U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
NATIONAL EUTROPHICATION SURVEY
WORKING PAPER SERIES
REPORT
ON
DIAMOND LAKE
DOUGLAS COUNIY
OREGON
EPA REGION X
WORKING PAPER No,
CORVALLIS ENVIRONMENTAL RESEARCH LABORATORY - CORVALLIS, OREGON
and
ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING & SUPPORT LABORATORY - LAS VEGAS, NEVADA
.P.O. 699-440
-------
<.-
REPORT
ON
DIAMOND LAKE
DOUGLAS GOUMY
OREGON
EPA REGION X
WORKING PAPER No, 828
WITH THE COOPERATION OF THE
OREGON DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY
AND THE
OREGON NATIONAL GUARD
JANUARY, 1978
-------
CONTENTS
Page
Foreword ii
List of Oregon Lakes and Reservoirs iv
Lake or Reservoir Drainage Area Map v
Sections
I. Introduction 1
II. Conclusions 1
III. Lake and Drainage Basin Characteristics 3
IV. Water Quality Summary 4
V. Literature Reviewed 7
VI. Appendices 8
-------
ii
£0 R.I W 0 R D.
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)]5
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 concentrations (and loading) and trophic condi-
tion are being made to advance the rationale and data base for
refinement of nutrient water quality criteria for the Nation's
fresh water lakes. Likewise, multivariate evaluations for the
relationships between land use, nutrient export, and trophic
condition, by lake class or use, are being developed to assist
in the formulation of planning guidelines and policies by EPA
and to augment plans implementation by the states.
ACKNQWLEDMENT
The staff of the National Eutrophication Survey (Office of
Research & Development, U. S. Environmental Protection Agency)
expresses sincere appreciation to the Oregon Department of Environ-
mental Quality for the professional involvement and to the Oregon
National Guard for conducting the tributary sampling phase of the
the Survey.
William H. Young, Department Director, and Harold L. Sawyer,
Administrator, and the staff of the Water Quality Control Division
provided invaluable lake documentation and counsel during the
Survey, reviewed the preliminary reports, and provided critiques
most useful in the preparation of this Working Paper series.
Brigadier General Richard A. Miller, the Adjutant General
of Oregon, and Project Officer Lt. Colonel' John Mewhn, who
directed the volunteer efforts of the Oregon National Guardsmen,
are also gratefully acknowledged for their assistance to the
Survey.
-------
1v
NAME
Brownlee
Diamond
Hells Canyon
Hills Creek
Owyhee
Oxbow
Suttle
Waldo
NATIONAL EUTROPHICATION SURVEY
STUDY LAKES and RESERVOIRS
STATE OF OREGON
COUNTY
Baker, OR; Washington, ID
Douglas
Baker, Wai Iowa, OR; Adams,
Idaho, ID
Lane
Malhuer
Baker, OR; Adams, ID
Jefferson
Lane
-------
43° 10'
Map Location
DIAMOND LAKE
X Lake Sampling Site
i; Drainage Area Boundary
1 f ? ?| 4 sKm.
i . 2 3 Mi.
Scale
122°10'
122°05'
-------
DIAMOND LAKE
STORE! NO. 4102
I. INTRODUCTION
Due to Inaccessibility, no tributary or outlet samples were col-
lected. Therefore, this report relates only to the lake sampling data.
II. CONCLUSIONS
A. Trophic Condition:
Survey data indicate that Diamond Lake is meso-eutrophic.
It ranked second in overall trophic quality when the eight
Oregon lakes and reservoirs sampled in 1975 were compared using
a combination of six lake parameters*. One of the other water
bodies had less median total phosphorus and orthophosphorus,
none had less and two had the same median inorganic nitrogen,
three-had less mean chlorophyll a^ and one had greater mean Secchi
disc transparency. Depression of dissolved oxygen with depth
was not detected during Survey sampling, but Sanville and Powers
(1971) reported oxygen depletion in September, 1971.
Survey limnologists observed surface concentrations of
algae in July and October, and Sanville and Powers (op. cit.)
reported late summer blooms of Gloeotrichia sp. and Anabaena
sp., as well as large beds of aquatic macrophytes along the
lake shore in 1971.
B. Rate-Limiting Nutrient:
Due to changes in the nutrients in the samples during shipment
from the field to the laboratory, the algal assay results are
* See Appendix A.
-------
2
not considered representative of conditions In the lake at
the time of sample collection.
