U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
NATIONAL EUTROPHICATION SURVEY
WORKING PAPER SERIES
REPORT
ON
COCODRIE LAKE
RAPIDES PARISH
LOUISIANA
EPA REGION VI
WORKING PAPER No, 535
CORVALLIS ENVIRONMENTAL RESEARCH LABORATORY - CORVALLIS, OREGON
and
ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING & SUPPORT LABORATORY - LAS VEGAS, NEVADA
699-440
-------
REPORT
ON
COCODRIE LAKE
RAPIDES PARISH
LOUISIANA
EPA REGION VI
WORKING PAPER No, 535
WITH THE COOPERATION OF THE
LOUISIANA WILD LIFE AND FISHERIES COMMISSION
AND THE
LOUISIANA NATIONAL GUARD
MARCH, 1977
-------
REPORT ON COCODRIE LAKE
RAPIDES PARISH, LOUISIANA
EPA REGION VI
by
National Eutrophication Survey
Water and Land Quality Branch
Monitoring Operations Division
Environmental Monitoring & Support Laboratory
Las Vegas, Nevada
and
Special Studies Branch
Corvallis Environmental Research Laboratory
Corvallis, Oregon
Working Paper No. 535
OFFICE OF RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT
U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
March 1977
-------
CONTENTS
Page
Foreword i i
List of Louisiana 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 10
V. Literature Reviewed 15
VI. Appendices 16
-------
11
FOREWORD
The National Eutrophication Survey was Initiated 1n 1972 1n
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 C§303(e)], water quality criteria/standards review
[§303(c)], clean lakes [§314(a,b)], and water quality monitoring
[§106 and §305(b)] activities mandated by the Federal Water
Pollution Control Act Amendments of 1972.
-------
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, Eiologist; Louis Johnson, Biologist; Lee Cau-
barreaux, Biologist; Dan-ell 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
Bundick 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
-------
COCODRIE LAKE
Rapides Parish)
Tributary Sampling SHe
X Lake Sampling Site
. '.'Km-
-------
REPORT ON COCODRIE LAKE, LOUISIANA
STORE! NO. 2220
1. CONCLUSIONS
A. Trophic Condition:*
On the basis of field observations and Survey data
Cocodrie Lake is considered eutrophic, i.e., nutrient
rich and highly productive. Whether such nutrient enrich-
ment is to be considered beneficial or deleterious is deter-
mined by its actual or potential impact upon designated
beneficial water uses.
Chlorophyll a^ levels in the lake were very high, ranging
from 22.3 yg/1 to 53.8 yg/1 with a mean of 33.4 yg/1. Of the
19 Louisiana lakes sampled in 1974, 4 had greater median total
phosphorus, 8 had greater median dissolved orthophosphorus and
18 had greater median inorganic nitrogen than Cocodrie Lake.
Survey limnologists noted abundant aquatic plants at
Station 01 during March sampling. Ketelle and Uttormark (1971)
reported that the lake had problems with silt pollution
due to runoff from past gravel dredging operations.
*See Appendix E.
-------
B. Rate-Limiting Nutrient:
Mean inorganic nitrogen to orthophosphorus ratios (N/P)
for Cocodrie Lake were 13/1 or less on both sampling occasions
suggesting primary limitation by nitrogen. Algal assay results
show high potential for primary production in the reservoir, and
support nitrogen limitation.
C. Nutrient Controllability:
1. Point sources -
There were no known point sources impacting Cocodrie
Lake during the sampling year. The mean annual phosphorus
loading of 0.60 g P/m2/yr was less than the "oligotrophic"
level proposed by Vollenweider (1975) for a lake with such
volume and retention time. However, the calculated loading
for Cocodrie Lake is somewhat underestimated. The nutrient
concentrations in Little Spring Creek were substantially
higher than those of any other sampled tributary entering the
lake (Section IV-E). Since Little Spring Creek was not
gaged, and is included in the estimated ungaged nutrient load-
ing to the lake (based upon background loading from other
gaged tributaries), it is likely that the true nutrient loads
to Cocodrie Lake are much higher than indicated herein. Addi-
tional sampling is needed to determine an accurate nutrient
budget for the lake.
-------
2. Nonpoint sources -
The mean annual phosphorus loads from measured tribu-
taries amounted to 62.0% of the total load reaching Cocodrie
Lake. Cocodrie Bayou contributed 45.2% of the total non-
point load, and ungaged tributaries were estimated to have
contributed 34.9%.
