U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
NATIONAL EUTROPHICATION SURVEY
WORKING PAPER SERIES
REPORT
ON
TORONTO ESERVOIR
AND WOODSON COUNTIES
KANSAS
EPA REGION VII
WORKING PAPER No, 523
CORVALLIS ENVIRONMENTAL RESEARCH LABORATORY - CORVALLIS, OREGON
and
ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING & SUPPORT LABORATORY - LAS VEGAS, NEVADA
699-440
-------
REPORT
ON
TORONTO RESERVOIR
AND WOODSON COUNTIES
KANSAS
EPA REGION VII
WORKING PAPER No, 523
WlTH THE COOPERATION OF THE
KANSAS DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND ENVIRONMENT
AND THE
KANSAS NATIONAL GUARD
APRIL, 1977
-------
CONTENTS
Page
Foreword ii
List of Kansas Study Reservoirs 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 10
V. Literature Reviewed 15
VI. Appendices 16
-------
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 freshwater 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 [5106 and §305(b)j 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
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 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 Kansas State Department of
Health and Environment for professional involvement, to the Kansas
National Guard for conducting the tributary sampling phase of
the Survey, and to those Kansas wastewater treatment plant opera-
tors who voluntarily provided effluent samples and flow data.
The staff of the Kansas Division of Environmental Health pro-
vided invaluable lake documentation and counsel during the Survey,
reviewed the preliminary reports, and provided critiques most use-
ful in the preparation of this Working Paper series.
Major General Edward R. Fry, the Adjutant General of Kansas,
and Project Officer Colonel Albin L. Lundquist, who directed the
volunteer efforts of the Kansas National Guardsmen, are also grate-
fully acknowledged for their assistance to the Survey.
-------
IV
NATIONAL EUTROPHICATION SURVEY
STUDY RESERVOIRS
e
STATE OF KANSAS
NAME COUNTY
Cedar Bluff Trego
Council Grove Morris
Elk City • Montgomery
Fall River Greenwood
John Redmond Coffey, Lyon
Kanopolis Ellsworth
Marion • Marion
Melvern Osage
Mil ford Clay, Geary
Norton Norton
Perry Jefferson
Pomona Osage
Toronto Greenwood, Woodson
Tuttle Creek Marshall, Potta-
watomie, Riley
Wilson Russell
-------
96M5'
96'00'
38*15—
38-00—
TORONTO
RESERVOIR
Map Location
TORONTO RESERVOIR
(g) Tributary Sampling Site
X Lake Sampling Site
* Sewage Treatment Facility
—^ Drainage Area Boundary
Land Subject to Inundation
Y> 20 Km.
10 Mi.
Scale
-------
TORONTO RESERVOIR
STORET NO. 2013
I. CONCLUSIONS
A. Trophic Condition:
Survey data indicate Toronto Reservoir is potentially
eutrophic. However, the reservoir becomes quite turbid during
periods of runoff, and primary productivity is intermittently
light-limited (Kring, 1977).
This water body ranked seventh in overall trophic quality
when the 15 Kansas reservoirs sampled in 1974 were compared
using a combination of six parameters*. Nine of the reservoirs
had less median total phosphorus, five had less and one had the
same median orthophosphorus, four had less median inorganic
nitrogen, three had less mean chlorophyll £, and eleven had
greater mean Secchi disc transparency.
B. Rate-Limi ting Nutrient:
The algal assay results indicate the reservoir was phosphorus
limited at the times the assay samples were taken (04/10/74 and
10/02/74).
The reservoir data also indicate phosphorus limitation at
those times. However, the low Secchi disc transparencies and
numbers of phytoplankton (page 7) indicate primary productivity
is light-limited at times rather than nutrient-limited as noted
above.
* See Appendix A.
-------
C. Nutrient Controllability:
1. Point sources—Point sources contributed 9.0% of the
total phosphorus load to Toronto Reservoir during the sampling
year. The Hamilton, Madison, and Toronto wastewater treatment
plants added 1.6%, 5.3%, and 2.0%, respectively. Septic tanks
serving shoreline dwellings and recreational areas contributed
an estimated 0.1% of the phosphorus load.
The present phosphorus loading of 2.26 g/m2/yr is nearly
twice that proposed by Vollenweider (Vollenweider and Dillon,
1974) as a eutrophic loading (see page 14). However, the median
hydraulic retention time of the reservoir is a short 22 days,
and Vollenweider's model probably is not applicable.
Even complete removal of phosphorus at the point sources
noted above would still leave a loading of 2.06 g/m2/yr; and
because primary productivity is light-limited part of the time,
point-source phosphorus control would not be expected to result
in a significant improvement in the trophic condition of Toronto
Reservoir.
2. Non-point sources—The phosphorus contributions of non-
point sources accounted for 91.0% of the total input to the reser-
voir during the sampling year. The Verdigris River contributed
31.1% of the total load; Walnut Creek, 17.5%; West Creek, 14.7%;
and the ungaged minor tributaries and immediate drainage added an
-------
estimated 26.9% of the total load.
The phosphorus export rates of the gaged tributaries were
quite low (page 13) and are comparable to the rates of the two
gaged tributaries of nearby Fall River Reservoir* (9 and 11
kg/km2/yr).
Working Paper No. 514.
