U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
NATIONAL EUTROPHICATION SURVEY
WORKING PAPER SERIES
REPORT
ON
S/WTA MARGARITA U\KE
SAN LUIS OBISPO COUNJY
CALIFORNIA
EPA REGION IX
WORKING PAPER No, 756
CORVALLIS ENVIRONMENTAL RESEARCH LABORATORY - CORVALLIS, OREGON
and
ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING & SUPPORT LABORATORY - LAS VEGAS, NEVADA
-------
REPORT
ON
SANTA MARGARITA LAKE
SAN LUIS OBISPO COUNTY
CALIFORNIA
EPA REGION IX
WORKING PAPER No, 756
WITH THE COOPERATION OF THE
CALIFORNIA STATE WXER RESOURCES CONTROL BOARD
AND THE
CALIFORNIA NATIONAL GUARD
1973
-------
CONTENTS
Foreword ii
List of California Study Lakes iv
Lake and Drainage Area Map v
Sections
I. Conclusions 1
II. Lake and Drainage Basin Characteristics 3
III. Lake Water Quality Summary 4
IV. Nutrient Loadings 8
V. Literature Reviewed ' 12
VI. Appendices 13
-------
ii
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.
-------
iii
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
Crow!ey
Don Pedro
El sinore
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
Marin
San Diego
Lake
San Luis Obispo
Shasta
Fresno
Mono
El Dorado, Placer, CA;
Carson City, Douglas,
Washoe, NV
Calaveras, Tuolumne
Mono
Mono
-------
>>
>as
SANTA
MARGARITA
LAKE
SANTA MARGARITA LAKE
<8> Tributary Sampling Site
X Lake Sampling Site
Drainage Area Boundary
5
—I—
2 1/2
Scale
5 Mi.
120*30'
10 Km.
120'25'
120'20'
35'20'—
35*15'
120'15'
-------
SANTA MARGARITA LAKE
STORET NO. 0620
I. CONCLUSIONS
A. Trophic Condition*:
Survey data indicate that Santa Margarita Lake is eutrophic.
It ranked sixteenth in overall trophic quality when the 24 Cali-
fornia lakes and reservoirs sampled in 1975 were compared using
a combination of six parameters**. Fourteen of the water bodies
had less median total phosphorus, 15 had less and one had the
same median inorganic nitrogen, 14 had less and one had the
same median dissolved orthophosphorus, 18 had less mean chloro-
phyll a_, and 11 had greater mean Secchi disc transparency. Sig-
nificant decreases in dissolved oxygen with depth occurred at
all three sampling stations in June and at stations 1 and 2 in
November; and hypolimnetic depression is reported to occur during
summer stratification (Bailey, 1977).
Survey limnologists noted emergent macrophytes along much
of the shoreline but did not observe any surface concentrations
of algae.
Fish kills and phytoplankton are reported to be problems in
the reservoir (Johns, 1975).
B. Rate-Limiting Nutrient:
The results of the algal assay indicate nitrogen limitation
in November. The reservoir data indicate nitrogen limitation all
three sampling times.
* Trophic assessment is based on the levels of nutrients, dissolved oxygen
and chlorophyll a^ phytoplankton, kinds and numbers; and transparency
(Allurn et al., 1977).
** See Appendix A.
-------
2
C. Nutrient Controllability:
1. Point sources—No known municipal wastewater treatment
plants impacted Santa Margarita Lake during the sampling year.
Septic tanks serving shoreline recreational facilities were
estimated to have contributed 0.3% of the total phosphorus
load, but a shoreline survey would have to be done to determine
the significance of those sources.
The present phosphorus loading of 0.48 g/m2/yr is only a
little less than that proposed by Vollenweider (Vollenweider
and Dillon, 1974) as a eutrophic loading (see page 11). How-
ever, considering the lack of point sources and the low phos-
phorus export rates of the tributaries (see below), it does
not seem likely the loading can be reduced appreciably.
2. Non-point sources--Non-point sources, including direct
precipitation, contributed 99.7% of the total phosphorus load.
The Salinas River added 40.0% of the total; Toro Creek, 8.4%;
and the ungaged minor tributaries and immediate drainage con-
tributed an estimated 47.7%.
The phosphorus export rates of the Salinas River and Toro
Creek were 3 and 5 kg/km2/yr, respectively (see page 10).
-------
II. RESERVOIR AND DRAINAGE BASIN CHARACTERISTICS1
A. Morphometry :
1. Surface area: 3.18 kilometers2.
2. Mean depth: 10.1 meters.
3. Maximum depth: 39.6 meters.
4. Volume: 32.107 x 106 m3.
5. Mean hydraulic retention time: 1.6 years,
B. Tributary and Outlet:
(See Appendix C for flow data)
1. Tributaries -
Name
Salinas River
Toro Creek
Minor tributaries &
immediate drainage -
Totals
Drainage
area (km2)*
182.1
24.8
80.0
286.9
2. Outlet -
Salinas River 290.1**
C. Precipitation***:
1. Year of sampling: 84.3 centimeters.
2. Mean annual: 77.6 centimeters.
Mean flow
(mVsec)*
0.501
0.017
0.229
0.747
0.646**
t Table of metric conversions—Appendix B.
tt Dendy, 1974.
