U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
NATIONAL EUTROPHICATION SURVEY
WORKING PAPER SERIES
REPORT
ON
LYMANLAKE
APACHE COUNTY
ARIZONA
EPA REGION IX
WORKING PAPER No, 730
CORVALLIS ENVIRONMENTAL RESEARCH LABORATORY - CORVALLIS, OREGON
and
ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING & SUPPORT LABORATORY - LAS VEGAS, NEVADA
-------
REPORT
ON
LYMANLAKE
APACHE COUNTY
ARIZONA
EPA REGION IX
WORKING PAPER No, 730
WITH THE COOPERATION OF THE
ARIZONA STATE DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH
AND THE
ARIZONA NATIONAL GUARD
AUGUST, 1977
-------
REPORT ON LYMAN LAKE
APACHE COUNTY, ARIZONA
EPA REGION IX
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. 730
OFFICE OF RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT
U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
August 1977
-------
1
CONTENTS
Page
Foreword i i
List of Arizona Study Lakes 1v
Lake and Drainage Area Map v, vi
Sections
I. Conclusions 1
II. Lake and Drainage Basin Characteristics 4
III. Lake Water Quality Summary 6
IVo Nutrient Loadings 12
V. Literature Reviewed 17
VI. Appendices 18
-------
11
FOREWORD
The National Eutrophlcation 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,bj], and water quality monitoring
[§106 and §305(b)] activities mandated by the Federal Water
Pollution Control Act Amendments of 1972.
-------
111
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 Arizona State Department
of Health for professional Involvement, to the Arizona National
Guard for conducting the tributary sampling phase of the Survey,
and to those Arizona wastewater treatment plant operators who
provided effluent samples and flow data.
The staffs of the Bureau of Water Quality Control, Environ-
mental Health Services, Arizona State Department of Health, and
the Arizona Game and Fish Department, provided Invaluable lake
documentation and counsel during the Survey, reviewed the pre-
liminary reports and provided critiques most useful in the
preparation of this Working Paper Series.
Major General John G. Smith, the Adjutant General of Arizona,
and Project Officer Colonel Richard A. Col son, who directed the
volunteer efforts of the Arizona National Guardsmen, are also
gratefully acknowledged for their assistance to the Survey.
-------
iv
NATIONAL EUTROPHICATION SURVEY
STUDY LAKES
STATE OF ARIZONA
LAKE NAME
Big Lake
Fools Hollow Lake
Lake Havasu
Luna Lake
Lyman Lake
Lake Mohave
Lake Pleasant
Lake Powell
Rainbow Lake
Theodore Roosevelt Lake
San Carlos Reservoir
COUNTY
Apache
Navajo
Mohave (San Bernadino
1n CA)
Apache
Apache
Mohave (Clark 1n NV)
Yavapai, Maricopa
Coconlno (Kane, Garfield,
San Juan 1n UT)
Navajo
Gil a
Graham, G1la, Plnal
-------
® Tributary Sampling Site
x Lake Sampling Site
Sewage Treatment Facility
• ci"* rro
-J A? .
\r ,.^;
-------
LYMAN LAKE
Tributary Sampling Site
Lake Sampling Site
1 2 Km
Map Location
-------
REPORT ON LYMAN LAKE, ARIZONA
STORE! NO. 0405
I. CONCLUSIONS
A. Trophic Condition:*
Survey data indicate that Lyman Lake is eutrophic, i.e.,
nutrient rich and potentially highly productive. Whether such
nutrient enrichment is to be considered beneficial or deleterious
is determined by its actual or potential impact upon designated
beneficial water uses of each lake.
Chlorophyll a^ values in the lake ranged from 1.3 yg/1 in
April to 4.5 yg/1 in October, with a mean of 2.6 yg/1. Potential
for primary productivity as measured by algal assay control
yield was high. Of the 11 Arizona lakes sampled, only 1 had
higher median total phosphorus levels (0.099 mg/1), 6 had higher
median inorganic nitrogen values (0.060 mg/1), and 1 had higher
median orthophosphorus levels (0.056 mg/1) than Lyman Lake.
Survey limnologists did not note any phytoplankton blooms
or widespread macrophytes. However, it was noted that the lake
was highly turbid on all sampling occasions, and low Secchi
disc transparencies (range of 0.2 to 0.8 meters) probably in-
dicate that primary productivity in the lake is light limited.
*See Appendix E.
-------
B. Rate-Limiting Nutrient:
The algal assay results indicate that Lyman Lake was limited
by available nitrogen levels during the assay sample collection
times (04/30/75, 10/06/75). The lake data substantiate primary
limitation by nitrogen throughout the sampling year.
C. Nutrient Controllability:
1. Point sources -
There was one known point source, the Springervilie-
Eager plant, impacting Lyman Lake during the sampling year.
The plant was estimated to contribute 14.6% of the total
phosphorus load to Lyman Lake. This annual contribution may
be somewhat overestimated since plant operators state that a
portion of the discharges from the Springervilie plant are
diverted and used for irrigation purposes; however, the State
of Arizona considers the plant as a significant discharger,
and states that continued discharge from this overloaded
facility will result in deterioration of stream water quality
and possible health hazards (Arizona Department of Health
Services, 1976).