-------
4
II. RESERVOIR AND DRAINAGE BASIN CHARACTERISTICS1"
A. Morphometry :
1. Surface area: 11.33 kilometers2.
2. Mean depth: 2.5 meters.
3. Maximum depth: 10.0 meters.
4. Volume: 28.73 x 106 m3.
5. Fourteen-year median hydraulic retention time: 22 days.
B. Tributary and Outlet:
(See Appendix C for flow data)
1. Tributaries -
Drainage Mean flow
Name area (km2)* (m3/sec)*
Verdigris River 795.1 5.79
Walnut Creek 331.5 2.63
West Creek 305.6 2.42
Minor tributaries &
immediate drainage - 491.2 3.88
Totals 1,923.4 14.72
2. Outlet -
Verdigris River 1,934.7** 14.42
C. Precipitation***:
1. Year of sampling: 114.5 centimeters.
2. Mean annual: 93.5 centimeters.
t Table of metric conversions—Appendix B.
tt Kring, 1977.
* For limits of accuracy, see Working Paper No. 175, "...Survey Methods,
1973-1976".
** Includes area of reservoir.
*** See Working Paper No. 175.
-------
III. WATER QUALITY SUMMARY
Toronto Reservoir was sampled three times during the open-water
season of 1974 by means of a pontoon-equipped Huey helicopter. Each
time, samples for physical and chemical parameters were collected
from two or more depths at two stations on the reservoir (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
and last visits, 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 6.1 meters at station 1
and 4.6 meters at station 2.
The sampling results are presented in full in Appendix D and
are summarized in the following table (the June nutrient samples
were not properly preserved and were not analyzed).
-------
PARAMETER
TEMP (C)
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)
A. SUMMARY OF PHYSICAL AND
1ST SAMPLING ( 4/10/74)
' SITES
RANGE
11.1 - 11.9
9.4 - 9.8
170. - 365.
8.2 - 8.2
MEAN MEDIAN
11.4 H.l
9.6 9.6
365.
8.2
168.
302.
8.2
166. - 186. 174.
0.060 - 0.067 0.074 0.068
0.011 - 0.014 0.013 0.013
0.420 - 0.520 0.466 0.470
0.050 - 0.100
0.200 - 0.600
0.470 - 0.610
0.072 0.060
0.380 0.400
0.538 0.530
0.846 0.890
0.670 - 1.020
12.0 - 13.5 12.8 12.8
0.3 - 0.3 0.3 0.3
CHEMICAL CHARACTERISTICS FOR TORONTO RESERVOIR
STO^ET CODE 2013
2ND SAMPLING ( 6/24/74)
2 SITtS
RANGE
24.1 - 26.2
2.0 - 9.6
327. - 340.
MEAN MEDIAN
25.0 24.9
6.3
335.
6.4
335.
7.9 - 8.0 7.9 7.9
««»«»» -»««««««««««»«»««»«««*»
««««»* _«««»«»«««««»««»««»»«««
_»««««»»«»*««»«»»«««««»
«<>»»»« _««*««««**•»»«»»««*«««•
2.3 - 2.3 2.3 2.3
0.3 - 0.3 0.3 0.3
3RD SAMPLING
-------
B. Biological characteristics:
1. Phytoplankton -
Sampling
Date
04/10/74
06/24/74
10/02/74
Dominant
Genera
1. Stephanodiscus sp.
2. Cryptomonas sp.
3. Chroomonas sp.
4. Melosira sp.
5. Ankistrodesmus sp.
Total
1. Cryptomonas sp.
2. Chroomonas sp.
3. Melosira sp.
4. Stephanodiscus sp.
Total
1. Anabaena sp.
2. Cryptomonas sp.
3. Chroomonas sp.
4. Melosira sp.
5. Chlamydomonas sp.
Other genera
Total
Algal Units
per ml
2,355
449
393
336
168
3,701
255
255
127
42
679
103
103
69
69
34
139
517
-------
8
2. Chlorophyll a -
C.
Sampling
Date
04/10/74
06/24/74
10/02/74
Station
Number
1
2
1
2
1
2
Chlorophyll a
(yg/1 )
12.0
13.5
2.3
2.3
3.5
5.9
Limiting Nutrient Study:
1. Autoclaved,
filtered, and nutrient
spiked -
a. April sample -
Spike (mg/1 )
Control
0.050 P
0.050 P + 1.
1.0 N
b. October
Spike (mg/1)
Control
0.050 P
0.050 P + 1.
1.0 N
Ortho P
Cone, (mg/1)
0.010
0.060
0 N 0.060
0.010
sample -
Ortho P
Cone, (mg/1)
0.025
0.075
0 N 0.075
0.025
Inorganic N
Cone, (mg/1)
0.465
0.465
1.465
1.465
Inorganic N
Cone, (mg/1)
0.415
0.415
1.415
1.415
Maximum yield
(mg/1 -dry wt.)
5.1
12.3
26.3
3.6
Maximum yield
(mg/1 -dry wt. )
3.6
8.5
18.3
3.7
-------
2. Discussion -
The control yields of the assay alga, Selenastrum capri-
cornutum, indicate that the potential primary productivity
of Toronto Reservoir was high at the times the samples were
taken (04/10/74 and 10/02/74). The lack of growth response
to the addition of only nitrogen and the significant increase
in yield when phosphorus alone was added, indicate that phos-
phorus was limiting at those times.
The reservoir data also indicate phosphorus limitation.
The mean inorganic nitrogen to orthophosphorus ratios were
41 to 1 in April and 48 to 1 in October and phosphorus limi-
tation would be expected. However, primary productivity is
light-limited rather than nutrient-limited part of the time
(Kring, 1977).
