U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
NATIONAL EUTROPHICATION SURVEY
WORKING PAPER SERIES
REPORT
ON
BU\CKFISH LAKE
CRITTENDEN AND ST, FRANCIS COUNT
EPA REGION VI
WORKING PAPER No,
CORVALLIS ENVIRONMENTAL RESEARCH LABORATORY - CORVALLIS, OREGON
and
ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING & SUPPORT LABORATORY - LAS VEGAS, NEVADA
699-440
-------
REPORT
ON
BLACKFISH LAKE
AT* ST, FRANCIS COUNTIES
EPA REGION VI
WORKING PAPER No,
WITH THE COOPERATION OF THE
ARKANSAS DEPARTMENT OF POLLUTION
CONTROL AND ECOLOGY
AND THE
ARKANSAS NATIONAL GUARD
JANUARY, 1977
-------
REPORT ON BLACKFISH LAKE
CRITTENDEN AND ST. FRANCIS COUNTIES, ARKANSAS
EPA REGION VI
by
National Eutrophication Survey
Water and Land Monitoring Branch
Monitoring Applications Laboratory
Environmental Monitoring & Support Laboratory
Las Vegas, Nevada
and
Eutrophication Survey Branch
Corvallis Environmental Research Laboratory
Corvallis, Oregon
Working Paper No. 481
OFFICE OF RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT
U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
January 1977
-------
CONTENTS
Page
Foreword ii
List of Arkansas 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 6
IV. Nutrient Loadings 11
V. Literature Reviewed 15
VI. Appendices 16
-------
11
FOREWORD
The National Eutroph1cat1on Survey was Initiated in 1972 in
response to an Administration commitment to Investigate the nation-
wide threat of accelerated eutrophicatlon to freshwater lakes and
reservoirs.
OBJECTIVES
The Survey was designed to develop, in conjunction with state
environmental agencies, information on nutrient sources, concen-
trations, 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 nonpoint source pollution abatement in lake water-
sheds.
ANALYTIC APPROACH
The mathematical and statistical procedures selected for the
Survey's eutrophicatlon 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 eutrophlcation control can be made.
LAKE ANALYSIS
In this report, the first stage of evaluation of lake and
watershed 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
L§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 condition
are being made to advance the rationale and data base for refine-
ment of nutrient water quality criteria for the Nation's freshwater
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 the U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency and to augment plans implementation by the states.
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
The staff of the National Eutrophication Survey (Office of
Research and Development, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency)
expresses sincere appreciation to the Arkansas Department of Pollution
Control and Ecology for professional involvement, to the Arkansas
National Guard for conducting the tributary sampling phase of the
Survey, and to those Arkansas wastewater treatment plant operators
who provided effluent samples and flow data.
The staff of the Water Division of the Arkansas Department
of Pollution Control and Ecology provided Invaluable lake documentation
and counsel during the Survey, reviewed the preliminary reports
and provided critiques most useful 1n the preparation of this Working
Paper series.
Major General Thomas C. Armstrong, the Adjutant General of
Arkansas, and Project Officer Colonel Lavaun M. James, who directed
the volunteer efforts of the Arkansas National Guardsmen, are also
gratefully acknowledged for their assistance to the Survey.
-------
IV
NATIONAL EUTROPHICATION SURVEY
STUDY LAKES
STATE OF ARKANSAS
LAKE NAME
Beaver
Blackfish
Blue Mountain
Bull Shoals
Catherine
Chicot
DeGray
Erling
Grand
Greer's Ferry
Hamilton
Millwood
Nimrod
Norfork
Ouachita
Table Rock
COUNTY
Benton, Carroll, Washington
Crittenden, St. Francis
Logan, Yell
Baxter, Boone, Marion
(Taney, Ozark in MO)
Garland, Hot Spring
Chicot
Clark, Hot Spring
Lafayette
Chicot
Van Buren, Cleburne
Garland
Hempstead, Howard,
Little River, Sevier
Perry, Yell
Baxter, Fulton (Ozark in MO)
Garland, Montgomery
Boone, Carroll (Barry,
Taney in MO)
-------
\\ /
BLACKFISH LAKE
Tributary Sampling Site
X Lake Sampling Site
Map Location
-------
REPORT ON BLACKFISH LAKE, ARKANSAS
STORE! NO. 0502
I. CONCLUSIONS
A. Trophic Condition:*
Based upon field observations and Survey data, Blackfish
Lake is considered hypereutrophic. Chlorophyll .a values
ranged from a low of 1.9 yg/1 in the spring to a high of
70.1 yg/1 in the fall with a mean of 19.8 yg/1. The mean
Secchi disc transparency was only 9.8 cm (3.9 inches).
