U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
NATIONAL EUTROPHICATION SURVEY
WORKING PAPER SERIES
REPORT
ON
LAKEHENSH/W
SAN DIEGO COUNTY
CALIFORNIA
EPA REGION IX
WORKING PAPER No, 748
CORVALLIS ENVIRONMENTAL RESEARCH LABORATORY - CORVALLIS, OREGON
and
ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING & SUPPORT LABORATORY - LAS VEGAS, NEVADA
-------
REPORT
ON
LAKEHENSHAW
SAN DIEGO COUNTY
CALIKMA
EPA REGION IX
WORKING PAPER No, 748
WITH THE COOPERATION OF THE
CALIFORNIA STATE WATER RESOURCES CONTROL BOARD
AND THE
CALIFORNIA NATIONAL GUARD
JUNE, 1978
-------
CONTENTS
Pag_e
Foreword ii
List of California Study Lakes iv
Lake and Drainage Area Map v
Sections
I. Conclusions 1
II. Reservoir and Drainage Basin Characteristics 4
III. Lake Water Quality Summary 5
IV. Nutrient Loadings 10
V. Literature Reviewed 15
VI. Appendices 16
-------
11
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
V
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.
-------
m
Beyond the single lake analysis, broader based correlations
between nutrient concentration (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 California State Water
Resources Control Board and the nine Regional Water Quality
Control Boards for professional involvement, to the California
National Guard for conducting the tributary sampling phase of
the Survey, and to those California wastewater treatment plant
operators who voluntarily provided effluent samples and flow
data.
The staff of the Division of Planning and Research of the
State Water Resources Control Board provided invaluable lake
documentation and counsel during the Survey, coordinated the
reviews of the preliminary reports, and provided critiques
most useful in the preparation of this Working Paper series.
Major General Glen C. Ames, the Adjutant General of Cali-
fornia, and Project Officer Second Lieutenant Terry L. Barrie,
who directed the volunteer efforts of the California National
Guardsmen, are also gratefully acknowledged for their assistance
to the Survey.
-------
iv
NATIONAL EUTROPHICATION SURVEY
STUDY RESERVOIRS
State of California
Name
Amador
Boca
Britton
Casitas
Crowley
Don Pedro
Elsinore
Fallen Leaf
Hennessey
Henshaw
Iron Gate
Lopez
Mary
Mendocino
Nicasio
Lower Otay
Pillsbury
Santa Margarita
Shasta
Shaver
Silver
Tahoe
Tulloch
Lower Twin
Upper Twin
County
Amador
Nevada
Shasta
Ventura
Mono
Tuolumne
Riverside
El Dorado
Napa
San Diego
Siskiyou
San Luis Obispo
Mono
Mendocino
Mari n
San Diego
Lake
San Luis Obispo
Shasta
Fresno
Mono
El Dorado, Placer, CA;
Carson City, Douglas,
Washoe, NV
Calaveras, Tuolumne
Mono
Mono
-------
116'50'
116'30'
LAKE HENSHAW
® Tributary Sampling Site
X Lake Sampling Site
\> Drainage Area Boundary
Land Subject to Inundation
s 10 Km.
5 Mi .
Scale
Map Location
-------
LAKE HENSHAW
STORE! NO. 0610
I. CONCLUSIONS
A. Trophic Condition*:
Survey data indicate Lake Henshaw is eutrophic. It
ranked twenty-first in overall trophic quality among the
24 California lakes and reservoirs sampled in 1975 when com-
pared using a combination of six water quality parameters**.
Twenty water bodies had less median total phosphorus and
dissolved orthophosphorus, 15 had less and one had the same
median inorganic nitrogen, 22 had less mean chlorophyll a^,
and 20 had greater mean Secchi disc transparency. No signifi-
cant depression of dissolved oxygen occurred during Survey sam-
pling; however, destratification equipment has been installed
in this reservoir (Bailey, 1977).
Survey limnologists noted submerged macrophytes in the
southeast end of the reservoir in March and June. Surface con-
centrations of algae were noted at both sampling stations in
March and November.
B. Rate-Limiting Nutrient:
The algal assay results indicate that Lake Henshaw was
, nitrogen limited at the time the sample was collected (03/07/75).
The reservoir data indicate nitrogen limitation at both stations
and at all sampling times.
* Trophic assessment is based on levels of nutrients, dissolved oxygen, and
chlorophyll a; phytoplankton kinds and numbers; and transparency (Allum
et al., 1977]".
** See Appendix A.
-------
C. Nutrient Controllability:
1. Point sources—No known point sources impacted Lake
Henshaw during the sampling year.
The estimated phosphorus loading of 0.09 g/m2 measured
during the sampling year is a little less than that proposed
by Vollenweider (Vollenweider and Dillon, 1974) as an oligp-
trophic loading (see page 14). However, the eutrophic con-
dition of Lake Henshaw and the apparent loss of phosphorus
during the sampling year (page 11), indicate an underestimation
of phosphorus inputs (see discussion below). Also, the area
of the reservoir at maximum pool was used to calculate the
areal loading; if the mid-summer area of 3.67 km2 (Johns, 1975)
is used, the loading would be 0.58 g/m2/yr or nearly three
times Vollenweider's eutrophic rate. Further, if it is assumed
that the incoming phosphorus load is at least equal to the
load leaving the reservoir (i.e., no phosphorus retention) the
areal loading at maximum pool would be 0.23 g/m2/year.
