U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
NATIONAL EUTROPHICATION SURVEY
WORKING PAPER SERIES
REPORT
ON
BRUIN LAKE
TENSAS PARISH
LOUISIANA
EPA REGION VI
WORKING PAPER No, 532
CORVALLIS ENVIRONMENTAL RESEARCH LABORATORY - CORVALLIS, OREGON
and
ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING & SUPPORT LABORATORY - LAS VEGAS, NEVADA
•&G.P.O. 699-440
-------
REPORT
ON
BRUIN LAKE
TENSAS PARISH
LOUISIANA
EPA REGION VI
WORKING PAPER No, 532
WlTH THE COOPERATION OF THE
LOUISIANA WILD LIFE AND FISHERIES COMMISSION
AND THE
LOUISIANA NATIONAL GUARD
MARCH, 1977
-------
REPORT ON BRUIN LAKE
TENSAS PARISH, LOUISIANA
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. 532
OFFICE OF RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT
U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
March 1977
-------
CONTENTS
Page
Foreword ii
List of Louisiana Study Lakes iv
Lake and Drainage Area Map v
Sections
I. Introduction 1
II. Conclusions 1
III. Lake Characteristics 3
IV. Lake Water Quality Summary 4
V. Literature Reviewed 9
VI. Appendices 10
-------
11
FOREWORD
The National Eutrophicatlon 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, 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 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
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
[§303(c)], clean lakes [§314(a,b)L and water quality monitoring
[§106 and §305(b)] activities mandated by the Federal Water
Pollution Control Act Amendments of 1972.
-------
m
Beyond the single lake analysis, broader based correlations
between nutrient concentrations (and loading) and trophic 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 Louisiana Wild Life and
Fisheries Commission, Division of Water Pollution Control for
professional involvement, to the Louisiana National Guard for
conducting the tributary sampling phase of the Survey, and to
those Louisiana wastewater treatment plant operators who pro-
vided effluent samples and flow data.
Robert A. Lafleur, Chief; J. Dale Givens, Assistant Chief;
Lewis R. Still, Biologist; Louis Johnson, Biologist; Lee Cau-
barreaux, Biologist; barrel 1 Reed, Engineer; Dempsey Alford,
Biologist; and Elwood Goodwin, Water Quality Control Technician,
all of the Louisiana Wild Life and Fisheries Commission, Division
of Water Pollution Control reviewed the preliminary reports and
provided critiques most useful in the preparation of this
Working Paper Series.
Major General O'Neil Daigle, Jr., the Adjutant General of
Louisiana, and Project Officer Colonel Lawrence P. Dupre, who
directed the volunteer efforts of the Louisiana National Guards-
men, are also gratefully acknowledged for their assistance to
the Survey.
-------
IV
NATIONAL EUTROPHICATION SURVEY
STUDY LAKES
STATE OF LOUISIANA
LAKE NAME
Anacoco Lake
Lake Bistineau
Black Bayou
Black Lake
Bruin Lake
Bundicks Lake
Caddo Lake
Cocodrie Lake
Cocodrie Lake (Lower)
Concordia Lake
Cotile Lake
Cross Lake
D'Arbonne Lake
False River Lake
Indian Creek Reservoir
Saline Lake
Turkey Creek Lake
Lake Vernon
Lake Verret
PARISH
Vernon
Bienville, Webster
Caddo
Natchitoches and Red River
Tensas
Beauregard
Caddo (Menon and Harrison
in Texas)
Concordia
Rapides
Concordia
Rapides
Caddo
Union
Pointe Coupee
Rapides
LaSalle
Franklin
Vernon
Assumption
-------
-31'58
Map Location
-arse'
0
i
0
BRUIN LAKE
X Lake Sampling Site
1 ? ? 1 Km.
1c i 2 Mi-
Scale
-------
REPORT ON BRUIN LAKE, LOUISIANA
STORE! NO. 2202
I. INTRODUCTION
Bruin Lake was included in the National Eutrophication Survey
(NES) as a water body of interest to the Louisiana Stream Control
Commission and Louisiana Wild Life and Fisheries Commission. Tri-
butaries and nutrient sources were not sampled, and this report
relates only to the data obtained from lake sampling.