Potentials for primary production as measured by algal assay
control yields were extremely high. Of the 16 Arkansas lakes
sampled in 1974, none had higher median total phosphorus,
dissolved orthophosphorus, or inorganic nitrogen levels than
Blackfish Lake.
Survey limnologists reported large amounts of floating
debris and oil scum over the water surface. Emergent trees
and branches were observed throughout most of the lake.
B. Rate-Limiting Nutrient:
Algal assay results indicate that Blackfish Lake is
limited by available nitrogen. Spikes with nitrogen or
nitrogen and phosphorus simultaneously resulted in increased
*See Appendix E
-------
assay yields. The addition of phosphorus alone did not produce
a growth response. The ratios of total available nitrogen to
orthophosphorus (N/P) in the lake data suggest near-col imitation
in the spring, nitrogen limitation in the summer, and phosphorus
limitation in the fall.
C. Nutrient Controllability:
1. Point sources -
There are no known point sources impacting Blackfish
Lake. The present phosphorus loading of 69.22 g/m2/yr is
40 times that proposed by Vollenweider (1975) as eutrophic
for a lake of such volume and retention time. Although
Vollenweider's model may not apply to water bodies with
short hydraulic retention times (eight days for Blackfish
Lake) the loading is excessively high; regardless of the
applicability of the model, it is certain that the trophic
condition of Blackfish Lake will continue to deteriorate if
the present loading rate is maintained.
2. Nonpoint sources -
Nonpoint sources contributed all the loading reaching
Blackfish Lake. Measured tributaries contributed 99.0% of the
total phosphorus load. Tributary C-l (Unnamed Stream) con-
tributed 84.8%, while ungaged tributaries contributed 1.0% of
the total load.
The nonpoint phosphorus and nitrogen exports for the two
tributaries to Blackfish Lake (Section IV-D) are extremely
-------
high. These tributaries drairi a vast agricultural water-
shed and are the result of a long array of interconnecting
ditches and streams. Further investigation is necessary to
determine the effects of this agricultural runoff into the
lake and of any unknown sources contributing loading before
recommendations for lake improvement can be proposed.
-------
II. LAKE AND DRAINAGE BASIN CHARACTERISTICS
Lake and drainage basin characteristics are itemized below.
Lake morphometry values were provided by the Arkansas Department
of Pollution Control and Ecology. Tributary flow data were pro-
vided by the Arkansas District Office of the U.S. Geological
Survey (USGS). Outlet drainage area includes the lake surface
area. Mean hydraulic retention time was obtained by dividing
the lake volume by the mean flow of the outlet. Precipitation
values are estimated by methods as outlined in National Eutro-
phication Survey (NES) Working Paper No. 175. A table of metric/
English conversions is included as Appendix A.
A. Lake Morphometry:
1. Surface area: 1.62 km .
2. Mean depth: 1.8 meters.
3. Maximum depth: 6.7 meters.
4. Volume: 2.964 x 105 m3.
5. Mean hydraulic retention time: 8 days.
-------
B. Tributary and Outlet:
(See Appendix B for flow data)
1. Tributaries -
Drainage Mean flow
Name area(km ) (m /sec)
C-l Unnamed Stream 247.3 3.65
D-l Ditch #1 37.0 0.54
Minor tributaries and
immediate drainage - 2.8 0.06
Totals 287.1 4.25
2. Outlet - B-l Blackfish Ditch 288.8 4.25
C. Precipitation:
1. Year of sampling: ?
2. Mean annual: ?
-------
III. LAKE WATER QUALITY SUMMARY
Blackfish Lake was sampled three times during the open-
water season of 1974 by means of a pontoon-equipped Huey heli-
copter. Each time, samples for physical and chemical parameters
were collected from three stations on the lake (Station 03 was
sampled only twice) and from one or more depths at each station
(see map, page v). During each visit, depth-integrated samples
were collected from each station for chlorophyll a_ analysis and
phytoplankton identification and enumeration. During the first
visit, 18.9-liter depth-integrated samples were composited for
algal assays. Maximum depths sampled were 1.5 meters at Station
01, 1.5 meters at Station 02, and the surface at Station 03. For
a more detailed explanation of NES methods, see NES Working Paper
No. 175.
