U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
NATIONAL EUTROPHICATION SURVEY
WORKING PAPER SERIES
REPORT
ON
LOWER BOWNS RESERVOIR
GARFIELD COUNTY
UTAH
EPA REGION VI11
WORKING PAPER No,
CORVALLIS ENVIRONMENTAL RESEARCH LABORATORY - CORVALLIS, OREGON
and
ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING & SUPPORT LABORATORY - LAS VEGAS, NEVADA
-------
REPORT
ON
LOWER BOWNS RESERVOIR
GARFIELD COUNTY
UTAH
EPA REGION VIII
WORKING PAPER No, 842
WITH THE COOPERATION OF THE
UTAH STATE DIVISION OF HEALTH
AND THE.
'JTAH NATIONAL GUARD
NOVEMBER, 1977
-------
1
CONTENTS
Page
Foreward fi
List of Utah Study Lakes and Reservoirs 1v
Lake and Drainage Area Map y
Sections
I. Introduction 1
II. Conclusions 1
III. Reservoir and Drainage Basin Characteristics 2
IV. Water Quality Summary 3
V. Literature Reviewed 7
VI. Appendices 8
-------
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
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)]t water
quality criteria/standards review [§303(c)], clean lakes [§314(a,b)]t
and water quality monitoring [§106 and §305(b)j activities mandated
by the Federal Water Pollution Control Act Amendments of 1972.
-------
111
Beyond the single lake analysis, broader based correlations
between nutrient concentrations (and loading) and trophic 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 s.taff of the National Eutrophication Survey (Office of
Research and Development, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency)
expresses sincere appreciation to the Utah Department of Social
Services and the Utah Department of Natural Resources for pro-
fessional involvement, to the Utah National Guard foe conducting
the tributary sampling phase of the Survey, and to those Utah
wastewater treatment plant operators who voluntarily provided
effluent samples and flow data.
The staffs of the Bureau of Water Quality of the Division
of Health and the Division of Wildlife Resources provided inval-
uable lake documentation and counsel during the Survey, reviewed
the preliminary reports, and provided critiques most useful in
the preparation of this Working Paper series.
Major General Maurice L. Watts,'the Adjutant General of Utah,
and Project Officer Lt. Colonel T. Ray Kingston, who directed the
volunteer efforts .of the Utah National Guardsmen, are also grate-
fully acknowledged for their assistance to the Survey.
-------
IV
NATIONAL EUTROPHICATION SURVEY
STUDY LAKES AND RESERVOIRS
STATE OF UTAH
NAME
Bear
Deer Creek
Echo
Fish
Flaming Gorge
Huntington
Ooes Valley
Lower Bown's
Lynn
Minersv;ille
Moon
Navajo
Newcastle
Otter Creek
Panguich
Pelican
Pineview
Piute
Porcupine
Powel1
Pruess
Sevier Bridge
Starvation
Steinaker
Tropic
Utah
Willard Bay
COUNTY
Rich, UT; Bear Lake, ID
Wasatch
Summi t
Sevier
Daggett, UT;
Sweetwater, WY
Emery
Emery
Garfield
Box Elder
Beaver
Duchesne
Kane
Iron
Piute
Garfield
Uintah
Weber
Piute
Cache
Garfield, Kane, San
Juan, UT; Coconino, AZ
Mil lard
Juab, Sanpete
Duchesne
Uintah
Garfield
Utah
Box Elder
-------
LOWER BOWNS RESERVOIR
X Lake Sampling Site;
° 1
Scale
nri9'
iMi.
Creek
line
Oak
Creek
dam*
LOWER
BOWNS
RESERVOIR
38 06-
nri6'
-------
LOWER BOUNS RESERVOIR
STORET NO. 4902
I. INTRODUCTION
Lower Bowns Reservoir was Included In the National Eutrophlcation
Survey as a water body of Interest to the Utah Bureau of Environmental
Health. Tributaries and nutrient sources were not sampled, and this
report relates only to the reservoir sampling data.
II. CONCLUSIONS
A. Trophic Condition:
Survey data Indicate that Lower Bowns Reservoir 1s meso-
trophlc. It ranked eighth in overall trophic quality when
the 27 Utah lakes and reservoirs sampled in 1975 were com-
pared using a combination of six water quality parameters*.
Fourteen of the water bodies had less median total phosphorus,
ten had less and three had the same median dissolved ortho-
phosphorus, none had less and 10 had the same median Inorganic
nitrogen, nine had less mean chlorophyll a^ and four had
greater mean Secchl disc transparency.
