U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
NATIONAL EUTROPHICATION SURVEY
WORKING PAPER SERIES
REPORT
ON
BRAUNIG LAKE
BEXAR COUNTY
1TOS
EPA REGION VI
WORKING PAPER No, 634
CORVALLIS ENVIRONMENTAL RESEARCH LABORATORY - CORVALLIS, OREGON
and
ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING & SUPPORT LABORATORY - LAS VEGAS, NEVADA
•&G.P.O. 699-440
-------
REPORT
ON
BRAUNIG LAKE
BEXAR COUNTY
TEXAS
EPA REGION VI
WORKING PAPER No, 634
WITH THE COOPERATION OF THE
TEXAS WATER QUALITY BOARD
AND THE
TEXAS NATIONAL GUARD
APRIL, 1977
-------
CONTENTS
Page
Foreward ii
List of Texas'Study Reservoirs iv
Lake and Drainage Area Map vi
Sections
I. Introductions 1
II. Conclusions 1
III. Lake and Drainage Basin Characteristics 3
IV. Lake Water Quality Summary 4
V. Nutrient Loadings 10
VI. Literature Reviewed 11
VII. Appendices 12
-------
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 [§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 condi-
tion are being made to advance the rationale and data base for
refinement of nutrient water quality criteria for the Nation's
fresh water lakes. Likewise, multivariate evaluations for the
relationships between land use, nutrient export, and trophic
condition, by lake class or use, are being developed to assist
in the formulation of planning guidelines and policies by EPA
and to augment plans implementation by the states.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
The staff of the National Eutrophication Survey (Office of
Research & Development, U. S. Environmental Protection Agency)
expresses sincere appreciation to the Texas Water Quality Board
for professional involvement, to the Texas National Guard for
conducting the tributary sampling phase of the Survey, and to
those Texas wastewater treatment plant operators who voluntarily
provided effluent samples.
Hugh C. Yantis, Jr., Executive Director of the Texas Water
Quality Board, and John B. Latchford, Jr., Director, and the staff
of the Field Operations Division provided invaluable lake documen-
tation and counsel during the Survey, reviewed the preliminary
reports, and provided critiques most useful in the preparation of
this Working Paper series.
Major General Thomas Bishop, the Adjutant General of Texas,
and Project Officer Colonel William L. Seals, who directed the
volunteer efforts of the Texas National Guardsmen, are also grate-
fully acknowledged for their assistance to the Survey.
-------
iv
NATIONAL EUTROPHICATION SURVEY
STUDY RESERVOIRS
State of Texas
NAME
Amistad
Bastrop
Bel ton
Braunig
Brownwood
Buchanan
Caddo
t
Calaveras
Canyon
Colorado City
Corpus Christi
Diversion
Eagle Mountain
Fort Phantom Hill
Houston
Kemp
Lake O'The Pines
Lavon
Lewisville (Garza-Little Elm)
Livingston
COUNTY
Val Verde
Bastrop
Bel 1, Coryel1
Bexar
Brown
Burnet, Llano
Harrison, Marion, TX;
Caddo Parish, LA
Bexar
Comal
Mitchell
Jim Wells, Live Oak, Sa.n
Patricio
Archer, Baylor
Tarrant, Wise
Jones
Harris
Baylor
Camp, Marion, Morris,
Upshur
Coll in
Denton
Polk, San Jacinto, Trinity,
Walker
-------
Lyndon B. Johnson
Medina
Meredith
0. C. Fisher (San Angelo)
Palestine
Possum Kingdom
Sam Rayburn
Somervilie
E. V. Spence
Stamford
Still house Hollow
Tawakoni
Texoma
Travis
Trinidad
Twin Buttes
White River
Whitney
Wright Patman (Texarkana)
Burnet, Llano
Bandera, Medina
Hutchinson, Moore,
Potter
Tom Green
Anderson, Cherokee,
Henderson, Smith
Palo Pinto, Stephens,
Young
Angelina, Jasper
Nacogdoches, Sabine, San
Augustine
Burleson, Lee, Washington
Coke
Haskell
Bell
Hunt, Rains, Van Zandt
Cooke, Grayson TX; Bryan,
Johnston, Love, Marshall, OK
Burnet, Travis
Henderson
Tom Green
Crosby
Bosque, Hill
Bowie, Cass
-------
v1
98'23'
BRAUNIG LAKE
Tributary Sampling Site
X Lake Sampling Site
^ Drainage Area Boundary
E23 Urban Area
o.l 2 Km.