In general, few lakes are nitrogen limited as a result
of low nitrogen. Rather, excessive phosphorus levels shift
limitations to nitrogen or other factors. Regardless of the
primary nutrient limitation suggested by either algal assay
or nutrient ratios, the most feasible approach to nutrient
control, if desirable, is through available phosphorus con-
trol technology and subsequent establishment of phosphorus
limitation within the water body.
-------
II. LAKE AND DRAINAGE BASIN CHARACTERISTICS
Lake and drainage basin characteristics are itemized below.
Lake morphometry values were provided by the State of Louisiana.
Tributary flow data were provided by the Louisiana District Office
of the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS). Outlet drainage area in-
cludes the lake surface area. Mean hydraulic retention time was
obtained by dividing the lake volume by the mean flow of the out-
let. Precipitation values are estimated by methods as outlined
in National Eutrophication Survey (NES) Working Paper No. 175.
A table of metric/English conversions is included as Appendix A.
A. Lake Morphometry:
9
1. Surface area: 24.68 km.
2. Mean depth: 0.5 meters.
3. Maximum depth: 4.3 meters.
4. Volume: 13.569 x 106 m3.
5. Mean hydraulic retention time: 14 days.
-------
B. Tributary and Outlet:
(See Appendix B for flow data)
1. Tributaries -
Drainage Mean flow
Name area (km2) (m3/sec)
A-2 Cocodrie Bayou 186.7 2.56
B-l Spring Creek 177.7 2.44
Minor tributaries and
immediate drainage - 205.0 4.66
Totals 569.4 9.66
2. Outlet - A-l Cocodrie Bayou 621.4 11.24
C. Precipitation:
1. Year of sampling: 176.2 cm.
2. Mean annual: 155.4 cm.
-------
III. LAKE WATER QUALITY SUMMARY
Cocodrie Lake was sampled two 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 (Station 02 was sampled
only once) and from a number of depths at each station (see map,
page v). During each visit, depth-integrated samples were col-
lected from each station for chlorophyll a_ analysis and phyto-
plankton identification and enumeration. During the last visit,
an 18.9-liter depth-integrated sample was composited for algal
assays. Maximum depths sampled were 2.4 meters at Station 01
and 2.4 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 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.
-------
COCOORIE
STOET CODE 2220
PHYSICAL
CHEMICAL CHAKACTEKISTICS
PARAMETER
TEMPERATURE (Of-, i
0.-1.5 M nEPT-i
MAX DEPTH**
DISSOLVED UAYfjtN
0.-1.5 M OEPTrt
MAX DEPTH**
S»»*
N» • KANGE
CdrtT )
2
1
(.«G/L)
1
1
26.3-
26.3-
3.2-
3.2-
26.8
2*. 3
3.2
3.2
= 1
MEDIAN
26.6
?^.3
3.c
3.2
MAX.
Dt°TH
4AIM&E
(METE
0.0-
0.9-
0.9-
0.9-
PS)
0.9
0.9
0.4
0.9
N*
2
1
2
1
s*«*
HANGE
16.7- 16.7
lt>.6- 16.6
8.2- tt.2
8.0- 8.0
= 1
MEDIAN
16.7
16.6
U.2
8.0
MAX
OEt>TH
PANGE
(METErtS)
0.0-
2.4-
0.0-
2.4-
1.5
2.4
1.5
2.4
CONDUCTIVITY (UMHOS)
O.-l.S M DEPTH
MAX DEPTH**
2
1
58.-
59.-
59.
59.
59.
59.
0.0-
0.9-
0.9
0.9
2
1
167.- 180.
210.- 210.
174.
210.
0.0-
2.4-
1.5
2.4
PH (STANDARD UNITS)
O.-l.S * OEPTrt
MAX DEPTH**
TOTAL ALKALINITY
0.-1.5 M DEPTH
MAX DEPTH**
TOTAL P (MG'/L)
O.-l.S M DEPTH
MAX DEPTH**
DISSOLVED OKTHO P
O.-l.S M OEPTn
MAX DEPTH**
N02»iN03 (MG/L)
O.-l.S * DEPTi
MAX OEPTh**
AMMONIA (MG/L)
O.-l.S M DEPTH
MAX UEPTH**
KJELD4HL M (M-3/L)
0.-1.5 M DEPTH
MAX DEPTH**
2
1
(MG/L)
2
1
2
1
(MG/L)
2
1
2
1
2
1
2
1
6.5-
6.5-
12.-
13.-
0.070-0
o.oro-o
0.009-0
0.009-0
0.060-0
0.060-0
0.06C-0
0.060-0
0.900-0
0.900-0
6.6
6.5
13.