The apparent loss of phosphorus from the reservoir may have
been the result of unmeasured loads from the immediate
drainage area. Survey limnologists observed cattle grazing
and watering along much of the shoreline in June and November
and reported that the pasture areas appeared to be subject
to periodic inundation. Depending on animal densities, such
inundation could result in a significant phosphorus load to
-------
the reservoir. In this regard, note that the mean total phos-
phorus concentration at the outlet (0.213 mg/1) was over four
times the mean of the concentrations in the five sampled tribu-
taries (page 13).
2. Non-point sources--Non-point sources accounted for all
of the total phosphorus input to the reservoir during the sampling
year. The San Luis Rey River contributed an estimated 16.6%,
the West Fork added 5.4%, and the ungaged minor tributaries
and immediate drainage contributed an estimated 57.9% of the
total load.
-------
II. RESERVOIR AND DRAINAGE BASIN CHARACTERISTICS1"
A. Morphometry"^:
1. Surface area: 24.36 kilometers2.
2. Mean depth: 6.1 meters.
3. Maximum depth: 10.7 meters.
4. Volume: 148.596 x 106 m3.
5. Mean hydraulic retention time: 5.7 years.
B. Tributary and Outlet:
(See Appendix C for flow data)
1. Tributaries -
Drainage Mean flow
Name area (km2)* (m3/sec)*
San Luis Rey River 87.0 0.156
W. Fk., San Luis Rey River 66.0 0.125
Minor tributaries &
immediate drainage - 356.1 0.682
Totals 509.1 0.964
2. Outlet -
San Luis Rey River 533.5** 0.820
C. Precipitation***:
1. Year of sampling: 33.6 centimeters.
2. Mean annual: 35.7 centimeters.
t Table of metric equivalents—Appendix B.
tt Johns, 1975.
* For limits of accuracy, see Working Paper No. 175, "... Survey Methods,
1973-1976".
** Includes area of reservoir.
*** See Working Paper No. 175.
-------
III. WATER QUALITY SUMMARY
Lake Henshaw was sampled three times in 1975 by means of a pontoon-
equipped Huey helicopter. Each time, samples for physical and chemical
parameters were collected from one or more depths at two stations on the
reservoir (see map, page v). During each visit, a single depth-integrated
(4.6 m or near bottom to surface) sample was composited from the stations
for phytoplankton identification and enumeration; and during the first
visit, a single 18.9-liter depth-integrated sample was composited for
algal assays. Also each time, a depth-integrated sample was collected
from each of the stations for chlorophyll a^ analysis. The maximum depths
sampled were 6.1 meters at station 1 and 1.2 meters at station 2.
The sampling results are presented in full in Appendix D and are
summarized in the following table.
-------
PARAMETER
TEMP
OISS OXY (MG/L)
CNDCTVY (MCROMO)
PH (STAND UNITS)
TOT ALK (MG/L)
TOT P (MG/L)
ORTHO P (MG/L)
N02*N03 (MG/L)
AMMONIA (MG/L)
Kj£L N (MG/L)
INORG N (MG/L)
TOTAL N (MG/L)
CriLRPYL A (UA/L)
SECCHI (METE=?S)
A. SUMMARY or PHYSICAL AND
1ST SAMPLING ( 3/ 7/75)
2 SITES
RANGE
10.3 - 11.6
7.6 - 9.0
603. - 624.
7.9 - e.3
Ib2. - 165.
0.114 - 0.125
0.062 - 0.067
0.020 - 0.02'J
0.030 - 0.050
0.40U - 1.100
O.C50 - 0.070
0.480 - 1.120
26.6 - 32.1
0.3 - 0.3
CHEMICAL CHARACTERISTICS FOR LAKE MENSHAW
STORET CODE 0610
2ND SAMPLING ( 6/23/75)
2 SITES
3RD SAMPLING (11/13/75)
2 SITES
MEAN
10.7
8.3
614.
8.1
164.
0.120
0.063
0.02C
0.044
0.600
0.064
0.620
29.3
0.3
MEDIAN
10.5
8.2
618.
8.1
164.
C.119
0.062
0.020
0.050
0.500
0.070
0.520
29.3
0.3
RANGE
18.0 - 21.4
5.2 - 8.4
520.
8.6
168.
0.256
0.211
0.020
0.020
0.600
0.040
0.620
6.5
1.5
- 560.
8.9
- 172.
- 0.274
- 0.232
- 0.030
- U.050
- 1.100
- 0.0 du
- 1.120
b.7
1 . B
MEAN
19.6
7.5
540.
8.8
170.
0.262
0.218
0.022
0.032
0.767
0.053
0.788
fo.b
1.7
MEDIAN
19.5
7.9
540.
8.8
171.
0.260
0.216
0.020
0.030
0.700
0.050
0.725
6.6
1.7
RANGE
10.9 - 11.0
8.6 - 8.8
415.
8.3
191.
0.128
0.071
0.080
0.020
O.bOO
0.100
0.580
44.4
O OiHH* **
- 437.
6.4
- 196.
- 0.141
- 0.083
- 0.030
- 0.030
- 0.600
- 0.110
- 0.680
44.4
""
MEAN
11.0
a. 7
426.
8.4
194.
0.134
0.075
0.080
0.022
0.525
0.102
0.605
44.4
MEOI AN
11.0
8.7
425.