Survey Hmnologlsts observed floating and submerged macro-
phytes 1n May and August.
B. Rate-Limiting Nutrient
The algal assay results are not considered representative
of conditions in the reservoir at the times the samples were
collected. The reservoir data Indicate phosphorus limitation
1n May and nitrogen limitation 1n August and September.
See Appendix A.
-------
III. RESERVOIR AND DRAINAGE BASIN CHARACTERISTICS1'
j.j,
A. Morphometry :
1. Surface area: 0.36 kilometers2.
2. Mean depth: 0.1 meters.
3. Maximum depth: 17.7'meters.
4. Volume: 0.036 x 106 m3.
B. Precipitation*:
1. Year of sampling: 20.8 centimeters.
2. Mean annual: 28.5 centimeters.
t Table of metric equivalents—Appendix B.
tt Sudweeks, 1975; volume from Ikner, 1975.
* See Working Paper No. 175, "...Survey Methods, 1973-1976",
-------
3
IV. WATER QUALITY SUMMARY
Lower Downs' 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 several depths at one station on the reservoir (see map, page v).
During each visit, a depth-Integrated (4.6 m to surface) sample was
collected for phytoplankton Identification and enumeration, and a simi-
lar sample was taken for chlorophyll a_ analysis. During the first
and last .visits, a single 18.9-liter depth-Integrated sample was col-
lected for algal assays. The maximum depth sampled was 7.6 meters.
The sampling results are presented in full In Appendix C and are
summarized In the following table.
-------
PARAMETER
TEMP
DISS OXV
CNDCTVY (MOO*"))
PH (STAND UNITS)
TOT ALK (MG/I.)
TOT P (Mfi/L)
OUTHO P (MG/L)
N02*N03 (MG/L)
AMMONIA (MG/L)
KJEL N (MG/L)
1NORG N (MG/L)
TOTAL N (MG/D
CHLRPYL A «jr,/n
SECCHI (METERS)
A. SUMMARY OF PHYSICAL AND
1ST SAMPLING ( 5/ Q/75)
1 SITES
CHEMICAL CMARACTEHISTICS.FOR
STOrtET CODE «*902
-------
B; Biological characteristics:
1. Phytoplanktori -
Sampling
Date
05/09/75
08/13/75
09/25/75
2. Chlorophyll a_ -
Sampling
Date
Dominant
Genera
1. Cryptomonas sp.
2. ChroomonasTC?) sp.
Total
1. Gloeotrichla sp.
2. Chroomonas (?T"sp_.
3. Anabaena sp.
4. MIcrocystTs sp.
Total
1. Chroomonas (?) sp.
2. Aphanocapsa sp.
3. Cryptomonas sp.
4. Staurastrum sp.
5. GloeotrlcHTa sp.
Total
Station
Number
Algal Units
per ml
286
24
310
231
103
51
26
411
970
562
357
153
102
2,144
Chlorophyll a
(ua/1)
05/09/75 1 2.7
08/13/75 1 5.1
09/25/75 1 8.9
C. Limiting Nutrient Study:
Significant nutrient changes occurred in the samples prior
to the beginning of the algal assays, and the results are not
Indicative of conditions In the reservoir at the times the samples
were collected (05/09/75 and 09/25/75).
-------
6
The reservoir data indicate phosphorus limitation in May and
nitrogen limitation in August and September (the mean inorganic
nitrogen/orthophosphorus ratios were 14/1, 8/1, and 4/1 respec-
tively).
-------
V. LITERATURE REVIEWED
Ikner, James* 1975. Personal communication (volume of reservoir).
U.S. Geol. Surv., Salt Lake City.
Sudweeks, Calvin K., 1975. Personal conrmunication (reservoir
morphometry). UT Bur. of Environmental Health, Salt Lake City.