The results obtained are presented in full in Appendix C
and are summarized in III-A for waters at the surface and at the
maximum depth for each site. Results of the phytoplankton counts
and chlorophyll ^determinations are included in III-B. Results
of the limiting nutrient study are presented in III-C.
-------
STQ»ET CODE 05 02
A. PHYSICAL AND CnE"ICAL CHARACTER IST ICS
( *** 1'C.^in
jui « w* Pi CT O T LJ o U.
f A A Uur-lr*wv
DISSOLVED OAYGEN
O.-l.S * OtPTH
MAX DEPTH**
CONDUCTIVITY (U^H'
01 Q M i 1 f Ll T r4
• — 1 . T> M UtKfH
MAX DEPTH**
CfNT)
(MG/L)
2
2
U=)
2
HANGE
8O 31
. " — 7 . 1
8Q Q 1
. ^— 7.1
7. 2- 8.6
7.2- 8.6
C* l\ U ti
o U • — bo .
60.- 85.
= 3
MEDIAN
9r,
• U
9ft
. U
7.9
7.9
•7 -3
t 3 .
73.
JC.PTI-.
<->ANGE
(METERS)
On A r\
. u —
On
. U —
0.0-
0.0-
On
. 0 —
0.0-
u . u
0.0
0.0
0.0
Of\
. 0
0.0
N*
*
2
3
3
4
2
^000
KANGE
•30 | O 3 A
CC . 1 — CC . ^
3 O 1 O D 1
2£ .1- cc • i
3.0- «*.0
3.0- 4.0
d7 •- 9b«
o * • """ O O .
MED I AN
3D 1
C.d . 1
22. 1
3.2
3.2
88.
88.
OEPTH
•
-------
8
B. Biological Characteristics:
1. Phytoplankton -
Sampling
Date
03/26/74
06/04/74
10/16/74
Dominant
Genera
1. Euglena
2. Chroomonas
3. Nitzschia
4. Phormidium
5. Gyrosigma
Other genera
Total
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
Cryptomonas
Flagellates
Trachelomonas
Euglena
Lepocinclis
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
Other genera
Total
Nitzschia
Cryptomonas
Chlamydomonas
Euglena
Dactylococcopsis
Other genera
Total
Algal
Units
per ml
116
93
93
46
23
117
488
475
238
238
59
60
59
1,129
1,767
1,556
1,346
1,136
1,093
4.627
11,525
-------
2. Chlorophyll a^ -
Sampling
Date
03/26/74
06/04/74
10/16/74
Station
Number
01
02
03
01
02
03
01
02
03
Chlorophyll a_
(yg/D
1.9
2.8
8.8
11.3
6.6
13.5
70.1
43.2
C. Limiting Nutrient Study:
1. Autoclaved, filtered, and nutrient spiked
a. 03/26/74
Spike (mg/1)
Control
0.05 P
0.05 P + 1.0 N
1.00 N
b. 10/16/74
Ortho P
Cone, (mg/1)
0.175
0.225
0.225
0.175
Ortho P
Spike(mg/l) Cone, (mg/1)
Control
0.05 P
0.05 P + 1.0 N
1.00 N
0.062
0.112
0.112
0.062
Inorganic N
Cone, (mg/1)
0.917
0.917
1.917
1.917
Inorganic N
Cone, (mg/1)
0.386
0.386
1.386
1.386
Maximum Yield
(mg/1-dry wt.)
28.4
25.8
53.7
51.5
Maximum Yield
(mg/1-dry wt.)
11.9
12.9
32.2
19.3
-------
10
2. Discussion -
The control yield of the assay alga, Selenastrum capri-
cornutum, indicates that Blackfish Lake had a high potential for
primary productivity during the spring and fall sampling periods.
The assay samples were nitrogen limited at those times as indicated
by the increased yield of the test alga in response to an addition
of inorganic nitrogen. Spikes with phosphorus and nitrogen simul-
taneously resulted in a maximum yield. Spikes with phosphorus
alone did not produce a response significantly beyond the control
yield.
The mean N/P ratio in the spring lake data was 14/1, suggesting
near col imitation by the two nutrients. An N/P ratio of 14/1 or
greater generally reflects phosphorus limitation. The N/P ratio
for the summer was 6/1, indicating nitrogen limitation, and 18/1
for the fall, indicating phosphorus limitation.