* For limits of accuracy, see Working Paper No. 175, "...Survey Methods,
1973-1976".
** Includes area of reservoir; lesser outflow due to evaporation.
*** See Working Paper No. 175.
-------
4
III. WATER QUALITY SUMMARY
Santa Margarita Lake 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 a number of
depths at three stations on the reservoir Csee map, page v). During
each visit, a single depth-integrated (4.6 m to surface) sample was
composited from the stations for phytoplankton identification and
enumeration; and during the last 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 30.2
meters at station 1, 21.3 meters at station 2, and 11.0 meters at
station 3.
The sampling results are presented in full in Appendix D and
are summarized in the following table.
-------
PARAMETER
TEMP (o
OISS OXY (MG/L)
CNOCTVY (MCKOMO)
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 N (MG/L)
CHLRPYL A (Uf,/L)
SECCHI (METERS)
A. SUMMARY OF PHYSICAL AND
1ST SAMPLING ( 3/10/75)
3 SITES
RANGE
7.9 - 11.8
4.0 - 10.4
275. - 298.
7.6 - 8.7
112. - 122.
0.020 - 0.054
0.005 - 0.020
0.020 - 0.070
0.040 - 0.130
0.200 - 0.900
0.060 - 0.180
0.240 - 0.920
7.1 - 17.5
«»«««« _»««««««
CHEMICAL CHARACTERISTICS FOR SANTA MARGARITA LAKE
STORET CODE 0620
2ND SAMPLING ( 6/25/75)
3 SITES
3RD SAMPLING (11/12/75)
3 SITES
MEAN
9.9
7.5
287.
8.0
117.
0.030
0.010
0.032
0.076
0.447
0.107
0.479
12.0
«»»«««««»««
HANGE
8.3
0.2
290.
7.7
114.
0.018
0.003
0.020
0.020
0.300
0.040
0.320
1.8
2.4
- 21.2
8.0
- 420.
8.2
- 138.
- 0.158
- 0.111
- 0.190
- 0.310
- 0.600
- 0.430
- 0.720
3.5
2.6
MEAN
16.2
4.8
367.
8.0
130.
0.054
0.026
0.043
0.068
0.400
0.111
0.443
2.7
2.5
MEDIAN
20.1
7.2
410.
8.0
131.
0.031
0.010
0.020
0.030
0.400
0.060
0.420
2.8
2.6
RANGE
9.3
1.0
230.
7.3
125.
0.041
0.013
0.020
0.020
0.200
0.040
0.220
5.9
««»«»«
- 14.1
8.4
- 309.
8.1
- 141.
- 0.306
- 0.200
- 0.020
- 0.490
- 1.400
- 0.510
- 1.420
- 25.1
-»»«»««»<
MEAN
12.1
5.2
275.
7.7
130.
0.127
0.067
0.020
0.130
0.500
0.150
0.520
12.7
HHHHHHHK
MEDIAN
13.1
7.0
282.
7.9
128.
0.077
0.026
0.020
0.020
0.400
0.040
0.420
7.0
»»«»«»»
-------
B. Biological characteristics:
1. Phytoplankton -
Sampling
Date
03/10/75
06/25/75
11/12/75
2. Chlorophyll a_ -
Sampling
Date
03/10/75
06/25/75
11/12/75
Domi nant
Genera
1. Asterionella sp.
2. Cryptomonas sp.
Total
Mougeotia sjj.
Synedra s"p.
Dinobryon sp.
Anabaenopsis sp.
Oscillator!a sp.
Other genera
Total
1. Dactylococcopsis sp.
2. Cerati urn sj>_.
3. Stephanodiscus sp.
4. Dinobryon sp.
5. Glenodinium sp.
Other genera
Total
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
Station
Number
1
2
3
1
2
3
1
2
3
Algal Units
per ml
4,920
109
5,029
2,181
488
163
130
130
98_
3,190
304
152
122
91
61
121
851
Chlorophyll a
CM/1)
11.4
17.5
7.1
1.8
2.8
3.5
5.9
25.1
7.0
-------
7
Limiting Nutrient Study:
1. Autoclaved, filtered, and nutrient spiked -
Ortho P Inorganic Maximum yield
Spike (mg/1) Cone, (mg/1) Cone, (mg/1) (mg/1-dry wt.)