13.
.083
.070
.010
.009
.060
.060
.070
.060
.900
.900
6.5
6.5
13.
13.
0.07o
0.070
0.004
0.009
0.060
0.060
0.065
0.060
0.^00
0.900
0.0-
0.9-
0.0-
0.9-
0.0-
0.9-
0.0-
0.9-
0.0-
0.9-
0.0-
0.9-
0.0-
0.9-
0.9
0.9
0.9
0.9
0.9
0.9
0.9
O.V
0.9
0,9
0.9
0.9
0.9
0.9
2
1
2
1
2
1
2
1
2
1
2
1
2
1
7.7- 7.7
7.6- 7.6
(^^.- 82.
82.- 82.
0.093-0.130
0.066-0.066
0.014-0.027
0.014-0.014
0.020-0.020
0.020-0.020
0.020-0.030
0.020-0.020
0.700-0.800
0.800-0.800
7.7
7.6
82.
62.
0.111
0.086
0.020
0.014
0.020
0.020
0.025
0.020
0.750
0.800
0.0-
2.4-
0.0-
2.4-
0.0-
2.4-
0.0-
2.4-
-
0.0-
2.4-
0.0-
2.4-
0.0-
2.4-
1.5
2.4
1,5
2.4
1.5
2.4
1.5
2.4
1.5
2.4
1.5
2.4
1.5
2.4
SECCHI OISC
0.9- 0.9
o.s- o.s
O.b
« N = NO. OF SAMPLFS
»« MAXIMUM UEPTH SAMPLED AT EACH SITE
»«» s = NO. Ot- SITES SAMPLED ON TH!^ i)ATt
-------
B. Biological Characteristics:
1
Phytoplankton -
Sampling
Date
05/29/74
11/12/74
Dominant
Genera
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
Flagellates
Dactyl ococcops is
Synedra
Cryptomonas
Centric diatom
Other genera
Total
Lyngbya
Dactylococcopsis
Nitzschia
Melosira
Microcystis
Other genera
Total
Algal
Units
per ml
1,592
1,493
1 ,393
1,294
896
3,481
10,149
17,947
6,505
4,075
2,508
940
6,348
38,323
Chlorophyll a_ -
Sampling
Date
05/29/74
11/12/74
Station
Number
01
01
02
Chlorophyll a^
53.8
22.3
24.2
-------
Ortho P
Cone. (mg/1)
0.026
0.076
0.076
0.026
Inorganic N
Cone. (mg/1)
0.063
0.063
1.063
1.063
Maximum yield
(mq/l-dry wt. )
1.8
2.7
23.8
11.4
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 capricornutum,
indicates that the potential for primary production in Cocodrie Lake
was high at the time of autumn assay sample collection. Strong
growth response to the addition of nitrogen, as well as the lack of
significant response to the addition of phosphorus indicates nitro-
gen limitation. Maximum yield was achieved with the simultaneous
addition of both nutrients.
Cocodrie Lake was not sampled in March 1974. Consequently, no
spring algal assay sample was collected.
The N/P ratios for Cocodrie Lake were 13/1 in the summer and
2/1 during autumn, suggesting primary limitation by nitrogen (an N/P
ratio of 14/1 or greater generally reflects phosphorus limitation).
It should be noted that significant chemical changes took place in
Louisiana lake samples between collection and algal assay. The
assay data should be considered in this context and until such
difficulties are resolved, used with caution for any prediction of
actual lake conditions. Such chemical changes are likely to alter
the control yield as well as modifying the N/P ratio.
-------
10
IV. NUTRIENT LOADINGS
(See Appendix D for data)
For the determination of nutrient loadings, the Louisiana
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, March, and April when
two samples 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 Louisiana 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 of the nutrient loads, in kg/km^/yr, in Cocodrie Bayou and
Spring Creek at Stations A-2 and B-l, and multiplying the means
p
by the ZZ area in km .