-------
11
IV. NUTRIENT LOADINGS
(See Appendix D for data)
For the determination of nutrient loadings, the Arkansas
National Guard collected monthly near-surface grab samples from
each of the tributary sites indicated on the map (page v), ex-
cept for the high runoff months of March and April when two sam-
ples were collected. Sampling was begun in June 1974, and was
completed in May 1975.
Through an interagency agreement, stream flow estimates for
the year of sampling and a "normalized" or average year were pro-
vided by the Arkansas District Office of the USGS for the tribu-
tary sites nearest the lake.
In this report, nutrient loads for sampled tributaries were
determined by using a modification of a USGS computer program for
calculating stream loadings. Nutrient loads indicated for tribu-
taries are those measured minus known point source loads, if any.
Nutrient loadings for unsampled "minor tributaries and imme-
diate drainage" ("ZZ" of USGS) were estimated by using the mean
annual nutrient loads, in kg/km^/yr, in Unnamed Stream and Ditch #1,
at Stations C-l and D-l, and multiplying the means by the ZZ area
in km .
-------
12
A. Waste Sources:
1. Known municipal - None
2. Known industrial - None
B. Annual Total Phosphorus Loading - Average Year:
1. Inputs -
% of
Source kg P/yr total
a. Tributaries (nonpoint load) -
C-l Unnamed Stream 95,065 84.8
D-l Ditch #1 15,895 14.2
b. Minor tributaries and immediate
drainage (nonpoint load) - 1,140 1.0
c. Known municipal STP's - None
d. Septic tanks* - 5 <0.1
e. Known industrial - None
f. Direct precipitation** - 30 <0.1
Totals 112,135 100.0
2. Outlet - B-l Blackfish Ditch 92,130
3. Net annual P accumulation - 20,005
*Estimate based on 26 lakeside residences.
**Estimated (see NES Working Paper No. 175).
-------
13
C. Annual Total Nitrogen Loading - Average Year:
1. Inputs -
% of
Source kg N/yr total
a. Tributaries (nonpoint load) -
C-l Unnamed Stream 340,320 87.1
D-l Ditch #1 44,930 11.5
b. Minor tributaries and immediate
drainage (nonpoint load) - 3,625 0.9
c. Known municipal STP's - None
d. Septic tanks* - 275 0.1
e. Known industrial - None
f. Direct precipitation** - 1,750 0.4
Totals 390,900 100.0
2. Outlet - B-l Blackfish Ditch 303,920
3. Net annual N accumulation - 86,980
*Estimate based on 26 lakeside residences.
**Estimated (see NES Working Paper No. 175).
-------
14
D. Mean Annual Nonpoint Nutrient Export by Subdrainage Area:
o 2
Tributary kg P/knr/yr kg N/km /yr
Unnamed Stream 384 1,376
Ditch #1 430 1,214
E. Yearly Loadings:
In the following table, the existing phosphorus annual
loading is compared to the relationship proposed by Vollenweider
(1975). Essentially, his eutrophic loading is that at which
the receiving waters would become eutrophic or remain eutrophic;
his oligotrophic loading is that which would result in the
receiving water remaining oligotrophic or becoming oligotrophic
if morphometry permitted. A mesotrophic loading would be
considered one between eutrophic and oligotrophic.
Note that Vollenweider's model may not apply to lakes with
short hydraulic retention times or in which light penetration is
severely restricted by high concentrations of suspended solids
in the surface waters.
Total Yearly
Phosphorus Loading
Estimated loading for Blackfish Lake 69.22
Vollenweider's eutrophic loading 1.80
Vollenweider's oligotrophic loading 0.90
-------
15
LITERATURE REVIEWED
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. 1975. National Eutro-
phication Survey Methods 1973-1976. Working Paper No. 175,
National Environmental Research Center, Las Vegas, Nevada,
and Pacific Northwest Environmental Research Laboratory,
Corvallis, Oregon.
Vollenweider, R. A. 1975. Input-Output Models With Special
Reference to the Phosphorus Loading Concept in Limnology.
Schweiz. Z. Hydrol. 37:53-84.