II. CONCLUSIONS
A. Trophic Condition:*
\
Bruin Lake is classified as eutrophic i.e., nutrient
rich and highly productive based upon Survey data. Whether
such nutrient enrichment is to be considered beneficial or
deleterious is determined by its actual impact upon designated
beneficial water uses of each lake.
Potential for primary production as measured by algal assay
control yield was high, and Secchi disc visibility was low.
Dissolved oxygen levels were depleted below 9 meters during
summer sampling at Station 01. Chlorophyll a^ levels ranged
from 10.7 yg/1 in the spring to 22.9 yg/1 in the summer with a
mean of 16.4 yg/1.
*See Appendix C.
-------
Of the 19 Louisiana lakes sampled by NES in 1974, 11 had
higher median total phosphorus values, 9 had higher median
orthophosphorus, and only 2 had higher medial total inorganic
nitrogen levels.
B. Rate-Limiting Nutrient:
Spring algal assay results suggest that Bruin Lake was
nearly colimited by available phosphorus and nitrogen levels.
Spikes with phosphorus or nitrogen alone resulted in increases
in assay yield, and maximum response was achieved with the
simultaneous addition of both nutrients. The lake ratios of
inorganic nitrogen to orthophosphorus (N/P) suggest phosphorus
limitation in spring and fall, and nitrogen limitation during
the summer.
-------
III. LAKE CHARACTERISTICS
A. Lake Morphometry:*
2
A. Surface area: 9.48 km .
B. Mean depth: 9.1 meters.
C. Maximum depth: 16.8 meters.
D. Volume: 86.177 x 106 m3.
B. Precipitation:
A. Year of sampling: 155.8 cm.
B. Mean annual: 127.5 cm.
*Provided by the State of Louisiana.
-------
IV. LAKE WATER QUALITY SUMMARY
Bruin Lake 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 stations on the lake 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 and last visits, 18.9-liter
depth-integrated samples were composited for algal assays. Maxi-
mum depths sampled were 11.6 meters at Station 01 and 9.1 meters
at Station 02. For a more detailed explanation of NES methods,
see NES Working Paper No. 175.
The results obtained are presented in full in Appendix B and
are summarized in IV-A for waters at the surface and at the maxi-
mum depth for each site. Results of the phytoplankton counts and
chlorophyll a_ determinations are included in IV-B. Results of the
limiting nutrient study are presented in IV-C.
-------
LAKE
STCHtT CO^E £202
PHYSICAL AND CHEMICAL CHARACTERISTICS
( 3/19/74 ) ( 5/30/74 )
( 11/11/74 I
PARA^ETEH
O.-l.S M DEPTH
MA* DE°TH»«
DISSOLVED o*Y
4
2
4
2
(MG/L)
4
2
4
*
4
2
4
2
7.5- 8.0
7.0- 7.1
33.- 95.
84.- «5.
O.U35-0.040
0.066-0.074
0.010-0.012
0.024-0.036
0.090-0.160
0.220-0.230
0.04Q-0.100
0.240-0.300
0.500-0.600
0.700-0.700
7.7
7.0
69.
as.
0.031*
0.070
0.011
0.030
0.126
0.225
0.065
0.270
0.550
0.700
0.0-
9.1-
0.0-
9.1-
0.0-
9.1-
0.0-
9.1-
0.0-
9.1-
0.0-
9.1-
0.0-
9.1-
1.5
11.3
1.5
11.3
1.5
11.3
1.5
11.3
1.0
11.3
1.5
11.3
1 .5
11.3
4
2
4
2
4
2
4
2
4
?
4
?
4
P
8.1- 8.8
7.3- 7.4
9n.- 92.
91.- 93.
0.034-0.050
0.262-0.288
0.005-0.011
0.082-0.097
0. 060-0. OfcO
0.100-0.100
0. 0«sO-0. 060
0.460-0.610
0. 500-0. HOO
0.800-1.000
8.5
7.3
91.
92.
0.041
0.275
0.007
0.089
0.060
0.100
0.060
0.535
0.650
0.900
0.0-
7.6-
0.0-
7.6-
0.0-
7.6-
0.0-
7.6-
0.0-
7.6-
0.0-
7.6-
0.0-
7.6-
1.5
11.6
1.5
11.6
1.5
11.6
1.5
11.6
1.5
11.6
1.5
11.6
1.5
11.6
4
2
4
2
<»
*
4
2
4
2
4
'
7.5- 7.5
7.2- 7.6
94.- 95.
