U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
NATIONAL EUTROPHICATION SURVEY
WORKING PAPER SERIES
REPORT
ON
TULLOCK RESERVOIR
CALAVERAS AND TUOLlFlNE (UNTIES
CALIFORNIA
EPA REGION IX
WORKING PAPER No, 760
CORVALLIS ENVIRONMENTAL RESEARCH LABORATORY - CORVALLIS, OREGON
and
ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING & SUPPORT LABORATORY - LAS VEGAS, NEVADA
-------
c
REPORT
ON
TULLOCK RESERVOIR
CALAVERAS AND TUOLlFlNE COUNTIES
CALIFORNIA
EPA REGION IX
WORKING PAPER No, 760
WITH THE COOPERATION OF THE
CALIFORNIA STATE WATER RESOURCES CONTROL BOARD
AND THE
CALIFORNIA NATIONAL GUARD
JUNE, 1978
-------
CON HINTS
Foreword ii
List of California Study Lakes iv
Lake and Drainage Area Map v
I. Conclusions 1
II. Reservoir and Drainage Basin Characteristics 3
III. .Water Quality Summary 4
IV. Nutrient Loadings 8
V. Literature Reviewed 12
VI. Appendices 13
-------
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)]s
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 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
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
Marin
San Diego
Lake
San Luis Obispo
Shasta
Fresno
Mono
El Dorado, Placer, CA;
Carson City, Douglas,
Washoe, NV
Calaveras, Tuolumne
Mono
Mono
-------
*) ^Copp^opoli, X X^"^/
TULLOCH RESERVOIR
Tributary Sampling Site
X Lake Sampling Site
5 Km.
3 Mi.
Scale
Hap Location
-------
TULLOCK RESERVOIR
STORE! NO. 0624
I. CONCLUSIONS
A. Trophic Condition*:
Survey data indicate that Tullock Reservoir is eutrophic.
It ranked eleventh in overall trophic quality when the 24 Cali-
fornia lakes and reservoirs sampled in 1975 were compared
using a combination of six parameters**. Eleven of the water
bodies had less median total phosphorus, ten had less median
dissolved orthophosphorus, nine had less and five had the same
median inorganic nitrogen, 19 had less mean chlorophyll a^, and
15 had greater mean Seechi disc transparency. Significant
depression of dissolved oxygen with depth did not occur at any
station or sampling time.
Survey limnologists did not observe macrophytes or surface
concentrations of algae. However, the chlorophyll a^ concen-
tration at station 3 in November (64.2 pg/1) indicates a
possible bloom condition there at that time.
B. Rate-Limiting Nutrient:
Due to significant changes in nutrients in the samples
during shipment from the field to the laboratory, the algal
assay results are not considered representative of conditions
in the reservoir at the times the samples were taken.
The reservoir data indicate nitrogen limitation in March
and June and phosphorus limitation in November.
* Trophic assessment is based on levels of nutrients, dissolved oxygen, and
chlorophyll a^ phytoplankton kinds and numbers; and transparency (Allurn
et al., 1977.
** See Appendix A.
-------
C. Nutrient Controllability:
1. Point sources—No known municipal wastewater treatment
plants impacted Tullock Reservoir during the sampling year.
Septic tanks serving shoreline dwellings were estimated to have
contributed 0.1% of the total phosphorus load, but a shoreline
survey is needed to determine the significance of those sources.
The present phosphorus loading of 7.34 g/m2/yr is a little
more than twice that proposed by Vollenweider (Vollenweider and
Dillon, 1974) as a eutrophic loading (see page 11). However, the
mean hydraulic retention time of the reservoir is a short 19
days, and Vollenweider's model probably is not applicable.
2. Non-point sources--Non-point sources, including direct
precipitation, added 99.9% of the total phosphorus load to the
reservoir during the sampling year. The Stanislaus River
contributed 92.4% of the total load; Black Creek, 0.5%; and
the ungaged tributaries, an estimated 6.9%.
The phosphorus export rates of the Stanislaus River and
Black Creek were 15 and 3 kg/km2/yr, respectively (see page 10).
-------
II. RESERVOIR AND DRAINAGE BASIN CHARACTERISTICS1"
A. Morphometry"^:
1. Surface area: 5.10 kilometers2.
2. Mean depth: 16.5 meters.
3. Maximum depth: 62.5 meters.
4. Volume: 84.371 x 106 m3.
5. Mean hydraulic retention time: 19 days.
B. Tributary and Outlet:
(See Appendix C for flow data)
1. Tributaries -
Drainage Mean flow
Name area (km2)* (mVsec)*
Stanislaus River 2,343.9 49.840
Black Creek 49.5 0.242
Minor tributaries &
immediate drainage - 134.8 1.508
Totals 2,528.2 51.590**
2. Outlet -
Stanislaus River 2,533.3** 51.590
C. Precipitation***:
1. Year of sampling: 89.7 centimeters.
2. Mean annual: 81.1 centimeters.
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; inflows adjusted to equal outflow.