-------
10
IV. NUTRIENT LOADINGS
(See Appendix E for data)
For the determination of nutrient loadings, the Kansas 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 May, June, and July when two samples were collected.
Sampling was begun in October, 1974, and was completed in September,
1975.
Through an interagency agreement, stream flow estimates for the
year of sampling and a "normalized" or average year were provided by
the Kansas District Office of the U.S. Geological Survey for the
tributary sites nearest the reservoir.
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 shown are
those measured minus point-source loads, if any.
Nutrient loads for unsampled "minor tributaries and immediate
drainage" ("II" 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 II area in km2.
The operators of the Hamilton, Madison, and Toronto wastewater
treatment plants provided monthly effluent samples but could not
provide corresponding flow data. Therefore, nutrient loads were
* See Working Paper No. 175.
-------
11
estimated at 1.134 kg P and 3.401 kg N/capita/year, and flows were
estimated at 0.3785 m3/capita/day.
A. Waste Sources:
1. Known municipal* -
Name
Hamilton
Madison
Toronto
Pop.
Served
363
1,200
458
Treatment
stab, pond
tr. filter
tr. filter
Mean Flow
(mVd)
137.4
454.2
173.4
Receiving
Water
Willow Creek
Verdigris River
Verdigris River
arm of Reservoir
2. Known industrial - None
* Treatment plant questionnaires.
-------
12
B. Annual Total Phosphorus Loading - Average Year:
1. Inputs -
kg P/ % of
Source yr total
a. Tributaries (non-point load) -
Verdigris River 7,975 31.1
Walnut Creek 4,490 17.5
West Creek 3,760 14.7
b. Minor tributaries & immediate
drainage (non-point load) - 6,875 26.9
c. Known municipal STP's -
Hamilton 410 1.6
Madison 1,360 5.3
Toronto 520 2.0
d. Septic tanks* - 15 0.1
e. Known industrial - None
f. Direct precipitation** - 200 0.8
Total 25,605 100.0
2. Outputs -
Reservoir outlet - Verdigris River 35,940
3. Net annual P loss - 10,335 kg.
* Estimate based on 40 shoreline dwellings and two campgrounds; see
Working Paper No. 175.
** See Working Paper No. 175.
-------
13
C. Annual Total Nitrogen Loading - Average Year:
1. Inputs -
kg N/ % of
Source y_r total
a. Tributaries (non-point load) -
Verdigris River 222,380 34.9
Walnut Creek 114,615 18.0
West Creek 110,145 17.3
b. Minor tributaries & immediate
drainage (non-point load) - 169,955 26.7
c. Known municipal STP's -
Hamilton 1,235 0.2
Madison 4,080 0.6
Toronto 1,560 0.3
d. Septic tanks* - 565 0.1
e. Known industrial - None
f. Direct precipitation** - 12,230 1.9
Total 636,765 100.0
2. Outputs -
Reservoir outlet - Verdigris River 661,285
3. Net annual N loss - 24,520 kg.
D. Non-point Nutrient Export by Subdrainage Area:
Tributary kg P/km2/yr kg N/km2/yr
Verdigris River 10 280
Walnut Creek 14 346
West Creek 12 360
* Estimate based on 40 shoreline dwellings and two campgrounds; see Working
Paper No. 175.
** See Working Paper No. 175.
-------
14
E. Mean Nutrient Concentrations in Ungaged Stream:
Mean Total P Mean Total N
Tributary Cone, (mg/1) Cone, (mg/1)
Dry Creek 0.053 1.092
F. 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
Total Accumulated Total Accumulated
grams/m2/yr 2.26 loss* 56.2 loss*
Vollenweider phosphorus loadings
(g/m2/yr) based on mean depth and 14-year median
hydraulic retention time of Toronto Reservoir:
"Dangerous" (eutrophic loading) 1.22
"Permissible" (oligotrophic loading) 0.61
* There was an apparent loss of nutrients during the sampling year. This
may have been due to unknown and unsampled point sources discharging
directly to the reservoir but more likely was due to insufficient outlet
sampling in relation to the short hydraulic retention time of the reser-
voir.
-------
15
V. LITERATURE REVIEWED
Kring, R. Lynn, 1977. Personal communication (revised reservoir
morphometry; primary productivity). KS Dept. of Health &
Environment, Topeka.
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.