The present phosphorus loading of 1.72 g P/m^/yr is five
times that proposed by Vollenweider (1975) as a "eutrophic"
loading. However, Vollenweider's model probably is not
applicable to lakes in which epilimnetic light penetration is
-------
severely reduced by the presence of suspended materials
in the surface waters. In Lyman Lake, primary production
as roughly estimated by chlorophyll a_ levels, was consid-
erably lower than would be expected based upon nutrient
levels. The likely reason for this is the inability to
develop phytoplankton levels to potential due to light
limitation caused by suspended sediments in the water
column.
2. Nonpoint sources -
Nonpoint sources, including precipitation, contri-
buted all of the calculated phosphorus loading to Lyman
Lake during the sampling year. The Little Colorado River
contributed 80.0% of the total phosphorus load, and un-
gaged drainage areas contributed an estimated 4.4% of the
total.
The phosphorus export rate of the Little Colorado
2
River (5 kg/km /yr) compares favorably with the unimpacted
2
tributary rate of nearby Luna Lake* (6 kg/km /yr), and Fools
Hollow Lake* (1 kg/km2/yr).
*See Working Paper NQS. 727 and 729.
-------
II. LAKE AND DRAINAGE BASIN CHARACTERISTICS
Lake and drainage basin characteristics are itemized below.
Lake morphometry data were provided by Ned Rathbun (1974); average
surface area and maximum volume are indicated. Tributary flow
data were provided by the Arizona District Office of the
U.S. Geological Survey (USGS). Outlet drainage area includes the
lake surface area. Mean hydraulic retention time was obtained
by dividing the lake volume by mean flow of the outlet. Pre-
cipitation 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:
2
1. Surface area: 5.67 km .
2. Mean depth: 6.7 meters.
3. Maximum depth: 17.4 meters.
4. Volume: 38.238 x 106 m3.
5. Mean hydraulic retention time: 868 days (2.4 years).
-------
B. Tributary and Outlet:
(See Appendix B for flow data)
1. Tributaries -
Drainage Mean Flow
Name area (M ) (m3/sec)
A-2 Little Colorado River 1,934.7 0.73
Minor tributaries and
immediate drainage - 105.7 0.07
Total 2,040.4 0.80
2. Outlets -
A-l Little Colorado River 2,046.1 0.14
B-l Lyman Canal 0.0 0.37
Total 2,046.1 0.51
C. Precipitation:
1. Year of sampling: 32.0 cm.
2. Mean annual: 28.8 cm.
-------
III. LAKE WATER QUALITY SUMMARY
Lyman Lake was sampled three times during the open-water season
of 1975 by means of a pontoon-equipped Huey helicopter. Each time,
samples for physical and chemical parameters were collected from
three stations on the lake and from a number of depths at each station
(see maps, pages v, vi). 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. Maximum depths sampled were 9.8 meters at Station 01,
8.8 meters at Station 02, and 3.4 meters at Station 03. For a more
detailed explanation of NES methods, see NES Working Paper No. 175.
The results obtained are presented in full in Appendix C and
are summarized In III-A for waters at the surface and at the maximum
depth for each site. Results of the phytoplankton counts and chloro-
phyll a_ determinations are included in III-B. Results of the limiting
nutrient study are presented in III-C.
-------
LYM4N
STO*ET cone 0405
A. PHYSICAL AND CHEMICAL CHARACTERISTICS
( 4/30/75 ) J 6/19/75 )
( 10X 6/75 )
PARAMFTEW
TEMPERATURE (DEG
0.-1.5 M DEPTH
"AX DEPTH"
DISSOLVED OXYGEN
0.-1.5 *• DE^TH
MAX DEPTH"
M*
CF'-T)
S
3
(MG/L)
=,
3
S<>"
^uNGE
in. 7- 12.1
•3.P- 10.4
6.0- «.0
7.*,- 8.0
= 7
MED I AN
11.3
10.0
8.0
7.6
MAX
DEPTH
RAMGF
(«ETt
0.0-
3.0-
n.o-
3.0-
RS)
1.5
9.4
1.5
9.4
N*
6
3
6
3
S«eo
OANGE
16.2- 16o6
14.8- 15.3
6.8- 7.2
6o2- 6.8
= 3
MEDIAN
16.3
15.0
7.0
6.6
MAR
DEPTH
KflNGE
(METEHS) N«
OoO-
3.4-
0.0-
3.4-
1.5
9.8
1.5
9.8
6
3
6
3
S»««
WANGF
17.5- IP. 6
17.4- 17.6
608- 8oO
?.0- 7.6
= 3
MEDIAN
17.9
17.4
7.3
7.4
MAX
DEPTH
RANGE
•METERS)
0.0-
3.0-
0.0-
3.0-
1.5
9.1
1.5
9.1
CONDUCTIVITY (UMHOS)
0.-1.5 M DEPTH
MAX DEPTH»o
PH (STANDARD UNI
0.-1.5 M DEPTH
MAX DEPTH"
TOTAL ALKALINITY
0.-1.5 M DEPTH
MAX DEPTH"
TOTAL P (MG/L)
0.-1.5 M DEPTH
MAX DEPTH"
DISSOLVED ORTHO
0.-1.5 M DEPTH
MAX DEPTH"
N02»N03 (MG/L)
0.-1.5 M DEPTH
MAX DEPTH"
AMMONIA (MG/L)
0.-1.5 M DEPTH
MAX DEPTH"
KJELOAHL N (MG/L
0.-1.5 M nEPTH
MAX DEPTH"
n
0
TS)
5
?
