It
ranked fourteenth in overall trophic quality when the 20 Ohio
lakes sampled in 1973 were compared using a combination of six
lake parameters*. Seven lakes had less median total phosphorus,
five had less median orthophosphorus, 17 had less median inorganic
nitrogen, 12 had less mean chlorophyll ia, and nine had a greater
mean Secchi disc transparency. Marked depression of dissolved
oxygen with depth occurred at station 2 in August, and depletion
occurred there in October.
Survey limnologists did not observe algae concentrations or
macrophytes, with the exception of an April algal bloom at station 2.
B. Rate-Limiting Nutrient:
The algal assay results indicate that Lake Shawnee was phos-
phorus limited at the time the sample was collected. This finding
is substantiated by the lake data; i.e., the mean N/P ratios were
37/1 or greater on all sampling occasions.
C. Nutrient Controllability:
1. Point sources—During the sampling year, the estimated
phosphorus contribution from known point sources was only 1.1%
of the total load to Lake Shawnee. This input is attributed to
* See Appendix A.
-------
2
the unsewered homes around the lake. The U.S.G.S. map used for
determining the number of residences was dated 1968 and showed
only fifteen dwellings. However, the Survey limnologists reported
the shoreline was almost completely developed with homes. The
additional homes probably would add significantly to the phosphorus
input to Lake Shawnee.
The present estimated loading of 0.60 g/m2/yr of total phos-
phorus is below that proposed by Vollenweider (Vollenweider and
Dillon, 1974) as a eutrophic loading (see page 11). However, the
lake is obviously eutrophic, and all phosphorus inputs to the lake
should be minimized to the greatest practicable extent to slow
the rate of eutrophication.
2. Non-point sources—About 78% of the total annual phosphorus
input to Lake Shawnee was contributed by Caesar Creek, and about
17% is estimated to have been contributed by the immediate drainage
and minor tributaries.
The phosphorus export rate of Caesar Creek was a relatively
low 15 kg/km2/yr (see page 10) and compares well with the export
rates of two unimpacted tributaries of nearby Deer Creek Reservoir*
(21 and 28 kg/km2/yr).
* Working Paper No. 398.
-------
II. LAKE AND DRAINAGE BASIN CHARACTERISTICS'1"
A. Lake Morphometry:
1. Surface area: 0.77 kilometers2.
2. Mean depth: 2.5 meters.
3. Maximum depth: >7.6 meters.
4. Volume: 1.905 x 10s m3.
5. Mean hydraulic retention time: 73 days.
B. Tributary and Outlet:
{See Appendix C for flow data)
1. Tributaries -
Drainage Mean flow
Name area (km2)* (mV.sec)*
Caesar Creek 24.3 0.2
Minor tributaries &
immediate drainage - 3.1 <0.1
Totals 27.4 0.3
2. Outlet -
Caesar Creek 28.2** 0.3
C. Precipitation***:
1. Year of sampling: 108.4 centimeters.
2. Mean annual: 98.6 centimeters.
t Table of metric equivalents—Appendix B.
tt Youger, 1975.
* For limits of accuracy, see Working Paper No. 175, "...Survey Methods,
1973-1976".
** Includes area of lake.
*** See Working Paper No. 175.
-------
4
III. LAKE WATER QUALITY SUMMARY
Lake Shawnee 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 two
stations on the lake and from two or more depths at each station
(see map, page v). During each visit, a single depth-integrated {4.6 m
or 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 1.8 meters at station 1 and 7.6 meters at station 2.
The lake sampling results are presented in full in Appendix D and
are summarized in the following table.
-------
PARAMETER
TEMP
CNDCTVY (HCROMO)
Pri (STAND UNITS)
TOT ALK (MG/L)
TOT P (MG/L)
ORTHO P (HG/L)
N02»N03 (MG/L)
AMMONIA (MG/L)
KJEL N (MG/L)
INORG N (MG/L)
TOTAL N (MG/L)
CHLRPYL A IUG/LI
SECCHI (METERS)
A.