-------
VI. APPENDICES
16
APPENDIX A
LAKE RANKINGS
-------
LAKE DATA TO BE USED IN RANKINGS
LAKE
CODE LAKE NAME
2001 CEDAR BLUFF RESERVOIR
2002 COUNCIL GROVE
2003 ELK CITY
2004 FALL RIVER RESERVOIR
2005 JOHN REDMOND RESERVOIR
2006 KANOPOLIS RESERVOIR
2007 MARION RESERVOIR
2008 MELVERN RESERVOIR
2009 MILFORO RESERVOIR
2010 NORTON RESERVOIR
2011 PERRY RESERVOIR
2012 POMONA RESERVOIR
2013 TORONTO RESERVOIR
2014 TUTTLE CREEK RESERVOIR
2015 WILSON RESERVOIR
MEDIAN
TOTAL P
0.017
0.069
0.030
0.053
0.118
0.056
0.052
0.034
0.079
0.122
0.055
- 0.040
0.067
0.162
0.023
MEDIAN
INORG N
0.055
0.830
0.590
0.470
1.250
0.640
0.430
0.265
0.710
0.110
0.970
1.240
0.425
0.970
0.265
500-
MEAN SEC
431.667
485.889
490.400
488.667
492.667
487.000
483.667
459.111
466.333
476.750
478.571
481.333
488.500
470.667
445.222
MEAN
CHLORA
4.217
9.789
3.212
7.683
9.467
16.033
12.400
30.400
18.883
21.360
5.614
8.312
6.583
11.278
8.867
15-
MIN DO
10.800
10.400
14.000
9.200
8.200
10.200
9.000
14.400
12.800
8.000
13.400
13.000
13.000
13.600
13.400
MEDIAN
DISS ORThO P
0.004
0.028
0.003
0.016
. 0.066
0.011
0.010
0.007
0.036
0.036
0.017
0.021
0.011
0.067
0.004
-------
LAKES RANKED 8Y INDEX NOS
RANK LAKE CODE LAKE NAME INDEX NO
i 2001 CEDAR BLUFF RESERVOIR 539
2 2015 WILSON RESERVOIR 439
3 2007 MARION RESERVOIR 357
4 2003 ELK CITY 350
5 2004 FALL RIVER RESERVOIR 328
6 2008 MELVERN RESERVOIR 326
7 2013 TORONTO RESERVOIR 303
8 2010 NORTON RESERVOIR 292
9 2011 PERRY RESERVOIR 279
10 2006 KANOPOLIS RESERVOIR 271
11 2012 POMONA RESERVOIR 267
12 2002 COUNCIL GROVE 230
13 2009 MILFORD RESERVOIR 214
14 2005 JOHN REDMOND RESERVOIR 164
15 2014 TUTTLE CREEK RESERVOIR 139
-------
PERCENT OF LAKES WITH HIGHER VALUES (NUMBER OF LAKES WITH HIGHER VALUES)
LAKE
CODE LAKE NAME
2001 CEDAR BLUFF RESERVOIR
2002 COUNCIL GROVE
2003 ELK CITY
2004 FALL RIVER RESERVOIR
2005 JOHN REDMOND RESERVOIR
2006 KANOPOLIS RESERVOIR
2007 MARION RESERVOIR
200fl MELVERN RESERVOIR
2009 MILFORO RESERVOIR
2010 NORTON RESERVOIR
2011 PERRY RESERVOIR
2012 POMONA RESERVOIR
2013 TORONTO RESERVOIR
2014 TUTTLE CREEK RESERVOIR
2015 WILSON RESERVOIR
MEDIAN
TOTAL P
100 <
29 <
86 <
57 (
14 (
43 (
64 (
79 (
21 1
7 1
50 1
71 <
36 I
0 *
93 l
: 14)
: 4)
; 12)
: 8)
: 2)
: 6)
! 9)
; ID
: 3)
i i)
I 7)
! 10)
; 5>
( 0)
I 13)
MEDIAN
INORG N
100 <
29 (
50 (
57 <
0 (
43 <
64 1
82 1
36 1
93 1
18 <
7 1
71 (
18
82 i
; 14)
: 4)
: 7)
: 8)
: o)
[ 6)
! 9)
: ID
[ 5)
I 13)
[ 2)
( 1)
( 10)
I 2)
( 11)
500-
MEAN SEC
100 (
36 <
7 (
14 <
0 (
29 (
43 (
86 (
79 <
64 i
57 1
50 1
21 1
71 i
93 i
: 14)
: 5)
: i)
2)
: o)
: 4)
: 6)
; 12)
: ID
: 9)
! 3)
[ 7)
[ 3)
C 10)
; 13)
MEAN
CHLORA
93 (
43 (
100 (
71 <
50 (
21 (
29 <
0 (
14 (
7 1
86 1
64 1
79 1
36 i
57 1
: 13)
6)
: 14)
10)
: 7)
: 3)
; 4>
; o)
; 2)
[ i)
I 12)
[ 9)
: ID
[ 5)
[ 8)
15-
MIN DO
57 <
64 <
7 (
79 <
93 (
71 (
86 (
0 (
50 (
100 1
25 1
39 1
39 1
14 I
25 I
: 8)
: 9)
: i)
: ID
: 13)
: 10)
: 12)
: o>
: 7)
I 14)
[ 3)
[ S)
I 5)
t 2)
( 3)
MEDIAN
01 SS ORTHO P
89 (
29 (
100 (
50 <
7 <
64 <
71 (
79 <
14 1
21 i
43 1
36 <
57 1
0 <
89 <
12)
4)
: 14)
: 7)
: i)
: 9)
: 10)
: ID
; 2)
[ 3)
: 6)
[ 5)
[ 8)
[ 0)
( 12)
INDEX
NO
539
230
350
328
164
271
357
326
214
292
279
: 267
303
139
439
-------
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
-------
TRIBUTARY FLO* INFORMATION FOR KANSAS
OS/03/76
LAKE CODE 2013
TORONTO
TOTAL
TRIBUTARY
201JA1
2013A2
2013ril
2013C1
2013ZZ
DRAINAGE AREA OF LAKE (S3 KM) 1890.