(MG/L)
5
2
5
2
P (MG/L)
5
2
5
2
5
?
}
S
?.
O«*HH»o- H.6
12«.- 196.
171.- 197.
0.093-0. 185
O.OR2-0.11*
0.033-0.050
0.03?-0.036
0.0?0-0.060
0.030-0.040
0.0?0-0.040
0.040-0.050
0.400-0.700
0.400-0.400
»««««
««ooo
8.6
8.6
!«?.
1»4.
0.090
0.099
0.037
0.034
0.0?0
O.O^b
0.030
0.045
0.500
0.400
»««»««
oooo.o
0.0-
7.9=
O.o-
7.9-
0.0-
7.9-
0.0-
7.9-
0.0-
7.9-
0.0-
7.9-
0.0-
7.9-
»««{>
oaoo
1.5
9.4
1.5
9.4
1.5
9.4
1.5
9.4
1.5
9.4
1.5
9.4
1.5
9.4
6
3
6
3
6
3
6
3
6
3
6
3
6
3
6
3
307.- 313.
302.- 304.
8.4- 8.5
8.3- P. 4
160.- 164.
162.- 163.
0.102-0.129
0.104-0.134
0.058-0.064
0.059-0.063
0.060-0.070
0.070-0.080
0.050-0.080
0.060-0.070
0.300-0.700
0.300-0.400
308.
304.
8.4
8.3
161.
162.
0.110
0.128
0.060
0.062
0.070
0.080
0.065
0.060
0.400
0.400
0.0-
3.4-
0.0-
3.4-
0.0-
3.4-
0.0-
3.4-
0.0-
3.4-
0.0-
3.4-
0.0-
3.4-
0.0-
3.4-
1.5
9.8
1.5
9.8
1.5
9.8
1.5
9.8
1.5
9.8
1.5
9.8
1.5
9.8
1.5
9.8
6
3
6
3
6
3
6
3
6
3
6
3
6
3
6
3
303.- 318.
304.- 318.
8.5- 8.6
8.6- 8.6
165.- 171.
162.- 171.
0.084-0.150
0.093-0.105
0.049-0.057
0.054-0.057
0.020-0.020
0.020-0.020
0.020-0.020
0.020-0.020
0.200-0.200
0.200-0.200
308.
307.
8.6
8.6
169.
169.
0.090
0.104
0.054
0.056
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
O.?00
0.200
0.0-
3.0-
0.0-
3.0-
0.0-
3.0-
0.0-
3.0-
0.0-
3.0-
0.0-
3.0-
0.0-
3.0-
0.0-
3.0-
1.5
9.1
1.5
9.1
1.5
9.1
1.5
9.1
1.5
9.1
1.5
9.1
1.5
9.1
1.5
9.1
SECCHI
o.a- 0.3
n.3
0.2- 0.3 0.3
0.5- 0.8 0,6
« N = NO. OF S«MPLES
»« MAXIMUM DEPTH SAMPLED AT EACH SITE
s = NO. OF STTES SAMPLED ON THl^ DATE
-------
8
B. Biological Characteristics:
1. Phytoplankton -
Sampling
Date
04/30/75
06/19/75
10/06/75
Dominant
Genera
1.
2.
3.
4.
1.
2.
1.
2.
3.
Cryptomonas
Cocconeis
Nitzschia
Phacus
Other genera
Total
Chroomonas?
Stephanodiscus
Other genera
Total
Chroococcus
Chroomonas?
Stephanodiscus
4. Cryptomonas
5. Anabaena
Other genera
Total
Algal
Units
Per ml
62
31
31
31
155
234
39
273
276
184
46
46
46
45
643
-------
2. Chlorophyll a. -
Sampling Station Chlorophyll a_
Date Number (yg/1)
04/30/75 01 1.3
02 1.3
03 1.8
06/19/75 01 2.5
02 2.4
03 3.7
10/06/75 01 4,5
02 3.5
03 2.7
-------
10
C. Limiting Nutrient Study:
1. Autoclaved, filtered, and nutrient spiked
a, 04/30/75
Spike (mg/1)
Control
0.05 P
0.05 P + 1.0 N
1.00 N
b. 10/06/75
Ortho P
Cone. (mg/1)
0.045
0.095
0.095
0.045
Spike (mg/1)
Control
0.05 P
0.05 P + 1.0 N
1.00 N
Ortho P
Cone, (mg/1)
0.055
0.105
0.105
0.055
Inorganic N
Cone, (mg/1)
0.120
0.120
1J20
1.120
Inorganic N
Cone, (mg/1)
0.095
0.095
1.095
1.095
Maximum Yield
(mg/l-dry wt.)
8,6
7,1
24.5
11.7
Maximum Yield
(mg/l-dry wt.)