-------
16
VI. APPENDICES
APPENDIX A
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 B
TRIBUTARY FLOW DATA
-------
TRIBUTARY FLCU INFORMATION FOR ARKANSAS
LAKE CODE 050? aLACKFISH LAKE
TOTAL DRAINAGE AREA OF LAKE ?sa.e
03/02/77
SUB-DRAINAGE
NORMALIZED FLOWS(CMS)
TRIBUTARY
0502A1
0502B1
0502C1
0502D1
0502ZZ
AREA (SO KM)
288.8
288.8
2*7.3
37.0
*.*
JAN
0.0
6.51
5.58
0.83
0.096
F£B
0.0
8. 1C
6.9*
1.03
0.119
MAR
0.0
7.76
6.65
0.99
0.113
APR
0.0
6.26
5.38
0.80
0.091
MAY
0.0
5.72
*.90
0.72
0.082
JUN
0.0
3.00
2.58
0.38
0.0*5
JUL
0.0
2.50
2.15
0.32
0.037
AUG
0.0
l.*0
1.20
0.18
0.021
SEP
0.0
l.*5
1.2*
0.18
0.022
OCT
0.0
1.25
1.07
0.16
0.013
NOV
0.0
3.26
2.80
O.*l
0.0*8
DEC
0.0
*. 1 1
3.51
0.52
0.059
MEAN
0.0
*.25
3.65
0.5*
0.062
TOTAL DRAINAGE AREA OF LAKE =
SUM OF SUB-DRAINAGE AREAS =
288.8
288.8
MEAN MONTHLY FLOWS AND DAILY FLOWSICMSI
TRIBUTARY MONTH YEAR MEAN FLOW DAY
0502A1
FLOW DAY
050281
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
1
2
3
*
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
1
2
3
*
5
7*
7*
7*
7*
7*
7*
7*
75
75
75
75
75
7*
7*
7*
7*
7*
7*
7*
75
75
75
75
75
SUMMARY
TOTAL FLOW IN =
TOTAL FLOW OUT =
51.28
51.32
FLOW DAY
FLOW
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
5.578
2.29*
2.9*5
1.586
0.300
3.625
1.926
5.069
7.589
15.688
17.500
3.030
22
20
17
21
19
22
18
23
8
5
19
22
20
17
21
19
2*
22
18
23
8
5
18
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0 22
0.0 19
0.0
1.982
1.0*8
3.*83
l.*87
0.728
12.573
0.991
7.617
19.«22
7.617 22
26.901 19
6.456 19
0.0
0.0
19.822
2*. 806
6.286
-------
TRIBUTARY FLO* INFORMATION FOR ARKANSAS
02/02/77
LA«;E CODE 050?
dLACivFISrt LAKE
^EAN MONTHLY F(_OWS AND DAILY FLOwS(CMS)
TRIBUTARY MONTH YEAR MEAN FLO* DAY
0502C1
0502D1
0502ZZ
6
7
8
9
10
1 1
12
1
?
3
u
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
1
?
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
1
2
3
it
5
74
74
74
74
74
74
74
75
75
75
75
75
74
74
74
74
74
74
74
75
75
75
75
75
74
74
74
74
74
74
74
75
75
75
75
75
FLO* DAY
FLO* OAY
FLOW
4.786
1.982
2.520
1.359
0.258
3.115
1.642
4.361
6.513
13.451
15.065
2.605
0.708
0.283
0.368
0.198
0.037
0.453
0.255
0.651
0.963
2.010
2.209
0.385
0.085
0.028
0.057
0.028
0.006
0.057
0.028
0.057
0.113
0.227
0.261
0.042
22
20
17
21
19
24
24
18
23
8
5
22
20
17
21
19
24
22
18
23
a
5
19
22
20
17
21
19
24
22
18
23
8
5
18
1.699
0.906
2.973
1.274
0.623
10.760
0.850
6.513
16.990
6.513 22
23.050 19
0.255
0.142
0.453
0.198
0.085
1.614
0.127
0.991
2.549
0.963 22
3.455
0.793
0.028
0.0
0.057
0.014
0.020
0.020
0.014 24
0.113
0.283
0.142 22
0.425 19
0.096 19
16.990
21.238
2.549
0.014
0.283
0.396
0.096
-------
APPENDIX C
PHYSICAL AND CHEMICAL DATA
-------
STDtfET RETRIEVAL OATF 77/02/03
050201
35 07 45.0 090 27 25.0 3
05123 ARr^ANSAS
100691
/TYPA/AM8NT/LAKE
DATE TIME DEPTH
F30M OF
TO
74/03/26
74/06/04
74/10/16
DATE
FROM
TO
74/03/26
74/06/04
74/10/16
DAY FEET
10 50 0000
11 15 0000
11 15 0005
11 55 0000
TIME DEPTH
OF
DAY FEET
10 50 0000
11 15 0000
11 15 0005
11 55 0000
00010
HATER
TEMP
CENT
9.1
22.4
22.1
00665
PMOS-TOT
MG/L P
0.457
0.423
0.366
0.274
11EPALES 04001002
0006 FEET DEPTH CLASS 00
00300 00077 00094 00400 00410 00610 00625 00630 00671
DO T«ANSP CNDUCTVY PH T ALK NH3-N TOT KJEL N02&NG3 PrtOS-DIS
SECCHI FIELD CAC03 TOTAL N M-TOTAL ORTrlO
MG/L INCHES MIC30MHO 5U MG/L MG/L MG/L MG/L MG/L P
8.6 4
2
3.2
6.8 8
32217 00031
CHLfiPHYL INCDT LT
A REMNING
UG/L PERCENT
1.9
11.3
70.1
35 7.30 36 0.450 1.500 0.640 0.09S
88 6.60 34 0.180 1.500 1.580 0.082
87 6.10 18 0.230 1.400 1.540 0.091
7.70 124 0.140 1.400 0.040 0.032
-------
STORET RETRIEVAL DATE 77/02/02
050202
35 07 08.0 090 26 35.0 3
CLuCKFISH L*KE
05123 Arti\ANSAS
100691
/TYPA/AMBNT/LAKF.