SUB-DRAINAGE
AREAISQ KM)
1934.7
795.1
331.5
305.6
458.4
,7
NORMALIZED FLOWS(CMS)
JAN
9. 06
2.66
1.25
1.19
1.8-+
FtB
e.50
3.40
1.59
1.47
?.35
MAR
17.84
6.80
3.40
3.11
4.31
APR
16.71
9.06
4.25
3.96
6.23
MAY
16.41
9.63
4.81
4.25
6.51
JUN
27.47
10.76
4.25
3.96
6.80
JUL
13.31
8.50
3.96
3.68
5.66
AUG
4.81
3.40
1.42
1.25
2.35
SEP
17.56
4.81
1.98
1.81
3.11
OCT
15.57
4.81
2.12
1.98
3.11
NOV
14.72
3.11
1.30
1.19
2.01
DEC
9. 06
2.41
1.19
1.08
1.70
MEAN
14.42
5.79
2.63
2.42
3.88
TOTAL DRAINAGE AREA OF LAKE = 1890.7
SUM OF SUB-DRAINAGE AREAS = 1890.7
MEAN MONTHLY FLOWS AND DAILY FLOWS(CMS)
TRIBUTARY MONTH YEAR
2013A1
MEAN FLOW DAY
FLOW DAY
2013A2
10
11
12
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
74
74
74
75
75
75
75
75
75
75
75
75
74
74
74
75
75
75
75
75
75
75
75
75
SUMMARY
TOTAL FLO* IN = 176.30
TOTAL FLOW OUT =» 173.02
FLOW DAY
FLOW
6.116
63.996
22.965
13.309
39.644
29.733
25.060
12.431
56.351
2.662
0.396
0.269
2.010
8.778
3.398
4.243
7.929
6.513
7.079
5.663
24.636
0.963
0.038
0.125
24
9
14
9
11
12
16
3
16
12
28
20
24
9
14
9
11
12
16
3
16
12
28
20
0.510
30.299
28.600
28.034
58.899
19.765
18.123
6.711 18
59.749 29
0.850 30
0.368
0.269
11.327
13.989
11.723
9.911
8.495
11.610
9.345
3.681 18
5.380 29
0.991 30
0.028
0.127
18.066
58.899
0.269
1.699
4o248
0.311
-------
TRIBUTARY FLOW INFORMATION FOR KANSAS
05/03/76
LAKE CODE 2013
TOKONTO
MEAN MONTHLY FLOWS AND DAILY FLO»S
TRI6UTARY
201331
2013C1
2013ZZ
MONTH
YEAr?
10
11
12
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
a
9
10
11
12
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
7<*
70
74
75
75
75
75
75
75
75
75
75
74
74
74
75
75
75
75
75
75
75
75
75
74
74
74
75
75
75
75
75
75
75
75
75
MEAN FLOW DAY
FLO« DAY
FLO* DAY
FLO*
0.90*1
3.681
1.699
1.982
3.681
3.393
3.398
2.747
9.911
0.453
0.037
0.054
0.850
3.398
1.557
1.869
3.398
3.115
3.115
2.549
9.061
0.396
0.034
0.043
1.331
5.947
2.435
2.832
5.380
4.531
4.814
3.681
15.574
0.651
0.062
0.088
24
9
14
9
11
12
16
3
16
12
28
20
24
9
14
9
11
12
16
3
16
12
28
20
2.039
2.265
2.832
2.690
2.549
7.532
1.641
0.425
0.461
0.170
0.003
0.0
2.520
2.520
2.549
2.209
2.12^
10.194
1.642
1.019
1.218
0.218
0.011
0.011
18
29
30
16
29
30
0.425
0.085
0.006
9.061
0.878
0.116
-------
APPENDIX D
PHYSICAL and CHEMICAL DATA
-------
STORET RETRIEVAL DATE 76/05/03
301301
37 44 50.0 095 55 29.0 3
TORONTO RESER\/OI*
20207 KANSAS
100491
DATE
FROM
TO
74/04/10
74/06/24
74/10/02
TIME
OF
DAY
15
15
15
13
13
13
13
13
15
15
15
30
30
30
55
55
55
55
55
20
20
20
DEPTH
FEET
0000
0005
0015
0000
0005
0010
0015
0020
0000
0005
0010
00010
WATER
TEMP
CENT
11.1
11.1
11.1
26.2
25.7
25.0
24.3
24.1
16.7
16.7
16.7
00665
DATE
FROM
TO
74/04/10
74/06/24
74/10/02
TIME
OF
DAY
15
15
15
13
15
15
15
30
30
30
55
20
20
20
DEPTH
FEET
0000
0005
0015
0000
0000
0005
0010
PHOS-TOT
MG/L P
0
0
0
0
0
0
.068
.067
.060
.069
.050
.069
00300
DO
MG/L
9.
9.
6.
6.
6.
6.
9.
8.
8.
8.
32217
00077 00094
TRANSP CNDUCTVY
SECCHI FIELD
INCHES MICROMHO
12
6
8
8 10
8
4
4
6
0 12
2
0
00031
365
365
365
338
335
334
332
327
257
258
258
11EPALES 2111202
0027 FEET DEPTH CLASS 00
00400 00410 00610 00625 00630 00671
PH T ALK NH3-N TOT KJEL N02&N03 PHOS-DIS
CAC03 TOTAL N N-TOTAL ORTHO
SU
8.
8.
8.
8.
7.
7.
7.
7.
7.
7.
7.
20
20
20
00
90
90
90
90
80
90
90
MG/L MG/L MG/L MG/L MG/L P
167 0.060 0.400 0.490 0.013
166 0.090 0.200 0.520 0.012
168 0.060 0.200 0.470 0.014
114 0.040 0.300 0.380 0.007
113 0.050 0.200K 0.380 0.009
112 0.020K 0.200K 0.250 0.003
CHLRPHYL INCDT LT
A
UG/L
12.
2.
3.