5.8
5.9
40.6
25.4
-------
11
2. Discussion -
The control yields of the assay alga, Selenastrum capri-
cornutum*, indicate that the potential for primary productivity'in
Lyman Lake was high at both sample collection times (04/30/75,
10/06/75). In both assays a significant increase in yield over
that of the control occurred when nitrogen was added alone and in
combination with phosphorus, indicating nitrogen limitation. The
addition of only phosphorus resulted in yields which were not sig-
nificantly greater than that of the control.
The mean inorganic nitrogen to orthophosphorus ratios (N/P)
in the lake data were approximately 2/1 in the spring and summer
and 1/1 in the fall, further suggesting primary limitation by
nitrogen (a mean N/P ratio of 14/1 or greater generally reflects
phosphorus limitation).
*For further information regarding the algal assay test
procedure and selection of test organisms, see U.S. EPA (1971).
-------
12
IV. NUTRIENT LOADINGS
(See Appendix D for data)
For the determination of nutrient loadings, the Arizona National
Guard collected monthly near-surface grab samples from each of the
tributary sites indicated on the maps (pages v, vi), except for the
high runoff months of April and May when two samples were collected.
Sampling was begun in December 1974, and was completed in November
1975.
Through an interagency agreement, stream flow estimates for the
year of sampling and a "normalized" or average year were provided by
the Arizona District Office of the USGS for the tributary 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 tributaries
are these measured minus known point source loads, if any.
Nutrient loadings for unsampled "minor tributaries and immediate
drainage" ("II" of USGS) were estimated by using the mean annual
2
nutrient loads, in kg/km /year in the Little Colorado River, at
2
Station A-2, and multiplying the means by the II area in km .
Nutrient loads for the Springervilie-Eager wastewater treatment
plant were estimated using provided monthly effluent samples and
estimated flows.
-------
13
A. Waste Sources:
1. Known municipal -
Name
Pop.*
Served
Springerville- 1,750
Eager
Treatment*
Stabilization
Pond
Mean Flow
(m3/d x IP3)
0.662**
Receiving
Water
Nutrioso Creek
2. Known industrial - None
*Provided by treatment plant operator.
**Estimated at 0.785 m3/capita/day.
-------
14
B. Annual Total Phosphorus Loading - Average Year:
1. Inputs -
% of
Source kg P/yr total
a. Tributaries (nonpoint load) -
A-2 Little Colorado River 7,775 80.0
b. Minor tributaries and immediate
drainage (nonpoint load) - 425 4.4
c. Known municipal STP's -
Springervilie-Eager 1,425 14.6
d. Septic tanks* - <5 <0.1
e. Known industrial - None
f. Direct precipitation** - 100 1.0
Total 9,725 100.0
2. Outputs -
A-l Little Colorado River 545
B-l Lyman Canal 2.900
Total 3,445
3. Net annual P accumulation - 6,280
*Estimate based on 1 park.
**Estimated (See NES Working Paper No. 175).
-------
15
C. Annual Total Nitrogen Loading - Average Year:
1. Inputs -
% of
Source kg N/yr total
a. Tributaries (nonpoint load) -
A-2 Little Colorado River 36,225 75.6
b. Minor tributaries and immediate
drainage (nonpoint load) - 2,010 4.2
c. Known municipal STP's -
Springervilie-Eager 3,535 7.4
d. Septic tanks* - 35 0.1
e. Known industrial - None
f. Direct precipitation** - 6,120 12.7
Total 47,925 100.0
2. Outputs -
A-l Little Colorado River 5,890
B-l Lyman Canal 37.200
Total 43,090
3. Net annual N accumulation - 4,835
*Estimate based on 1 park.
**Estimated (See NES Working Paper No. 175).
-------
16
D. Mean Annual Nonpoint Nutrient Export by Subdrainage Area:
2 2
Tributary kg P/km /yr kg N/km /yr
Little Colorado River 4 19
E. Yearly Loading:
In the following table, the existing phosphorus 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 be applicable to water
bodies with very short retention times or in which light penetration
is severely restricted from high concentrations of suspended solids
in the surface waters.
Total Yearly
Phosphorus Loading
(g/m?/yr)
Estimated loading for Lyman Lake 1.72
Vollenweider's "eutrophic" loading 0.33
Vollenweider's "oligotrophic" loading 0.16
-------
17
V. LITERATURE REVIEWED
Arizona Department of Health Services. 1976. Water Quality
Management Basin Plan, Little Colorado River Basin, Arizona.
Phoenix, Arizona.
Rathbun, Ned L. 1974. Personal Communication (lake morphometry).
Arizona Game and Fish Department, Phoenix, Arizona.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. 1971. Algal Assay Procedure
Bottle Test. National Eutrophication Research Program, Corvallis,
Oregon.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. 1975. National Eutrophica-
tion Survey Methods 1973-1976. Working Paper No. 175. National
Environmental Research Center, Las Vegas, Nevada, and Pacific
Northwest Environmental Research Laboratory, Corvallis, Oregon.
Vollenweider, R. A. 1975. Input-Output Models With Special
Reference to the Phosphorus Loading Concept in Limnology.