The lake data indicate nitrogen limitation in July and
October.
C. Nutrient Controllability:
1. Point sources—As far as is known, the only point
sources that may be adding nutrients to Diamond Lake are septic
tanks serving dwellings along the west shore, but a shoreline
survey would have to be done to determine the significance of
those sources.
A sewage interceptor system and treatment facility serving
the dwellings, campgrounds, and the lodge along the south and
east shores of the lake was completed in December, 1975, and
eliminated nutrient contributions from those sources (Powers,
1977).
-------
III. LAKE AND DRAINAGE BASIN CHARACTERISTICS1"
A. Morphometry :
1. Surface area: 13.00 kilometers2.
2. Mean depth: 6.9 meters.
3. Maximum depth: 15.8 meters.
4. Volume: 90.000 x 106 m3.
B. Precipitation:*
1. Year of sampling: 123.4 centimeters,
2. Mean annual: 117.0 centimeters.
t Table of metric equivalents—Appendix B.
tt Powers, 1975.
* See Working Paper No. 175.
-------
4
IV. WATER QUALITY SUMMARY
Diamond Lake was sampled two 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 two stations on the lake (see map, page v). Dur-
ing 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 both 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
samples were 4.3 meters at station 1 and 9.4 meters at station 2.
The sampling results are presented in full in Appendix D and are
summarized in the following table.
-------
ISS 'JXY
-IDCrVY (MCROMO)
i (STAND UNITS)
OT ALK (MG/L)
OT P (MG/L)
RTHO P (MG/L)
02»N03 (MG/L)
MMONIA (MG/L)
JEL N (MG/L)
NOKG N (MG/L)
OTAL N (MG/L)
HLR^YL A (UG/L)
ECCHI (METERS)
A. SUMMARY OF PHYSICAL AND
1ST SAMPLING ( 7/16/75)
? SITES
RANGE
10.6 - 17.3
H.? - 9.?
.?!. - 46.
7.? - 8.4
19. - ?3.
0.011 - 0.045
f.009 - 0.033
0.020 - 0.020
0.020 - 0.030
C.?00 - 0.300
O.OAO - C.050
O.??0 - 0.320
1.9 - 2.2
4.* - 5.0
CHEMICAL CHARACTERISTICS FOR DIAMOND
STORET CODE 4102
SAMPLING (10/31/75)
2 SITES
MEAN
16.9
8.6
34.
7.9
21.
0.018
0.016
0.020
0.021
0.214
0.041
0.234
2.0
5.0
MEDIAN
16.7
S.b
34.
7.7
21.
0.015
0.015
0.020
0.020
0.200
0.040
0.220
2.0
5.0
RANGE
7.7
9.8
7.
8.6
10.
0.027
0.004
0.020
0.020
0.400
0.040
0.420
8.1
5.2
is. 9
- 12.0
9.
9.0
25.
- 0.060
- 0.011
- 0.020
- 0.020
- 0.600
- 0.040
- 0.620
- 17.0
5.8
MEAN
8.5
10.4
8.
8.8
17.
0.035
0.008
0.020
0.020
0.429
0.040
0.449
12.5
5.5
MEDIAN
8.8
10.2
8.
8.7
21.
0.031
0.009
0.020
0.020
0.400
0.040
0.420
12.5
5.5
3RD SAMPLING
0 SITES
RANGE MEAN MEDIAN
—««»«»««««*«««»«««««««»
—»«««««»»«»«««»•»«»**«*»
«««»«« -«««««»»««»»»««*«»«««««
«*«»»» _«»»«»««««««•»««»««*«««
-------
B. Biological characteristics:
1. Phytoplankton -
Sampling
Date
07/16/75
10/31/75
2. Chlorophyll a^ -
Sampling
Date
07/16/75
10/03/75
Dominant
Genera
1. Asterionella s£.
2. Anabaena sp7
3. Chroomonas (?) sp_.
Total
1. Stephanodiscus sjx
2. Cyclotella sp.
3. Chroomonas I?) S£.
4. Cymbella sp.
5. Eplthemia sp.
Other genera
Total
Station
Number
1
2
1
2
Algal Units
per ml
2,113
31
2,175
402
331
47
24
24
22
850
Chlorophyll a
(yg/l)
1.9
2.2
17.0
8.1
C. Limiting Nutrient Study:
Because of significant nutrient changes in the samples from
the time of collection to the beginning of the assays, the re-
sults are not considered representative of conditions in the
»
lake at the times the samples were taken.