1ST
SUMMARY Of PHYSICAL AND CHEMICAL CHARACTERS? ICS FOS SHAWNEE
STORET CODE 3933
SAMPLING ( 4/28/73) 2ND SAMPLING i B/ 1/731
2 SITES
RANGE
11.8 -
9.3 -
460. -
7.8 -
166. -
0.073 - 0
0.004 - 0
3.800 - 4
0.040 - 0
0.800 - 1
3.640 - *
4.600 - 5
39.1 -
0.4 -
13.1
14.6
520.
8.5
180.
.254
.020
.000
.080
.200
.080
.200
62.2
0.5
MEAN
12.5
10. B
478.
8.2
176.
0.123
0.010
3.867
0.052
0.983
3.918
4.850
50.6
0.5
MEDIAN
12.7
9.7
473.
a. 2
180.
0.085
0.006
3.800
0.040
0.900
3.840
4.700
50.6
0.5
16.8
0.2
404.
7.5
ff^1"
146.
0.054
0.006
0.1SO
0.100
0.700
2.060
2.900
8.6
0.6
2 SITES
RANGE
- 25.3
8.8
- 434.
8.7
- 220.
- 0.183
- 0.013
- 2.300
- 2.680
* 4.200
- 2.830
- 4.350
- 46.3
0.9
MEAN
23.3
4.8
421.
8.1
166.
0.081
0.009
1.838
0.623
1.633
2.462
3.472
27.4
0.7
MEDIAN
24.8
7.1
422.
B.3
158.
0.062
0.009
2.175
0.170
1.250
2.380
3.365
27.4
0.7
LAKE
3RO SAMPLING (10/ 9/73>
2 SITES
RANGE HEAN MEDIAN
19.7 - 22.5 21.0 21.1
0.0 - 7.8 3.4 3.0
337. - 379. 349. 345.
7.3 - 8.0 0.2 8.2
137. - 163. 145. 142.
0.059 - 0.120 0.074 0.067
0.008 - 0.034 0.015 0.011
0.090 - 0.210 0.147 0.140
0.130 - 1.210 0.408 0.24S
1.300 - 3.500 1.733 1.400
0.250 - 1.330 0.555 0.405
1.390 - 3.620 1.860 1.570
38.8 - 42.4 40.6 40.6
0.7 - 0.8 O.e 0.8
-------
B. Biological characteristics:
1. Phytoplankton -
Sampling
Date
04/28/73
08/01/73
10/09/73
2. Chlorophyll a^ -
Sampling
Date
04/28/73
08/01/73
10/09/73
Dominant
Genera
1. Stephanodiscus sp_.
2. Flagellates
3. Dactylococcopsis sp.
4. Cryptomonas sp.
5. Gymnodinium sp.
Other genera
Total
1. Oscillator-fa sj>.
2. Raphidiopsis sp.
3. Synedra sp_.
4. Flagellates
5. Stephanodiscus sp.
Other genera
Total
1. Raphidiopsis sp_.
2. Synedra s£.
3. Oscillator)a sp_.
4. Flagellates
5. Achnanthes sp_.
Other genera
Total
Station
Number
01
02
01
02
01
02
Algal Units
per ml
45,654
9,519
1,571
739
185
278
57,946
21,734
12,419
2,734
1,807
834
3,430
42,958
66,849
3,564
2,970
1,650
726
1,846
77,605
Chlorophyll a_
(ug/1)
39.1
62.2
8.6
46.3
42.4
38.8
-------
7
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) (mg/1-dry wt.)