29'15—
Map Location
-------
BRAUNIG LAKE
STORE! NO. 4804
I. INTRODUCTION
Braunig Lake was included in the National Eutrophication Survey as
a water body of interest to the Texas Water Quality Board. Tributaries
and nutrient sources were not sampled, and this report relates only to
the lake sampling data.
II. CONCLUSIONS
A. Trophic Condition:
Survey data indicate that Braunig Lake is eutrophic; i.e.,
well supplied with nutrients and quite productive. Whether
nutrient enrichment is beneficial or deleterious depends on
the actual or potential effect on the uses of the lake. In
this regard, the Texas Water Quality Board has indicated that
there is little or no known impairment of the designated
beneficial uses of this water body.
Braunig Lake ranked thirty-sixth when the 39 Texas reser-
voirs sampled in 1974 were compared using a combination of
six parameters*. Thirty-six of the reservoirs had less median
total and median dissolved phosphorus, 22 had less and one had
the same median inorganic nitrogen, 35 had less mean chlorophyll
a^, and 19 had greater mean Secchi disc transparency. Near-
depletion of dissolved oxygen with depth occurred at station 1
in May and August.
See Appendix A.
-------
B. Rate-Limiting Nutrient:
The algal assay results indicate primary productivity in
Braunig Lake was limited by nitrogen. The lake data also indi-
cate nitrogen limitation.
-------
III. LAKE AND DRAINAGE BASIN CHARACTERISTICS1"
A. Morphometry :
1. Surface area: 5.46 kilometers2.
2. Mean depth: 6 meters.
3. Maximum depth: >10.1 meters.
4. Volume: 32.760 x 106 m3.
5. Mean hydraulic retention time: 3.7 years.
B. Outlet:
(See Appendix C for flow data)
Drainage Mean flow
Name area (km2)* (m3/sec_)*
Unnamed Stream A-l 24.3** 0.28
C. Precipitation***:
1. Year of sampling: 94.0 centimeters.
2. Mean annual: 70.0 centimeters.
t Table of metric conversions—Appendix B.
tt Latchford, 1974.
* For limits of accuracy, see Working Paper No. 175, "...Survey Methods,
1973-1976"; lake level maintained by a diversion from the San Antonio
River.
** Includes area of lake.
*** See Working Paper No. 175.
-------
IV. WATER QUALITY SUMMARY
Braunig Lake was sampled four times in 1974 by means of a pontoon-
equipped Huey helicopter. Each time, samples for physical and chemical
parameters were collected from a number of depths at two stations on
the lake (see map, page vi). 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 March and
November 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 10.1 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 August nutrient samples were not
preserved properly and were not analyzed).
-------
TEMP (C)
DISS OXY (MG/L)
CNDCTVY (MCP-OMO)
PH (STAND UNITS)
TOT ALK (MG/D
TOT P (MG/L)
OrtTHO P (MG/L)
N02»N03 (MG/L)
AMMONIA (MG/L)
KJEL N (MG/L)
INO*G N (MG/L)
TOTAL N (MG/L)
CHLrtPYL A (ur,/L)
SECCHI (METERS)
A. SUMMARY OF PHYSICAL ANO
1ST SAMPLING ( 3/12/74)
2 SITES
RANGE
16.3 - 25.0
1.8 - 8.2
1005. - 1215.
7.5 - 8.6
175. - 178.
0.104 - 0.134
MEAN MEUIAN
21.6 22.1
5.0 5.3
1126. 1133.
8.? 8.4
177. 177.
0.120 0.122
0.025 - 0.066 0.049 0.052
0.030 - 0.160 0.092 0.100
0.104 0.035
1.112 1.100
0.196 0.145
0.03G - 0.320
1.000 - 1.300
0.060 - 0.430
1.030 - 1.360
23.9 - 25.1
0.9 - 0.9
1.205 1.225
24.5 24.5
0.9 0.9
CHEMICAL CHARACTERISTICS FOR BHAUNIG LAKE
STO^ET CODE 4304
2ND SAMPLING ( 5/21/74)
d SITES
MANGE
24.1 - 31.1
0.6 - 8.0
1220. - 1407.
7.9 - 8.8
164. - 175.