*** See Working Paper No. 175.
-------
III. WATER QUALITY SUMMARY
Tullock Reservoir 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
a number of depths at three stations on the reservoir (see 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 first and last visits, a single 18.9-
liter depth-integrated sample was composited for algal assays. Also
each time, a depth-integrated sample was collected from each of the
stations for chlorophyll £ analysis. The maximum depths sampled were
45.1 meters at station 1, 35.4 meters at station 2, and 32.3 meters
at station 3.
The sampling results are presented in full in Appendix D and are
summarized in the following table.
-------
PARAMETER
TEMP (C)
OISS OXY (MG/L)
CNDCTVY (MCROMO)
PH (STAND UNITS)
TOT ALK (MG/L)
TOT P (MG/L)
OWTHO P (MG/L)
N02*N03 (MG/L)
AMMONIA (MG/L)
KJEL N (MG/L)
INOKG N (MG/L)
TOTAL N (MG/L)
CHLRPYL A
SECCHI (METERS)
A. SUMMARY OF PHYSICAL AND
1ST SAMPLING < 3/14/75)
3 SITES
RANGE
4.7 - 10.8
9.4 - 12.0
84.
9.0
CHEMICAL CHARACTERISTICS FOR TULLOCK RESERVOIR
STORET CODE 0624
MEAN MEDIAN
9.0 8.7
10.9 11.0
57. -
7.5 -
41. - 51.
0.015 - 0.056 0.029 0.029
0.009 - 0.020 0.014 0.014
0.051 0.040
0.029 0.020
0.200
69.
8.2
46.
0.020 - 0.160
0.020 - 0.070
0.200 - 0.500
0.040 - 0.220
0.220 - 0.520
1«..0 - 15.6
1.2 - 1.2
67.
7.8
46.
0.264
0.080 0.060
0.315 0.300
2ND SAMPLING ( 6/25/75)
3 SITES
14.8
1.2
14.9
1.2
RANGE
12.6 - 20.3
8.4 - 10.0
28. - 63.
7.2 - 7.9
19. - 24.
0.014 - 0.186
0.003 - 0.015
0.020 - 0.030
0.030 - 0.060
0.200 - 0.500
0.050 - 0.030
0.220 - 0.520
0.2 - 4.5
1.8 - 2.1
MEAN
16.1
9.3
34.
7.5
22.
0.031
0.007
0.020
0.037
0.257
0.057
0.278
3.0
2.3
MEDIAN
14.3
9.2
32.
7.5
22.
0.023
0.006
0.020
0.030
0.200
0.050
0.220
4.4
2.4
3RD SAMPLING ui/i2/75>
3 SITES
RANGE
13.7 - 14.7
7.6 - 10.8
89.
71. -
7.5 -
30. -
8.3
39.
MEAN
14.3
9.6
79.
7.8
33.
ME 01 AN
14.4
10.2
79.
7.8
32.
0.016 - 0.041 0.027 0.027
0.002 - 0.012 0.005 O.OOa
0.020 - 0.150 0.068 0.060
0.020 - 0.070 0.032 0.020
0.200 - 0.300 0.208 0.200
0.040 - 0.200 0.100
0.220 - 0.360 0.275
3.2 - 64.2
1.2 - 2.0
23.8
1.5
0.080
0.260
3.9
1.4
-------
B. Biological characteristics:
1. Phytoplankton -
Sampling
Date
03/14/75
Dominant
Genera
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
Achananthes sp.
Asterionella sp.
Synedra sp.
Stephanodiscus sp_.
Cryptomonas sp.
Other genera
Total
Algal Units
per ml
864
006
783
743
297
744
9,437
06/25/75
11/12/75
1.
2.
3,
4.
5.
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
Asterionella sp.
Stephanodiscus sp.
Fragilaria sp.
Qscillatoria sp.
Dinobryon sp.
Other genera
Total
Oscillator! a sp.
Glenodinium sp.
Asterionella sp.
Cryptomonas sp.
Stephanodiscus sp.
Other genera
432
118
79
79
79
195
982
225
112
37
37
37
113
Total
561
-------
2. Chlorophyll a_ -
Sampling Station Chlorophyll a^
Date Number (yg/1)
03/14/75 1 14.0
2 15.6
3 14.9
06/25/75 1 4.5
2 4.4
3 0.2
11/12/75 1 3.9
2 3.2
3 64.2
C. Limiting Nutrient Study:
The algal assay results are not considered representative of
conditions in the reservoir at the time of sample collection be-
cause of significant changes in the nutrients in the samples
during shipment from the field to the laboratory.