Control 0.016 0.940 3.0
0.050 P 0.066 0.940 21.0
0.050 P -f 1.0 N 0.066 1.940 22.7
1.0 N 0.016 1.940 4.0
2. Discussion -
The control yield of the assay alga, Selenastrum capri-
cornutum, indicates that the potential primary productivity
of Lake Shawnee was moderately high at the time the sample
was collected. The addition of phosphorus alone produced a
significant increase in yield over that of the control. Note
that addition of nitrogen alone produced an insignificant
increase in yield, and phosphorus limitation is indicated.
The lake data substantiate phosphorus limitation. At all
sampling times, the mean inorganic nitrogen/orthophosphorus
ratios were 37/1 or greater, and phosphorus limitation would
be expected.
-------
IV. NUTRIENT LOADINGS
{See Appendix E for data)
For the determination of nutrient loadings, the Ohio 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 months of February and March when two samples were collected.
Sampling was begun in May, 1973, and was completed in April, 1974.
Through an interegency agreement, stream flow estimates for the
year of sampling and a "normalized" or average year were provided by the
Ohio 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 immediate
drainage" ("ZZ" of U.S.G.S.) were estimated using the means of the
nutrient loads, in kg/km2/year, at stations B-l and C-l of nearby
Rocky Fork Reservoir and multiplying the means by the ZZ area in km2.
* See Working Paper No. 175.
-------
9
A. Waste Sources:
1. Known municipal - None
2. Known industrial - None
B. Annual Total Phosphorus Loading - Average Year:
1. Inputs -
kg P/ % of
Source yr total
a. Tributaries (non-point load) -
Caesar Creek 360 78.2
b. Minor tributaries & immediate
drainage (non-point load) - 80 17.4
c. Known municipal STP's - None
d. Septic tanks* - 5 1.1
e. Known industrial - None
f. Direct precipitation** - 15 3.3
Total 460 100.0
2. Outputs -
Lake outlet - Caesar Creek 550
3. Net annual P loss - 90 kg.
* Estimate based on 15 seasonal lakeshore dwellings (from 1968 U.S.G.S.
quad, map); see Working Paper No. 175.
** See Working Paper No. 175.
-------
10
C. Annual Total Nitrogen Loading - Average Year:
1. Inputs -
kg N/ % of
Source yjr total
a. Tributaries (non-point load) -
Caesar Creek 34,480 90.4
b. Minor tributaries & immediate
drainage (non-point load) - 2,665 7.0
c. Known municipal STP's - None
d. Septic tanks* - 160 0.4
e. Known industrial - None
f. Direct precipitation** - 830 2.2
Total 38,135 100.0
2. Outputs -
Lake outlet - Caesar Creek 30,495
3. Net annual N accumulation - 7,640 kg.
D. Mean Annual Non-point Nutrient Export by Subdrainage Area:
Tributary kg P/km2/yr kg N/km2/yr
Caesar Creek 15 1,419
* Estimate based on 15 seasonal lakeshore dwellings (from 1968 U.S.G.S.
quad, map); see Working Paper No. 175.
** See Working Paper No. 175.
-------
n
E. Yearly Loadings:
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 oligo-
trophic if morphometry permitted. A mesotrophic 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
grams/m2/yr
Total
0.60
Accumulated
loss*
Total
49.5
Accumulated
9.9
Vollenweider phosphorus loadings
(g/m2/yr) based on mean depth and mean
hydraulic retention time of Lake Shawnee:
"Dangerous" (eutrophic loading) 0.68
"Permissible" (oligotrophic loading) 0.34
* There was an apparent loss of phosphorus from Lake Shawnee during the
sampling year. This may have been due to unknown and unsampled point
sources discharging directly to the lake or, more probably, to under-
estimation of septic tank contributions.
-------
12
V. LITERATURE REVIEWED
Vollenweider, R. A., and P. J. Dillon, 1974. The application of the
phosphorus loading concept to eutrophication research. Natl.
Res. Council of Canada Pub!. No. 13690, Canada Centre for Inland
Waters, Burlington, Ontario.
Youger, John, 1975. Personal communication (lake morphometry). OH
Env. Prot. Agency, Columbus.