11EPALES 04001002
0006 FEET DEPTH CLASS 00
DATE TIME DEPTH
FROM OF
TO DAY FEET
74/03/26 11 00 0000
74/06/04 11 35 0000
11 3? 0005
74/10/16 12 10 0000
DATE TIME DEPTH
FROM OF
TO DAY FEET
74/03/26 11 00 0000
74/06/04 11 35 0000
11 35 0005
74/10/16 12 10 0000
C0010
WATER
TEMP
CENT
8.9
22.2
22.1
00665
PHOS-TOT
MG/L P
0.826
0.570
0.405
0.238
00300 00077 00094
DO TRANSP CNOUCTVY
SECCHI FIELD
MG/L INCHES MICROMHO
7.2 4 60
3 95
3.0 88
6.0 6
32217 00031
CHLRPHYL INCDT LT
A REMMNG
UG/L PERCENT
2.8
6.6
43.2
00400 00410 00610 00625 00630 00671
PH .. T ALK NH3-N TOT KJEL N02^M03 PHOS-DIS
CAC03 TOTAL N N-TOTAL ORTHO
SU MG/L MG/L MG/L Mli/L MG/L P
6.80 24 0.260 1.300 0.690 0.094
6.40 31 0.160 1.100 1.410 0.098
6.25 24 0.230 1.300 1.790 0.090
7.55 100 0.090 1.900 0.030 0.019
-------
STOSET RETRIEVAL OATF. 77/03/02
/TYPA/AM8NT/LAKE
DATE
FROM
TO
TIME DEPTH
OF
DAT1 FEET
74/03/26 \l IS 0000
74/06/04 II «55 0000
00010
*ATER
TEMP
CENT
00300 UOC77 00094
DO TRANSP CNDUCTVY
SECCHI FIELD
MG/L INCHES MICROMHO
4.0
050203
35 06 35.0 090 27 36.0 3
BLACisFISri L.AKE
05035 AKKANSAS
1006*1
11EPALES 04001002
0001 FEET DEPTH CLASS 00
00400
PH
su
7.00
6.30
00410
T ALK
CAC03
MG/L
72
18
00610
NH3-N
TOTAL
MG/L
0.580
0.220
00625
TOT KJEL
N
MG/L
1.300
1.500
00630
N02&N03
N-TOTAL
MG/L
0.790
2.010
00671
PHOS-DIS
ORTHO
MG/L P
0.063
0.133
00665 32217 00031
DATE TIME DEPTH PHOS-TOT CHLRPHYL INCDT LT
FROM OF A REMNING
TO DAY FEET MG/L P UG/L PERCENT
74/03/26 11 15 0000 1.150 8.8
74/06/04 11 55 0000 0.426 13.5
-------
APPENDIX D
TRIBUTARY DATA
-------
NiTL = UT-OPH!C
- P 4 - L. 4 S V = '3 S 5
E 75/11/23
*-T! ON
050241
3b 06 50. 1 090
25 45.0
05 ' 15 -
J/5LACKFISH
XING 4T 5" Tt P CF
211120*
0000 F = £T
74/07/20
74/08/17
74/09/21
74/1O/19
74/12/22
75/01/18
75/02/23
75/03/08
75/03/22
75/04/U5
75/04/19
75/05/19
v -
04.Y F
13 45
10 20
09 15
09 20
14 30
OS 45
09 00
09 15
08 45
09 15
10 20
09 15
15 00
00630
NQ2EN03
N-T}T4L
MO/I.