Control 0.090 0.155 8.0
0.050 P 0.140 0.155 8.4
0.050 P + 1.0 N 0.140 1.155 17.3
1.0 N 0.090 1.155 18.8
2. Discussion -
The control yield of the assay alga, Selenastrum capri-
cornutum, indicates that the potential primary productivity
of Santa Margarita Lake was high at the time the sample was
collected 01/12/75). Also, the significant growth response
when nitrogen was added alone, and the lack of response with
the addition of only phosphorus, indicate nitrogen limitation.
The reservoir data indicate nitrogen limitation all three
sampling times. The mean inorganic nitrogen to orthophosphorus
ratios were 11 to 1 in March, 4 to 1 in June, and 2 to 1 in
November.
-------
8
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). Sampling was begun in
November, 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 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. Nutri-
ent loads for unsampled "minor tributaries and immediate drainage"
("ZZ" of U.S.G.S.) were estimated using the mean concentrations in
Alamo Creek at station B-l and the mean annual ZZ flow.
No known municipal wastewater treatment plants impacted Santa
Margarita Lake during the sampling year.
-------
9
A. Waste Sources:
1. Known municipal - None
2. Known industrial - None
B. Annual Total Phosphorus Loading - Average Year:
1. Inputs -
kg P/ % of
Source yr total
a. Tributaries (non-point load) -
Salinas River 615 40.0
Toro Creek 130 8.4
b. Minor tributaries & immediate
drainage (non-point load) - 735 47.7
c. Known municipal STP's - None
d. Septic tanks* - 5 0.3
e. Known industrial - None
f. Direct precipitation** - 5_5_ 3.6
Total 1,540 100.0
2. Outputs -
Reservoir outlet - Salinas River 935
3. Net annual P accumulation - 605 kg.
* Estimate based on 6 picnic areas; see Working Paper No, 175.
** See Working Paper No. 175.
-------
10
C. Annual Total Nitrogen Loading - Average Year:
1. Inputs -
kg N/ % of
Source y_r total
a. Tributaries (non-point load) -
Salinas River 4,090 31.2
Toro Creek 385 3.0
b. Minor tributaries & immediate
drainage (non-point load) - 4,970 38.0
c. Known municipal STP's - None
d. Septic tanks* - 210 1.6
e. Known industrial - None
f. Direct precipitation** - 3.435 26.2
Total 13,090 100.0
2. Outputs -
Reservoir outlet - Salinas River 14,135
3. Net annual N loss - 1,045 kg.
D. Non-point Nutrient Export by Subdrainage Area:
Tributary kg P/km2/yr kg N/km2/yr
Salinas River 3 21
Toro Creek 5 16
E. Nutrient Concentrations in Ungaged Stream:
Mean Total P Mean Total N
Tributary Cone, (mg/1) Cone, (mg/1)
Alamo Creek 0.102 0.688
* Estimate based on 6 picnic areas; see Working Paper No. 175.
** See Working Paper No. 175.
-------
11
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 ollgotrophic
or becoming oligotrophic if morphometry permitted. A meso-
trophic loading would be considered one between "dangerous"
and "permissible".
Note that Vollenweider's model may not be applicable to
water bodies with short hydraulic retention times.
Total Phosphorus Total Nitrogen
Total Accumulated" Total Accumulated
grams/m2/yr 0.48 0.19 4.1 loss*
Vollenweider phosphorus loadings
(g/m2/yr) based on mean depth and mean
hydraulic retention time of Santa Margarita Lake:
"Dangerous" (eutrophic loading) 0.52
"Permissible" (oligotrophic loading) 0.26
* There was an.apparent loss of nitrogen during the sampling year. This
may have been due to nitrogen fixation in the reservoir} solubllization
of previously sedimented nitrogen, recharge with nitrogen-rich ground
water, or unsampled point sources discharging directly to the reservoir.
Whatever the cause, a similar nitrogen loss has occurred at Shagawa Lake,
Minnesota, which has been intensively studied by EPA's former National
Eutrophication and Lake Restoration Branch (Malueg et al., 1975).
-------
12
V. LITERATURE REVIEWED
Allum, M. 0., R. E. Glessner, and J. H. Gakstatter, 1977. An
evaluation of the National Eutrophication Survey data.
Corvallis Env. Res. Lab., Corvallis, OR.
Bailey, Thomas E., 1977. Personal conmunication (reviews of pre-
liminary reports). CA Water Res. Contr. Bd., Sacramento.
Dendy, William B., 1974. Personal communication (waterbody in-
- formation and morphometry). CA Water Res. Contr. Bd., Sacra-
mento.
Johns, Gerald E., 1975. Personal communication (lake information),
CA Water Res. Contr. Bd., Sacramento.
Malueg, Kenneth W., D. Phillips Larsen, Donald W. Schults, and
Howard T. Mercier; 1975. A six-year water, phosphorus, and
nitrogen budget for Shagawa Lake, Minnesota. Jour. Environ.