-------
13
VI. APPENDICES
APPENDIX A
LAKE RANKINGS
-------
PT INUE* -N05,
LAKE. COOE LAKE NAME
5 3914
6 3914
7 3927
a 3^33
9 390t
10 3901
11 3<)1S
12 3907
13 3-J12
14 3^33
15 3930
16 39U5
17 3902
18 3908
19 3917
20 3931
ATnUuD REst^VOl*
MOSUUlTO CHEEK
PLEASANT hI(_L LAKE
dE-'LIN RESERVOIR
nOO^EK hiESE^VOIR
TAPPAN LAKE
LAKE SAINT MAKYS
ROCKY FORK LAKE
OEER Cf*EEK HESE«VOJR
BEACH CITiT ktSERVOI*?
INDIAN LAKE
DELAWARE RESERVOIR
GRANT LAKE
SHAWNE.E LAKE
HOLIDAY LAKE
CHAhlLtS MILL RESEHVOIR
MUCKLrE LAl\t
DILLIOU RE5EKVOH<
LORAMIE LAKE
O'SMAUGNESSr RESEHVOIH
INDEX Nj
491
431
39?
391
2
-------
PERCENT OF LAKES WITH HIGHER VALUES (NUMBEK OF LAKES WITH HIGHEK VALUES)
LAKE
CODE LAKE NAME
3901 BEACH CITr RESERVOIR
3903 BUCKEYE LAKE
3905 CHAftLES MILL RESERVOIR
390t> DEE** CREEK RESERVOIR
3907 DELAWARE RESERVOIR
3908 OILLION RESERVOIk
3912 GRANT LAKE
3914 HOOVER RESERVU1S
3915 INDIAN LAKE
3917 LORAMIE LAKE
392J MOSQUITO CREEK HESERVOIR
3924 PLEASANT HILL LAI\E
3927 LAKE SAINT MAKYS
3928 ATrfOOD RESERVOIR
3929 BERLIN RESERVOIR
3930 HOLIDAY LAKE
3931 O'SHAUGNESSY
3932 ROCKY FORK
3933 SHAWNEE LAKE
3934 fAPPAN LAKE
MEDIAN
TOTAL P
37 (
11 (
26 (
S3 (
58 (
16 (
47 t
67 (
42 <
5 (
7* <
95 <
21 I
100 (
79 (
32 (
0 (
68 <
63 <
87 1
7)
2)
5)
10)
in
3)
91
16)
3)
1)
14)
18)
4)
19)
15)
6)
0)
13)
12>
16)
MEDIAN
INOUG N
21 <
76 (
b3 (
5 (
16 (
32 <
se (
26 (
76 (
37 <
100 t
6B (
95 (
89 (
42 <
53 (
0 (
47 (
11 (
04 {
4)
14)
12)
1)
3)
6)
11)
5)
14)
7)
19)
13)
IB)
17)
8)
10)
0)
9)
2)
16)
500-
MEAN SEC
11 (
5 (
37 (
63 (
32 (
42 (
16 <
89 (
21 (
0 (
62 (
100 (
26 (
95 (
74 (
tJ2 (
47 I
58 (
S3 <
68 (
2)
1)
7)
12)
6)
8)
3)
17)
4)
0)
lb>
19)
5)
U)
14)
15)
9)
11)
10)
13)
MEAN
CHLOhfA
84 (
0 (
21 (
95 (
39 (
58 (
32 (
79 <
16 <
5 (
53 <
63 (
11 (
68 (
74 (
26 (
100 (
42 (
37 (
47 (
16)
0)
4)
18)
17)
ID
6)
IS)
3)
1)
10)
12)
2)
13)
14)
S)
19)
a)
7)
9)
Ib-
M1N DO
82 (
89 (
11 (
63 (
47 (
53 (
74 (
32 (
58 (
97 (
82 I
39 (
97 (
39 (
68 (
11 <
26 <
11 I
11 (
11 (
15)
17)
0)
12)
9)
10)