Schweiz. Z. Hydrol. 37:53-84.
-------
18
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 = 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
-------
FLO* INFIIKMAUUN f OH
ll/26//b
LAKt CODE 0405 LtMAx
TUTAL GRAINAbE A*tA OF
SUb-DflAlNflGt
TRIHUTAKY AHEAtSij KM)
040bAl
0405A2
040bBl
040b£Z
2046.1
1934.1
o.o
111.4
JAN
0.011
0. J4
O.OOfc
O.G2«
TOTAL i
SUM OF
t-Eo
O.OOt)
0.37
0.006
MAW
0.014
0.91
n.ooe
O.Ottb
AH«
3.11
0.425
0.2»3
J^AINA&E AHEA OF LAM: =
SUS-OKAINAGt AKEAS =
MAY
0.850
1.42
0.850
0.227
2046.1
2046.1
JUN
0.113
0.850
0.042
6UMM
JOL
0.1*7
0.34
0.850
0.014
AHY
AOG btH
0.113 0.071
0.71 0.40
0.9V1 0.425
0.014 0.028
TOTAL FLOW IN =
TOTAL FLO* OUT =
OCT
0.014
0.15
0.0
0.057
14.05
I.o3
NOV
0.014
0.23
0.0
0.028
DEC
o.oll
0.31
0.003
0.014
Mt-
0.1
0.
0.3
0.0
MtAN MONTHLY FLO*.5 AND DAILY FLOob(CMS)
TRIbUTAwY
040bAl
MONTH
YEA*
MtAN
0405A2
12
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
1
2
3
«
5
6
7
a
9
10
11
74
fb
/5
75
75
75
75
75
75
75
75
75
74
75
73
73
75
75
75
75
fa
75
75
75
i h L0v«
O.OOe
0.005
O.OOb
0.006
0.008
0.083
0.116
0.148
0.120
0.049
0.018
0.023
0.133
0.084
0.213
0.966
4 . 1 0 b
2.461
0.544
0.566
0.255
0. 733
0.114
0.126
DAY
8
1
B
5
?
15
16
16
11
13
IS
a
i
«
5
2
15
16
16
11
13
IS
FLO«
O.OOf
O.OOb
0.006
0.003
0.051
0.136
0.153
0.119
0.034
0.017
0.02b
0.150
0.13b
0.204
1.642
7.07V
0.425
0. J9b
0.272
1.041
0.10B
0.136
UAY
lb
18
18
le
DAY
FLO*
0.006
0.096
2.775
-------
f-LiJ* INFORMATION FOK AHI/ONA
LAKE. COOt OtOi
VC.AN MONTHLY
MONTH
Id
1
3
4
6
7
8
10
11
12
1
2
3
6
7
8
9
10
11
LYMAiv
AND OAlLY KLO*S < CMS )
YC.A-,
75
7b
75
7b
75
75
75
75
75
75
75
75
75
75
75
75
75
MEAN
FLO* DAY
FLU* UAY
FLO*
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.070
0.79b
0.866
0.980
1.042
0.430
0.0
0.0
0.014
0.014
0.0d8
0.170
0.425
0.227
0.014
0.014
0.006
0.057
0.028
0.028
a
1
fl
s
?
IS
16
Ifr
11
13
15
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
.u
.0
.0
.0 le 0.0
.481 Ib 0.708
.708
.195
.18^
.481
.0
.0
-------
APPENDIX C
PHYSICAL AND CHEMICAL DATA
-------
NATL
cc.TKlr.VAL JfiT'. 7t/ll/2<>
34 22 23.0 109 22 45.0 3
7b0109 211120*:
OGJb r£ET DEPTH CLASS 00
D«Tt
Ty
75/04/30
TIM
Of-
DAY
14
14
14
0 0 0 1 0
t De^Tf-
17.3
17.4
006b5
DATE
h WC'-t
TO
75/04/30
7b/U6/lv
75/10/06
TIME
OF
DAY
14
14
14
14
11
11
11
11
14
14
14
14
35
35
35
35
20
20
£0
tO
30
30
30
30
DEPTH
FEET
0000
0005
0015
0031
0000
0005
0011
0032
OOOU
0005
0015
0030
PnOS-TOT
MG/L P
0
0
0
U
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
.087
.083
.081
. 08?
.105
.116
.096
. 104
.067
.089
.094
.105
00300
LJO
uOO/7 OOOV4 00400 00410
TWANbP CNDUCTVY PH F AL*
StCCtil HELL! CAC03
•tti/L INCHES MiCf'OMMO bU
6.
a.
d.
a.
7.
7.
6.
O.
7.
7.
7.
7.
32217
0 13
0
2
0
2 12
0
b
2
4 2<»
6
6
6
00031
6.bu
8.50
B.bu
8.00
313 8.bO
3C7 8.45
304 8.40
304 o.3o
306 f. .bb
303 8.00
303 «.6o
307 a. 60
Mo/L
19b
196
195
197
Ibti
161
Ib2
16«;
169
109
1/0
169
CHLriPhYL INCOT LT
A
UG/L
1.
2.
4.