0.115 - 0.234
0.046 - 0.149
0.0*0 - 0.250
0.030 - 0.150
0.800 - 1.400
0.070 - 0.320
0.850 - 1.450
It.5 - 14.5
1.2 - 1.5
MEAN
28.6
4.4
1335.
8.5
167.
0.153
0.080
0.089
0,075
0.937
0.164
1.026
14.5
MEDIAN
28.8
4.5
1344.
8.6
166.
0.130
0.055
0.060
0.060
0.900
0.120
0.965
14.5
SAMPLING ( 8/14/74)
2 SITES
MANGE MEAN MEDIAN
27.1 - 35.3 30.9 29.1
0.2 - 8.2 5.3 5.8
1328. - 1518. 1404. 1356.
8.<> - S.3 8.9 9.1
-oooooooooooooooooooooo
-0000000000*00000000000
1.4
1.4
000*00
oooooo
.'00000
oooooo
oooooo
00*000
oooooo
0000*0
24.5
0.1
-oooooooooooooooooooooo
.000000000000*000000000
-oooooooooooooooooooooo
_oooooooooo«ooooo«oouoo
-oooooooooooooooooooooo
-oooooooooooooooooooooo
- 33.7 29.1 29.1
1.2 0.7 tj.l
-------
A. SUMMARY OF PHYSICAL AND CHEMICAL Crl Aft ACTE* ISTICS FOR bRAUNlvi LAKE
STOfitf CODE HB04
4TH SAMPLING (I!/
PARAMETER
TEMP
OISS OXY (MG/U)
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 M (MG/L)
CHLR^YL A (UG/L)
SECCHI (METERS)
2 SITES
rtANGE MEAN
25.9
4.6
1207.
8.b
124.
C.193
0.115
0.110
0.020
0.200
0.130
0.310
20.0
0.7
- 28.1
6;2
- 1259.
8.6
- 168.
- 0.209
- 0 . 1 34
- 0.160
- 0.06C
- 1.200
- 0.200
- 1.360
- 25.9
1.2
26. f.
5.3
1222.
B.S
161.
0.200
0.123
0.123
0.040
0.914
0.163
1.037
22.9
l.C
MEDIAN
26.3
5.0
1213.
tt.S
Ib8.
O.lVV
0.125
0.120
0.040
O.^OO
0.160
1.020
22.9
1.0
-------
B. Biological characteristics:
1. Phytoplankton -
Sampling
Date
03/12/74
05/21/74
08/14/74
11/05/74
Dominant Al
gal Units
Genera per ml
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
Centric diatoms
Nitzschia s£.
Merismopedia sp.
Dactylococcopsis sp.
Tetraedron sj>.
Other genera
Total
Nitzschia s£.
Chlorophytan coccoid cells
Tetraedron sp.
Mesostigma sp.
Oscillatoria sp.
Other genera
Total
Centric diatoms
Scenedesmus sp.
Chlorococcalean coccoid cells
Merismopedia sp.
Oscillatoria sp.
Other genera
Total
Oscillatoria sp.
Dactylococcojisis sp.
Scenedesmus sj).
Chlorophytan coccoid cells
Lyngbya sp.
Other genera
7,060
5,758
2,673
2,193
1,988
1,851
21,523
654
551
482
413
275
1,342
3,717
3,480
1,723
1,505
627
564
2,980
10,879
4,143
909
775
642
561
2,353
Total
9,383
-------
8
2. Chlorophyll a_ -
C.
Sampling
Date
03/12/74
05/21/74
08/14/74
11/05/74
Station
Number
1
2
1
2
1
2
1
2
Chlorophyll a
(yg/D
25.1
23.9
14.5
14.5
24.5
33.7
25.9
20.0
Limiting Nutrient Study:
1. Autoclaved,
filtered, and nutrient
spiked -
a. March sample -
Spike (mg/1)
Control
0.050 P
0.050 P + 1.
1.0 N
b. November
Spike (mg/1)
Control
0.050 P
0.050 P + 1.
1.0 N
Ortho P
Cone, (mg/1)
0.055
0.105
0 N 0.105
0.055
sample -
Ortho P
Cone, (mg/1)
0.117
0/167
ON 0.167
0.117
Inorganic N
Cone, (mg/1)
0.152
0.152
1.152
1.152
Inorganic N
Cone, (mg/1)
0.195
0.195
1.195
1.195
Maximum yield
(mg/1 -dry wt. )
4.3
6.2
19.6
14.4
Maximum yield
(rng/1-dry wt.)