0.024
0.032
1.700
0.040
0.504
0.024
0.200
0.384
0. 112
0.300
0.290
0.170
0.200
C')625
TjT KJ61
M
MG/L
2.000
5.000
2. 1C!
1.100
3.400
1.100
2.500
5.000
1.6CO
1.850
1.850
3.300
2.500
00610
K'H3-N
TOTAL
MG/ L
0.030
0.150
0.065
0.015
0.170
0.045
0. 136
0.040
0.315
0.110
0.055
0.07C
0.025
30671
pH3S-DI S
7-PTHO
MG/L P
0.130
0.420
0.300
0.055
0.110
0.140
0. 180
0.256
0.224
0.289
0.125
0.145
0.160
00665
PHOS-TJT
MG/L P
0.590
I. 100
0.980
0.200
0.560
0.370
0.790
2. 700
0.900
0.910
0.750
1.450
0.690
-------
'~ 75/11/23
7t/Ob/22
74/07/20
74/03/17
74/09/21
74/10/19
74/11/24
74/12/22
75/01/18
75/02/23
75/03/08
75/03/22
75/04/05
75/04/19
75/05/19
13 30
09 30
09 0?
09 00
14 30
11 15
09 30
09 20
09 00
08 30
09 00
10 00
09 30
14 30
D5J231
35 Of 30.0 090 27 27.0
5LAC<=!S- DI'CH
05 15 3CM-3NTS3N
:!SH L&K"
1^7 <">.2 '••! S Cc US 70
11EP&LES 2111204
4 0000 CEET DE°TH
006 30
\02f03
r._T-;74L
MG/L
0.232
0.0=2
0.45^
0.056
0.064
0.416
0.352
0.1 76
0.336
0.284
0.590
0.560
0.575
0. 200
006? 5
" T K J£L
N
MG/L
1.600
1.2CO
1.300
1.100
1. 500
1 .SCO
2.700
3.200
2.600
2. 500
3.SOO
2.6CO
2.000
006 1C
MH3-M
TOT&L
MG/L
C.300
0.105
0.195
0.095
0.050
0.04C
0. 160
0.112
0. 104
0.172
0.220
0.260
0.185
0.080
00671
PHOS-0! S
0"THO
MG/L P
0. 310
0.060
0.050
0.045
0.030
0.228
0.082
0.200
0. 104
0. 144
0.097
0.250
0.145
00665
PHGS-TJT
MG/L P
0.800
0.240
0.200
0.195
0.210
0.540
0.440
1.050
1.500
1.300
0.970
1.650
1.150
0.600
-------
N:TL ^-j
-Pi- Li
74/06/22
74/07/20
74/08/17
74/09/21
74/10/ 19
74/11/24
74/12/24
75/01/18
75/02/23
75/03/03
75/03/22
75/04/05
75/04/19
13
10
11
15
15
11
11
09
Id
09
10
10
10
10
0"
00
30
20
30
1 .1
•+0
00
30
10
35
00
00630
MG/L
35 39 51.0 090 23
006
••'G/L
OCilC
MG/L
00671
PH>-S-OI
•1G/L P
006o5
OHOS-TJT
1G/L P
1.P76
0. 340
0.600
H. 38C
o.oie
1 . 0 K
1. 184
0.176
0.660
0.308
0.546
o.sin
0.540
1 . 90'~>
1.9CO
1.500
3 . 1 CO
C.900
2.200
1.3CO
6.500
3.400
2.400
2.800
4.1M
2.700
C.2SC
C. 310
0.143
0.04C
0.02C
C.048
0.085
0.232
0.084
0. 168
0.235
0.2CO
0. 145
0.300
0.090
0.090
0.090
0. 105
0.416
0. 125
C.180
0.120
0.165
0.106
0.250
0.135
0.38J
0.290
0.440
0.660
0.320
l.uSO
0.480
O.tiSO
1.500
1.200
0.990
1.750
1.150
15 ="i
BAN.< 'J
211120^.
0000
-------
-------
APPENDIX E
PARAMETRIC RANKINGS OF LAKES
SAMPLED BY NES IN 1974
STATE OF ARKANSAS
-------
uA'A To Be. UStO I
COUtL LAist ivAi«c.