The reservoir data indicate nitrogen limitation in March and
June and phosphorus limitation in November. The mean inorganic
nitrogen to orthophosphorus ratios were 6 to 1 in March, 8 to 1
in June, and 20 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 September, 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 "minor tributaries and immediate drainage"
("ZZ" of U.S.G.S.) were estimated using the mean concentrations in Green
Spring Run at station B-l and the mean annual ZZ flow.
No known wastewater treatment plants impacted Tullock Reservoir
during the sampling year.
-------
A. Waste Sources:
1. Known municipal - None
2. Known municipal - None
B. Annual Total Phosphorus Loading - Average Year:
1. Inputs -
kg P/ % of
Source yr total
a. Tributaries (non-point load) -
Stanislaus River 34,580 92.4
Black Creek 170 0.5
b. Minor, tributaries & immediate
drainage (non-point load) - 2,570 6.9
c. Known municipal STP's - None
d. Septic tanks* - 10 <0.1
e. Known industrial - None
f. Direct precipitation** - 90_ 0.2
Total 37,420 100.0
2. Outputs -
Reservoir outlet - Stanislaus River 32,540
3. Net annual P accumulation - 4,880 kg.***
* Estimate based on 40 shoreline dwellings; see Working Paper No. 175.
** See Working Paper No. 175.
*** The phosphorus "loss" shown in the preliminary report resulted from
the inclusion of an erroneous value (0.120 mg/1 on 05/12/75) in the
calculation of the outlet load at station A-l.
-------
10
C. Annual Total Nitrogen Loading - Average Year:
1. Inputs -
kg N/ % of
Source yjr total
a. Tributaries (non-point load) -
Stanislaus River 1,439,725 94.2
Black Creek 11,240 0.7
b. Minor tributaries & immediate
drainage (non-point load) - 72,050 4.7
c. Known municipal STP's - None
d. Septic tanks* - 425 < 0.1
e. Known industrial - None
f. Direct precipitation** - 5,505 0.4
Total 1,528,945 100.0
2. Outputs -
Reservoir outlet - Stanislaus River 1,506,550
3. Net annual N accumulation - 22,395 kg.
D. Non-point Nutrient Export by Subdrainage Area:
Tributary kg P/km2/yr kg N/km2/yr
Stanislaus River 15 614
Black Creek 3 227
E. Mean Nutrient Concentrations in Ungaged Stream:
Mean Total P Mean Total N
Tributary Cone, (mg/1) Cone, (mg/1)
Green Spring Run 0.054 1.515
* Estimate based on 40 shoreline dwellings; 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 oligotrophic
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 7.34 0.96 299.8 4.4
Vollenweider phosphorus loadings
(g/m2/yr) based on mean depth and mean
hydraulic retention time of Tullock Reservoir:
"Dangerous" (eutrophic loading) 3.40
"Permissible" (oligotrophic loading) 1.70
-------
12
V. LITERATURE REVIEWED
Allum, M.O., R.E. Glessner, and J.H. Gakstatter, 1977. An evalua-
tion of the National Eutrophication Survey data. Con/all is Env.
Res. Lab., Corvallis, OR.
Dendy, William B., 1974. Personal communication (waterbody in-
formation and morphometry). CA Water Res. Contr. Bd., Sacra-
mento.
Vollenweider, R. A., and P. J. Dillon, 1974. The application of
the phosphorus loading concept to eutrophication research.
Natl. Res. Council of Canada Pub!. No. 13690, Canada Centre
for Inland Waters, Burlington, Ontario.