The lake data indicate nitrogen limitation both sampling
times. The mean inorganic nitrogen to orthophosphorus ratios
were 3 to 1 in July and 5 to 1 in October, and nitrogen limi-
tation would be expected.
-------
LITERATURE REVIEWED
Powers, Charles F., 1975. Personal communication (lake morphometry).
EPA, Coral 1 is, OR.
, 1977. Personal communication (status of treatment
facilities at Diamond Lake). EPA, Corvallis, OR.
Sanville, William D., and Charles Powers, 1971. Diamond Lake Studies—
1971. Prog. Rept. No. 1, Working Paper #8. National Eutrophication
Research Program, EPA, Corvallis.
-------
VI. APPENDICES
APPENDIX A
LAKE RANKINGS
-------
LAKE DATA TO BE USED IN RANKINGS
LAKE
CODE LAKE NAME
4101 8ROWNLEE RESERVOIR
4102 DIAMOND LAKE
4103 HELLS CANYON RESERVOIR
4104 HILLS CREEK RESERVOIR
4105 OwYHEE
4106 OXBOrt RESERVOIR
4107 SUTTLE LAKE
4108 WALDO LAKE
MEDIAN
TOTAL P
0.079
0.028
0.068
0.038
0.095
0.071
0.031
0.005
MEDIAN
INORG N
0.560
0.040
0.640
0.060
0.425
0.690
0.040
0.040
500-
MEAN SEC
428.133
294.500
429.111
435.200
480.417
425.555
95.000
-100.000
MEAN
CHLORA
16.207
7.300
18.722
2.333
3.350
10.311
9.167
0.350
15-
MIN DO
14.500
6.800
12.400
7.400
13.200
12.200
6.800
6.800
MEDIi
DISS OHTr
0.043
0.011
0.045
0.027
0.064
0.040
0.020
0.006
-------
:7^
PERCENT OF LAKES WITH HIGHER VALUES {NUMBER OF LAKES WITH HIGHER VALUES)
LAKE
CODE LAKE NAME
4101 8ROWNLEE RESERVOIR
4103 DIAMOND LAKE
4103 HELLS CANYON RESERVOIR
4104 HILLS CREEK RESERVOIR
4105 OWYHEE
4106 OXBOW RESERVOIR
4107 SUTTLE LAKE
4108 WALDO LAKE
MEDIAN
TOTAL P
14 (
86 (
43 (
57 (
0 (
29 (
71 (
100 (
1)
6)
3)
4)
0)
2)
5)
7)
MEDIAN
INORG
29 (
93 <
14 (
57 (
43 (
0 (
71 (
93 (
N
2)
6)
1)
4)
3)
0)
5)
6)
500-
MEAN
MEAN SEC
43 (
71 (
29 (
14 (
0 (
57 (
86 (
100 (
3)
5)
2)
1)
0)
4)
6)
7)
CHLORA
14 (
57 (
0 (
86 (
71 (
29 (
43 (
100 (
1)
4)
0)
6)
5)
2)
3)
7)
15-
MEDIAN
MIN DO
0 (
86 (
29 (
57 (
14 (
43 (
86 (
86 (
0>
5)
2)
4)
1)
3)
5)
5)
DISS ORTHO P
29 (
86 (
14 (
57 (
0 (
43 (
71 (
100 (
2)
6)
1)
4)
0)
3)
5)
7)
INDEX
NO
129
479
129
328
128
201
426
579
-------
LAKES RANKED BV INDEX NOS.
RANK LAKE CODE LAKE NAME INDEX NO
1 4108 WALDO LAKE • 579
2 4102 DIAMOND LAKE 479
3 4107 SUTTLE LAKE 428
4 4104 HILLS CREEK RESERVOIR 323
5 4106 OXBOnf RESERVOIR 201
6 4101 8ROWNLEE RESERVOIR 129
7 4103 HELLS CANYON RESERVOIR 129
8 4105 OWYHEE 128
-------
APPENDIX B
CONVERSION FACTORS
-------
CONVERSION FACTORS
ifectares x 2.471 * acres
Kilometers x 0.6214'• miles
Meters x 3.281 « feet
•4
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
4
THograms x 2.205 * pounds
kilograms/square kilometer x 5.711 « Ibs/square mile
-------
APPENDIX C
PHYSICAL and CHEMICAL DATA
-------
STOKET RETRIEVAL UATE 76/j>v 1 2
00010
00300 00077 00094
CNDUCTVY
FIELO
MICROMHO
21
36
46
7
7
8
DATE
FROM
TO
75/07/16
75/10/31
DATE
FROM
TO
75/07/16
75/10/31
TIME DEPTH
OF
DAY FEET
11 30 0000
11 30 0005
11 30 0010
11 35 0000
11 35 0005
11 35 0014
TIME DEPTH
OF
DAY FEET
30 0000
30 0005
30 0010
35 0000
35 0005
35 0014
*ATEP
TEMP
CENT
17. 3
lh.7
16.3
8.2
8.0
7. ?