-------
8
VI. APPENDICES
APPENDIX A
LAKE RANKINGS
-------
*: JATA TO BE USED IN RANKINGS
LAKE
CODE LAKE NAME
0408 LAKE POWELL
4901 BEAK LAKE
4902 LGrfER BONN'S RESERVOIR
4903 DEER CREEK RESERVOIR
4904 ECHO RESERVOIR
4905 LYNN RESERVOIR
4906 FISH LAKE
4907 KUNTINGTON NORTH RESERVO
4903 JOE'S VALLEY RESERVOIR
4909 MINERSVILLE RESERVOIR
4910 HOON LAKE
4911 MAVAJO LAKE
4912. NEWCASTLE RESEHVOI2
4913 OTTER CREEK RESERVOIR
4914 PANQUITCH LAKE
<*S15 PELICAN L*KE
4916 PINEVIEW KESEKVOIR
4917 PIUTE RESr.avOIfi
4913 PORCUPINE RESERVOIR
4919 P3UESS RESERVOIR
-------
PERCENT OF LAKES tolTH HIGHER VALUES (NUMBER OF LAKES WITH HIGHER VALUES)
LAKE
CODE LAKE NAME
0403 LAKE POWELL
4%01 BEAR LAKE
4902 LOWER ROrfN'S RESERVOIR
4903 DEER CREEK RESERVOIR
4904 E.CHO RESERVOIR
4905 LYNN RESERVOIR
4906 FISH LAKE
4907 HUNTINGTON NORTH RESERVO
4903 JOE'S VALLEY RESERVOIR
4909 HINERSVILLE RESERVOIR
4910 HOOS LAKE
4911 NAVAJO LAKE
4912 NEWCASTLE RESERVOIR
4913 OTTER CREEK RESERVOIR
4914 PAN8UITCH LAKE
/
4915 PELICAN LAKE
4916 PINEVIEW RESERVOIR
4917 PIUTE RESERVOIR
4913 PORCUPINE RESERVOIR
4919 PRUESS RESERVOIR (GARRIS
4920 SEVIER BRIDGE RESERVOIR
4921 STARVATION RESERVOIR
4922 STEINAKER RESERVOIR
4923 TROPIC RESERVOIR
4424 UTAH LAKE
4925 WILLARO BAY RESERVOIR
5605 FLAMING GORGE RESERVOIR
MEDIAN
TOTAL P
96 <
90 (
46 (
42 <
31 <
8 <
62 <
77 <
81 <
0 (
100 <
69 (
23 <
15 (
12 (
37 <
50 .(
27 <
58 (
19 <
54 (
73 (
85 (
65 <
4 (
37 <
90 1
25)
23)
12)
11)
8)
2)
16)
20)
21)
0)
26)
18)
6)
4)
3)
9)
13)
7)
15)
5)
14)
19)
22)
17)
1)
9)
23)
MEDIAN
. INORG N
4
87
87
,19
27
23
65
65
58
44
87
87
87
87
65
54
15
31
38
35
8
87
87
50
12
44
0
( 1)
( 19)
( 19)
( 5)
( 7)
( 61
( 16)
( 16)
( IS)
( 11)
< 19)
( 19)
( 19)
1 19)
( 16)
< 14)
( 4>
C 8)
( 10)
< 9)
C 2)
( 19)
( 19)
< 13)
( 3)
< 11)
( 0)
500-
MEAN SEC
81
96
85
42
19
58
100
69
62
27
73
77
46
15
50
35
38
8
31
0
23
65
88
54
4
12
92
C 21)
( 25)
( 22)
< 11)
C 5)
( 15)
< 26).
< 18)
( 16).
( 7)
( 19)
( 20)
( 12)
( 4)
( 13)
( 9)
( 10)
1 2)
( 8)
< o>.
( 6)
( 17)
f 23)
C 14)
( 1)
( 3)
< 24)
MEAN
CHLORA
73
100
65
35
50
8
23
92
85
12
77
88
27
31
4
54
58
15
38
69
19
62
96
46
0
42
81
( 19)
f 26)
< 17)
f 9)
< 13).
< 2)
( 6)
< 24)
< 22)
( 3)
( 20)
( 23)
( 7)
( 8)
1 1)
( 14)
< 15)
C 4)
1 10)
f 18)
( 5)
( 16)
C 25)
f 12)
C 0)
« ID
f 21)
15-
MIN 00
15 (
77 (
73 (
0 (
12 <
62 <
62 (
96 (
46 <
85 (
69 (
100 (
19 (
54 (
8 (
90 (
4 (
38 (
33 <
81 (
33 I
23 1
27 1
90 1
42 (
50 (
62 (
4)
20)
19)
0)
3)
IS)
15)
25)
12)
22)
18)
26)
5)
14)
2)
23)
1)
10)
8)
21)
8)
6)
7)
23)
ID
13)
IS)
MEDIAN
DISS ORTHO P
42
90
SO
58
13
4
79
69
96
0
100
as
27
a
23
73
58
46
19
37
37
79
65
58
13
31
«a
( 11)
( 23)
< 13)
( 14)
( 3)
( 1)
< 20)
f 18)
< 25)
( 0)
( 26)
f 22)
< 7)
( 2)
( 6)
( 19)
( 14)
C 12)
( 5)
( 9)
< 9)
( 20)
( 17)
( 14)
( 3)
( 8)
c
INDEX
NO
311
540
406
196
152
163
391
468
428
168
506
506
229
210
162
343
223
165
217
241
174
389
448
363
75
216
-------
LAKES RA.-XEO BY INDEX NOS.