Qual., Vol. 4, No. 2, pp. 236-242.
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.
-------
13
APPENDIX A
LAKE RANKINGS
-------
LAKE DATA TO BE USED IN BANKINGS
LAKE
C09E LAKE NAME
0601 A*ADOH RESERVOIR
0602 80CA LAKE
0603 LAKE BPITTON
060* CASITAS RESERVOIR
0605 CPOWLEY LAKE
0606 DON PEDRO RESERVOIR
0607 LAKE ELSINORE
0608 FALLEN LEAF RESERVOIR
0609 LAKE HENNESSEY
0610 LAKE HENSHAW
0611 IRON GATE RESERVOIR
061* LOPEZ LAKE
0615 LAKE MARY
061e LAKE MENDOCINO
0617 NICASIO RESERVOIR
0618 LOWER OTAY RESERVOIR
0619 LAKE PILLSBURY
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 P
0.040
0.012
0.067
0.029
0.046
0.013
0.469
0.007
.0.027
0.138
0.184
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
I NOR 6 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
CHLOKA
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
b.389
9.122
4.087
1.700
1.800
13.878
3.340
2.900
15-
MIN oo
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
8.200
14.800
9.000
7.400
7.000
7.400
7.400
11.400
MEDIAN
DISS ORTHO
0.020
0.003
0.047
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 LSKES *ITi HIGHER VALUES fNUMSER OF LAKES rflTrt HIGHER VALUES)
LAKE
CODE LAKE NAME
0601 AMADOR RESERVOIR
0602 BOCA LAKE
0603 LAKE BPITTON
060* CASITAS RESERVOIR
0605 CROWLEY LAKE
0606 DON PEORO 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 MENOOCINO
0617 NICASIO RESERVOIR
0618 LOWER OTAY RESERVOIR
061Q LAKE PILLSBURY
0630 SANTA MARGARITA LAKE
0621 SHASTA LAKE
0622 SHAVER
062J SILVER LAKE
062* 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)
1)
22)
15)
6)
5)
13)
9)
14)
18)
20)
12)
16)
17)
MEDIAN
INOPG N
4
98
22
74
78
54
17 i
87 '
54 i
33 i
0 i
26 I
87 I
70 I
9 I
13 I
41 1
33 1
54 1
41 i
65 (
54 (
98 (
87 <
( 1>
( 22)
( 5)
( 17)
( 18)
t 11)
1 4)
1 19)
I ID
1 7)
! 0)
t 6)
! 19)
I 16)
I 2)
! 3)
I 9)
; 7)
; ID
! 9)
: is>
ID
: 22)
19)
500-
MEAN SEC
43
70
17
48
65
57
0
100
39
13
26 '
74 i
91 l
30 i
4 i
22 l
9 1
52 1
61 1
83 1
78 (
35 (
87 (
96 I
< 10)
( 16)
( 4)
( 11)
( 15)
( 13)
( 0)
( 23)
( 9)
( 3)
t 6)
I 17)
1 21)
[ 7)
I 1)
I 5)
! 2)
t 12)
I 14)
1 19)
: 18)
: 8)
20)
22)
MEAN
CHLORA
9
91
48
7C
43
61
0
100
52
4
39 i
26 l
83 <
74 l
30 1
13 1
35 1
22 1
57 1
96 (
87 <
17 (
65 (
78 (
( 2)
( 21)
( 11)
< 16)
( 10)
( It)
( 0)
( 23)
( 12)
( 1)
1 9)
1 6)
I 19)
1 17)
1 7)
1 3)
1 8)
[ 5)
[ 13)
: 22)
20)
; 4)
15)
18)
15-
MIN DO
17
100
43
22
30
37
78
70
4 i
54 i
26 i
4 1
48 1
61 I
54 1
4 I
74 (
13 1
65 (
87 (
96 (
87 (
87 (
37 (
< 4)
( 23)
( 10)
( 5)
< 7)
( 8)
( 18)
( 16)
I 0)
I 12)
I 6)
! 0)
! 11)
I 14)
1 12)
1 0)
! 17)
: 3)
: 15)
: 19)
22)
19)
19)
8)
MEDIAN
OISS ORTHO P
26
91
17
37
22
78
9
70
52
13
4 '
0 i
100 i
63 i
46 i
46 1
63 1
37 1
30 1
78 (
91 <
57 <
78 (
91 (
( 6)
( 20)
( 4)
( 8)
( 5)
( 17)
( 2)
( 16)
( 12)
( 3)
( 1)
1 0)
I 23)
1 14)
1 10)
I 10)
[ 14)
t 8)
I 7)
1 17)
: 20)
13)
17)
20)
INDEX
NO
134
539
164
294
268
370
104
527
249
130
104
134
505
363
169
120
279
196
328
463
506
302
485
463
-------
LAKES RANKED BY INDEX NOS.