C-066S
PhOS-TOT
MG/L P
0.015
0.017
0.017
0.030
0.031
0.037
DO
HG/L
rt.6
3.6
8.4
10.2
10. "»
10.2
32217
CHLRPHYL
A
UG/L
1.9
17.0
TtfANSP
SECCHI
INCHES
192
204
00031
INCDT LT
REMNING
PERCENT
410201
43 08 35.0 122 09 12.0 3
DIAMOND LAKE
41019 OREGON
131092
11EPALES
2111202
0016 FEET DEPTH CLASS
00400
PH
SO
6.40
8.30
8.40
8.70
8.60
U.60
00410
T AUK
CAC03
MG/L
19
2\
19
21
10K
10K
00610
NH3-N
TOTAL
M6/L
0.030
0.020
0.020K
0.020K
0.020K
0.020K
00
00625
TOT KJEL
N
MG/L
0.200K
0.200
0.200K
0.400
0.400
0.400
00630
N02tkN03
N-TOTAL
MG/L
0.020
0.020K
0.020K
0.020K
0.020K
0.020K
00671
PHOS-OIS
ORTrlO
MG/L P
0.009
0.016J
0.015J
0.009
0.011
0.011
K» V4LUF KNO-.VN TO -IF LESS
THAN IMDIC4TFO
J» VALUE KNO*N TO -it I'M h'RP-OR
-------
STORET
OA7E >h/(Ki/l2
J<>»0 2
131092
DATE
FROM
TO
75/07/16
75/10/31
DATE
FROM
TO
75/07/16
75/10/31
TIME DEPTrt
OF
DAY FEET
11 SO 0000
11 SO 0005
11 SO 001S
11 SO 0030
11 15 0000
11 15 0005
11 15 0015
11 15 0031
TIME DEPTH
OF
DAY FEET
11 SO 0000
11 50 0005
11 50 0015
11 50 0030
11 15 0000
11 15 0005
11 15 0015
11 15 0031
OOC1C
«AT£R
TEMP
CENT
17,2
16.9
16.6
10. to
8.9
8.*>
8.ri
8.H
00665
PHOS-TOT
MG/L P
0.011
0.012
0.011
0.045
0.027
0.031
0.031
0.060
003oo
DO
MG/L
H.2
1,?
A. ?
9.2
12.0
^.fi
i o . o
10.0
32217
CHLRPhYL
A
UG/L
2.2
a.i
OG077
T*A\'SP
SLCCHI
INCHES
198
228
00031
INCOT LT
REMN1NG
PERCENT
OOG3':
CNOUCTVY
FIELD
MICPOMHO
36
32
33
34
9
8
8
B
!. 1EPALES
CO?^ FEET
DEPTH
2i11202
CLASS 00
05^90
SU
7.70
7.70
7.60
7.20
8.70
8.9C
8.90
ca«;.o
T ALK
CAC03
MG/L
21
23
22
23
10K
23
25
22
00610
NK3-N
TOTAL
MG/L
0 020
0.02Q
0.020
0.020
0.020*
0.020K
0.020K
O.OeOK
00625
TOT KJEL
K
MG/L
0.200
C.200
0.200
0.300
0.400
0.400
0.400
0.600
00630
N02&^03
N-TOTAL
MG/L
0.020K
0.020K
0.020K
0.020K
0.020K
0.020K
0.020K
0.020K
00&71
PHOS-UIS
OHTHU
MG/L P
0.012J
O.OUJ
O.OlbJ
0.033J
0.004
0.005
0.005
0.009
e KNOWN TO BE LESS
THAN INDICATED
J» VALUF KiMOWM TO dE 1M
------- |