H.4
194.
0.134
0.072
0.080
0.020
0.500
0.100
0.580
44.4
-------
B. Biological characteristics:
1. Phytoplankton -
Sampling
Date
03/07/75
06/23/75
11/13/75
Dominant
Genera
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
Mallomonas sp_.
Chroomonas (?) sp,.
Ankistrodesmus sp.
Cryptomonas sp.
Melosira sp.
Other genera
Total
Microcystis sp.
Ankistrodesmus sp.
Glenodinium sp.
Chroomonas (?) sp.
Kirchneriella sp.
Other genera
Total
Oscillatoria sp.
Chroomonas (?) sp.
Ankistrodesmus sp.
Pediastrum sp.
Melosira sp.
Other genera
Algal Units
per ml
7,701
553
277
184
184
323
9,222
987
816
258
258
215
728
3,262
681
367
314
209
209
577
Total
2,357
-------
Sampling
Date
03/07/75
06/23/75
11/13/75
Station
Number
1
2
1
2
1
2
8
2. Chlorophyll a^ -
Chlorophyll
-------
The reservoir data also indicate nitrogen limitation. The
mean inorganic nitrogen/orthophosphorus ratios at both sam-
pling stations were 1/1 or less, and nitrogen limitation
would be expected.
-------
10
IV. NUTRIENT LOADINGS
(See Appendix E for data)
For the determination of nutrient loadings, the California 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 month of March when two samples were collected. Sampling was
begun in November, 1974, and was completed in October, 1975.
Through an interagency agreement, stream flow estimates for the
year of sampling and a "normalized" or average year were provided by
the California District Office of the U.S. Geological Survey for the
tributary sites nearest the reservoir.
In this report, nutrient loads for sampled tributaries were cal-
culated using mean annual concentrations and mean annual flows. Nu-
trient loads for unsampled San Luis Rey River at station A-2 were esti-
mated using the mean nutrient concentrations measured at station H-l
and the mean river flow.
Nutrient loads for unsampled "minor tributaries and immediate
drainage" ("IT1 of U.S.G.S.) were estimated using the mean concentrations
at stations B-l, F-l, and G-l and the mean ZZ flow.
No known wastewater treatment plants impacted the reservoir during
the sampling year.
-------
11
A. Waste Sources:
1. Known municipal - None
2. Known industrial - None
B. Annual Total Phosphorus Loading - Average Year:
1. Inputs -
kg P/ % of
Source yjr total
a. Tributaries (non-point load) -
San Luis Rey River 350 16.6
W. Fk., San Luis Rey River 115 5.4
b. Minor tributaries & immediate
drainage (non-point load) - 1,225 57.9
c. Known municipal STP's - None
d. Septic tanks - Unknown ?
e. Known industrial - None
f. Direct precipitation* - 425 20.1
Total 2,115 100.0
2. Outputs -
Reservoir outlet - San Luis Rey River 5,510
3. Net annual P loss - 3,395 kg.
* See Working Paper No. 175.
-------
12
C. Annual Total Nitrogen Loading - Average Year:
1. Inputs -
kg N/ % of
Source yjr total
a. Tributaries (non-point load) -
San Luis Rey River 7,415 10.5
W. Fk., San Luis Rey River 5,530 7.9
b. Minor tributaries & imnediate
drainage (non-point load) - 31,120 44.2
c. Known municipal STP's - None
d. Septic tanks - Unknown ?
e. Known industrial - None
f. Direct precipitation* - 26,300 37.4
Total 70,365 100.0
2. Outputs -
Reservoir outlet - San Luis River 39,460
3. Net annual N accumulation - 30,905 kg.
D. Non-point Nutrient Export by Subdrainage Area:
Tributary kg P/km2/yr kg N/km2/yr
San Luis Rey River 4 85
W. Fk., San Luis Rey River 2 84
* See Working Paper No. 175.
-------
13
E. Mean Nutrient Concentrations in Ungaged Streams:
Mean Total P Mean Total N
Tributary Cone, (mg/1) Cone, (mg/1)
Carista Creek 0.057 1.572
Unnamed Stream E-l 0.020 0.860
Unnamed Stream F-l 0.047 1.559
Sparling Creek 0.065 1.232
Unnamed Stream H-l 0.071 1.507
-------
14
F. Yearly Loads:
In the following table, the existing phosphorus loadings
are compared to those proposed by Vollenweider (Vollenweider
and Dillon, 1974). Essentially, his "dangerous" loading is
one at which the receiving water would become eutrophic or
remain eutrophic; his "permissible" loading is that which
would result in the receiving water remaining oligotrophic
or becoming oligotrophic if morphometry permitted. A meso-
trophic loading would be considered one between "dangerous"
and "permissible".
Note that Vollenweider1s model may not be applicable to
water bodies with short hydraulic retention times.
Total Phosphorus Total Nitrogen
Total Accumulated Total Accumulated
grams/m2/yr 0.09 loss* 2.9 1.3
Vollenweider phosphorus loadings
(g/m2/yr) based on mean depth and mean
hydraulic retention time of Lake Henshaw:
"Dangerous" (eutrophic loading) 0.20
"Permissible" (oligotrophic loading) 0.10
* There was an apparent loss of phosphorus during the sampling year. This
would not be expected to occur and may be indicative of unsampled
point sources discharging directly to the reservoir, resolubilization of
previously sedimented phosphorus, recharge with phosphorus-rich
groundwater, or underestimation of the immediate drainage load (see
page 2).