RANK 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 (JON PEDRO RESERVOIR 370
9 0616 LAKE MENDOCINO 363
10 0621 SHASTA LAKE 328
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 HENSHAW 130
22 0618 LOWER OTAY RESERVOIR 120
23 0607 LAKE ELSINORE 104
24 0611 IRON 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
09/24/76
LAKE CODE 0620
SANTA MARGARITA
TOTAL DRAINAGE AREA OF LAKE(SO KM)
SUB-DRAINAGE
TRIBUTARY AREA(SQ KM)
JAN
FEB
290.1
MAR
APR
MAY
NORMALIZED FLO«*S(CM:>)
JUN JUL AUG
SEP
OCT
NUV
DEC
MEAN
0620A1
0620A2
0620C1
0620ZZ
290.1
203-3
24.3
S3.I
1.444 1.416 1.416 0.906
1.642 1.586 1.246 0.765
0.042 0.054 0.040 0.017
0.753 0.725 0.561 0.354
0.
0.
0.
0.
040
110
008
051
0.173
0.046
0.008
0.020
0.167
0.020
0.006
0.008
0.085
0.011
0.006
0.006
0.130
0.011
0.003
0.006
0.040
0.014
0.006
0.006
0
0
0
0
.017
.079
.008
.034
0. J96
0.481
0.011
0.218
0.645
0.521
0.017
0.229
SUMMARY
TOTAL DRAINAGE AREA OF LAKE =
SUM UF SUB-DRAINAGE AREAS =
290.1
290.0
TOTAL FLOW
TOTAL FLOW
IN =
OUT =
8.
6.
97
23
MEAN MONTHLY FLOWS AND DAILY FLOWS(CMS)
TRIBUTARY MONTH YEAR MEAN FLOW DAY
0620A1
0620A2
0620C1
11
1?
1
?
3
5
6
7
9
11
12
1
2
3
5
6
7
9
11
12
1
2
3
5
6
7
9
74
74
75
75
75
75
75
75
75
74
74
75
75
75
75
75
75
75
74
74
75
75
75
75
75
75
75
0.014
0.057
0.178
0.011
0.011
0.176
0.263
0.680
0.011
0.040
0.082
0.062
0.425
0.595
0.119
0.071
0.025
0.011
0.023
0.023
0.020
0.028
0.025
0.014
0.008
0.006
0.008
16
8
4
2
2
3
1
28
6
16
8
4
2
2
3
1
28
6
16
8
4
2
2
3
1
28
6
FLOW DAY
0.014
0.020
0.176
0.065
0.003
0.003
0.453
0.003
0.0
0.028
0.071
0.065
1.104
0.119
0.252
0.059
0.020
0.008
0.025
0.011
0.020
0.133
0.017
0.020
0.011
0.006
0.006
FLOW DAY
FLOW
-------
APPENDIX D
PHYSICAL and CHEMICAL DATA
-------
5TORET RETRIEVAL DATE
DATE
FROM
TO
75/03/10
75/06/25
75/11/12
00010
TIME DEPTH WATER
OF TEMP
DAY FEET
13
13
13
13
13
13
13
13
09
09
09
09
09
09
13
13
13
13
13
13
13
35
35
35
35
35
35
35
35
45
45
45
45
45
45
20
20
20
20
20
?0
20
0000
0005
0015
0030
0050
0065
0080
0096
0000
0005
0015
0035
0065
0099
0000
0005
0015
0035
0045
0070
0091
CENT
11
11
10
9
8
8
8
7
20
20
20
10
8
8
13
13
13
12
9
9
9
.5
.2
.8
.3
.9
.5
.0
.9
.4
.3
.1
.6
.7
.3
.2
.1
.1
.5
.9
.4
.3
00300
DO
MG/L
9.
9.
9.
7.
6.
6.
6.
6.
8.
7.
8.
0.
0.
0.
7.
7.
6.
4.
1.
1.
1.