REMNING
PERCENT
0
3
5
K VALUE KNOWN TO BE
LESS THAN INDICATED
-------
STORE! RETRIEVAL DATE 76/05/03
201302
37 46 03.0 095 56 03.0 3
TORONTO RESERVOIN
20207 KANSAS
100391
11EPALES 2111202
0008 FEET DEPTH CLASS 00
DATE
FROM
TO
74/04/11
74/06/24
74/10/02
DATE
FROM
TO
74/04/H
74/06/24
74/10/02
TIME DEPTH
OF
DAY FEET
10 15 0000
10 15 0005
14 20 0000
14 20 0005
15 45 0000
15 45 0005
15 45 0010
15 45 0015
TIME DEPTH
OF
DAY FEET
10 15 0000
10 15 0005
14 20 0000
15 45 0000
15 45 0005
15 45 0010
15 45 0015
00010
MATER
TEMP
CENT
11.9
11.9
24.9
24.8
16.5
16.5
16.5
16.5
00665
PHOS-TOT
MG/L P
0.086
0.087
0.066
0.060
0.061
0.066
00300
DO
MG/L
9.4
2.0
6.0
7.8
8.2
6.0
8.0
32217
CHLRPHYL
A
UG/L
13.5
2.3
5.9
00077 00094
TRANSP CNOUCTVY
SECCHI FIELD
INCHES MICSOMHO
12
11
12
00031
INCDT LT
REMNING
PERCENT
170
245
340
336
271
270
272
271
00400 00410 00610 00625 00630 00671
PH T ALK NH3-N TOT KJEL N02&N03 PHOS-DIS
CAC03 TOTAL N N-TOTAL ORTHO
SU
8.20
8.20
8.00
7.90
7.90
7.90
7.89
7.85
MG/L MG/L MG/L MG/L MG/L P
183 0.050 0.600 0.420 0.011
186 0.100 0.500 0.430 0.013
121 0.020K 0.200 0.370 0.005
121 0.020 0.200K 0.380 0.007
122 0.020K 0.200K 0.370 0.013
118 0.020 0.600 0.380 0.015
K VALUE KNOWN TO BE
LESS THAN INDICATED
-------
APPENDIX E
TRIBUTARY AND WASTEWATER
TREATMENT PLANT DATA
-------
STORE! RETRIEVAL DATE 76/05/04
DATE TIME DEPTH .N02S.N03
FROM OF
TO DAY
7^/10/2^
74/11/09
74/12/14
75/01/09
75/02/11
75/03/12
75/04/16
75/05/03
75/05/18
75/06/16
75/06/29
75/07/12
75/07/30
75/08/28
75/09/20
09
09
08
13
09
10
09
14
10
13
17
10
09
13
10
12
00
45
30
30
45
15
00
50
30
20
30
45
15
05
2013A1
37 42 20.0 095 54 20.0 4
VERDIGRIS RIVER
20 15 FREOOMA
0/TOKONTO RESERVOIR 100491
bRDG ON SEC RO 1826 1.5 M NH OF COYVILLE
11EP4LES 2111204
0000 FEET DEPTH CLASS 00
0
c,
0
G
0
a
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
630 00625
N03 TOT KJEL
TAL N
/L MG/L
.312 0.6CC
.184 2.300
.296
.368
.375
.376 (
.315 t
.130
.107
.000
.700
.100
.500
'.100
.200
.300
.400 0.650
.375 0.850
.330 0.650
.315 0.550
.230 0.675
.310 1.000
00610 00671 00665
Nn3-M PhOS-DIS PnOS-TOT
TOTAL ORTMO
MG/L
A
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
.015
.440
.030
.024
.048
.032
.035
.060
.075
.015
.045
.055
.025
.015
MG/L P
G
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
.015
.045
.020
.005
.008
.OOB
.010
.010
.010
.020
.025
.025
.020
.025
.025
MG/L P
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
.060
.100
.060
.030
.090
.050
.050
.060
.070
.100
.140
.090
.090
.110
.105
-------
STORET RETRIEVAL DATE 76/os/04
DATE TIME DEPTH N02&N03
FROM OF
TO DAY FEET
74/10/24
74/1 1/09
74/12/14
75/01/09
75/02/11
75/03/12
75/04/16
75/05/03
75/05/18
75/06/16
75/06/29
75/07/12
75/07/30
75/08/28
75/09/20
10 20
10 30
10 05
14 55
10 50
12 05
10 45
16 00
13 10
15 00
18 35
12 15
11 45
14 50
12 10
2013A2
37 53 30.0 096 00 43.0 4
VEROIGRIS RIVER
20 7.5 VIRGIL
T/TO*\>NTO RESERVOI* 100391
6ROG ON LGriT OTY rij 2. a MI S Of VI-GIi_
11EPALES 2111204
0000 FEET DEPTH CLASS 00
0630
&N03
OTAL
G/L
0.11?