^EMNliMG
PEHCENT
3
5
5
OOblO 00025 00630
\H3-N TOT fvJcL N02<>MOJ
TOTAL N N-TOTAL
Mb/L MG/L MCi/L
0.030
0.020
0.030
0.040
o.oeo
0.060
0.070
0.060
0.020K
0.0?OK
0.020K
0.020K
0. 700
0.400
0.500
0.400
0.700
0.400
0.400
0.300
O.iOorv
0.200«
0.2UOK
0.020
0.0?OK
0.020K
0.040
0.070
0.060
0.070
0.0-40
0.020K
0.020*
0.020K
0.020K
00^71
-nOS-OlS
0-
-------
STOKtT KETRIEVAL DATE 76/11/26
NATL EUTROPHICATION SUHVEY
Ei-'A-LAS VEGAS
040502
34 21 40.0 109 21 40.0 3
LTMAN LAHE
04001 ARIZONA
11EHALES 760109 2111202
0030 FEET DEt-TH CLASS 00
00010
UATE TI.-E DEPTH »
h>0w OF
TO
7S/U4/30
7t>/06/19
75/10/06
DAY FEtT
15
15
15
15
11
11
11
11
14
14
14
14
00
00
00
00
50
50
50
50
50
50
50
50
0000
0005
001S
0026
0000
0005
0015
0029
0000
0005
0015
0023
(ATE*
TtMP
CtliT
11.3
11.2
10.1
10.0
16. J
16.2
15.6
15.0
16.1
17.6
17.6
17.4
00300
00
Mtf/l_
7.0
b.U
0.0
7.6
7.2
b.b
6.d
6.6
0.0
7.2
7.2
7.4
00077
THANS"
StCCfil
INChtS
12
9
30
00094
CNDUCTVY
FIELD
MICHOMHU
306
308
301
30£
309
304
303
318
00400
PH
SU
8.60
fa. 60
6.65
8.65
8.40
8.40
8.40
8.35
8.60
8.60
b.60
8.60
00410
T ALK
CAC03
Mfa/L
182
ISO
1/3
171
161
161
160
16^
171
171
169
171
00610
MH3-N
TOTAL
MO/L
0.030
0.030
0.040
0.050
0.060
0.080
0.090
0.070
0.020K
0.020K
0.020K
0.020K
0062b
T01 KJEL
N
MG/L
0.300
0.400
0.400
0.400
0.500
0.300
0.400
0.400
0.200K
0.2001V
0.200K
0.200K
00630
N02&N03
N-TOTAL
MG/L
0.030
0.020
0.030
0.030
0.060
0.070
o.oao
0.080
0.020K
0.020K
0.020K
0.020K
00671
PHOS-DIS
OHTnO
MG/L P
0.03b
0.037
0.03«
0.036
0.059
0.060
0.062
0.062
0.054
0.056
0.055
0.054
DATE TIME DEPTH
FKOM OF
TO DAY FthT
75/04/30 15 00 0000
Ib 00 0005
15 00 0015
15 00 0026
75/06/19 11 50 0000
11 50 0005
11 50 0015
11 50 0029
75/10/06 14 50 0000
14 50 0005
14 50 001S
14 50 0023
30665
3S-TOT
i/L P
0.094
0.090
0.094
0.116
U.105
0.102
0.112
0.134
0.08*
0.150
0.084
0.104
32217
CHLRPnYL
A
OS/L
1.3
2.4
3.5
00031
INCDT LT
REMNlNG
PEKCtNT
K VALUE KNOWN TO BE LESS
THAN INDICATED
-------
STOHET KtTRIEVAL UATt
NATL tOTXOPrllCATiO--.
EPA-LAS VEGAS
040bOJ
34 £1 12.0 109 20 45.0 3
LYMAN LAKE
AHI40NA
OATt
FROM OF
TO DAY
TIME DEPTh
FEtl
75/04/30 Ib 25 OOUfl
Ib 25 0010
7&/06/19 12 15 0000
12 ib oooe>
12 Ib 0011
75/10/06 13 10 0000
Ib 10 OuOa
Ib 10 0010
llEHALti 760109 211120*:
0014 FEET Uc'HTri CLASS 00
00010
ATE*
Tfc.iP
CENT
11.
10.
16.
16.
15.
18.
la.
If.
4
It
3
2
3
6
3
6
00300
00
MG/L
8.
7.
6.
7.
6.
6.
7.
7.
0
8
8
0
8
8
0
0
00077
THANSP
SECCHI
INCHES
9
11
18
00094
CNOUCTVY
FIELD
MICWOMHO
30a
307
304
318
313
304
00400
f-H
su
8.60
8.40
8.40
8.40
8.60
H.bO
8.60
00410
T ALK
CAC03
MG/L
128
16f
100
163
16b
168
162
00610
(MH3-N
TOTAL
MG/L
0.040
0.050
0.070
0.060
0.020K.