8
8
0
0
4
A
0
0
0
6
0
4
2
6
4
0
8
0
4
0
0
063001
35 15 00.0 120 30 01.0 3
SAMTA MARGARITA LAKE
06079 CALIFORNIA
140491
11EPALES 2111203
0100 FEET DEPTH CLASS 00
00300
DO
MG/L
9.8
9.8
9.0
7.0
6.4
6.4
6.0
6.0
8.0
7.6
8.0
0.4
0.2
0.6
7.4
7.0
6.8
4.0
1.4
1.0
1.0
00077 00094
TRANSP CNDUCTVY
SECCHI FIELD
INCHES M1CROMHO
296
295
293
286
283
280
275
275
102 410
410
410
300
290
290
282
295
294
283
250
255
243
00400
PH
SU
8.60
8.60
7.90
7.90
7.80
7.80
7.80
7.80
8.10
8.10
8.10
8.00
7.90
7.80
7.95
7.90
7.85
7.50
7.35
7.30
7.30
00410
T ALK
CAC03
MG/L
112
113
112
114
121
116
116
122
125
125
126
114
119
129
128
128
126
128
125
135
134
00610
NH3-N
TOTAL
MG/L
0.050
0.050
0.060
0.070
0.080
0.070
0.080
0.100
0.020
0.020
0.020K
0.030
0.050
0.310
0.020
0.020K
0.020K
0.020
0.120
0.430
0.490
00625
TOT KJEL
N
MG/L
0.900
0.700
0.500
0.500
0.500
0.400
0.300
0.400
0.400
0.400
0.400
0.300
0.300
0.600
0.400
0.400
0.200
0.200
0.400
0.600
0.700
00630 00671
N02&N03 PHOS-OIS
N-TOTAL ORTHO
MG/L MG/L P
0.020K
0.020K
0.020K
0.020
0.040
0.050
0.060
0.070
0.020K
0.020K
0.020K
0.070
0.190
0.120
0.020K
0.020K
0.020K
0.020K
0.020K
0.020K
0.020K
0.014
0.011
0.010
0.009
0.011
0.010
0.017
0.020
0.015
0.004
0.004
0.007
0.023
0.094
0.015
0.014
0.019
0.041
0.061
0.177
0.137
K VALUE KNOWN TO SE
LESS THAN INDICATED
-------
STORET RETRIEVAL DATE 76/09/24
062001
35 15 00.0 120 30 01.0 3
SANTA MARGARITA LAKE
06079 CALIFORNIA
140491
11EPALES 2111202
0100 FEET DEPTH CLASS 00
DATE
FROM
TO
75/03/10
75/06/25
75/11/12
00665 32217 00031
TIME DEPTH PHOS-TOT CHLRPHYL INCOT LT
OF A REMNING
DAY FEET
13
13
13
13
13
13
13
13
09
09
09
09
09
09
13
13
13
13
13
13
13
35
35
35
35
35
35
35
35
45
45
45
45
45
45
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
0000
0005
0015
0030
0050
0065
0080
0096
0000
0005
0015
0035
0065
0099
0000
0005
0015
0035
0045
0070
0091
MG/L P
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
c
0
0
.032
.029
.021
.021
.025
.025
.027
.035
.029
.018
.020
.018
.034
.146
.045
.043
.041
.081
.132
.296
.266
UG/L PERCENT
11.4
1.8
5.9
-------
STORET RETRIEVAL DATE 76/09/34
062003
35 19 54.0 120 29 20.0 3
SANTA MARGARITA LAKE
06079 CALIFORNIA
140491
DATE
FROM
TO
75/03/10
75/06/25
75/11/12
DATE
FROM
TO
75/03/10
75/06/25
75/11/12
TIME
OF
DAY
14
14
14
14
14
14
10
10
10
10
10
13
13
13
13
13
13
30
30
30
30
30
30
30
30
30
30
30
00
00
00
00
00
00
TIME
OF
DAY
14
14
14
14
14
14
10
10
10
10
10
13
13
13
13
13
13
30
30
30
30
30
30
30
30
30
30
30
00
00
00
00
00
00
DEPTH
FEET
0000
0005
0015
0030
0050
0070
0000
0005
0015
0035
0058
0000
0005
0015
0035
0045
0062
DEPTH
FEET
0000
0005
0015
0030
0050
0070
0000
0005
0015
0035
0058
0000
0005
0015
0035
0045
0062
00010
WATER
TEMP
CENT
11.8
11.5
11.0
9.3
8.6
8.2
20.1
20.5
20.3
10.4
8.9
14.1
13.2
13.2
12.1
9.8
9.6
00665
PHOS-TOT
MG/L P
0.037
0.035
C.029
0.021
0.025
0.036
0.028
0.030
0.031
0.039
0.156
0.052
0.046
0.066
0.222
0.261
0.306
00300 00077 00094
DO TRANSP CNDUCTVY