-------
15
V. LITERATURE REVIEWED
Allum, M.O., R.E. Glessner, and J.H. Gakstatter, 1977. An evalua-
tion of the National Eutrophication Survey data. Working Paper
No. 900, Corvallis Env. Res. Lab., Con/all is OR.
Bailey, Thomas E., 1977. Personal communication (reviews of pre-
liminary report). CA Water Res. Contr. Bd., Sacramento.
Johns, Gerald E., 1975. Personal communication (water quality
information). CA Water Res. Contr. Bd., Sacramento.
Vollenweider, R. A., and P. J. Dillon, 1974. The application of
the phosphorus loading concept to eutrophication research.
Natl. Res. Council of Canada Publ. No. 13690, Canada Centre
for Inland Waters, Burlington, Ontario.
-------
16
APPENDIX A
LAKE RANKINGS
-------
LAKE DATA TO BE USED IN RANKINGS
LAKE
COOE LAKE NAME
A*ADO» WESERVOI*
0603 80CA LAKE
0603 LAKE BPITTON
0604 CASITAS RESERVOIS
0605 CROWLEY LAKE
0606 DON PEDRO RESERVOIR
0607 LAKE ELSINORE
0601 FALLEN LEAF RESERVOIR
0&09 LAKE HENNESSEY
06io LAKE HENSHAW
0611 IRON GATE RESERVOIR
0614 LOPEZ LAKE
0615 LAKE MARY
061fc LAKE MENDOCINO
0617 NICASIO RESERVOIR
0618 LOWER OTAY RESERVOIR
0619 LAKE PILLS8URY
0620 SANTA MARGARITA LAKE
0621 SHASTA LAKE
0622 SHAVER
0623 SILVER LAKE
0624 TULLOCK RESERVOIR
0625 UPPER TWIN LAKES
0626 LOWER TWIN LAKES
MEDIAN
TOTAL f
0.040
0.012
0.067
0.029
0.04f>
0.013
0.469
0.007
0.027
0.138
0.164
0.371
0.010
0.020
0.055
0.058
0.022
0.037
0.021
0.014
0.012
0.025
0.015
0.014
MEDIAN
INORG N
0.390
0.040
0.115
0.050
0.045
0.060
0.120
0.040
0.060
0.070
0.690
0.090
0.040
0.050
0.345
0.180
0.060
0.070
0.060
0.060
0.055
0.060
0.040
0.040
500-
MEAN 5EC
408.667
372.833
44d.500
400.250
374.750
381.733
489.214
24.357
416.000
461.000
440.333
372.000
296.000
436.500
482.778
447.250
466.667
400.000
381.542
346.400
356.000
433.000
300.200
248.000
MEAN
CHLOrtA
22.383
1.700
4.811
3.192
5.800
3.564
70.572
0.786
4.525
26.783
6.217
8.658
2.550
3.100
6.633
15.933
6.389
9.122
4.087
1.700
1.800
13.878
3.340
2.900
15-
MIN 00
14.600
6.800
11.200
14.000
12.200
11.400
8.000
8.800
15.000
9.800
13.800
15.000
10.600
9.400
9.800
15.000
a. 200
1^.800
9.000
7.400
7.000
7.400
7.400
11.400
MEDIAN
DISS OKTHO P
0.020
0.003
0.04/
0.014
0.034
0.004
0.092
0.005
0.012
0.073
0.124
0.343
0.002
0.008
0.013
0.013
0.008
0.014
0.015
0.004
0.003
0.009
0.004
0.003
-------
PERCENT OF LAKES wITn HIGHER VALUES (NUMBER OF LAKES -ITH HIGHER VALUES)
LAKE
CODE LAKE NAME
0601 AMADOR RESERVOIR
0602 BOCA LAKE
0603 LAKE BPITTON
0604 CASITAS RESERVOIR
0605 CROWLEY LAKE
0606 DON PEDRO RESERVOIR
0607 LAKE ELSINORE
0608 FALLEN LEAF RESERVOIR
0609 LAKE HENNESSEY
0610 LAKE HENSHAW
0611 IRON GATE RESERVOIR
0614 LOPEZ LAKE
0615 LAKE MARY
0616 LAKE MENDOCINO
0617 NICASIO RESERVOIR
0618 LOWER OTAY RESERVOIR
0619 LAKE PILLSBURY
0620 SANTA MARGARITA LAKE
0621 SHASTA LAKE
0622 SHAVER
062J SILVER LAKE
0624 TULLOCK RESERVOIR
0625 UPPER TWIN LAKES
0626 LOWER TWIN LAKES
MEDIAN
TOTAL P
35 (
89 (
17 (
43 (
30 (
83 (
0 (
100 (
48 (
13 (
9 (
4 (
96 (
65 (
26 (
22 (
57 (
39 (
61 (
78 (
89 <
52 (
70 (
74 (
8)
20)
4)
10)
7)
19)
0)
23)
11)
3)
2)
D
22)
15)
6)
5)
13)
9)
14)
18)
20)
12)
16)
17)
MEDIAN
INOWG N
it
98
22
74
78
54
17
B7
54
33
0
26
87
70
9
13
41
33
54
41
65
54
98
87
( 1)
I 22)
( 5)
( 17)
( 18)
( 11)
( 4)
( 19)
( 11)
( 7)
( 0)
( 6)
( 19)
( 16)
( 2)
( 3)
( 9)
( 7)
( 11)
( 9)
( 15)
( 11)
( 22)
( 19)
500-
MEAN SEC
43
70
17
48
65
57
0 '
100 '
39
13 i
26 i
74 i
91 i
30 i
4 I
22 1
9 1
52 1
61 1
83 1
78 (
35 (
87 (
96 (
( 10)
( 16)
( 4)
( 11)
( IS)
( 13)
( 0)
t 23)
( 9)
[ 3)
t 6)
( 17)
I 21)
( 7)
I 1)
I 5)
I 2)
! 12)
! 14)
U 19)
: 18)
: a) .