14)
6)
ID
18)
15)
7)
18)
7)
13)
0)
5)
0)
0)
0)
MEL1IAN
DISS 0*THO P
42 (
26 (
58 (
11 (
21 <
5 t
34 (
79 1
53 I
34 (
92 (
66 (
47 (
100 <
92 I
16 (
0 (
66 (
74 (
84 {
8)
5)
11)
2)
4)
1)
6)
15)
10)
6)
17)
12)
9)
19)
17)
3)
0)
12)
14)
le>)
INUEX
NO
277
207
216
290
263
206
261
392
266
178
483
431
297
491
429
220
173
292
249
381
-------
LAKE DATA TO BE USED IN RANKINGS
LAKE
COOE LAKE NAME
3901 BEACH CITY RESERVOIR
3902 BUCKEYE LAKE
3905 CMAKLES MILL HESEWVOIR
3906 DEER CREEK RESEHVOJR
3907 DELAWARE RESERVOIH
3908 OILLION RESERVOIR
3912 GRANT LAKE
3914 HOOVER RESERVOIR
3915 INDIAN LAKE
3917 LORAMIE LAKE
3921 MOSQUITO CREEK RESERVOIR
3924 PLEASANT MILL LAKE
3927 LAKE SAINT MARYS
3928 ATWUOD RESERVOIR
3929 BERLIN RESEHVOH
3930 HOLIDAY LAKE
3931 O'SHAUGNESSt RESERVOIR
3932 ROCKY FORK LAKE
3933 SHAilNEE LAKE
3934 TAPPAN LAKE
MEDIAN
TOTAL P
0.122
0,179
0.127
0.098
0.086
0.163
0.113
0.040
0*120
0.185
0.058
0.036
0.148
0.031
0.042
0.125
0.208
0.067
0.069
0.040
MEDIAN
INO^G N
1.990
0.380
0.465
2.980
2.340
1.590
0.570
1.640
0.380
1.380
0.150
0.455
0.200
0.205
0.900
0.575
3.070
0.790
2.380
0.280
500-
MEAN SEC
489.000
490.000
482.555
470.125
4B4.111
481.250
486.333
462.750
485. 222
494.000
465.333
456.833
464.167
462.000
465.435
465.333
479.333
473.000
474.333
466.111
MEAN
CHLOKA
10.867
186.567
67.144
9.887
10.856
27.400
40.533
13.017
76.855
104.100
36.267
22.850
79.150
16.442
15.496
55.350
5.522
38.022
39.567
37.711
15-
MIN 00
11.600
9.600
15.000
13.900
14.500
14.300
12.200
14.800
14.200
8.500
11.600
14.700
8.200
14.700
13.600
15.000
14.900
15.000
15.000
15.006
MEDIAN
OISS OHTrtO f>
O.Olb
0.020
0.011
0.036
0.024
0.037
0.019
0.006
0.012
0.019
0.006
0.010
0.014
0.005
0.006
0.034
0.159
0.010
0.009
0.007
-------
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 = 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
-------
FUK Only
1/87/75
LAKE CUuE 3433 LAKE Si-
FUT&L DRAINAGE A*EA Of LAKt (bli KM)
TkldUlArJY AREA(SU r.M>
JAiJ
Ftri
0.5h(
O.nl
0. /*l
0 . <3?