ObOi
0 b U 2 BLAC-\i-I>H LAK
ObUJ BLUE MOUNTAIN
ObO-» bULL SKOALS LAK.t
OoU3 LAKt LAThE-.INt
ODOb LAKt CMICOT
050'
ObOb LAKE
UsO-v oPANU LAK.fc
0510 LAKE
Obll MILLWOOD'LAKt
Oblel NIMNUD LAKt
Obl3 NORFOLK LAKt
OS1* LAKE OUACHITA
051S TAbLE KOCK LAKt
Obl6 GHiEEH'S LAKt
10T-L K
0 . ^C.t
0
0
0
0
0
o
o
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
.424
.ObB
.015
.02*
.1(32
.01*
.Ob,
.101
.024
.040
.03S
.015
.015
.022
.012
.*t'Jl AN
I N 0 * o N
0.3JU
1.
0.
0.
0.
0.
U.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
on.
160
3oO
180
4 = U
130
120
090
130
120
160
320
135
350
140
500- WHAN
MtAN bllC C h L 0 "< A
4-*o
48<»
343
451
486
419
454
"79
426
46b
469
356
389
410
370
.125
.000
.^
.667
.000
.050
.667
.667
.111
.776
.000
.321
. 144
.776
.875
19
a
3
14
13
12
13
62
10
14
15
3
4
9
3
.Y7b
.903
.,9b
.04^
.722
.300
.369
.86/
.889
.9b7
.633
.441
.344
.103
.762
13-
M I f. 0 U
14.900
12.
14.
15.
11.
14.
15.
14.
0.
14.
9.
8.
15.
15.
15.
15.
000
bOO
000
600
1300
000
ftOO
400
400
600
600
000
000
000
000
Dlab
0
u
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
U
0
0
0
0
0
MtUI AN
UK r.io
.OOi
.0^0
.010
.004
.006
.089
.004
.020
.021
.006
.006
.006
.005
.006
.007
.004
-------
PLKCtNT OF LAKES «aIT<-l
VALUcS (NUM^Fn
LAKt5 bITn nlGnt*
LAKE.
COL/C.
U301
0 = 0.
050J
050"
050 =
0506
0507
ObOb
0509
0510
0511
0512
0513
051"
0515
0516
LAKt NiAMt
EitAvEK LAKt
BLACKFISri LAKE
dLUE MOUNTAIN LAKt
cHJLL bnOALb LAKE
LAKt CATHERINE
LAKE CulCOT
OEGRAY RESERVOIR
LAKE ERLING
GRAND LAKE
LAKE HAMILTON
MILLWOOD LAKE
NIMROL) LAKE
NORFOLK LAKE
LAKE OUACHITA
TABLE ROCK LAKE
GREER'S LAKE
'< E 0 1 A N
10TAL P
63
0
.0
->d
-7
7
73
27
13
53
33
40
on
90
63
100
( 9 )
( 0)
( 3)
( 13)
( 7)
( 1)
t 11)
( 4)
( 2)
( 8)
( 5)
( 6)
( 12)
( 13)
( 9)
( IS)
MtJI AM
dl
0
47
13
40
7
77
90
100
77
90
53
33
60
20
67
( "» )
( 0)
( 7)
( *>
( 6)
( 1)
( 11)
( 13)
( 15)
( 11)
( 13)
< b)
( 5)
( 9)
< 3)
( 10)
3UO-
MtAN at
b7 (
U (
13 (
100 (
^7 (
7 (
t>0 (
40 (
20 (
53 (
33 (
27 (
93 (
60 (
73 (
87 (
Mt AN
:C CMLUKA
10)
J)
2)
la)
n
1)
9)
6)
3)
6)
5)
*>
14)
12)
11)
13)
B7
/
67
80
2?
33
47
40
0
53
20
13
100
73
60
93
( 13)
( 1)
( 10)
( 12)
( 4)
( 5)
( 7)
( 6)
( 0)
( b)
( 3)
( 2)
( 15)
( 11)
( 9)
( 14)
MlN OU
*0 (
73 (
57 (
17 (
bO (
47 (
17 (
57 (
100 (
67 (
U7 (
93 (
17 (
17 (
17 (
17 (
6)
11)
B)
0)
12)
7)
0)
8)
15)
10)
13)
14)
0)
0)
0)
U)
DISS 0-
5)
7)
12)
8)
6)
13)
------- |