-------
13
VI. APPENDICES
APPENDIX A
LAKE RANKINGS
-------
LAKE DATA TO BE USED IN BANKINGS
LAKE
COOE LAKE NAME
0601 A«ADOW RESERVOIR
0603 80CA LAKE
0603 LAKE flPITTON
0604 CASITAS RESERVOIR
060S CPOWLEY LAKE
0606 DON PEORO RESERVOIR
0607 LAKE ELSINORE
0603 FALLEN LEAF RESERVOIR
o&09 LAKE HENNESSEY
06io LAKE HENSHAW
0611 IRON GATE RESERVOIR
0614 LOPEZ LAKE
0615 LAKE MARY
06it 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
INOR6 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 SEC
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
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-
MlN 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
U. 200
14.800
9.000
7.400
7.000
7.400
7.400
11.400
MEDIAN
DISS OHThO
0.020
0.003
0.047
0.014
0.034
0.004
0.092
O.OOS
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 L4KES
LAKE
COOE LAKE NAME
rtlGhEH VALUES (NUMBER OF LAKES
HIGHER VALUES)
0601 AMADOR RESERVOIR
0602 BOCA LAKE
0603 LAKE bPITTON
0604 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
0619 LAKE PILLSBURY
0620 SANTA MARGARITA LAKE
0621 SHASTA LAKE
0622 SHAVER
062J SILVER LAKE
062* TULLOCK RESERVOIR
*
0625 UPPLR TWIN LAKES
0626 LOWER TWIN LAKES
MEDIAN
MEDIAN
TOTAL P INOPG
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)
16)
20)
12)
16)
17)
4 (
98 (
22 <
74 (
78 (
54 (
17 (
87 (
54 <
33 1
0 <
26 (
87 (
70 (
9 (
13 (
41 (
33 (
54 (
41 (
65 (
54 (
98 (
87 (
N
1)
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
43
70
17
48
65
57
0
100
39
13
26
74
91
30
4
22
9
52
61
83
78
35
87
96
SEC
( 10)
( 16)
( 4)
( 11)
( 15)
( 13)
( 0)
( 23)
( 9)
( 3)
( 6)
( 17)
( 21)
( 7)
( 1)
( 5)
( 2)
( 12)
( 14)
(. 19)
( 18)
( 8)
( 20)
( 22)
MEAN
CHLORA
9 (
91 (
48 <
7C (
43 (
61 (
0 (
100 (
52 (
4 (
39 (
26 (
83 (
74 <
30 (
13 (
35 <
22 (
57 (
96 (
87 (
17 (
65 (
78 (
2)
21)
11)
16)
10)
14)
0)
23)
12)
1)
9)
6)
19)
17)
7)
3)
8) .
5)
13)
22)
20)
4)
15)
18)
15-
MEDIAN
MIN oo
17 (
100 (
43 (
22 (
30 (
37 (
78 (
70 (
4 (
54 (
26 (
4 (
48 (
61 (
54 (
4 (
74 (
13 (
65 (
87 (
96 (
87 (
87 t
37 (
4)
23)
10)
5)
7)
8)
18)
16)
0)
12)
6)
0)
11)
14)
12)
0)
17)
3)
15)
19)
22)
19)
19)
8)
OISS ORTHO P
26 (
91 <
17 (
37 <
22 (
78 <
9 (
70 (
52 (
13 (
4 (
0 (
100 (
63 (
46 (
46 (
63 <
37 <
30 (
78 (
91 <
57 (
78 (
91 (
6)
20)
4)
8)
5)
17)
2)
16)
12)
3)
1)
0)
23)
14)
10)
10)
14)
8)
7)
17)
20)
13)
17)
20)
INDEX
NU
134
539
164
294
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.
RAMK LAKE CODE LAKE NAME INOEX NO
I 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 328
11 0624 TULLOCK RESERVOIR 302
12 0604 CASITAS RtSEKVOIR 294
13 0619 LAKE PILLSBURY 279
1«» 0605 CROWLEY LAKE 268
15 0609 LAKE HENNESSEY 249
Ib 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 IHON 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 = 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
-------
LAKE CODE 0624
TRIBUTARY FLOW INFORMATION FOR CALIFORNIA
TULLOCH RESERVOIR
12/02/76
TOTAL DRAINAGE AREA OF LAKE(SO KM) 2533.3
SOB-DRAINAGE
TRIBUTARY AREACSQ KM)
JAN
FEB
MAR
NORMALIZED FLOWS(CMS)
APR MAY JUN JUL AUG
SEP
OCT
NOV
DEC
MEAN
0624A1
0624A2
0624C1
0624ZZ
2533.3
2343.9
49.5
139.9
76.46
34.63
0.906
5.267
57.20
40.50
0.623
3.483
62.01
39.57
0.566
3.256
67.68
75.75
0.283
1.727
99.68
116.25
0.085
0.481
84.67
109.14
0.034
0.187
47.01
55.03
0.011
0.071
42.48
40.81
0.003
0.017
32.28
26.12
0.003
0.023
14.27
12.99
0.006
0.045
8
12
0.
0.
.13
.52
062
368
SUMMARY
TOTAL
SUM OF
DRAINAGE
AREA OF
LAKE =
SUB-DRAINAGE AREAS =
2533.
2533.
3
3
TOTAL FLOW
TOTAL FLOW
IN =
OUT a
617
619
.64
.15
27.30 51.59
34.63 49.84
0.340 0.242
1.869 1.391
MEAN MONTHLY FLOWS AND DAILY FLOWS(CMS)
TRIBUTARY
0624A1
MONTH YEAR
MEAN FLOW DAY
FLOW DAY
FLOW DAY
FLOW
0624A2
11
12
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
74
74
75
75
75
75
75
75
75
75
7S
75
74
74
75
75
75
75
75
75
75
75
75
75
14.781
21.436
2.124
46.156
47.57?