7.6
7.8
33.2
33.1
-------
2. Discussion -
The control yields of the assay alga, Selenastrum capri-
cornutum, indicate that the potential primary productivity
of Braunig Lake was high at the times the samples were col-
lected. In both assays, there was an insignificant change
in yield with the addition of orthophosphorus but a large
increase in yield when only nitrogen was added. This indi-
cates Braunig Lake was limited by nitrogen when sampled.
The lake data also indicate nitrogen limitation; i.e.,
inorganic nitrogen to orthophosphorus ratios were 5 to 1 or
less at all stations in March, May, and November.
-------
10
V. NUTRIENT LOADINGS
Insufficient flows in the tributaries during the sampling year pre-
vented sampling. Therefore, estimates of nutrient loadings are not
available.
-------
11
VI. LITERATURE REVIEWED
Latchford, John B., Jr., 1974. Personal communication (morphometry),
TX Water Qual, Bd., Austin.
-------
12
VI. APPENDICES
APPENDIX A
LAKE RANKINGS
-------
LAKES RANKED BY i'VJ-.A .\U;.
RANK LAKE CODE LAKE NAME
2 4833
3 4«13
4 4816
5 4801
6 4805
7 4802
8 4838
9 4825
10 4835
11 4803
12 4831
13 4812
14 4806
15 4839
16 4822
17 4827
18 4828
19 4837
20 4810
21 482^»
22 4818
23 4807
24 4814
25 4806
26 4830
27 4819
28 4832
CANYON RESERVOIR
LAKE MEREDITH
EAGLE MOUNTAIN LAKE
KEMP LAKE
AMISTAO LAKE
9RO»NWOOD LAKE
BASTRUP LAKE
WHITE RIVEH RESERVOIR
POSSUM KINGOOM RESERVOIR
TRAVIS LAKE
BELTON RESERVOIR
STILLHOUSE HOLLOW RESERV
DIVERSION LAKE
CALAVERAS LAKE
WHITNEY LAKE
MEDINA LAKE
SAM RAYBURN RESERVOIR
E V SPENCE RESERVOIR
TWIN BUTTES RESERVOIR
LAKE COLORADO CITY
PALESTINE LAKE
LAKE OF THE PINES
CADDO LAKE
FT PHANTOM HILL LAKE
LAKE BUCHANAN
STAMFORD LAKE
LAVON RESERVOIR
TAWAKONI LAKE
INDEX NO
445
441
430
423
402
394
393
390
387
384
384
372
372
362
357
342
322
321
311
310
302
298
297
296
261
259
258
253
-------
LAKES RANKED BY INDEX NOS.
RANK LAKE CODE LAKE NAME INDEX NO
29 4821 LYNDON 8 JOHNSON LAKE 238
30 4834 TEXOMA LAKE 217
31 4829 SOMEKVILLE LAKE 208
32 4826 SAN ANGELO KESERVOIR 200
33 4833 TEXAHKANA LAKE 176
34 4815 GARZA LITTLE ELM RESERvO 173
35 4836 TRINIDAD 169
36 4B04 6RAUNIG LAKE 159
37 4811 CORPUS CRIST! LAKE 155
38 4817 HOUSTON LAKE 139
39 4820 LIVINGSTON LAKE 91
-------
LAKE DATA TO 8t USED IN RANKINGS
LAKE
CODE LAKE NAME
4801 AMISTAD LAKE
4802 BASTROP LAKE
4803 8ELTON RESERVOIR
4804 BRAUNIG LAKE
4805 BROWNWOOD LAKE
4806 LAKE BUCHANAN
4807 CAOOO LAKE
4808 CALAVERAS LAKE
<»B09 CANYON RESERVOIR
4810 LAKE COLORADO CITY
4811 CORPUS CRISTI LAKE
4812 DIVERSION LAKE
4813 EAGLE MOUNTAIN LAKE
4814 FT PHANTOM HILL LAKE
4815 GARZA LITTLE ELM RESEKVO
4816 KEMP LAKE
4817 HOUSTON LAKE
4818 LAKE Of THE PINES
4819 LAVON RESERVOIR
4820 LIVINGSTON LAKE
4821 LYNDON B JOHNSON LAKE
4822 MEDINA LAKE
4823 LAKE MEREDITH
4824 PALESTINE LAKE
4825 POSSUM KINGDOM'RESERVOIR
4826 SAN ANGELO RESERVOIR
4827 SAM RAYBURN RESERVOIR
4828 E V SPENCE RES£RVOf,R
MEDIAN
TOTAL P
0.013
0.02?