0.020K
0.020K
00625
TOT KjtL
N
M6/L
0.500
0.400
O.oOO
O.»00
0.200
0.200*
0.200K
00610
N02&N03 f
N-TOTAL
Mb/L
0.060
0.070
0.070
0.070
0.020K
O.O?OK
0.020K
00t>71
'HOS-OIS
O^TiO
MU/L f
0.030
0.058
0.064
0.063
0.037
0.055
0.056
iJATt TIME OEHTH
F'rfOM OF
TO DAY FEET
75/04/JO 15 25 0000
7b/06/19 12 13 0000
12 15 0005
12 15 0011
73/10/06 15 10 0000
Ib 10 OOOb
Ib 10 0010
066b
S-10T
/L P
0.185
0.126
0.129
0.128
0.091
0.099
0.093
32217
CHLHPHYL
A
Uo/L
1.8
3.7
2.7
00031
INCOT LT
REMNING
PEHCENT
K VALUE KNOWN TO BE LESS
THAN INDICATED
-------
APPENDIX D
TRIBUTARY AND WASTEWATER
TREATMENT PLANT DATA
-------
STORET RETRIEVAL DATE 76/11/30
NATL EUTROPH1CATION SURREY
EPA- LAS VEGAS
DATE TIME DEPTH
FROM OF
TO DAY FEET
74/12/08
75/02/01
75/03/08
75/04/05
75/04/18
75/05/02
75/05/18
75/06/15
75/07/16
75/08/16
75/09/11
75/10/13
75/11/15
09 30
09 20
09 25
07 10
16 35
13 05
10 00
11 05
11
11
15
20
09 20
14 30
11 05
0405A1
34 22 05.0 109 22 56.0 4
LITTLE COLORADO HIVER
04 7.b LYMAN LK S*
0/LYMAN LAKE 110591
PAVED RD BKDG tiELUM LYMAN DAM
11EPALES 2111204
0000 FEET DEPTH CLASS 00
0630
t.N03
GTAL
G/L
0.024
0.008
0.015
0.015
0.005
0.020
0.040
0.070
0.145
0.065
0.045
O.G20
0.020
00625
TOT KJEL
N
MG/L
1.200
1.600
1.200
0.600
1.250
0.550
0.950
1.250
0.900
1.200
0.600
2.000
1.700
00610
NH3-fi
TOTAL
MG/L
O.UlO
0.016
0.022
0.020
0.030
0.020
0.030
0.035
0.115
0.025
0.055
0.045
0.030
00671
PMOS-DIS
ORTMO
MG/L P
0.045
0.048
0.045
0.040
0.035
0.025
0.055
0.080
0.100
0.070
0.070
0.065
0.055
00665
PMOS-TOT
rtG/L P
0.110
0.160
0.070
0.110
0.130
0.100
0.110
0.290
0.180
0.160
0.160
0.220
0.080
-------
STOHET RETRIEVAL UATt 7&/U/40
NATL EUTKCPHICATION
EPA- LAS VEGAS
0405A2
34 20 55.0 109 20 03.0 4
LITTLE. COLORADO HIVER
04 7.5 LVMAN LAKE
T/LYMAN LAKE
8NK 303 FT S* HO ii.5 M
11EPALES
0000 FEET DEPTH
110591
E KT 180/666 JCT
2111204
CLASS 00
DATE TIME DEPTH N02b.NOJ
FROM OF
TO DAY FEtT
74/12/08
75/02/01
75/03/08
75/04/05
75/04/16
75/05/02
75/05/18
75/06/15
75/07/16
75/08/16
75/09/11
75/10/13
75/11/15
OB 30
08 30
09 00
06 45
16 05
11 15
09 40
10 45
10 45
11 40
08 50
13 40
10 40
10630
IbNOJ
•QTAL
I&/L
0.008
O.OOU
0.012
0.010
U.030
U.050
0.020
0.005
0.085
0.005
0.090
0.005
0.005
00625
TOT KJtL
N
MO/L
0.800
0.800
1.450
0.800
3.600
1.950
2.100
1.480
0.800
1.800
1.500
1.500
0.800
00610
NM3-N
TOTAL
M6/L
0.03b
0.064
0.024
0.010
0.180
0.045
0.025
0.025
0.050
0.025
0.040
0.015
0.005
00671
PHOS-OIS
ORTHO
MG/L P
0.090
0.112
0.128
0.075
0.080
0.065
0.075
0.080
0.210
0.175
0.120
0.075
0.060
00665
PHOS-TOT
MG/L P
0.150
0.170
0.270
0.300
0.690
0.830
0.190
0.135
0.400
0.360
0.500
0.150
0.120
-------
STORET RETRIEVAL DATE 76/11/30
NATL EUTROPHICATION SUMVEY
EPA- LAS VEGAS
UATE
TO
TIME DEPTH
OF
DAY
FEET
0405B1
3* 19 50.0 109 21 18.0 4
LYMAfSi CANAL
04 7.5 LYMAN LK SB
0/LYMAN LAKE 110591
6NK OFF PtfD RD .* M NNE HT 180/666 JCT
11EHALES 211120*
0000 FEET DEPTH CLASS 00
75/05/02 13 10
75/05/18 10 05
75/06/15 11 10
75/07/16 11 20
75/09/11 09 35
00630
N02kN03
N-TOTAL
MG/L
0.020
0.035
0.070
0.150
0.045
00685
TOT *JEL
N
MG/L
0.625
1.40U
1.800
0.500
OoSOO
00610
NH3-N
TOTAL
MG/L
0.025
0.045
0.045
0.045
0.045
00671
PHOS-DIS
OBTHO
MG/L P
0.025
0.055
0.070
0.100
0.070
00665
PHOS-TOT
MG/L P
0.115
0.110
0.280
0.190
0.180
-------
STO-
4
5
2
3
2
2
4
6
5
6
4
.200
.400
.300
.500
.800
.700
.200
.275
.700
.200
.700
MG/L f> INST MGO MONTHLY
4.500
6.100
3.300
4.400
3.900
4.200
7.200
7.300
6.400
6.900
7.100
/.400
-------
APPENDIX E
PARAMETRIC RANKINGS OF LAKES
SAMPLED BY NES IN 1975
STATE OF ARIZONA
Mean or median values for six of the key parameters evaluated
1n establishing the trophic conditions of Arizona lakes sampled are pre-
sented to allow direct comparison of the ranking, by parameter,
of each lake relative to the others. Median total phosphorus, median
Inorganic nitrogen and median dissolved orthophosphorus levels are
expressed 1n mg/1. Chlorophyll a_ values are expressed 1n yg/1.