93.- 96.
0.057-0.06?
0.065-0.085
0.005-0.013
0.004-0.006
0.060-0.070
0.060-0.070
0.180-0.190
0.1«0-0.230
O.bOO-0.900
0.800-0.900
7.5
7.4
94.
95.
0.061
0.075
0.006
O.OOS
0.06S
0.065
0.190
0.205
O.H50
0.850
0.0-
8.2-
0.0-
8.2-
0.0-
8.2-
0.0-
d.2-
0.0-
d.2-
0.0-
8.2-
0.0-
8.2-
1.5
9.*
1.5
9.4
1.5
9.4
1.5
9.4
l.s
9.4
1.5
9.4
1.5
9.4
SECCH1 DISC
1.3- 1.5
1 .4
1.1- 1.2
1.2
1.2- 1.2
1.2
» N = NO. OK SAMPLtS
»» MAXIMUM DEPTH SAMPLED AT EACH SITE
«»» S = NO. OK SITtS SAMPLED ON Thl« DATE
-------
B. Biological Characteristics:
1. Phytoplankton -
Sampling
Date
03/19/74
05/30/74
11/11/74
Dominant
Genera
1. Melosira
2. Cryptomonas
3. Dactylococcopsis
4. Ankistrodesmus
5. Micractinium
Other genera
Total
1. Dactylococcopsis
2. Nitzschia
3. Anabaenopsis
4. Oscillatoria
5. Melosira
Other genera
Total
Other genera
Total
Algal
Units
per ml
1,189
743
520
297
297
1,191
4,237
24,829
13,770
3,882
2,271
1,977
5,640
52,369
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
Dactyl ococcopsis
Oscillatoria
Flagellates
Nitzschia
Cryptomonas
4,945
2,448
832
735
685
4,064
13,709
-------
Sampling
Date
03/19/74
05/30/74
11/11/74
Station
Number
01
02
01
02
01
02
2. Chlorophyll a^ -
Chlorophyll £
(uq/D
13.5
10.7
22.9
20.9
13.4
16.7
C. Limiting Nutrient Study:
1. Autoclaved, filtered, and nutrient spiked -
Spike(mg/1)
Control
0.05 P
0.05 P + 1.0 N
1.00 N
2. Discussion -
The control yield of the assay alga, Selenastrum capricor-
nutum, indicates that the potential for primary production in
Bruin Lake was high at the time of spring sample collection.
Spikes with phosphorus or nitrogen alone resulted in slight
increased yield, suggesting near-col imitation by the two nutrients.
Maximum growth response was achieved with the simultaneous addi-
tion of both phosphorus and nitrogen.
It should be noted that significant chemical changes took
place in Louisiana lake samples between collection and algal assay.
Ortho P
Conc.(mg/l)
0.020
0.070
0.070
0.020
Inorganic N
Conc.(mg/l)
0.222
0.222
1.222
1.222
Maximum Yield
(mg/l-dry wt. )
3.6
4.9
11.7
4.3
-------
The assay data should be considered in this context and
until such differences are resolved, used with caution for
any prediction of actual lake conditions. Such chemical
changes are likely to alter the assay control yield as
well as modifying the N/P ratios.
The autumn algal assay results have not been included
in this report as the substantial changes in nutrient
levels have removed their information value.
The N/P ratios in the spring and fall lake chemistry
samples were respectively 16/1 and 33/1, indicating phos-
phorus limitation at those times. The N/P ratio was 7/1
for the summer lake samples, indicating nitrogen limitation
(an N/P ratio of 14/1 or greater generally reflects phos-
phorus limitation).
-------
V. LITERATURE REVIEWED
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. 1975. National
Eutrophication Survey Methods 1973-1976. Working Paper
No. 175. National Environmental Research Center, Las
Vegas, Nevada, and Pacific Northwest Environmental
Research Laboratory, Corvallis, Oregon.
-------
10
VI. APPENDICES
APPENDIX A
CONVERSION 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 B
PHYSICAL AND CHEMICAL DATA
-------
S, T 0 -; t T J t. T * j r. v i L J 4 T r.
NATL f uT-O^-IC JT 10% S
7 r / 1 2 / 1 1
220201
31 b * * 0 , G 091 1 •=
15 * U 1 '\ L A ^ E.