RANK LAKE CODE LAKE NAME INDEX NO
1 490i BEAR LAKE 540
2 4911 NAVAJO LAKE 506
3 4910 MOON LAKE 506
4 4907 HUNTINGTON NORTH RESERVO 468
5 4922 STEINAKER RESERVOIR 448
6 4903 JOE'S VALLEY RESERVOIR 428
7 5605 FLAMING GORGE RESERVOIR 415
8 4902 LOWER GOWN'S RESERVOIR 406
9 4906 FISn LAKE 391
10 4921 STARVATION HESERVOIR 389
II 4923 TROPIC RESERVOIR 363
12 4915 PELICAN LAKE 343
13 0403 LAKE POWELL 311
14 4919 PRUESS RESERVOIR (GARRIS 241
15 4912 NEWCASTLE RESERVOIR 229
16 4916 PINEVIEW RESERVOIR 223
17 491o PORCUPINE RESERVOIR 217
IS 4925 WILLARO BAY RESERVOIR 216
19 4913 OTTER CREEK RESERVOIR 210
20 4903 DEER CREEK RESERVOIR 196
21 4920 SEVIER BRIDGE RESERVOIR 174
22 4909 HINErtSVILLE RESERVOIR 168
23 4917 PIUTE RESERVOIR 165
24 4905 LYNN RESERVOIR 163
25 4914 PANOUITCH LAKE 162
26 4904 ECHO RESERVOIR 152
27 4924 UTAH LAKE 75
-------
APPENDIX B
CONVERSION FACTORS
-------
CONVERSION FACTORS
Hectares x 2.471 • acres
Kilometers x 0.6214 « miles
Keters x 3.281 » feet
-4
Cubic meters x 8.107 x 10 » acre/feet
Square kilometers x 0.3861 « square nlles
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
PHYSICAL and CHEMICAL DATA
-------
STJRET RETRIEVAL DATE 76/08/12
490201
37 59 01.0 111 16 13.0 3
LOtfEft BONN'S RESERVOIR
<*9017 UTAH
110291
DATE
FROM
TO
75/05/09
75/08/13
75/09/25
DATE
FROM
TO
75/05/09
75/08/13
75/09/25
TIME DEPTH
OF
DAY FEET
10 10 0000
10 10 0005
'10 10 0018
09 00 0000
09 00 0005
09 00 0018
09 45 QOOO
09 45 0005
09 45 0015
09 45 0025
TIME DEPTH
OF
DAY FEET
10 10 0000
10 10 0005
10 10 0018
09 00 0000
09 00 0005
09 00 0018
09 45 0000
09 45 0005
09 45 0015
09 45 0025
00010
WATER
TEMP
CENT
7.7
7.7
7.4
16.3
17.2
lb.2
17.2
17.2
17.0
16.7
00665
PHOS-TOT
MG/L P
0.03<»
0.033
0.041
0.024
0.025
0.029
0.068
0.025
0.068
0.026
00300
DO
MG/L
9.2
9.6
9.8
7.2
7.2
5.6
8.6
7.6
7.4
32217
CHLRPHYL
A
UG/L
2.7
5.1
8.9
00077 00094
TRANSP CNOUCTVY
SECCHI FIELD
INCHES MICROMHO
204 156
156
179
132 120
119
120
156 99
98
99
98
00031
INCDT LT
REMNING
PERCENT
11EPALES 2111202
0022 FEET DEPTH CLASS 00
00400 00410 00610 00625
PH
SU
8
a
8
9
9
8
8
9
9
9
.65
.65
.65
.00
.00
.75
.90
.30
.10
.20
T ALK
CAC03
MG/L
75
76
79
70
70
70
120
67
65
67
NH3-N TOT KJEL
TOTAL
MG/L
0.070
0.060
0.070
0.020K
0.020K
0.020K
0.020K
0.020K
0.040
0.020
N
MG/L
0.600
0.500
0.500
0.600
0.600
0.600
0.400
0.400
0.400
0.400
00630
N02&N03
N-TOTAL
MG/L
0.030
0.030
0.030
0.020K
0.020K
0.020K
0.020K
0.020K
0.020K
0.020K
00671
PHOS-DIS
ORTHO
MG/L P
0.006
0.006
0.008
0.005
0.004
0.005
0.020
0.008
0.009
0.007
K VALUE KNUriN TU BE
LiLSS THON IW)IC*TED
------- |