To maintain consistent rank order with the preceding parameters,
the mean Secchi disc depth, 1n Inches, 1s subtracted from 500.
Similarly, minimum dissolved oxygen values are subtracted from 15
to create table entries.
-------
LAKE DATA TO BE USED IN RANKINGS
MKE ..'.
CODE LAKE NAME
0401 BIG LAKE
0402 FOOLS HOLLOW
0403 LAKE HAVASU
0404 LUNA LAKE
0405 LYHAN LAKE
0406 LAKE HOHAVE
0467 LAKE PLEASANT
0408 LAKE POWELL
0409 RAINBOW LAKE
0410 ROOSEVELT LAKE
0411 SAN CARLOS RESERVOIR
3201 LAKE MEAD
MEDIAN
TOTAL P
0.032
0.059
0.015
6.182
0.099
0.017
0.027
0.009
0.046
6.020
0.056
0.620
MEDIAN
INORG N
0.090
0.090
0.170
0.050
0.060
0.240
0.040
0.400
0.045
0.040
0.060
0.505
500-
MEAN SEC
386.000
466.600
420.231
396.250
484.667
369.667
449.154
239.000
440.750
429.917
474.500
453.600
MEAN
CHLORA
2.900
10.683
3.948
3.400
2.633
4.404
9.808
1.333
16.367
4.073
14.750
1.150
15-
MIN 00
9.000
14.800
10.800
12.200
9.000
8.600
14.900
12.200
12.000
14.000
14.600
8.000
MEDI
DISS ORTl
0.007
0.014
0*005
0.131
0.056
0.010
0.004
0.010
0.009
0.008
0.009
0.007
-------
PERCENT OF LAKES WITH HIGHER VALUES (NUMBER OF LAKES WITH HIGHER VALUES)
LAKE
CODE LAKE NAME
0401 BIG LAKE
0402 FOOLS HOLLOW
0403 LAKE HAVASU
0404 LUNA LAKE
0405 LYMAN LAKE
0406 LAKE MOHAVE
0407 LAKE PLEASANT
c
0408 LAKE POWELL
0409 RAINBOW LAKE
0410 ROOSEVELT LAKE
• •*
04U SAN CARLOS RESERVOIR
3201 LAKE HEAD
MEDIAN
TOTAL P
45 I
18 (
91 1
0 1
9 <
82 (
55 1
100 '
36 I
68 l
27 I
68 1
[ 5)
[ 2)
I 10)
1 0)
I 1)
I 9)
I 6)
I 11)
[ 4)
; 7)
[ 3)
[ 7)
MEDIAN
INORG N
41 (
41 (
27 <
73 <
64 1
18 1
95 <
9 1
82 1
95 1
55 1
0 1
! 4)
[ 4)
; 3)
; 8)
1 7)
( 2)
: io>
[ 1)
[ 9)
[ 10)
[ 6)
1 0)
500-
MEAN SEC
82 (
18 (
64 (
73 (
0 (
91 (
36 (
r
100 (
45 (
55 (
9 <
27 (
9)
2)
7)
8)
0)
10)
4)
11)
5)
6)
1)
3)
MEAN
CHLORA
73 <
18 1
55 1
64 1
82 1
36 <
27 1
91 1
0 1
45 1
9 1
100 1
: a)
I 2)
[ 6)
I 7)
[ 9)
[ 4)
I 3)
[ 10)
1 9>
I 5)
E 1)
I 11)
15-
MIN DO
77 1
9 1
64 1
41 <
77 (
91 1
0 I
41 1
55 1
27 1
18 1
100 I
[ 8)
[ 1)
[ 7)
1 4)
[ 8)
I 10)
[ 0)
[ 4)
[ 6)
[ 3)
[ 2)
I 11)
MEDIAN
DISS OHTHO
73 (
18 (
91 (
0 (
9 (
32 (
100 <
32 (
45 (
64 (
55 (
82 (
8)
2)
10)
0)
1)
3)
11)
3)
5)
7)
6)
9)
------- |