; 20)
; 22)
MEAN
CHLORA
9
91
48
7C
43
61
0 '
100 i
52
4 1
39 <
26 i
83 I
74 l
30 I
13 1
35 1
. 22 1
57 1
96 1
87 (
17 (
65 1
78 <
( 2)
t 21)
( ID
( 16)
( 10)
( It)
( 0)
! 23)
I 12)
I 1)
1 9)
I 6)
I 19)
1 17)
1 7)
I 3)
1 8)
I 5)
: 13)
[ 22)
; 20
: 4)
: 15>
18)
15-
MIN DO
17 i
100 i
43 i
22 i
30 '
37
78 i
70 i
4 1
54 1
26 I
4 1
48 1
61 1
54 1
4 1
. 74 1
13 (
65 (
87 (
96 <
87 (
87 (
37 (
I 4)
I 23)
( 10)
1 5)
( 7)
( 8)
( 18)
I 16)
1 0)
I 12)
I 6)
1 0)
: ID
! 14)
I 12)
1 0)
! 17)
: 3)
15)
19)
22)
19)
19)
8)
MEDIAN
DISS ORTHO P
26
91
17
37
22
78
9
70
52
13
4
0
100
63
46
46 i
63
37 i
30 I
78 I
91 1
57 1
78 1
91 1
( 6)
( 20)
( 4)
( 8)
( 5)
( 17)
( 2)
( 16)
< 12)
( 3)
( 1)
( 0)
( 23)
( 14)
I 10)
( 10)
( 14)
[ 8)
I 7)
I 17)
[ 20)
I 13)
: 17)
: 20)
INDEX
NU
134
539
164
29<»
266
370
104
527
249
130
104
134
505
363
169
120
279
196
328
463
506
302
485
463
-------
LAKES RANKED BY INDEX NOS.
RASK LAKE CODE LAKE NAME INDEX NO
1 0602 BOCA LAKE 539
2 0608 FALLEN LEAF RESERVOIR 527
3 0623 SILVER LAKE 506
4 0615 LAKE MARY 505
5 0625 UPPER TWIN LAKES' 485
6 0626 LOWER TWIN LAKES 463
7 0622 SHAVER 463
8 0606 DON PEDRO RESERVOIR 370
9 0616 LAKE MENDOCINO 363
10 0621 SHASTA LAKE 32B
11 0624 TULLOCK RESERVOIR 302
12 0604 CASITAS RESERVOIR 294
13 0619 LAKE PILLSBURY 279
14 0605 CROWLEY LAKE 268
15 0609 LAKE HENNESSEY 249
16 0620 SANTA MARGARITA LAKE 196
17 0617 NICASIO RESERVOIR 169
18 0603 LAKE BRITTON 164
19 0614 LOPEZ LAKE 134
20 0601 AMADOR RESERVOIR 134
21 0610 LAKE HENSHArf 130
22 0618 LOWER OTAY RESERVOIR 120
23 0607 LAKE ELSINORE 104
24 0611 I«ON GATE RESERVOIR 104
-------
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 CALIFORNIA
11/30/76
LAKE CODE 0610
LAKE HENSHAVi
TOTAL DRAINAGE AREA OK LAKE(SO KM)
533.5
TRIBUTARY ASFA1SQ KM)
JAN
FE3
APR
MAY
NORMALIZED FLOwS(CMS)
JUN JUL AU6
SEP
OCT
NOV
DEC
MEAN
OblOAl
0610A2
061001
0610ZZ
533.5
87.0
66.0
66.0
0.75 3.08 2.49
0.267 0.634 0.392
0.181 0.3?6 0.366
1.170 2.791 1.711
TOTAL DRAINAGE AREA OF
1.44 0.«9 0.25 0.25 0.24 0.18
0.175 O.OSO 0.017 0.008 0.004 0.003
0.354 0.072 0.025 0.005 0.002 0.002
0.774 0.216 0.07.^ 0.036 0.018 0.036
SUMMARY
LAKE = 533.5 TOTAL FLOW IN =
SUM OF SUB-DRAINAGE AREAS = 219.1 TOTAL FLOW OUT =
MEAN
THlHUTAHY
0610A1
0610A2
MONTHLY
MONTH
11
12
1
?