-------
11
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) -
A-2 Cocodrie Bayou 6,635 45.2
B-l Spring Creek 2,465 16.3
b. Minor tributaries and immediate
drainage (nonpoint load) - 5,125 34.9
c. Known municipal STP's - None
d. Septic tanks* - 30 0.2
e. Known industrial - None
f. Direct precipitation** - 430 2.9
Totals 14,685 100.0
2. Output - A-l Cocodrie Bayou 13,075
3. Net annual P accumulation 1,610
*Estimate based on 100 lakeside residences.
**Estimated (see NES Working Paper No. 175).
-------
12
C. Annual Total Nitrogen Loading - Average Year:
1. Inputs -
% of
Source kg N/yr total
a. Tributaries (nonpoint load) -
A-2 Cocodrie Bayou 64,040 35.5
B-l Spring Creek 33,950 18.8
b. Minor tributaries and immediate
drainage (nonpoint load) - 54,735 30.3
c. Known municipal STP's - None
d. Septic tanks* - 1,065 0.6
e. Known industrial - None
f. Direct precipitation** - 26,645 14.8
Totals 180,435 100.0
2. Output - A-l Cocodrie Bayou 186,195
3. Net annual N export*** - 5,760
*Estimate based on 100 lakeside residences.
**Estimated (see NES Working Paper No. 175).
***Export probably due to unknown sources and/or sampling error.
-------
13
D. Mean Annual Nonpoint Nutrient Export by Subdrainage Area:
Tributary kg P/km2/yr kg N/km^/yr
Cocodrie Bayou 36 343
Spring Creek 14 191
E. Mean Nutrient Concentrations in Ungaged Streams:
Mean Total P Mean Total N
Tributary (mg/1) (mg/1)
C-l Hurricane Creek 0.061 0.438
D-l Little Spring Creek 0.384 1.893
Nutrient concentrations in Hurricane Creek are in line
with those found in the gaged tributaries entering Cocodrie
Lake. However, nutrient concentrations in Little Spring
Creek are substantially higher. This could be due to the
proximity of the D-l sampling site to the town of Glenmora,
or to unknown point sources impacting the creek upstream.
-------
14
F. 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
(g/m2/yr)
Estimated loading for Cocodrie Lake 0.60
Vollenweider's "eutrophic" loading 1.54
Vollenweider's "oligotrophic" loading 0.77
-------
15
V. LITERATURE REVIEWED
Ketelle, Martha J. and Paul D. Uttormark. 1971. Problem Lakes
in the United States. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Project #16010 EHR. University of Wisconsin, Madison, Wise.
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 Labora-
tory, Corvallis, Oregon.
Vollenweider, R. A. 1975. Input-Output Models With Special
Reference to the Phosphorus Loading Concept in Limnology.
Schweiz. 1. Hydro1. 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 FLOW INFORMATION FOR LOUISIANA
04/11/77
LAKE CODE 2220
TOTAL OR AI'•*':•
CJCOO-IE .4KE (RAPIDES)
TRIBUTARY AREA.': 1 « -O
.»Kt(S6 KM)
FE8
621.6
MAR
APR
MAY
NORMALIZED FLOWS(CMS)
JUN JUL AUG
SEP
OCT
NOV
DEC
2220 A 1
2220A2
222061
2220ZZ
621.':
186.7
177.'