50.121
111.85?
128.558
51.820
45.873
33.697
30.865
13.337
12.856
9.175
34.830
40.493
41.909
143.566
129.408
49.271
42.758
25.995
19.199
16
7
12
8
15
19
12
I
24
30
16
7
11
8
15
19
10
1
24
30
18.434
31.432
2.350
47.289
54.085
49.271
103.454
226.252
41.343
30.299
20.388
20.530
18.123
42.475
39.927
41.909
122.329
260.232
42.192
14.153
-------
LAKE CODE 0634
TRIBUTARY FLOW INFORMATION FOR CALIFORNIA
TULLOCH RESERVOIR
12/02/76
ME«N MONTHLY FLOWS AND DAILY FLOWS(CMS)
TRIBUTARY MONTH YEA*
0624C1
0624ZZ
11
12
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
1 1
12
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
74
74
75
75
75
75
75
75
75
75
75
75
74
74
75
75
75
75
75
75
75
75
75
75
MEAN FLOW DAY
0.040
0.227
0.340
1.133
1.246
0.453
0.085
0.028
0.003
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.229
1.274
1.841
6.428
7.136
2.265
0.566
'.,•.14?
0.04?
0.014
0.014
0.028
16
7
12
8
15
19
10
1
24
30
FLOW DAY
0.023
0.184
0.340
0.736
0.198
0.425
0.113
0.042
0.0
0.0
FLOW DAY
FLOW
-------
APPENDIX D
PHYSICAL and CHEMICAL DATA
-------
STORET RETRIEVAL DATE 76/09/24
DATE
FROM
TO
75/03/14
75/06/25
75/11/12
00010
TIME DEPTH WATER
OF TEMP
DAY FEET
09
09
09
09
09
09
09
09
14
14
14
14
14
14
14
11
11
11
11
11
55
55
55
55
55
55
55
55
15
15
15
15
15
15
15
OC
CO
00
00
00
0000
0005
0015
0025
0050
0080
0110
0148
0000
0005
0010
0020
0040
0060
0060
0000
0005
0016
0030
0058
CENT
10.
10.
10.
9.
8.
8.
7.
7.
19.
19.
18.
14.
13.
13.
13.
14.
14.
14.
14.
13.
4
4
3
0
7
4
9
4
4
2
6
3
v
5
0
7
4
3
2
7
00300
DO
MG/L
12
11
10
10
11
1C
10
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
10
10
10
10
8
.0
.8
.2
.4
.0
.6
.0
.2
.2
.4
.8
.4
.6
.0
.2
.2
.2
.0
.6
062*01
37 52 38.0 120 36 10.
TULLOCK RESERVOIR
06109 CALIFORNIA
0 3
141091
11EPALES
2111202
0152 FEET DEPTH CLASS
00300
DO
MG/L
12.0
11.8
10.2
10.4
11.0
1C. 6
10.0
9.2
9.2
9.4
9.8
9.4
9.6
9.0
10.2
10.2
10.2
10.0
8.6
00077 00094
TRANSP CNOUCTVY
SECCHI FIELD
INCHES MICROMHO
48 70
71
70
65
61
61
65
66
96 36
32
30
28
31
29
31
78 74
73
73
71
71
00400
PH
SU
8.90
8.90
8.10
7.80
7. 80
7.75
7.70
7.60
7.60
7.95
7.80
7.55
7.40
7.30
7.25
8.30
8.20
8.05
8.00
7.80
00410
T ALK
CAC03
MG/L
47
46
43
44
41
42
44
44
19
21
21
23
22
23
20
32
32
33
33
39
00610
NH3-N
TOTAL
Mti/L
0.020
0.020
0.020K
0.020
0.030
0.030
0.030
0.070
0.050
0.030
0.040
0.030
0.030
0.040
0.050
0.020K
0.020K
0.020K
0.020K
0.040
00
00625
TOT KJEL
N
MG/L
0.500
0.300
0.400
0.200
0.200
0.200
0.200K
0.200
0.300
0.200
0.300
0.200
0.200
0.200K
0.200
0.200K
0.200K
0.200K
0.200K
0.200K
00630
N02&N03
N-TOTAL
MG/L
0.020K
0.020K
0.020K
0.040
0.040
0.050
0.090
0.110
0.030
0.020K
0.020
0.020K
0.020K
0.020K
0.020K
0.020K
0.020K
0.050
0.020
0.150