SECCHI FIELD
MG/L INCHES MICROMHO
10.4
10.0
8.2
6.2
5.6
5.2
8.0 102
8.0
7.2
0.8
1.0
7.8
7.6
7.6
2.2
2.0
2.0
32217 00031
CHLRPHYL INCOT LT
A REMNING
UG/L PERCENT
17.5
2.8
25.1
298
297
294
283
280
279
415
415
410
300
290
278
291
309
263
230
244
11EPALES 2111202
0074 FEET DEPTH CLASS 00
00400 00410 00610 00625
PH T ALK NH3-N TOT KJEL
CAC03 TOTAL N
SU
8.70
8.70
7.90
7.90
7.90
7.80
8.00
8.20
8.00
7.80
7.70
8.05
8.00
7.90
7.40
7.30
7.30
MG/L
116
117
117
118
120
122
133
133
131
129
136
125
128
125
133
136
141
MG/L
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
.050
.040
.050
.080
.090
.120
.030
.030
.030
.040
.170
.020K
.020K
.020K
.220
.360
.370
MG/L
0.500
0.400
0.500
0.300
0.200
0.300
0.300
0.300
0.400
0.300
0.500
0.400
0.300
0.300
0.500
0.600
0.700
00630 00671
N02&N03 PHOS-DIS
N-TOTAL ORTHO
MG/L MG/L P
0.020K
0.020K
0.020K
0.020
0.040
0.060
0.020
0.020K
0.020K
0.020K
0.040
0.020K
0.020K
0.020K
0.020
0.020K
0.020K
0.005
0.006
0.005
0.006
0.011
0.012
0.006
0.003
0.005
0.019
0.061
0.016
0.020
0.040
0.163
0.200
0.163
-------
STOrtET RETRIEVAL DATE 76/09/2*
062003
35 19 18.0 120 27 50.0 3
SANTA MARGARITA LAKE
06079 CALIFORNIA
140491
DATE
FROM
TO
75/03/10
75/06/25
75/11/12
00010
TIME DEPTH rtATER
OF TEMP
DAY FEET
15
15
15
15
15
11
11
11
11
12
12
12
12
10
10
10
10
10
05
05
05
05
45
45
45
45
0000
0005
0015
0025
0035
0000
0005
0015
0036
0000
0005
0015
0033
CENT
11
11
11
9
8
21
21
20
10
13
13
13
12
.7
.6
.0
.3
.8
.2
.1
.9
.7
.8
.5
.1
.6
11EPALES
00300
DO
MG/L
9.4
9.2
7.4
6.0
4.0
7.8
7.6
7.0
0.2
8.4
8.4
7.4
7.2
00077 00094
TRANSP CNDUCTVY
SECCHI FIELD
INCHES MICROMHO
295
295
293
282
282
96 420
420
420
310
301
290
291
274
0039
00400
PH
SU
8.30
8.20
7.70
7.70
7.60
8.00
8.20
8.00
7.90
8.05
8.10
7.95
8.00
2111202
FEET DEPTH CLASS
00410
T ALK
CAC03
MG/L
116
115
116
117
117
135
136
134
138
133
132
127
128
00610
NH3-N
TOTAL
MG/L
0.060
0.090
0.090
0.080
0.130
0.040
0.030
0.040
0.160
0.020K
0.020K
0.020K
0.020K
00
00625
TOT KJEL
N
MG/L
0.500
0.600
0.400
0.300
0.300
0.500
0.400
0.400
0.500
0.400
1.400
0.500
0.500
00630 00671
N02&N03 PHOS-DIS
w-TOTAL ORTHO
MG/L MG/L P
0.020K
0.020
0.020
0.030
0.030
0.020K
0.020K
0.020K
0.020K
0.020K
0.020K
0.020K
0.020K
0.006
0.015
0.009
0.008
0.007
0.010
0.005
0.018
0.111
0.021
0.019
0.026
0.013
DATE
FROM
TO
75/03/10
75/06/25
75/11/12
00665 32217 00031
TIME DEPTH PHOS-TOT CHLRPHYL INCDT LT
OF A REMNING
DAY FEET
15
15
15
15
15
11
11
11
11
12
12
12
12
10
10
10
10
10
05
05
05
05
45
45
45
45
0000
0005
0015
0025
0035
0000
0005
0015
0036
0000
0005
0015
0033
MG/L P
0.054
0.048
0.029
0.025
C.020
0.029
0.037
C.042
0.158
0.066
0.096
0.066
0.077
UG/L PERCENT
7.1
3.5
7.0
K VALUE KNOWN TO BE
LESS THAN INDICATED
-------
APPENDIX E
TRIBUTARY DATA
-------
STOHET RETRIEVAL DATE 76/09/24
DATE TIME DEPTH N02S.N03
FROM OF
TO DAY FF.ET
74/11/16
74/12/08
75/01/04
75/02/02
75/03/02
75/05/03
75/06/01
75/07/28
75/09/06
75/11/01
09 40
13 ?0
10 35
09 ?0
14 00
10 00