2? LOUISIANA
lid-
FEtT
F '- 0 •'
TQ
74/03/19
74/0^/30
74/11/11
riv
OF
10
10
10
10
10
13
13
13
13
13
13
15
15
Ib
15
t
40
40
40
40
40
15
15
15
15
15
15
15
15
15
15
FEET
00 00
0005
0015
0025
0037
0000
000^
PO 15
0020
0030
0038
0000
0005
0020
0031
o n
0 1 0
EK
18.0
18.0
17.9
17.6
15.4
27.7
27.7
27.3
26.9
21.2
19.5
19.5
19.4
19.1
19.0
00665
UATE
ffHJV
TO
74/03/19
74/05/30
V4/11/H
TIwE
OF
DAY
10
10
10
10
10
13
13
13
13
13
1 J
15
15
15
15.
15
40
40
40
40
40
15
15
15
15
15
IS
15
15
15
15
15
DEPTH
FEET
0000
0005
0015
0025
0037
0000
0005
0015
0020
0030
003*
oooy
0002
000 =
0020
0031
PriOS-TOT
MG/L P
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
(1
0
I)
0
0
0
1)
0
.040
.035
.042
.048
.066
.040
.034
.046
.139
.147
.2«8
.062
.061
.0^9
.Obb
0 0 3 0 0 <;• 3 n 7 7
'JO TrtaMSP C;
StCCHl F
Mfj/L iNC^t.S "
9.
8.
8.
2.
7.
7.
5.
0.
0.
7.
6.
6.
5.
32217
60
0
6
U
8
44
2
0
0
0
0
4 4a
6
4
0
OOOJl
0 0 0 •» 4
i ELD
144
150
151
149
146
225
213
209
200
180
183
I6t)
170
168
169
CHLKPHYL INCDT LT
A
UG/L
13.
22.
13.
^FMN IMG
PEKCtr-lT
5
9
4
1 .1)
00400
'->!-!
'Si'
b.uo
7.90
7.90
7.50
7.00
8.80
8.80
b.6C
7.45
7.30
7.30
7.5J
7.52
7.*»0
7.24
00410
T AL"
CACO }
MG/L
**
95
94
83
84
90
90
90
42
92
91
*4
95
95
96
00610
1^.1 3-N
TOTAL
MR/L
0.040
0.040
0.050
0.230
0.300
0.0«0
0.060
0.040
0.230
0.210
0.610
0.190
0.190
o.iao
0.230
U"r» ^
TOT <.jti_
N
MP/L
0.600
O.fOO
o . 4 u o
0.600
0.700
0.800
O.iOO
o . r> 0 o
0.500
0.70U
1.000
0.900
0 . « tl 0
0.800
0.900
006 -tO
••JOPS.N03
'--TOTAL
"K/L
0.100
0.090
0.120
o. i yo
0.220
0.080
0.060
n . 0 3 0
0.030
0.030
0.100
0.060
0.060
0.060
0.060
00^71
10S-OIS
0.012
0.011
0.014
0.025
0.036
0.-006
0.005
0.007
0.065
0.057
O.On?
0.007
0.013
0.013
0.006
-------
3TC.-tT -ET-Ir.jAL -J^TK 7t-
SftTL El.'T-.O-'-'ICiTIO1 SU-VtY
£ r1 H -!_ 5 S V r £ " ^
~n S'- ?o.o o-u
i) 6 TE
F-O--'
TO
74/03/1^
74/05/30
74/11/11
TI •:
OF
G^Y
11
11
11
1 1
13
13
13
13
15
15
15
15
t
on
on
00
00
5S
55
55
5S
40
40
4U
40
DEJT-
FEET
n 0 0 0
000 =
00 I'-.
00 jn
000 0
0005
0015
1025
0 C 0 0
00u5
OOl^
0027
0 1
«aT
Tt
Ct
Hi 0
r_ *v
v P
NT
17.4
17.?
16.8
15.3
27.2
27.0
25.6
21.3
19.2
19.1
19.1
IB. 9
006&5
DATE
FRijM
TO
74/U3/19
74/05/30
74/11/11
TIME
OF
liAY
11
11
11
11
13
13
13
13
15
15
15
15
00
oo
00
00
55
55
55
55
40
40
40
40
OEPTr.
FEET
0001
OOO1^
0015
0030
0000
OOP?
OOlf-
00^5
0000
OOO^i
001?