00671
PHOS-OIS
ORTHO
MG/L P
0.009
0.011
0.013
0.011
0.020
0.020
0.012
0.017
0.004
0.003
0.007
0.005
0.005
0.005
0.005
0.004
0.004
0.003
0.002
0.006
K VALUE KNOWN TO BE
LESS THAN INDICATED
-------
STORET RETRIEVAL DATE 76/09/24
062^.0.1
37 52 38.0 120 36 10.0 3
TULLOCK RESERVOIH
06109 CALIFORNIA
1*1091
11EPALES
0152 FEET
2111202
DEPTH CLASS 00
DATE
FROM
TO
75/03/14
75/06/25
75/11/12
00665 32217 00031
TIME DEPTH PHOS-TOT CHLRPHYL INCDT LT
OF A REMNING
DAY FEET
09
09
09
09
09
09
09
09
14
14
14
14
14
14
14
11
11
11
11
11
55
55
55
55
55
55
55
55
15
15
15
15
15
15
15
00
00
00
00
00
0000
0005
0015
0025
0050
0080
0110
0148
0000
0005
0010
0020
0040
0060
0080
0000
OOOb
0016
0030
0058
MG/L P
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
u
0
.034
.03<«
.033
.036
.034
.041
.015
.020
.018
.016
.015
.014
.015
.015
.016
.018
.016
.017
.020
.025
UG/L PERCENT
14.0
4.5
3.9
-------
STORET RETRIEVAL DATE 76/09/24
062*02
37 5* 03.0 120 35 12.0 3
TULLUCK RESERVOIR
06009 CALIFORNIA
141091
11EPALES
2111202
0111 FEET DEPTH CLASS
DATE
FROM
TO
75/03/14
75/06/25
75/11/12
DATE
FROM
TO
75/03/1*
75/06/25
75/11/12
TIME DEPTH
OF
DAY FEET
10 55 0000
10 55 0005
10 55 0015
10 55 0035
10 55 0060
10 55 0085
10 55 0107
14 55 0000
14 55 0005
14 55 0010
14 55 0020
14 55 0040
14 55 0080
14 55 0116
10 ?0 0000
10 20 0005
10 20 0015
10 20 0031
TIME DEPTH
OF
DAY FEET
10 55 0000
10 55 0005
10 55 0015
10 55 0035
10 55 0060
10 55 0085
10 55 0107
14 55 0000
14 55 0005
14 55 0010
14 55 0020
14 55 0040
14 55 0080
14 55 0116
10 ?0 0000
10 20 0005
10 20 0015
10 ?0 0031
00010
WATER
TEMP
CENT
10.8
10.7
10.6
8.7
6.5
8.4
8.1
20.3
19.9
18.1
14.3
13.9
13.0
12.6
14.5
14.4
14.3
14.0
00665
PHOS-TOT
' MG/L P
C.C32
0.029
0.031
0.017
0.017
0.017
0.025
0.016
C.019
0.016
0.031
0.025
0.061
0.038
0.041
0.028
0.034
0.034
00300 00077
DO TRANSP
SECCHI
MG/L INCHES
11.8 48
11.8
10.2
11.0
10.6
9.8
9.4
10.0 108
9.2
9.2
9.8
9.2
9.0
8.4
10.2 48
9.4
7.8
7.6
32217 00031
CHLRPHYL INCDT LT
A REMNING
UG/L PERCENT
15.6
4.4
3.2
00094
CNDUCTVY
FIELD
MICROMHO
82
80
78
60
65
84
80
37
35
38
34
63
32
34
89
89
83
81
00400
PH
SU
9.00
8.95
8.75
7.95
7.80
7.60
7.50
7.70
7.70
7.80
7.40
7.40
7.30
7.20
7.70
7.60
7.50
7.50
00410
T ALK
CAC03
MG/L
48
48
49
42
44
51
51
22
20
21
22
20
22
23
33
32
33
30
00610
NH3-N
TOTAL
MG/L
0.020K
0.020K
0.020
0.020
0.030
0.040
0.060
0.040
0.040
0.040
0.030
0.030
0.040
0.060
0.030
0.020K
0.060
0.070
00
00625
TOT KJEL
N
MG/L
0.500
0.400
0.300
0.200K
0.200K
0.200K
0.200K
0.200
0.300
0.200K
0.200
0.200
0.300
0.300
0.300
0.200
0.200K
0.200K
00630
N02&N03
N-TOTAL
MG/L
0.020K
0.020K
0.020K
0.040
0.060
0.150
0.160
0.020K
0.020K
0.020K
0.020K
0.020K
0.020
0.020
0.060
0.080
0.100