0.016
0.134
0.027
0.036
0.055
0.038
0.010
0.042
0.113
0.025
0.024
0.060
0.045
0.023
0.097
0.031
0.063
0.196
0.042
0.010
0.021
0.031
0.023
0.098
0.029
0.036
MEDIAN
INORG N
0.500
0.090
O.lrt5
0.150
0.100
0.250
0.070
0.060
0.450
0.090
0.130
0.080
0.070
0.105
0.380
O.liO
0.260
0.090
0.180
0.555
0.420
0.600
0.070
0.180
0.070
0.140
0.150
0.080
500-
MEAN SEC
371.W4
419.917
378. J12
461.625
470.375
437.625
463.333
461.667
384.812
473.625
475.187
470 ..111
469.625
474.909
475.782
455.000
486.187
440.000
485.333
465.469
456.500
403.562
439.312
442.625
419...G45
481.000
439.458
462.583
MEAN
CHLOKA
2.042
12.392
8.025
22.762
4.887
8.606
14.808
22.500
2.500
12.675
19.756
15.867
5.662
6.317
14.156
10.217
16.650
12.919
5.400
16.112
8.100
12.944
3.037
10.619
9.495
24.675
6.267
11.775
15-
MIN 00
14.900
15.000
15.000
14.800
14.400
15.000
11.400
13.000
14.800
10.200
14.000
9.000
11.000
9.800
14.600
10.400
12.400
15.000
8.800
15.000
14.900
15.000
14.900
14.800
.15..000
10.200
15.000
15.000
MEDIAN
DISS ORTHO P
0.009
0.007
0.007
0.062
0.007
0.012
0.01 J
0.007
0.006
0.012
0.050
0.009
0.008
0.022
0.018
0.007
0.036
0.011
0.0 18
0.128
0.013
0.004
0.009
0.010
0.009
0.011
0.009
0.008
-------
LAKE DATA TO BE USED IN RANKINGS
LAKE
CODE LAKE NAME
4829 SOMEHVILLE LAKE
4830 STAMFORD LAKE
4831 STILLHOUSE HOLLO* RESEHV
4832 TAWAKONI LAKE
4833 TEXARKANA LAKE
4834 TEXOMA LAKE
4835 TRAVIS LAKE
4836 TRINIDAD
4837 TWIN 8UTTES RESERVOIR
4838 WHITE RIVER RESERVOIR
4839 WHITNEY LAKE
MEDIAN
TOTAL P
0.053
0.073
O.Olb
0.046
0.106
0.042
0.018
0.389
0.029
0.020
0.028
MEDIAN
INORG N
0.115
0.060
0.160
0.100
0.120
0.160
0.2SO
0.110
0.250
0.110
0.120
500-
MEAN SEC
473.833
482.714
406.250
46b.4l7
478.500
451.321
389.913
479.500
454.917
434.500
430.500
MEAN
CHLOftA
24.491
18.457
J.917
18.246
19.119
12.493
5.595
24.300
8.708
4.333
6.912
15-
MIN 00
13.000
10.600
15.000
13.200
12.400
15.000
15.000
10.000
14.800
15.000
15.000
MEDIAN
DISS O^TriG f>
0.013
0.012
0.010
0.013
0.030
0.018
0.007
0.240
0.009
0.009
0.006
-------
PERCENT Of LAKES «ITH HIGHER VALUES •: NUMBER OF LAKES WITH HlGHEw VALUES)
CODE LAKE NAME
4801 AMISTAO LAKE
4802 8ASTRO° LAKE
4803 8ELTON HESERVOI*
4804 BRAUNIG LAKE
4805 BROrfNWOOO LAKE
4806 LAKE BUCHANAN
4807 CAOOO LAKE
4808 CALAVERAS LAKE
4809 CANYON RESERVOIR
4810 LAKE COLORADO CITY
4811 CORPUS CRIST I LAKE
4812 DIVERSION LAKE
4813 EAGLE MOUNTAIN LAKE
4814 FT PHANTOM HILL LAKE
4815 GARZA LITTLE ELM RESERVO
4816 KEMP LAKE
4817 HOUSTON LAKE
4818 LAKE OF THE PINES
4819 LAVON RESERVOIR
4820 LIVINGSTON LAKE
4821 LYNDON B JOHNSON LAKE
4822 MEDINA LAKE
4823 LAKE MEREDITH
4824 PALESTINE LAKE
4825 POSSUM KINGDOM RESERVOIR
4826 SAN ANGELO RESERVOIR
4827 SAM RAYBURN RESERVOIR
4fl2fl E V SPENCE RESERVOIR
MEDIAN
TOTAL P
95
79
92
5
66
47
26
45
99
39
8
68
71
24
34
76
16
54
21
3
39
99
82
54
74
13
59
50
( 36)
( 30)
( 35)
( 2)
( 25)
( 18)
( 10)
( 17)
( 37)
( 14)
( 3)
( 26)
( 27)
< 9)
( 13)
( 29)
( 6)
( 20)
( 8>
( 1)
( 14)
( 37)
( 3D
( 20)
( 28)
( 5)
( 22)
( 19)
MEDIAN
IN09G N
5
7f
26
42
70
21
91
100
e
76
47
83
91
66
13
61
16
76
29
3
11
0
91
32
91
45
39
83
( 2)
( 28)
( 10!