3
4
5
6
7
H
9
10
11
12
1
2
j
it
5
6
7
R
9
10
FLO*S
fEAR
74
74
75
75
75
75
75
75
75
75
75
75
74
74
75
75
75
75
75
75
75
75
75
75
AND DAILY FLOWS(CMS)
MEAN FLOW DAY
0.0 23
u.O 22
0.146 18
0.365 13
0.394 8
0.216
0.374 18
0.601
0.753
0.53J
0 .4SQ
0.210
0.0 23
0.0
0.0 16
0.0 13
U.O 8
0.0
0.0 1«
0.0
0.0
o.o
0 . 0
0.0
FLOW DAY FLOW DAY FLOW
0.0
0.0
0.266
O.P66 2? 0.310
0.340 15 o.311
0.538 19 0.538 29 0.368
o.c
0.0
0.0 22 0.0
0.0
C.O 19 0.0 29 0.0
0.12 0.13
0.000 0.100
0.002 0.031
0.002 0.441
11.76
10.03
0.59 0.82
0.250 0.156
0.147 0.125
1.080 0.682
-------
FLO* INFORMATION FOR CALIFORNIA
11/30/76
LAKE CODE 0610
LAKE HENSnAW
MEAN MONTHLY FLO.VS AND DAILY FLOWS (CMS)
TSIriUTARY MONTri YEAK MEAN FLO* DAY
0610D1
0610ZZ
11
12
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
e
9
10
74
T*
75
75
75
75
75
75
75
75
75
75
74
74
75
75
75
75
75
75
75
75
75
75
0.000
0.000
O.'OOO
0.029
0.348
0.43C
0.110
0.01?
O.OC1
0.003
0.0
0.0
0.001
0.006
0.001
0.048
0.651
O.PSO
0. 19S
0.020
0.00?
0.001
C . 0 J 1
0.0
23
16
13
8
18
FLO*
0.0
0.001
0.040 22
1.416 15
0.102 19
r'LOH DAY
0.013
U.481
U.102 29
FLOW
0.051
-------
APPENDIX D
PHYSICAL and CHEMICAL DATA
-------
STORE! RETRIEVAL DATE 76/09/24'
DATE
FROM
TO
75/03/07
75/06/23
75/11/13
DATE
FROM
TO
75/03/07
75/06/23
75/11/13
TIME DEPTH
OF
DAY FEET
14 55 0000
14 55 0005
14 55 0015
14 55 0020
15 25 0000
15 25 0004
15 ?5 0010
15 25 0016
14 45 0000
14 45 0005
14 45 0015
TIME DEPTH
OF
DAY FEET
14 55 0000
14 55 0005
14 55 0015
14 55 0020
15 ?5 0000
15 ?5 0004
15 ?5 0010
15 25 0016
14 45 0000
14 45 0005
14 45 0015
00010
HATER
TEMP
CENT
10.5
10.7
10.4
10.3
19.6
19.5
18.1
18.0
11.0
11.0
10.9
00665
PHOS-TOT
MG/L P
0.125
0.119
0.115
0.114
0.256
0.260
0.262
0.274
0.141
0.128
0.131
00300
DO
MG/L
7.6
8.6
8.0
8.2
8.4
7.2
7.6
5.2
8.6
8.6
8.8
32217
CHLRPHYL
A
UG/L
26.6
6.5
44.4
00077
TRANSP
SECCHI
INCHES
12
72
00031
INCDT LT
REMNING
PERCENT
00094
CNDUCTVY
FIELD
MICROMHO
624
618
621
604
540
540
520
520
437
415
434
061001
33 14 11.0 116 45 10.0 3
LAKE HENSHAtl
06073 CALIFORNIA
140891
11EPALES
0024 FEET
DEPTH
2111302
CLASS 00
00400
PH
SU
7.90
8.00
8.10
8.10
8.80
8.80
8.90
8.60
8.30
8.35
8.40
00410
T ALK
CAC03
MG/L
00610
NH3-N
TOTAL
MG/L
00625
TOT KJEL
N
MG/L
00630 00671
N02&N03 PHOS-OIS
N-TOTAL ORTHO
MG/L MG/L P
165
164
163
164
170
168
170
171
191
193
195
0.050
0.040
0.050
0.050
0.030
0.030
0.020
0.050
0.020
0.030
0.020
1.100
0.500
0.400
0.400
0.900
1.100
0.700
0.700
0.600
0.500
0.500
0.020K
0.020K
0.020K
0.020K
0.020K
0.020K
0.020K
0.030
0.080
0.080
0.080
0.062
0.062
0.063
0.062
0.215
0.220
0.218
0.232
0.083
0.072
0.071
K VALUE KNOWN TO dE
LESS THAN INDICATED
-------
STORE! RETRIEVAL DATE 76/09/34
DATE
FROM
TO
75/03/07
75/06/33
75/11/13
DATE
FROM
TO
75/03/07
75/06/23
75/11/13
TIME DEPTH
OF
DAY FEET
16 30 0000
16 05 0000
16 05 0004
15 00 0000
TIME DEPTH
OF
DAY FEET
16 30 0000
16 05 0000
16 05 0004
15 00 0000
00010
WATER
TEMP
CENT
11.6
31.4
31.2
11.0
00665
PHOS-TOT
MG/L P
0.125
0.261
0.260
0.138
00300
DO
MG/L
9.0
8.4
8.2
8.8
32217
CHLRPHYL
A
UG/L
32.1
6.7
44.4
00077 00094
TRANSP CNDUCTVY
SECCHI FIELD
INCHES MICROMHO
12
60
00031
INCDT LT
REMNING
PERCENT
603
560
560
416
061003
33 13 32.0 116 44 14.0 3
LAKE HENSHAW
06073 CALIFORNIA
140892
11EPALES
0006 FEET
DEPTH
00400
PH
SU
8.30
8.90
8.90
8.40
00410
T ALK
CAC03
MG/L
162
171
172
196
2111202
H CLASS 00
00610
NH3-N
TOTAL
MG/L
0.030
0.030
0.030
0.020
00625
TOT KJEL
N
MG/L
0.600
0.600
0.600