0.120
00671
PHOS-DIS
ORTHO
MG/L P
0.014
o.oia
0.019
0.014
0.014
0.011
0.013
0.006
0.005
0.004
0.009
0.016
0.015
0.013
0.005
0.003
0.012
0.006
K VALUE KNOWN TO
LESS THAN
-------
STORET RETRIEVAL DATE 76/09/24
062403
37 53 38.0 120 34 19.0 3
TULLOCK RESERVOIR
06109 CALIFORNIA
141091
11EFALES 2111202
0110 FEET DEPTH CLASS 00
DATE TIME DEPTH WATER
FROM OF
TO OAY FEET
75/03/14 11 50 0000
11 50 0005
11 50 0015
11 50 0035
11 50 0060
11 50 0085
11 50 0106
75/06/25 15 30 0000
15 30 0005
15 30 0010
15 30 0020
15 30 0040
15 30 0060
15 30 0086
75/11/12 10 45 0000
10 45 0005
10 45 0015
10 45 0028
DATE TIME DEPTh
FROM OF
TO OAY FEET
75/03/14
50 0000
50 0005
50 0015
50 0035
50 0060
50 0085
50 0106
75/06/25 15 30 0000
15 30 0005
15 30 0010
15 30 0020
15 30 0040
15 30 0060
15 30 0086
75/11/12 10 45 0000
10 45 0005
10 45 0015
10 45 0023
0010 00300 00077 00094
TER DO TRANSP CNDUCTVY
EMP SECCHI FIELD
ENT MG/L INCHES MIC90MHO
10.4
10.4
10.0
8.7
8.5
8.1
4.7
20.3
20.3
19.3
14.4
13.6
13.6
12.8
14.6
14.5
14.4
14.1
0665
S-TOT
>/L P
0.056
0.050
0.022
0.029
0.026
0.017
0.022
0.027
0.026
0.025
0.023
0.023
0.025
0.186
O.C27
0.036
0.025
O.OP7
12.0 48
11.6
11.8
11.0
11.0
10.6
10.4
9.2 72
9.0
9.4
9.8
9.2
9.2
9.2
10.8 57
10.8
10.2
9.0
32217 00031
CHLRPHYL INCDT LT
A REMNING
UG/L PERCENT
14.9
0.2
64.2
74
75
68
57
57
64
64
36
32
35
30
33
31
31
79
79
81
81
00400 00410
PH T ALK
CAC03
SU
8.95
8.90
8.40
7.90
7.75
7.70
7.70
7.80
7.75
7.75
7.50
7.40
7.35
7.25
7.90
7.90
7.85
7.70
MG/L
48
49
47
41
42
47
46
23
24
22
23
23
22
23
32
32
32
38
00610 00625 00630 00671
NH3-N TOT KJEL N02&N03 PHOS-DIS
TOTAL N N-TOTAL ORTriO
MG/L
0.020K
0.020K
0.020K
0.020K
0.020
0.030
0.040
0.030
0.030
0.030
0.030
0.030
0.030
0.040
0.020K
0.020K
0.020K
0.060
MG/L
0.300
0.300
0.200K
0.200K
0.200K
0.200K
0.200K
0.300
0.300
0.300
0.300
0.200K
0.200K
0.500
0.200K
0.200K
0.200K
0.200K
MG/L
0.020K
0.020K
0.020K
0.030
0.040
0.060
0.080
0.020*
0.020K
0.020K
0.020K
0.020K
0.020K
U.020
0.030
0.030
0.060
0.140
MG/L P
0.013
0.013
0.016
0.014
0.017
0.016
0.016
0.009
0.008
0.009
0.008
0.004
0.004
0.012
0.005
0.008
0.003
0.006
K VALUE KNOWM TO 6t
LESS THAN INDICATED
-------
APPENDIX E
TRIBUTARY DATA
-------
STORE! RETRIEVAL DATE 76/09/24
DATE TIME DEPTH N02S.N03
FROM OF
TO DAY FEET
74/1 1/16
74/12/07
75/01/12
75/02/08
75/03/15
75/04/19
75/05/12
75/06/01
75/08/24
75/09/30
12
12
11
10
10
10
17
13
10
19
38
35
40
45
30
15
30
15
00
05
0624A1
37 52 34.0 120 36 12.0 4
STANISLAUS RIVER
06 15 COPPEROPOLIS
0/TULLOCri LAKE 141091
BNK dELO DAM 5.5 MI N£ OF KNIGHTS
IIE^ALES 2111204
0000 FEET DEPTH CLASS 00
0630
'S.N03
OTAL
G/L
0.048
0.040
0.088
0.104
0.0t>5
0.045
O.OtO
C.010
0.050
0.025
00625
TOT KJEL .