( 16)
( 26)
( 7)
( 33)
( 38)
( 3)
( 28)
( 18)
( 31)
( 33)
< 25)
( 5)
( 22)
( 6)
( 28)
< 11)
( 1)
( 4)
( 0)
( 33)
( 12)
( 3"3)
( 17)
( 15)
( 3D
500-
MEAN SEC
100
82
97
50
29
74
42
47
95
26
18
32
34
21
16
55
0
66
3
39
53
89
71
63
84
8
68
45
( 38)
( 3D
( 37)
( 19)
( 11)
( 28)
( 16)
( 18)
( 36)
( 10)
( 7)
( 12)
( 13)
( 8)
( 6)
( 21)
( 0)
( 25)
< D
( 15)
( 20)
( 34)
( 27)
( 24)
( 32)'
( 3)
( 2b>
( 17)
ME.AN
CrtLOHA
100
47
68
8
87
63
32
11
97
42
13
29
79
74
34
55
24
39
84
26
66
37
95
53
SB
0
76
50
( 3d)
( 18)
( 26)
( 3)
( 33)
( 24)
( 12)
( 4)
< 37)
( 16)
( 5)
( ID
( 30)
( 28)
( 13)
( 21>
( 9)
< 15)
( 32)
( 10)
( 25)
( 14)
( 36)
( 20)
( 22)
( 0)
( 29)
( 19)
15-
MIN DO
39
17
17
49
58
17
76
67
49
88
61
97
79
95
55
84
72
17
100
17
39
17
39
49
17
88
17
17
( 14)
( 0)
( 0)
( 17)
( 22)
( 0)
( 29)
( 25)
( 17)
( 33)
( 23)
( 37)
( 30)
( 36)
( 21)
( 32)
( 27)
( 0)
( 38)
( 0)
( 14)
( 0)
( 14)
( 17)
( 0)
( 33)
( 0)
( 0)
MEDIAN
OISS OHThG P
fe3
92
84
5
84
39
30
92
97
39
8
63
76
16
21
92
11
46
21
3
30
100
63
51
63
46
63
7,6
( 21)
( 34)
( 3D
f 2)
( 3D
( 14)
( 10)
( 34)
( 37)
( 14)
( 3)
( 21)
( 28)
( 6)
( 7)
( 34)
( 4)
( 17)
( 7)
( 1)
( 10)
( 38)
( 21)
( 19)
< 21)
( 17)
( 21)
( 28) _
INDEX
NO
40i
393
384
159
394
261
297
362
445
310
155
372
430
296
173
423
139
298
258
91
238
342
441
302
387
200
322
321
-------
PERCENT OF LAKES WITH HIGHER VALUES (NUMBER OF LAKES *ITH HIGHER VALUES)
LAKE
coot LAKE NAME
4829 SOMERVILLE LAKE
4830 STAMFORD LAKE
U831 STILLHOUSE HOLLOW RESE^V
4832 TAWAKONI LAKE
4833 TEXARKANA LAKE
4834 TEXOMA LAKE
4fi35 TRAVIS LAKE
<»836 THINIOAD
4837 TWIN BUTTES RESERVOIR
4838 WHITE RIVER RESERVOIR
4839 WHITNEY LAKE
MEDIAN
TOTAL P
29 (
18 (
88 (
32 <
11 (
39 (
88 (
0 (
59 (
84 (
63 (
11)
7)
33)
12)
4)
14)
33)
0)
22}
32)
24)
MtOIAN
INORG N
55
S7
37
70
51
34
21
61
21
61
51
( 21)
< 37)
( 14)
( 26)
( 19)
( 13)
< 7)
( 22)
t 7)
< 22)
( 19)
500-
MEAN SEC
24
5
a7
37
13
61
92
11
58
76
79
( 9)
( 2)
( 33)
( 14)
( 5)
( 23)
( 35)
( 4)
( 22)
( 29)
( 30)
>«1EAN
CHLORA
3
13
92
21
16
45
82
S
61
89
71
( 1)
( 7)
( 35)
( 8)
( 6)
( 17)
( 3D
( 2)
( 23)
( 34)
( 27)
lcj-
MIN 00
67
82
17
63
72
17
17
92
49
17
17
< 25)
( 3D
( 0)
( 24)
( 27)
( 0)
( 0)
( 35)
( 17)
( 0)
( 0)
MEDIAN
DISS 0*T.-iO H
30
39
51
30
13
21
84
0
63
63
76
( 10)
( 14)
I 19)
( 10)
( 5)
( 7)
( 31)
( 0)