0.352
0.336
0.283
0.46^
0.400
0.270
0.345
0.650
0.560
0.740
0.840
0.315
0.105
0.250
00625
TOT KJEL
N
MG/L
o.coo
o.eoo
1.000
1.100
0.700
0.800
0.650
1.200
1.750
0.700
C.700
0.550
0.900
0.550
0.700
00610
NH3-N
TOTAL
Mii/L
0.020
0.025
0.020
0.096
0.032
0.02<»
0.030
0.055
0.0^0
0.020
C.025
0.02S
0.035
0.012
0.030
00671
PHOS-OIS
ORTr-iO
MG/L P
C.OC5
0.025
0.010
0.010
0.008K
o.ooeK
0.005
0.010
0.010
0.030
0.020
0.015
0.010
0.005
0.015
00665
PHOS-TOT
MG/L P
0.040
0.060
0.060
0.050
0.050
0.030
0.050
0.060
0.060
0.100
0.070
0.050
0.050
0.030
0.040
K VALUE KNOWN TO BE
LESS THAN INDICATED
-------
570RET RETRIEVAL DATE 76/05/04
201331
37 49 20.0 096 05 20.0 4
WALNUT CREEK
20 7.5 NEAL
T/TOKONTO RESERVOIR 100391
COUNTY RD BRDG 1 MI S OF NEAL
IIE^ALES 2111204
0000 FEET DEPTH CLASS 00
DATE TIME DEPTH N02&N03
FROM OF
TO DAY FEET
7-/10/24
74/11/09
74/12/14
75/01/09
75/02/11
75/03/12
75/04/16
75/05/03
75/05/18
75/06/16
75/06/29
75/07/12
75/07/30
75/08/28
75/09/20
09 45
09 35
09 25
14 00
10 05
11 20
10 00
15 20
11 25
14 15
13 00
11 00
10 45
13 50
11 20
0630
&N03
OT4L
G/L
O.Ofc^
0.320
0.192
0.192
0.320
0.168
0.090
0.070
0.2<*0
0.230
0.030
0.025
0.010
0.010
0.095
00625
TOT KJEL
Nj
MG/L
.300
.200
.000
.300
.000
0.500
1.750
0.350
1.450
1.150
2.0CO
0.850
0.600
1.000
1.000
00610
NH3-N
TOTAL
MG/L
O.C30
0.345
0.015
0.072
0.024
0.012
0.025
0.030
0.025
0.085
C.080
0.020
0.020
0.015
0.095
00671
PHOS-DIS
ORTHO
MG/L °
C.025
0.025
0.020
0.020
0.008K
0.008K
0.005
C.010
0.015
0.020
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.030
0.025
00665
PHOS-TOT
MG/L P
0.052
0.040
0.080
0.070
0.060
0.030
0.050
0.050
0.070
0.090
0.060
0.070
0.070
0.120
0.110
K VALUE KNOWN TO 6E
LESS THAN INDICATED
-------
STORE! RETRIEVAL DATE 76/05/0'*
DATE TIME DEPT* N025.N03
FRuM OF"
TO OAf FEET
74/10/24
74/11/09
74/12/14
75/01/09
75/02/11
75/03/12
75/04/16
75/05/03
75/05/18
75/06/16
75/06/29
75/07/12
75/07/30
75/08/28
75/09/20
10
10
09
14
10
11
10
15
12
14
18
12
11
14
11
05
?5
50
25
30
50
30
45
55
40
20
00
30
28
50
2013C1
37 53 <«S.O 096 02 45.0 4
*E5T C^EE*
20 7.5 VIRGIL
T/TOwuNTO SESERVUlK
atfDG ON LGhT OTY RL)
11EPALES
0000 FEET DEPTH
1003^1
I N» OF OUl.NCr
2111204
CLASS 00
0630
5.N03
OTAL
G/L
0.02<»