09 45
14 00
10 45
09 20
0620A1
35 20 45.0 120 30 32.0 4
SALINAS rtlVER
06 SAN LUIS 08ISPO
0/SANTA MARGARITA LAKE 140491
PILITAS CrtK RO B*DG 5.6 M SE 5 MARGAKlTA
11EPALES 2111204
0000 FEET DEPTH CLASS 00
0630
'S.N03
OTAL
iG/L
0.012
O.OOH
0.008
0.056
0.008
0.010
0.005
C.015
0.010
0.015
00625
TOT KJEL
N
MG/L
0.300
0.250
1.400
0.600
0.600
0.100
0.100
1.650
0.700
1.100
00610
NH3-N
TOTAL
MG/L
0.055
0.008
0.020
0.008K
0.024
0.015
0.02C
0.025
C.045
0.015
00671
PHOS-DIS
ORTHO
MG/L P
0.005
0.013
0.010
0.040
0.008K
0.100
0.005
0.020
C.020
0.015
00665
PHOS-TOT
MG/L P
0.010
0.025
0.020
0.100
0.020
0.140
0.020
0.050
0.050
0.030
K VALUE KNOWN TO BE
LESS THAN INDICATED
-------
STORE! RETRIEVAL DATE 76/09/24
DATE TIME DEPTH N028.N03
FROM OF
TO DAY FEET
74/11/16
74/12/08
75/01/0*
75/02/02
75/03/02
75/05/03
75/06/01
75/07/28
75/1 1/01
10 45
14 30
11 20
10 10
14 40
10 50
11 00
14 50
10 00
0620A2
35 19 18.0 120 25 25.0 4
SALINAS RIVER
06 7.5 5 MRGHlTA LK
T/SANTA MARGARITA LAKE 140491
bNK OFF UNHVD RD 2.0 MI Nw PIPPIN CORNER
11EPALES 2111204
0000 FEET DEPTH CLASS 00
0630
'8.N03
OTAL
IG/L
0.008
0.008
0.008
0.256
0.040
0.005
0.005
0.010
0.010
00625
TOT KJEL
N
MG/L
0.200
0. 100K
0.100K
0.200
0.075
0.550
0.550
0.200
00610
NH3-N
TOTAL
MG/L
0.025
0.022
0.005
0.016
0.008
0.015
0.030
0.040
0.010
00671
PHOS-DIS
ORTHO
MG/U P
0.020
0.024
0.015
0.016
0.020
0.021
0.030
0.020
00665
PHOS-TOT
MG/L P
0.040
0.030
0.020
0.030
0.050
0.021
0.070
0.050
K VALUE KNOWN TO BE
LESS THAN INDICATED
-------
STORE! RETRIEVAL OATF 76/09/24
DATE TIME DEPTH N02&.N03
FROM OF
TO DAY FEET
75/02/02 10 20
75/03/02 15 00
75/05/03 10 40
75/0^/06 11 40
0620dl
35 i* 50.0 120 26 22.0 4
ALAMO CREEK
06 7.5 S MRGR1TA LK
T/SANTA MARGARITA LAKE 140491
UNPVD RD BROG 3.5 MI NW OF PIPPIN CORNER
11EPALES 2111204
0000 FEET DEPTH CLASS 00
0630
'&.N03
OTAL
IG/L
0.368
0.008
0.010
0.015
00625
TOT KJEL
N
MG/L
1.050
0.600
0.050K
0.650
00610
NH3-N
TOTAL
MG/L
0.008K
0.016
0.015
0.035
00671
PHOS-OIS
ORTHO
MG/L P
0.035
0.024
0.015
0.035
00665
PHOS-TOT
MG/L P
0.220
0.040
0.040
0.110
K VALUE KNOWN TO BE
LESS THAN INDICATED
-------
STORE! RETRIEVAL DATE 76/09/24
0620C1
35 19 23.0 120 25 20.0 4
TORO CREEK
06 7.5 S MRGRITA LK
T/SANTA MARGARITA LAK.E 140491
BrtK OFF UNPVD RD 2.4 MI NW PIPPIN CORNER
lltPALES 2111204
0000 FEET DEPTH CLASS 00
DATE
FROM
TO
74/11/16
74/12/08
75/01/04
75/02/02
75/03/02
75/05/03
75/06/01
75/07/28
75/09/06
75/11/01
TIME DEPTH
OF
DAY FEET
10 35
14 00
11 15
10 00
14 50
10 30
10 45
14 45
11 30
09 55
00630
N02kN03
N-TOTAL
MG/L
C.012
0.056
0.064
0.200
0.024
0.010
C.010
0.005
0.005
0.010
00625
TOT KJEL
N
MG/L
0.200
1.600
0.400
1.600
0.800
0.150
0.450
0.400
0.500
0.700
00610
NH3-N
TOTAL
MG/L
0.015
0.037
0.015
0.032
0.024
0.010
0.025
0.010
0.075
0.015
00671
PHOS-DIS
ORTHO
MG/L P
0.095
0.113
0.075
0.290
0.096
0.100
0.145
0.220
0.160
0.110
00665
PHOS-TOT
MG/L P
0.110
0.15C
0.105
0.900
0.150
0.150
0.180
0.270
0.210
0.190
------- |