( 21)
( 21)
( 28)
INOEX
NO
20a
259
372
2b3
176
217
J84
169
311
390
357
-------
APPENDIX B
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 C
TRIBUTARY FLOW DATA
-------
TRIBUTARY FLO* INFORMATION FOR T£XA5
03/16/7-
LAKE CODE 4604
BRAUNIG
TOTAL DRAINAGE AREA of ..AKEISQ
24.3
SUB-DRAINAGE
TRIBUTARY AREA(SO KM)
<»804A1
4804ZZ
JA'<
FFB
MAR
NORMALIZED F_OwS(CMb)
APR MAY JUN Jj-
0.28
0.0
24.3
0.0
0.26
0.0
0.23
0.0
0.28
0.0
0.28
0.0
0.23
0.0
0.28 0.
0.0 0.0
SUMMARY
0.23
0.0
0 .23
0.5
'..28
0.0
0.0
ME; an
o.o
TOTAL DRAINAGE AREA OF LAKE =
SUM OF SUB-DRAINAGE AREAS =
0.0
TOTAL FLOW IN
TOTAL FLOW OUT
0.0
3.40
NOTE *«» ELEVATION MAINTAINED BV PUMPING WATER FROM SAN ANTONIO RIVER.
MEAN MONTHLY FLOWS AND DAILY FLOWS(CMS)
TRIBUTARY MONTH YEAR MEAN FLOW DAY
9
10
11
12
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
74
74
74
74
75
75
75
75
75
75
75
75
74
74
74
74
75
75
75
75
75
7b
75
75
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.340
5.125
0.340
0.340
0.340
4.870
9.231
0.227
6.145
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.73ft
0.0
0.0
7
7
7
7
7
6
7
7
8
11
15
13
FLOW DAY
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.736
0.0
0.006
FLOW DAf
FLOW
23
22
0.0
0.0
-------
APPENDIX D
PHYSICAL and CHEMICAL DATA
-------
SlORET RETRIEVAL DATE 76/02/11
480'»01
29 14 16.0 098 22 16.0
BSAUNIG LAKE
48029 TEXAS
DATE
FROM
TO
74/03/12
74/05/21
74/08/14
74/11/05
DATE
FROM
TO
74/03/12
74/05/21
74/08/14
74/11/05
TIME DEPTH
OF
DAY FEET
15 30 0000
15 30 0006
15 30 0015
15 30 0025
15 30 0033
15 30 0000
15 30 0005
15 30 0015
15 30 0028
15 20 0000
15 20 0005
15 20 0015
15 20 0028
14 10 0000
14 10 0005
14 10 0015
14 10 0031
TIME DEPTH
OF
DAY FEET
15 30 0000
15 30 0006
15 30 0015
15 30 0025
15 30 0033
15 30 0000
15 30 0005
15 30 0015
15 30 0028
15 20 0000
15 20 0007
14 10 0000
14 10 0005
14 10 0015
14 10 0031
00010
WATER
TEMP
CENT
24.1
23.3
21.6
19.1
16.3
31.1
30.5
27.8
24.1
29.1
29.0
28.4
27.1
25.9
26.3
26.1
25.9
00665
PHOS-TOT
MG/L P
0.134
0.124
0.130
0.120
0.124
0.121
0.115
0.202
0.234
0.209
0.195
0.193
0.201
00300 00077
DO TRANSP
SECCHI
MG/L INCHES
36
8.2
7.2
1.8
2.0
60
8.0
4.6
0.6
5.8 48
5.0
3.2
0.2
4.8 47
5.0
4.8
4.6
32217 00031
CHLRPHYL INCDT LT
A REMNING
UG/L PERCENT
25.1
14.5
24.5
1.0
25.9
00094
CNDUCTVY
FIELD
MICROMHO
1190
1170