257. ;
16.-:
3. :i
3^ _
fc.Ti
17.27
3.34
3.17
7.14
16.54
3.51
3*34
6.85
16.59
3.17
3.03
•6.88
16.91
2*21
2.10
7.02
8.50
2.04
1.93
3.51
6.54
1.61
1.53
2.72
6.26
1.53
1.44
2.58
4.98
1.84
1.76
2.07
4.76
1*73
1.64
1.98
7. S3
2.58
2.46
3.11
12.71
3.94
3.74
5.27
11. ?4
2.S6
2.44
4.6*3
MEAN MONTHL' FLOrfS AND :AILY FLOWS(CMS)
TRIBUTARY MONT- YEArt -EAN FLOW DAY
2220A1
2220A2
2220B1
TOTi. DRAINAGE AREA OF LAKE = 621.6
f SUB-DRAINAGE AREAS = 621.6
FLOW DAY
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
9
10
11
12
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
1
2
3
4
5
74
74
74
74
74
74
74
75
75
75
75
75
74
74
74
74
74
74
75
75
75
75
75
74
74
74
74
74
7*
74
75
75
75
75
75
SUMMARY
TOTAL FLO* IN = 116.13
TOTAL FLOW OUT = 135.27
FLOW DAY
FLOW
7.957
5.267
5.040
6.768
3.341
4.332
16.735
25.174
13*790
13.366
9.911
28.883
2.209
1.756
1.671
1.359
2.690
4.304
3.228
2*209
3.143
2.973
8.665
2.090
1.671
1.552
1.591
1.303
2.549
4.106
3.058
2.095
2.973
2.803
8.212
8
6
10
7
6
2
7
4
1
2
6
4
8
6
7
6
2
7
4
1
2
6
4
8
6
10
7
6
2
7
4
1
2
6
4
8.495
4*899
4.955
5.663
3.710
2.973
21.379
23.276
20.898 23
8.382 23
7.079 20
30.299
1.812
1.784
1.388
1.359
1.388
20.813
3.653
1.727 23
1.586 23
1.699 20
26.561
1.727
1.699
1.388
1.331
1.303
1*331
19.822
3.455
1.642 23
1.501 23
1.614 20
25.174
13.847
18.434
5.465
1.841
2.237
1.642
1.756
2.124
1.557
-------
APPENDIX C
PHYSICAL AND CHEMICAL DATA
-------
STORE! RETRIEVAL OATE 75/13/11
NATL EUTROPHIGATION SURVEY
EPA-LAS VEGAS
223001
3\ 30 30.0 091 43 48.0
COCODRIE
22 LOUISIANA
11EPALES 2111202
4 0006 FEET PiE^TM
DATE
FROM
TO
74/05/29
74/11/12
DATE
FROM
TO
74/05/29
74/11/12
TIME
OF
DAY
14 35
14 35
08 40
08 40
08 40
TIME
OF
DAY
14 35
14 35
08 40
08 40
08 40
DEPTH
FEET
0000
0003
0000
0005
0008
DEPTH
FEET
0000
0003
0000
0005
0008
00010
WATER
TEMP
CENT
26.8
26.3
16.7
16.7
16.6
00665
PHOS-TOT
MG/L P
0.083
0.070
0.093
0.130
0.086
00300 00077 OOOS4 00400 00410 00610 00*25 00630 00671
00 TKANSP CNDUCTVY HH T AL« NM3-N TOT KJ6L NO^N03 PHOS-OIS
SECCHI FIELD CAC03 TOTAL N N-TOT4L ORTnO
MG/L INCHES MICROMHO sn MG/L MG/L MG/L IG/L MG/L P
35 58 6.60
3.2 59 b.50
8.2 18 167 7.67
6.2 180 7.67
8.0 210 7.63
32217 00031
CHLRPHYL INCDT LT
A REMNING
UG/L PERCENT
53.8
22.3
12 0.070 0.900 0.060 0.010
13 0.0*>0 0.900 0.060 0.00V
82 0.020 0.800 0.020K 0.014
82 0.030 0.700 0.020K 0.027
82 0.020 0.800 0.020K 0.014
K VALUE KNOWN TO BE LESS THAN
INDICATED
-------
STC"-ET RETRIEVAL DATE 76/01/2*
NfiTL EUTROPHICATION SURvEY
hPA-LAS
222002
30 ao oo.o 0^2 ay
COCOURIE LAKE
22079 LOUISIANA
48. o
UATE TIME DEPTH
FPOM OF
Tu DAT FRET
74/11/12 08 15 0000
08 15 000=.
Ort 15 OOOH
TEMP
GEM
16.6
liS.7
16.7
00300
DO
M3/L
12
00094
CNDUCT
FIELD
161
162
159
11EPALES
-i
00400
S'.