U.10
U.J-*
ii.Zti
O.OS
NOKMALl^EL) FLOi*S(CMS)
JUN JUL AUG
U.ll
O.lb
J.U/
o.ui
StP
u.OS
0.05
Ci.Ol
ocr
O.Ui
0.0
-------
APPENDIX D
PHYSICAL and CHEMICAL DATA
-------
STUKET RETRIEVAL DATE 75/01/27
393301
3y 39 05.0 083 46 07.0
SHAKNEE LAKE
J9oS7 OHIO
HEPALES
3
2111202
0010 FEET
DEPTH
DAft TIME DEPTH
FROM OF
TO (JAY FEET
73/04/28 15 00 0000
15 00 0006
73/Ott/Ol 11 25 0000
11 2S t>004
73/10/09 17 10 0000
17 10 0005
DATE TIME DEPTH
FMOM OF
TO UAY FEET
73/04/26 15 00 0000
IS 00 0006
73/tfb/Ol 11 25 0000
11 25 0004
73/10/09 17 10 0000
17 10 0005
OOOlu
*AT£R
TEMP
CtNT
11. a
11. d
25.0
24.9
21.3
21.0
00665
lOS-TOT
IG/L P
0.167
0.254
0.069
O.dbt
u.059
G.06H
00300
00
MG/L
14.6
7.1
4.0
32217
OLRPHYL
A
OG/U
3V. 1
6.6
42.4
Ou077
THANSP
SECCHl
INCHES
16
24
28
OOU94
CNDUCTVY
FltLO
MICROMHO
470
46U
420
425
341
346
00400
HH
SU
tt.10
7.80
6.50
6.40
8.70
6.00
00410
T ALK
CAC03
MG/L
170
166
158
158
140
144
00610
NH3-N
TOTAL
MG/L
0.070
o.cao
0.140
0.150
0.130
0.310
00625
TOT KJEL
N
HG/L
1.200
1.200
1.300
0.700
1.400
1.300
00630
N02(bN03
N-TOTAL
MG/L
4.000
4.000
2.270
2.200
0.160
0.210
00671
PHOS-DIS
OHTHO
MG/L P
0.018
0.020
0.006
0.006
0.006
0.017
-------
STlWtT MtfrtlEVAl. UATE 75/01/27
393302
39 38 48.0 083 47 33.0
SriA*NEE LAKE
OHIO
DATE
FKOM
TO
7J/U4/2B
7J/OH/01
73/10/09
DATE
FROM
TU
73/04/2*
73/00/01
I j/10/04
TIME DEPTH
OF
DAY FEET
15 20 0000
15 20 0006
15 20 0015
15 20 0023
10 ?5 0000
10 25 0005
10 25 0010
10 25 0015
10 25 0020
10 ?5 0025
16 45 0000
16 45 0005
16 45 0015
16 45 0022
TIME OEPTH
OF
DAT FEET
15 20 0000
15 20 0006
15 ?C 0015
IS 20 0023
10 25 0000
10 25 OOliS
10 25 0015
10 25 0025
16 45 0000
Ib 45 OOJt>
16 45 OU15
16 <*5 0022
uoolo
NATttt
TllMP
CENT
13.1
13.1
12. -y
12.6
25.3
25.2
24.7
23.8
21.1
16.8
22.5
21.3
20.5
19.7
00665
PHOS-TGT
rtG/L P
D.073
j.073
u.OdO
u .090
U.056
0.0 ai
U.Ufa-J
J.1B3
0.070
0 . Of>U
0.066
U.I 20
U03UO
DO
M&/L
9.9
9.5
9.3
8.8
7.5
0.3
L).£
7. B
2.0
0 .0
32217
CHLWPHYL
A
UG/L
62.2
46.3
3y.«
Uti)77
TKiANSH CNOUCTVY
StCChl FIELO
INCMtS M1CKUMHO
20
34
32
465
S20
4HO
475
404
412
424
426
420
434
343
337
348
379
lltHALES
3
004uO
PM
su
8.50
8.20
8.50
S. 20
8.70
d.2G
7.6it
7.50
8.UO
U.40
7.60
7.30
00410
T ALK
CAC03
MG/L
179
180
lUO
180
146
152
163
220
137
13V
146
163
2111202
0027
00610
frtnJ-H
TOIAL
MO/L
0.040
0.040
0.040
0.040
0.100
0.190
0.460
2.680
0.130
0.180
0.490
1.210
FEET DEPTH
00625
TOT KJEI.