N
MG/L
1.200
1.000
0.400
1.500
0.900
1.300
1.200
0.050
0.400
0.800
00610
NH3-N
TOTAL
MG/L
0.055
0.055
0.010
0.016
0.024
0.040
0.030
0.020
0.035
0.040
00671
PHOS-OIS
ORTHO
MG/L P
0.005K
0.005
0.005K
0.015
0.010
0.015
0.005K
0.005
0.005
0.005K
00665
PHOS-TOT
MG/L P
0.010
0.010
0.010K
0.040
0.020
0.020
0.030
0.010K
0.030
K VALUE KNOWN TO 8E
LESS THAN IMDIOTED
-------
STORET RETRIEVAL DATE 76/09/24
DATE TIME DEPTH N02&N03
FROM OF
TO DAY FEET
14 30
10 00
09 00
11 45
09 «55
09 00
18 SO
11 45
11 54
20 10
1/16
74/12/07
75/01/11
75/02/08
75/03/15
75/05/10
75/36/01
75/08/24
75/09/30
0624A2
37 56 50.0 120 31 45.0 4
STANISLAUS RIVER
06 15 COPPEROPOLIS
T/TULLOCH LAK.t" 141091
8NK 7 MI t OF COPPtKOPOLIS
11EPALES 2111204
0000 FEET DEPTH CLASS 00
0630
&N03
OTAL
G/L
0.040
0.160
0.071
0.048
0.040
0.020
0.010
0.015
0.020
0.040
00625
TOT KJEL
N
MG/L
0.700
1.600
1.600
0.900
0.300
1 .400
0.150
0.600
0.850
0.600
00610
NH3-N
TOTAL
MG/L
0.055
0.035
0.025
0.016
0.010
C.025
0.025
0.025
0.080
0.035
00671
PHOS-DIS
ORTHO
MG/L P
0.005K
0.015
0.005
0.010
0.010
0.005
0.005
0.005
0.005
0.005
00665
PHOS-TOT
MG/L P
0.020
0.030
0.020
0.020
0.030
0.020
0.010
0.020
0.010K
0.040
K VALUE KNOWN TO BE
LESS THAN INDICATED
-------
STORET RETRIEVAL DATE 76/09/34
DATE TIME DEPTH N02&N03
FROM Of
TO DAY FEET
74/11/16 11 4?
74/13/07 12 05
75/01/12 10 50
75/04/19
75/05/10 14 ?5
75/08/24 10 35
75/09/30 18 30
37 52 15.0 120 32 40.0 4
GREENSPRING RUN
06 15 COPPEROPOLIS
T/TULLOCH LAKE 141091
UNPVU RO dROG 2 MI NW OF H«Y 120 JCT
11EPALES 2111204
0000 FEET DEPTH CLASS 00
0630
&N03
OTAL
iG/L
0.056
1.010
0.680
0.300
0.220
0.020
O.OPO
00625
TOT KJEL
N
MG/L
2.000
2.000
1.050
1.000
0.650
0.700
0.900
00610
NH3-N
TOTAL
MG/L
0.050
0.040
0.005
0.030
C.035
0.065
0.050
00671
PHOS-DIS
ORTHO
MG/L P
0.025
0.055
0.045
0.090
0.045
0.020
00665
PHOS-TOT
MG/L P
0.030
0.060
0.050
0.100
0.030
0.060
0.050
-------
STORET RETRIEVAL DATE 76/09/24
DATE TIME DEPTH N02&N03
FROM OF
TO DAY FEET
74/11/16 10 35
74/12/07 10 30
75/01/12 10 00
75/02/08 09 40
75/03/15 09 20
75/04/19 08 30
75/05/10 13 20
75/06/01 12 30
062<*C1
37 55 50.0 120 37 05.0 4
BLACK CREEK
06 15 COPPEROPOLIS
T/TULLOCH LAKE 141091
BNK .2 M SW RO 4.2 MI SE OF COPPEROPOLIS
HErMLES 2111204
0000 FEET DEPTH CLASS 00
0630
6. NO 3
OTAL
G/L
0.112
2.160
1.160
0.552
0.284
0.195
0.155
0.035
00625
TOT KJEL
N
MG/L
0.200
1.000
0.850
1.000
0.900
1.530
0.950
0.700
00610
NH3-N
TOTAL
MG/L
0.020
0.030
0.015
0.008K
0.015
0.027
0.095
0.260
00671
PHOS-DIS
ORTHO
MG/L P
O.OOSK
0.015
0.005
0.005
0.010
0.025
0.015
00665
PHOS-TOT
MG/L P
0.010K
0.015
0.010K
0.020
0.010
0.025
0.054
0.030
K VALUE KNOWN TO BE
LESS THAN INDICATED
------- |