0.500
00630
N02&N03
N-TOTAL
MG/L
0.020K
0.020K
0.020K
0.080
00671
PHOS-DIS
ORTHO
MG/L P
0.067
0.313
0.311
0.073
K VALUE KNOWN TO BE
LESS THAN INDICATED
-------
APPENDIX E
TRIBUTARY DATA
-------
STORET RETRIEVAL DATE 76/09/24
DATE TIME DE»TH
FROM OF
TO DAY FEET
74/12/22
75/01/18
75/02/13
75/02/22
75/03/08
75/03/15
75/05/18
75/05/19
75/09/21
75/10/20
10
09
10
08
09
10
09
09
10
15
36
20
35
30
50
10
00
00
0610A1
33 14 20.0 116 46 07.0 4
SAN LUIS KEY RIVEK
06 7.5 MESA GriANOE
0/LAKE HEMSHAW 1^0891
M£D DTY RO 6RQG .7 Ml Nw OF GRAND STATN
11EJALES 2111204
0000 FEET DEPTH CLASS 00
0630
^N03
OTAL
G/L
C.OOe
0.012
0.040
0.0*0
0.010
0.010
0.065
0.020
0.050
0.005
00625
TOT KJEL
N
MG/L
3.100
1.000
1.100
1.200
2.500
1.000
1.750
1.250
1.300
0.800
00610
NH3-N
TOTAL
MG/L
O.lbO
0.028
0.032
0.062
0.050
0.015
0.0^5
0.055
0.100
0.165
00671
PHOS-DIS
ORTHO
MG/L P
0.107
0.055
0.072
0.072
0.075
0.080
0.095
0.180
0.360
0.070
00665
PHOS-TOT
MG/L P
0.290
0.120
0.170
0.100
0.160
0.140
0.150
0.190
0.500
0.310
-------
STORET RETRIEVAL OATE 76/09/24
DATE TIME DEPTH N02&N03
FROM OF
TO DAY FEET
74/11/23 10 10
10 25
10 05
11 00
08 45
09 45
10 55
09 25
14 15
10 15
75/01/18
75/02/13
75/02/2?
75/03/01
75/03/15
75/05/18
75/05/19
75/05/2-}
75/10/20
06lOdl
33 12 00.0 116 42 35.0 4
CARKISTA CREEK
C6 7.5 WARNERS RNCH
T/LAtsE HENSHA* 140892
BNK 20 FT BELO CONFLNC WITH CARRIZO
UE^ALES 2111204
0000 FEET DEPTH CLASS 00
0630
&N03
OTAL
G/L
0.040
0.012
0.012
0.024
0.024
C.055
0.062
0.140
P.CC5
0.110
0.005
00625
TOT KJEL
N
MG/L
3.900
2.350
2.050
0.300
0.400
1.300
2.200
1.300
0.250
1.150
1.100
00610
NH3-N
TOTAL
MG/L
0.045
0.077
0.032
0.016
0.024
0.030
0.018
0.025
0.015
0.070
0.025
00671
PHOS-OIS
ORTHO
MG/L P
0.045
0.045
0.040
0.032
0.031
0.030
0.033
0.035
0.035
0.175
0.055
00665
PHOS-TOT
MG/L P
0.045
0.042
0.040
0.033
0.030
0.040
0.040
0.040
0.200
0.060
-------
STORE! RETRIEVAL DATE 76/09/24
DATE TIME DEPTH
FROM OF
TO DAY FEET
75/03/13 12 00
75/02/22 13 05
75/03/08 09 20
75/03/15 10 30
75/05/19 10 30
75/05/23 15 00
061001
33 17 54.0 116 46 06.0 4
W FK SAN LUIS HEY HIV
06 7.5 HARNESS RANG
HT/uAKE rlENSHAW 14Q391
5000 FT S* W Fr^K HNR CMP USGS GAGE
UE^ALES 2111204
OOJO FEET DEPTn CLASS 00
ST
00630
N02^N03
N-TOTAL
MG/L
O.OOB
0.016
0.005
0.006
0.010
0.075
00625
TOT KJEL
N
HG/L
1.400
0.500
1.600
1.400
1.450
1.950
00610
NH3-N
TOTAL
MG/L
0.016
0.024
0.022
0.015
0.045
0.035
00671
PHOS-OIS
ORTHO
MG/L p
0.016
0.016
0.020
0.024
0.020
0.035
00665
PhOS-TOT
MG/L P
0.030
0.016
0.030
0.030
0.030
0.040
-------
STORE! RETRIEVAL DATE 76/09/24
DATE TIME DEPTH N02&N03
FROM OF
TO DAY FEET
75/02/13 12 15
75/02/22 13 20
75/03/08 10 30
75/03/15 10 45
75/05/18 11 40
75/05/19 10 15
75/05/2^ 15 15
0610E1
33 17 55.0 116 46 07.0 4
UNNAMED STREAM
06 7.5 PALOMArt OdSV
HENSHA* 140891
D .8 Ml NW XING a'ITi-1 W FHK SLUR
11EPALES 3111204
0000 FEET DEPTH CLASS 00
0630
&N03
OTAL
G/L
O.OOd
O.Olb
0.005
0.009
0.010
0.005
0.070
00625
TOT KJEL
N
MG/L
0.200
1.000
0.900
2.350
0.750
0.100
0.600
00610
NH3-N
TOTAL
MG/L
0.008
0.032
0.030
0.026
0.015
0.015
0.025
00671
PHOS-OIS
ORTriO
MG/L P
0.008K
O.OOdK
0.010
0.015
0.010
0.020
0.020
00665
PHOS-TOT
MG/L P
0.020
0.010K
0.020
0.030
0.010
0.020
0.030
K VALUE KNOWN TO BE
LESS THAN INDICATED
-------
STORE! RETRIEVAL DATE 76/09/34
DATE TIME DEPTH N02&N03
FROM OF
TO DAY FEET
7^/11/23
75/01/18
75/02/13
75/03/04
75/03/15
75/05/18
75/05/19
75/05/29
75/09/21
75/10/20
10
12
13
10
11
12
11
16
11
1?