N
MO/L
0.900
0.800
0.900
0.900
1.200
1.000
1.400
4.200
1.500
1.300
1.400
3. 500
00630
N02&M03
N-TOTAL
Mli/L
3.800
3.600
3.800
3.800
1.960
2.150
2.300
0.150
0.120
0.090
0.180
0.120
00671
PHOS-01S
OUT HO
MG/L P
0.004
0.004
0.005
0.007
0.009
0.009
0.013
0.009
0.011
0.009
0.034
0.012
-------
APPENDIX E
TRIBUTARY DATA
-------
OAft
3933A1
39 3B 45.0 083 4/ 45.0
CtASAW CrttEK
39071 7.b CtOA*VILLE
0/LAKE SrtAwNEE
JASPtW HD tWOG 2.5 MI W OF JAMESTOWN
HEPALES 2111204
4 0000 FEET DEPTH
OATt.
FKUH
TJ
73/05/Ob
73/UO/lo
73/y //l^
7j/Utf/H
73/0-^/15
7J/1J/^I
73/11/11
73/1^/0^
7**/ai/l^
7^/02/09
7<*/u2/2j
7«/u3/09
7'*/U'*/£?0
OJ630 U0625
TIMF DEPTH Nu2tiN03 TuT KJtL
OF .J-TOFAL N
UAY FEET
It
11
i<*
ly
Ib
13
L<*
13
14
14
15
13
00
Ib
00
30
16
30
S5
<+G
?5
?6
30
UO
Mb/L MO/L
^
?
?
1
0
0
0
2
3
3
2
2
a
.500 1.60u
.OoO 0.660
.tOO 1.47U
.440 l.t7G
.290 0.9PO
.370
.3t)4
.300
.200 I
.080
.560
.500
.650
.bbC
.600
.oOO
.UOO
.600
.600
.160 3.3uiJ
0'J610 00671 00665
NH3-N PHOS-DIb PnUb-TOT
TOTAL URTHO
MG/L
0.
0.
u .
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
u.
0.
037
046
Ib4
076
210
168
156
012
ulb
01S
030
050
MG/L
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
u.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
p
OObK
010
029
007
008
012
012
03ft
012
010
010
005K
017
MG/L P
0
U
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
u
0
.U30
.030
.050
,057
.050
.020
.045
.095
.OoG
.075
.090
.120
.03^
K VALUE Ki^GrtN fO Bt
LESS THAN
-------
^ETHIEVAL DATE 7b/02/u3
3-J33A2
3* 3N- TOTAL N
UA1
14
11
14
w
15
13
15
13
14
14
15
12
13
r FEET
30
32
05
35
29
45
10
50
35
37
40
23
OS
Mb/L
5
3
6
1
0
0
1
4
4
4
5
<+
3
3
.000
.bOO
.300
.600
.071
.890
.600
.100
.300
.600
.100
.boo
.300
.200
MG/L
0.
0.
1.
1.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
' 0.
2.
290
720
470
150
t»00
350
550
500
300
700
400
600
500
•900
00610 00671 OO&bD
NH3-N PHOb-OIS PMOb-TOT
TOTAL OPTHO
MG/L
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
022
025
270
OS2
140
02e>
028
u32
008
015
005K
015
015
040
HG/L P
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
u
0
0
J
0
0
. JOb
.007
.039
.019
.020
.009
.012
.020
.012
.020
.020
.020
.010
.005
MG/L P
0.020
0.015
0.110
l>.095
0.030
0.018
0.020
0.035
O.u20
0.020
O.O^b
0.100
O.tlS
O.ulb
h OF JAHEbTOWN
21112U4
0000 FEET DEPTH
K VALUE KNOWN TO b£
LESS THAN INDICATED
------- |