1120
1050
1005
1407
1385
1299
1220
1356
1355
1341
1328
1207
1213
1211
1209
11EPALES
3
00400 00410
PH T AI.K
su
8.55
8.55
8.30
7.60
7.55
8.85
8.30
8. 45
7.95
9.10
9.00
8.60
8.20
8.55
8.51
8.49
8.46
CAC03
MG/L
176
178
177
177
178
164
164
168
175
167
168
168
168
2111202
0037 FEET DEPTH
00610 00625 00630
NH3-N TOT KJEL N02&N03
TOTAL
MG/L
0.040
0.030
0.030
0.310
0.320
0.060
0.030
0.070
0.150
0.040
0.030
0.040
0.060
N
MG/L
1.200
1.000
1.000
1.200
1.200
1.400
0.900
0.900
0.800
1.200
1.100
0.900
0.900
N-TOTAL
MG/L
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
160
090
140
110
110
050
040
250
050
160
120
120
120
00671
PHOS-DIS
ORTHO
MG/L P
0.062
0.047
0.066
0.058
0.055
0.053
0.046
0.132
0.149
0.134
0.125
0.127
0.128
-------
STORET RETRIEVAL DATE 76/08/11
480402
29 15 24.0 098 23 14.0
b*AUNIG LAKE
48029 TEXAS
DATE TIME DEPTH
FROM OF
TO DAY FEET
74/03/12 16
16
16
74/05/21 15
15
15
15
74/08/14 13
13
13
74/11/05 14
14
14
00 0000
00 0006
00 0014
55 0000
55 0005
55 0010
55 0015
45 0000
45 0005
45 0010
35 0000
35 0005
35 0015
00010
WATER
TEMP
CENT
25.0
22.7
21.0
30.7
29.2
28.4
27.3
35.3
34.4
33.1
28.1
27.7
26.4
HEP ALES
00300
DO
MG/L
4.4
6.2
4.4
5.6
3.0
8.0
8.2
6.4
6.2
6.0
6.0
00077
TRANSP
SECCHI
INCHES
36
48
4
28
00094
CNDUCTVY
FIELD
MICHOMHO
1215
1145
1111
1384
1353
1335
1295
1518
1502
1430
1259
1240
1218
3
00400
PH
su
8.60
8.50
8.20
8.80
8.55
8.60
8.25
9.30
9.20
9.10
8.59
8.53
8.48
00410
T ALK
CAC03
MG/L
175
177
178
164
166
166
170
168
167
124
2111202
0018
00610
NH3-N
TOTAL
MG/L
0.030
0.030
0.040
0.060
0.050
0.040
0.140
0.050
0.040
0.020K
FEET DEPTH
00625
TOT KJEL
N
MG/L
1.300
1.000
1.000
0.900
0.800
0.900
0.900
0.900
1.200
0.200
00630
N02&N03
N-TOTAL
MG/L
0.040
0.030
0.060
0.070
0.060
0.060
0.130
0.120
0.110
0.110
00671
PHOS-DIS
ORTHO
MG/L P
0.025
0.030
0.050
0.049
0.056
0.055
0.099
0.118
0.115
0.117
DATE
FROM
TO
74/03/12
74/05/21
74/08/14
74/11/05
00665 32217 00031
TIME DEPTH PHOS-TOT CHLRPHYL INCDT LT
OF A REMNING
DAY FEET MG/L
16
16
16
15
15
15
15
13
13
14
14
14
00
00
00
55
55
55
55
45
45
35
35
35
0000
0006
0014
0000
0005
0010
0015
0000
0010
0000
0005
0015
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
P UG/L PERCENT
106 23.9
104
117
115 14.5
134
127
176
33.7
1.0
204 20.0
199
199
K VALUE KNOWN TO BE
LESS THAN INDICATED
------- |