43
?0
50
40
35
20
?0
30
15
45
0610F1
33 14 02.0 116 43 20.0 4
UNNAMED STREAM
06 7.5 WARNERS RNCH
T/LAKE HEN5HA* 140892
CLV«I 2 MI ,MW JCT WITH Hwr 79
IIE^ALES 2111204
0000 FEET DEPTH CLASS 00
0630
AN03
OTAL
G/L
0.416
0.392
0.368
0.390
0.380
0.380
0.420
o.oao
0.360
0.360
00625
TOT KJEL
N
MG/L
4.000
1.500
0.500
2.100
0.300
0.400
1.550
0.100
0.400
00610
NH3-N
TOTAL
MG/L
0.050
0.032
0.008K
0.010
0.018
0.005K
0.010
0.030
0.010
0.005K
00671
PHOS-DIS
ORTHO
MG/L P
0.040
0.050
0.048
0.050
0.055
0.050
0.015
0.045
0.045
00665
PHOS-TOT
MG/L P
0.040
0.060
0.048
0.050
0.060
0.050
0.040
0.030
0.050
0.045
K VALUE KNOWN TO BE
LESS THAN INDICATED
-------
STORET RETRIEVAL OATE 76/09/24
DATE TIME DEPTH N02&.N03
FROM OF
TO DAY FEET
7^/11/23
75/01/18
75/02/13
75/02/22
75/03/08
75/03/15
75/05/18
75/05/19
75/05/29
75/09/21
75/10/20
10 56
12 28
14 15
13 40
10 45
11 ?0
12 15
10 45
15 40
11 00
12 20
0610G1
33 15 C4.0 116 43 27.0 4
SPARLING CREEK
06 7.5 WARNER SPRGS
T/LAKE HENSHAW 140891
2.3 MI M JCT HWY 79 5.0 MI SW WRNR SPRNG
11EPALES 211120*
0000 FEET DEPTH CLASS 00
0630
&.N03
OTAL
G/L
0.672
0.600
0.600
0.600
0.600
0.617
0.600
0.430
0.470
0.750
0.610
00625
TOT KJEL
N
MG/L
2.600
0.800
0.400
0.400
0.050K
0.300
0.300
1.150
0.200
0.400
0.400
00610
NH3-N
TOTAL
MG/L
0.035
0.016
0.008
0.016
0.005
0.015
0.005K
0.025
0.005K
0.010
0.005
00671
PriOS-OIS
ORTHO
MG/L P
0.040
0.050
0.048
0.048
0.060
0.065
0.050
0.035
0.045
0.050
0.045
00665
PHOS-TOT
MG/L P
0.040
0.050
0.070
0.064
0.100
0.110
0.050
0.040
0.050
0.100
0.045
K VALUE KNOWN TO BE
LESS THAN INDICATED
-------
STORET RETRIEVAL DATE 76/09/24
DATE TIME DEPTH N02&N03
FROM OF
TO DAY FEET
74/11/23
75/01/18
75/02/13
75/02/22
75/03/08
75/03/14
75/05/18
75/05/19
75/05/29
75/09/21
75/10/20
11
11
12
13
10
11
11
11
16
10
11
?7
30
35
35
45
05
15
05
00
30
00
0610H1
33 16 30.0 116 44 12.0 4
UNNAMED STREAM
06 7.5 WARNER SPRGS
T/LANE HENSHAW 140891
CLVHT ON UNPVO RD 6 MI M OF EARNER SPRGS
11EPALES 2111204
0000 FEET DEPTH CLASS 00
0630
&N03
OTAL
G/L
0.736
0.564
0.680
0.680
0.430
0.439
0.375
0.660
0.470
0.640
0.600
00625
TOT KJEL
N
MG/L
2.200
0.500
1.300
2.100
0.550
0.500
0.450
0.600
1.200
0.700
0.200
00610
NH3-N
TOTAL
MG/L
0.030
0.024
0.016
0.056
0.010
0.015
0.020
0.010
0.025
0.065
0.010
00671
PHOS-DIS
ORTHO
MG/L P
0.035
0.035
0.064
0.072
0.035
0.045
0.030
0.070
0.035
0.040
0.040
00665
PHOS-TOT
MG/L P
0.040
0.040
0.180
0.090
0.040
0.050
0.030
0.160
0.050
0.050
0.050
------- |