0.5*0
0.336
0.320
o.^^a
0.268
0.190
0.290
0.140
0.450
0.175
0.095
0.125
0.100
0.340
00625
TOT KJEL
N
MG/L
1.700
0.900
1.400
1.900
0.900
0.500
0.600
1.400
1.900
1.050
0.662
1.000
0.775
0.550
0.500
00610
NH3-N
TOTAL
MU/L
0.030
C.375
C.260
0.040
0.024
0.012
0.005
0.035
0.025
0.080
0.025
0.020
0.055
0.005K
0.045
00671
PriOS-OIS
ORTHO
MG/L P
0.010
0.020
0.020
0.025
0.008K
0.008K
0.005K
0.005
0.005
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.005
0.005
0.010
00665
PHOS-TOT
MG/L P
0.055
0.030
0.120
0.105
0.050
0.020
0.040
0.070
0.060
0.070
0.055
0.040
0.055
0.050
0.050
K VALUE KNOWN TO BE
LESS THAN INDICATED
-------
STORET RETRIEVAL DATE 76/05/04
DATE TIME DEPTH N02J.N03
FROM OF
TO DAY FEET
74/10/24
74/11/09
74/12/14
75/01/09
75/02/11
75/03/12
75/04/16
75/05/03
75/05/18
75/06/16
75/06/29
75/07/12
75/07/30
75/08/28
75/09/20
10 40
10 55
10 25
15 16
11 10
12 25
11 25
16 00
13 30
15 20
18 55
12 45
12 15
15 10
12 30
201301
37 52 50.0 096 57 55.0 4
ORf C*EEK
20 7.5 QUINCY
T/TORONTO RESERvOIhc 100291
BROG ON LGrtT OTY RD 1.1 Ml E OF QUINCY
UE^ALES 2111204
0000 FEET DEPTH CLASS 00
0630
IJ.N03
OTAL
iG/L
0.008
0.672
0.256
C.296
0.590
0.368
0.220
0.125
0.300
0.370
0.135
0.010
0.010
0.040
0.025
00625
TOT KJF.L
N
MG/L
1.200
0.900
0.900
1.100
0.600
0.400
0.800
0.250
1.250
0.850
0.650
0.600
1.150
1.600
0.700
00610
NH3-N
TOTAL
MG/L
O.C25
0.060
0.035
0.0^8
0.016
0.012
0.070
0.015
0.045
0.025
0.030
0.050
0.040
0.010
0.015
00671
PHOS-DIS
ORTnO
MG/L P
0.035
0.010
0.015
0.010
O.OOHK
0.006K
0.005
0.005K
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
C.010
0.010
00665
PHOS-TOT
MG/L P
0.100
0.010
0.060
0.060
0.050
0.030
0.030
0.030
0.060
0.060
0.040
0.050
0.070
0.090
K VALUE KNOWN TO BE
LESS THAN INDICATED
-------
STORET RETRIEVAL DATE 76/05/04
2013AA TF2013AA P001200
38 09 00.0 096 08 00.0 4
MADISON
20 GREENWOOD CO.
T/TORONTO RES. 100392
VERDIGRIS RIVER
11EPALES 2141204
0000 FEET DEPTH CLASS 00
DATE
FROM
TO
75/06/04
75/06/30
75/07/17
75/08/05
75/09/19
75/10/15
75/10/30
75/11/19
75/12/05
76/01/16
76/02/04
76/02/25
00630
TIME DEPTH N02&N03
OF N-TOTAL
DAY FEET
11
14
10
15
14
15
11
14
11
11
15
14
30
00
00
00
00
30
15
00
30
30
00
00
MG/L
3.
4.
9.
23.
28.
9.
17.
15.
12.
4.
450
200
600
000
000
300
500
400
600
000
00625
TOT KJEL
N
MG/L
22.000
15.000
17.000
15.500
14.800
27.000
30.000
29.000
32.000
38.000
25.000
27.500
00610
NH3-N
TOTAL
MG/L
4.
2.
1.
4.
10.
10.
10.
12.
20C
800
700
400
000
500
500
000
00671
PHOS-DIS
ORTHO
MG/L
4.
6.
7.
7.
10.
10.
8.
11.
6.
8.
P
200
900
500
500
000
500
700
500
200
300
00665 50051 50053
PHOS-TOT FLOW CONDUIT
RATE FLOW-MGD
MG/L P INST MGD MONTHLY
7
10
8
10
10
12
10
16
13
11
.100
.500
.100
.500
.600
.000
.500
.500
.500
.500
-------
STOPET RETRIEVAL DATE 76/05/04
DATE
PROM
TO
75/02/11
CP(T>-
75/02/11
75/03/27
CP(T)-
75/03/27
75/04/30
CP(T>-
75/04/30
75/05/28
CP(T>-
75/05/28
75/06/24
CP(T)-
75/06/24
75/07/22
CP < T ) -
75/07/22
75/08/08
CP(T)-
75/oa/oa
75/09/26
CP(T)-
75/09/26
75/10/22
CP-
75/10/22
75/11/21
CP(T)-
75/11/21
75/12/01
CP(T)-
75/12/01
75/12/22
CP(T)-
75/12/22
00630
TIME DEPTH N02&N03
OF N-TOTAL
DAY FEET MG/L
11
16
11
16
11
16
11
16
11
16
11
16
11
16
11
16
11
16
11
16
11
16
11
16
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
5
5
93
10
12
22
24
22
9
10
9
8
.040
.280
.000
.500
.600
.500
.000
.000
.000
.500
.800
.800
00625
TOT KJEL
N
MG/L
1
3
7
1
2
5
8
10
27
21
15
29
.400
.900
.000
.800
.400
.300
.900
.500
.000
.000
.000
.000
2C13AB TF2013A8 P000458
37 46 00.0 095 57 00.0 4
TORONTO
20 7.5 TORONTO
T/TORONTO RES. 100391
VERDISRIS RIVER
11EPALES 2141204
0000 FEET DEPTH CLASS 00
00610 00671 00665 50051 50053
NH3-N PHOS-OIS PHOS-TOT FLOW CONDUIT
TOTAL ORTHO RATE FLOrf-M&Q
MG/L MG/L P MG/L P IMST HGD MONTHLY
0.100
7.300
1.800 2.400
0.360 0.980 1.500
0.310 4.500 5.600
0.240 2.400 2.400
0.050 2.630 2.630
0.050K 4.600 5.300
0.290 4.850 6.100
0.160 7.200 7.700
5.800 9.200 9.200
4.700 8.100
4.700 6.800
7.900
12.000
3.400 9.800
K VALUE KNOWN TO 8E
LESS THAN INDICATED
-------
STORE! RETRIEVAL DATE 76/05/04
DATE TIME DEPTH N02&N03
FROM OF
TO DAY FEET
75/05/13 13 30
75/07/25 14 00
75/08/04 09 00
75/09/10 10 00
2013CA P020UCA P000363
37 59 35.0 096 09 10.0 4
HAMILTON
20 GREENWOOD COUNTY
T/TORONTO RES 100391
BILLOW CREEK
11EPALES 2141204
oooo FEET DEPTH CLASS oo
0630
&N03
OTAL
G/L
0.050
0.075
0.025
0.075
00625
TOT KJEL
N
MG/L
6.500
3.600
21.500
4.900
00610
NH3-N
TOTAL
MG/L
0.080
0.025K
0.075
0.110
00671
PHOS-DIS
ORTHO
MG/L P
2.000
0.980
1.700
1.400
00665
PHOS-TOT
MG/L P
2.400
i.eoo
3.500
i.eoo
50051
FLO*
RATE
INST MGD
500S3
CONDUIT
FLOW-MGD
MONTHLY
K VALUE KNOWN TO BE
LESS THAN INDICATED
------- |