002?
PHOS-TOT
MG/L P
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
It
0
0
0
0
.039
.039
.041
.074
.042
.050
.056
.262
.061
.057
.112
.065
f. T « n ij
DO
MG/L
7.
6.
3.
5.
3.
?.
7.
b.
6.
6.
32217
u n r, y 7
T t- 4 \ -. J
StCCnl
TNOe S
50
2
2
4
48
8
o
0
2 <*8
d
8
8
00031
UOO-4
c^ouc TVY
FIELD
M J C^l"'Mi-lO
150
150
U9
145
213
209
?05
204
167
167
167
165
CHLPPMYL INCDT LT
A
UG/L
10.
20.
16.
PENNING
PEHCE.MT
7
9
7
4
00400
t>ri
Si'
21112V
0036 FttT
i/t-i"
0 0 •» 1 0
OOblo 00»^
NH3-N TOT
TOTAL '
006.10
N02S.N03
OOoM
j-,OS-0
OrVT-lO
G/L
150
150
1<»9
145
213
209
?05
204
167
167
167
165
7.50
7.50
7.40 .
7.10
«.
-------
APPENDIX C
PARAMETRIC RANKINGS OF LAKES
SAMPLED BY NES IN 1974
STATE OF LOUISIANA
-------
LAKE DATA TO BE USED IN RANKINGS
LAKE
CODE LAKE NAME
2201 ANACOCO LAKE
2202 BRUIN LAKE
2203 LAKE BISTINE4U
2204 BLACK BAYOU
2205 Sii.NDICK LAKE
2207 COCODPIE LAKE
220S COTILE LAKE
2209 CONCORDIA LAKE
2210 CROSS LAKE
2211 D'ARBONNE LAKE
2212 FALSE RIVER LAKE
2213 INDIAN CREEK
2214 SALINE LAKE
2215 TURKEY CREEK LAKE
2216 LAKE VERRET
2217 LAKE VERNON
2219 BLACK LAKE
2220 COCODRIE
4807 CAOOO LAKE
MEDIAN
TOTAL P
O.P31
0.057
O.n61
0.046
0.157
0.090
0.037
0.076
0.057
0.038
0.082
0.031
0.111
0.176
0.163
0.018
0.077
0.106
0.049
MEDIAN
INORG N
0.080
0.250
0.100
0.090
0.135
0.400
0.100
0.080
0.080
0.100
0.130
0.150
0.350
0.170
0.100
0.120
0.150
0.050
0.070
500-
MEAN SEC
455.833
450.333
458.000
453.417
469.667
479.000
442.333
468.333
475.250
458.250
442.500
458.333
493.000
477.833
481.428
436.667
454.000
478.333
463.562
MEAN
CHLOKA
8.700
16.350
12.933
17.818
20.467
35.300
12.650
32.950
38.385
6.800
24.550
21.467
15.333
21.967
62.028
4.900
12.733
33.433
20.125
15-
MIN 00
10.4QO
15.000
13.200
12.200
10.600
7.700
14.000
14.800
11.400
13.200
14.900
14.800
9.600
14.600
12.000
14.400
11.600
11.800
10.000
MEDIAN
OISS OPTHO P
0.007
0.012
0.013
0.009
0.073
0.026
0.011
0.009
0.010
0.011
0.023
0.010
0.025
0.033
0.056
0.007
0.015
0.014
0.008
-------
PERCENT OF LAKES wTTK HIGHER VALUES (NUM9FR OF I.AKES WITH HIGnER VALUES)
LAKE
CODE
2201
2202
2203
2204
2205
2207
2208
2209
2210
2211
2212
2213
2214
2215
2216
2217
2219
2220
4807
LAKE NAME
ANACOCO LAKE
8RUIN LAKE
LAKE BISTINEAU
BLACK BAYOU
BL'NOICK LAKE
COCODRIE LAKE
COTILE LAKE
CONCOWDIA LAKE
CROSS LAKE
O'ARBONNE LAKE
FALSE RIVER LAKE
INDIAN CREEK
SALINE LAKE
TURKEY CREEK LAKE
LAKE VERRET
LAKE VERNON
BLACK LAKE
COCOORIE
CADOO LAKE
MEDIAN
TOTAL P
92
61
50
72
11
28
83
44
56
78
33
92
17
0
6
100
39
22
67
( 1
------- |