7.e>o
7.b3
7.50
00*10
r ALI^
CAC03
M-3/L
2111202
0010 FEcT
64
M3
81
00610
MH3-N
TOTAL
Mb/L
0.030
0.0?0
0.030
TOT KJtL
M
MCi/L
1.200
O.dUO
0.700
00630
N02&N03
N-TOTAL
MG/L
0.020K
0.020K
0.020K
00671
PHOS-DIS
ORTHO
0.015
0.014
0.028
DATE TIME DEPTH PH05-TOT
FWOV OF
TO DAY FEET MG/L P
74/11/12 08 15 0000 0.120
08 15 0003
08 15 000^ 0.139
08 15 0008 0.13V
32217 OOOJ1
ChLrtPHYL INCOT LT
A REMNING
UG/L PF.HCENT
24.2
1.0
K VALUE KNOWN TO BE LESS THAN
INDICATED
-------
APPENDIX D
TRIBUTARY AND WASTEWATER
TREATMENT PLANT DATA
-------
STORET RETRIEVAL DATE 77/04/11
/TYPA/AMBNT/STPEAM
00630
DATE TIME DEPTH N02&N03
FROM OF N-TOTAL
TO DAY FEET MG/L
74/06/08
74/07/06
74/08/10
74/09/07
74/10/06
7<,/l 1/02
74/12/07
75/01/04
75/02/01
75/02/23
75/03/02
75/03/23
75/04/06
75/04/20
75/05/04
10 35
15 50
13 50
11 05
10 00
10 05
14 20
10 00
09 55
10 15
11 00
09 10
09 00
10 40
10 30
0.014
0.052
0.004
0.016
0.016
0.016
0.008
0.016
0.016
0.008
0.016
0.024
0.005
0.015
0.065
00625
TOT KJEU
N
MG/L
0.500K
0.500
0.400
0.900
0.400
0.300
0.500
0.500
0.400
0.700
0.500
0.450
0.450
0.600
00610
NH3-N
TOTAL
MG/L
0.042
0.030
0.045
0.025
0.020
0.027
0.020
0.032
0.032
0*024
0.032
0.032
0.025
0.050
0.090
2220A1
31 00 00.0 092 22 46.0 4
COCOORIE BAYOU
22 15 LECOMPTE
0/COCODRIE LAKE 101691
B*OG ON US RT 167 6.2 MI S OF LECOMPTE
11EPALES 04001004
3000 FEET DEPTH CLASS 00
00671 00665
PHOS-DIS PHOS-TOT
ORTHO
MG/L P MG/L P
0.020
0.015
0.010
0.015
0.010
0.022
0.010
0.022
0.024
0.016
0.016
0.016
0.010
0.025
0.020
0.025K
0.060
0.025
0.040
0.025
0.030
0.040
0.050
0.040
0.040
0.070
0*035
0.020
0.030
0.030
K VALUE KNOWN TO BE
LESS THAN INDICATED
-------
STORET RETRIEVAL DATE 77/04/11
/TYPA/AMBNT/STREAM
2220A2
30 56 00.0 092 2b 45.0 t
COCOORIE 8AYOU
22 15 TURKEY CREEK
T/COCODRIE LAKE 101991
SEC RD 8RDG 8 MI E OF GLENMORA
11EPALES 04001004
COOO FEET DEPTH CLASS 00
DATE
FROM
TO
74/06/0*
74/07/06
74/09/07
74/10/06
74/11/02
74/12/07
75/01/04
75/02/01
75/02/23
75/03/02
75/03/23
75/04/06
75/04/20
75/05/04
00630 00625
TIMF DEPTH M02&N03 TOT KJEL
OF N-TOTAL N
DAY FEET
10
15
10
10
10
13
10
10
10
11
09
10
11
11
00
15
40
28
36
55
39
25
45
25
40
25
10
00
MG/L
0
0
0
0
0
c
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
.148
.152
.100
.056
.040
.024
.028
.040
.040
.060
.048
.105
.125
.095
MG/L
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
1.
0.
0.
0.
1.
0.
500K
800
800
200
400
900
700
600
000
600
600
550
100
700
00610 00671 00665
NH3-N PHOS-DIS PHOS-TOT
TOTAL ORTHO
MG/L
i) .
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
045
075
045
070
020
025
032
048
064
040
048
060
110
125
MG/L
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
p
042
060
050
070
010
015
025
040
032
056
032
045
040
040
MG/L •>
0.100
0.170
0.090
0.085
0.080
0.020
0.070
0.080
0.080
0.130
0.080
0.090
0.120
0.040
K y/ALUE KNOWN TO BE
LESS THAN INDICATED
-------
STORE! RETRIEVAL DATE 77/04/11
/TrPA/AMSNT/STRrTAM
222081
31 00 00.0 092 33 50.0 4
SPRING CREEK
22 15 FOREST HILL
T/COCODRIE LAKE 101993
BROG ON Hwf 497 3 MI SM OF FOREST HILL
11EPALES 04001004
0000 FEET DEPTH CLASS 00
DATE
FROM
TO
74/06/08
74/07/06
74/08/10
74/09/07
74/10/06
74/11/02
74/12/07
75/01/04
75/02/01
75/02/23
75/03/0?
75/03/23
75/04/06
75/04/20
75/05/04
00630 00625
TIME DEPTH N02*.N03 TOT KJEL
OF N-TUTAL N
DAY FEET
09
15
12
10
11
11
13
11
10
11
12
10
11
11
11
30
00
38
05
00
15
20
11
50
15
00
05
00
46
30
MG/L
0.104
0.104
0.080
0.084
0.080
0.064
0.032
0.064
0.072
0.080
0.048
0.088
0.100
0.115
0.095
MG/L
0.100
0.700
0.100
1.000
0.100K
O.?00
0.400
0.400
0.100K
0.200
0.500
0.400
0.150
0.600
0.500
00610 OC671 00665
NH3-N PHOS-OIS PHOS-TOT
TOTAL ORTHO
MG/L
0.020
0.025
0.025
O.OSO
0.015
0.025
0.040
0.024
0.016
0.016
0.012
0.024
0.027
0.055
0.055
MG/L P
0.011
0.010
0.010
0.015
0.025
0.010
0.020
0.015
0.016
0.016
0.016
0.016
0.015
0.020
0.015
MG/L P
0.030
0.075
0.020
0.020
0.025
0.030
0.030
0.020
0.030
0.040
0.030
0.020
0.070
0.020
K VALUE KNOWN TO BE
LESS THAN INDICATED
-------
STORET RETRIEVAL DATE 77/04/11
/TYPA/AN-BNT/STSEAM
2220C1
31 00 34.0 092 30 10.0 4
HURRICANE CrtEEK
22 15 FOREST HILL
T/COCOORIE LAKE 101993
bftOG ON SEC RO 2.6. M SE JCT US «T
11EPALES 04001004
0000 FEET DEPTH CLASS 00
165
DATE
FROM
TO
74/06/08
74/07/06
74/08/10
74/09/07
74/10/06
74/11/02
74/12/07
75/01/04
75/02/01
75/02/23
75/03/02
75/03/23
75/04/06
75/04/20
75/05/04
00630 00625
TIME DEPTH N02NN03 TOT KJEL
OF N-TGTAL N
DAY FEET
09
14
12
09
11
11
13
11
10
11
12
10
12
11
00
30
20
50
15
35
00
30
10
-30
15
?0
15
45
MG/L
0
0
0
0
(J
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
.136
.120
.132
.132
.144
.176
.072
.064
.136
.112
.088
.112
.150
.155
.160
MG/L
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
200
300
300
500
150
135
400
900
100
300
600
200
400
850
450
00610 00671 00665
NH3-N PHOS-DIS PHOS-TOT
TOTAL ORTHU
MG/L
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
9.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
020
030
025
035
150
135
020
032
016
024
026
032
065
085
070
MG/L
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
P
Oil
010
005
010
010
050
025
055
016
016
008
016
005K
015
020
MG/L P
0.030
0.070
0.030
0.020
0.015
0.210
0.140
0.145
0.030
0.030
0.030
0.040
0.020
0.080
0.020
K VALUE KrMOWN TO BE
LESS THAN INDICATED
-------
STORE! RETRIEVAL DATF 77/04/11
/TY?A/AM8NT/STRCAN<
DATE TIME OEPT4 N02t>N03
FROM OF
TO DAY FEET
7^/06/08
74/07/06
74/08/10
74/09/07
74/10/06
74/1 1/02
74/12/07
75/01/04
75/02/01
75/02/23
75/03/02
75/03/23
75/04/06
75/04/20
75/05/04
0<
1<
i;
1C
1C
i
i:
11
1C
i
i
1C
1
1
1
> 50
» 50
'. 47
> 15
1 SO
05
5 30
05
> 47
00
50
00
50
40
20
332001
30 59 05.0 092 34 50.0 4
LITTLE SPRING CREEK
22 15 OAKDALE
T/COCOORIE LAKE 101992
bfiOG ON HWY 165 AT N EDGE OF GLENMORA
11EPALES 0400100*
0000 FEET DEPTH CLASS 00
00630 00625
?(>N03 TOT KJEL
TOTAL N
^G/L MG/i.
C.I 10 1.000
0.850 1.300
0.695 2.600
0.016 3.300
0.024 5.200
0.056 2.300
0.600 O.t:00
0.176
0.024
0.072
0.064
0.056
0.005
0.250
0.260
.200
.200
.500
.100
.900
.350
.'•OO
.350
00610
NHl-N
TOTAL
MG/L
0.165
0.085
0.430
0.020
0.125
C.070
0.035
0.048
0.104
0.128
0.116
0.104
0.260
0.240
0.260
00671
PHOS-DIS
ORTHO
MG/L P
0.115
0.030
0.100
0.145
0.015
0.065
0.128
0.120
0.136
0.104
0.105
0.105
0.085
00665
PHOS-TOT
MG/L P
0.225
0.150
0.500
0.855
1.500
0.560
0.020
0.150
0.330
0.310
0.260
0.190
0.280
0.250
0.180
-------
APPENDIX E
PARAMETRIC RANKINGS OF LAKES
SAMPLED BY NES IN 1974
STATE OF LOUISIANA
-------
LAKE DATA TO BE USED IN RANKINGS
LAKE
CODE LAKE NAME
2301 ANACOCO LAKE
3202 8RUIN LAKE
2203 LAKE BISTINEAU
2204 BLACK BAYOU
2205 BUNOICK LAKE
2207 COCOOR1E LAKE
2208 COTILE LAKE
2209 CONCOROIA LAKE
2210 CROSS LAKE
2211 O'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 CADDO LAKE
MEnlAN
TOTAL P
0.031
0.057
0.061
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
442,5,00
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-
HIN DO
10.400
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
DISS ORTHO P
0.007
0.012
o.oie
0.009
0.073
0.026
0.011
0.009
0.010
0.011
0.023
0.010
0.025
0.033
Q.056
0.007
0*015
0.014.
Q. ope
-------
PERCENT OF LAKES WITH >O3HER VALUES (NUMBER OF LAKES WITH HIGHER VALUES)
LAKE
CODE LAKE NAME
2201 ANACOCO LAKE
2202 BRUIN LAKE
2203 LAKE BISTINEAU
2204 BLACK BAYOU
2205 BUNDICK LAKE
2207 COCODRIE LAKE
2208 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 CADDO LAKE
MEDIAN
TOTAL P
92 (
61 (
50 (
J2 <
11 I
28 <
83 (
44 1
56 1
78 1
33 1
92 1
17 1
0 i
6 i
100
39
22
67
16)
11)
9)
13)
: 2)
1 5)
1 15)
1 8)
: 10)
: 14)
1 6)
! 16)
I 3)
I 0)
1 1)
( 18)
( 7)
( 4)
( 12)
MEDIAN
INOR6 N
83 (
11 (
58 (
72 (
33 (
0 (
58 (
83 (
83 (
58 (
39 (
28 (
6 (
17 (
58 (
44 (
22 (
100 (
94 (
14)
2)
9)
13)
6)
0)
9)
14)
14)
9)
7)
5)
1)
3)
9)
8)
4)
18)
17)
500-
MEAN SEC
67 (
83 (
61 (
78 (
33 (
11 (
94 (
39 1
28 1
56 1
89 1
50 1
0 I
22 i
6 i
100
72
17
44
12)
15)
11)
14)
: 6)
: 2)
[ 17)
! 7)
[ 5)
: 10)
! 16)
1 9)
I 0)
I 4)
1 1)
I 18)
( 13)
( 3)
( 8)
MEAN
CHLORA
89 I
61 (
72 (
56 1
44 1
11 1
83 1
22 1
6 <
94 1
28 I
39 i
67 i
33
0
100
78
17
50
: 16)
: 11)
: 13)
: io>
( 8)
[ 2)
[ 15)
: 4)
! 1)
I 17)
I 5)
t 7)
I 12)
( 6)
I 0)
( 18)
( 14)
( 3)'
( 9)
15-
MIN DO
83 (
0 (
42 (
50 (
78 (
100 <
33 <
14 <
72 (
42 (
6 (
14 I
94 (
22 1
56 1
28 1
67 i
61 i
89 i
15)
0)
7)
9)
14)
18)
6)
2)
13)
; 7)
: 1)
: 2>
: 17)
[ 4)
[ 10)
1 5)
1 12)
I 11)
I 16)
MEDIAN
DISS ORTHO P
94
50
33
81
0
17
61
81
69
56
28
69
22
11
6
100
39
44
89
( 17)
( 9)
( 6)
( 14)
( 0)
( 3)
< 11)
( 14)
( 12)
( 10)
( 5)
( 12)
< 4)
( 2)
< P
( 18)
( 7)
( 8)
( 16)
------- |